deanox

I don't mind them applying. It allows us to apply as well and it will demonstrate two completely different cases and subsequently emphasise how much we need it and they don't. I expect their application is emphatically debited and they are told to come back in 5 years. On the other hand, the fact that the saints have the gall to apply probably goes to show that the reason we didn't get one last year was political not based on any genuine justification.

I like the idea of reducing the lists to ~30. Players only get drafted when they are ready to play. It would take a few years to get the list number that low but it would strengthen the quality of the AFL, and strengthen the quality of the list leagues. To do so would mean draft age is still 18. Ready to go kids can be drafted, talls can develop. To do this we would need to have a second tier comp, either nationally or in Victoria, that was sufficiently funded to allow development of young players as required. Funding is required for both coaching/development and player payments. Players could enter this system from 16 but if they are signed at 16 they need to be given 3 year contracts to get them through high school part time. Similar the system should require all school leavers joining the system to enrol in a post footy program of some kind, be it higher education or trade, for their first two years in the system, to ready them for leaving the system.

Plus the influence of other professional football codes (mainly soccer but also the expansion of rugby and league) and as mentioned above the increased participation of tall blokes in basketball, means that the talent is spread further.

Take Terlich out too. Roos said he was the carry over emergency but Jones would play for Casey.

I like the changes. Both ins give us run, and x factor we have lacked. The type of players who will take opportunities. If they bring their defensive games and we as an 18 man unit play our defensive roles, manning up and defensive spread, we have the opportunity to be much closer than the past two weeks where not only did we struggle defensively, but we had no players taking opportunities.

Very good points. I don't dotage he needs to work on those things, but I feel players with spread who collect uncontested possessions are something we lack. Hopefully it is part of smart coaching policy to help him improve and he comes back with another string to his bow. He is a limited footballer but I think he is a worthy placeholder in the team as we rebuild target than a list clogger.

LDC you make some valid points. I'm writing on my phone so don't have the resources to crunch binders easily but I think both have an effect on thinking the talent. Previously being an elite sportsman was about only being good at the skills of that sport. Now it is more than ever about physical attributes (height, build) and ability/desire/other to achieve elite physical capacity ie be fit enough to be an elite sportsman. This criterion actually increases the number of people available play at AFL level. Players of freakish physical abilities and high dedication to fitness are suddenly in the AFL frame because they are fast or can run all day at elite pace or simply because they are 200 cm. But those players are in the game because of those physical attributes. Not because they are the best footballers, have the best skills or read the play the best. This in itself may result in diluting the pure football talent in favour of athletes. Many footballers never make it in favour of someone who runs well. This was less likely "back in the day" imo because while natural physical attributes came into it, capacity for elite physical performance didn't, because players weren't pushed to that point. Additionally, while there is a greater population available there are now more than 30 professional football teams of all codes in Australia which can attract players which means imo less potential players per team. I'd be interested to see participation in all codes (as a break down and as a whole) for 16 year olds both now vs 20 years ago.

Early nomination for post of the year. Love it.

I'd suggest that the current argument explains exactly why the talent is diluted. Not only are the 18 professional AFL teams there are also professional soccer teams, and more professional rugby league and union teams. The talent is spread across all sports and there are more professional teams competing for that talent now than before.

I'm surprised at Jones' omission. He may not be our best but he puts in and he is an accumulator while others like bail struggle to 15 touches. I hope he had been given clear instructions to improve his game at VFL probably including work on clean disposal when outside, which is currently his biggest liability imo.

Interesting that we never ever kick it straight. I can't remember how many times this season we've had someone free 30 m out and ignored it and kicked to a contest. Also, even if we can't get a clean chain of possession, I'd rather us take the short 30 m pocket option then bomb long from that kick putting the ball 80 m out than taking the long option first and kicking the ball long from the square and putting it 60 m out.

I noticed the same thing. Still criticism, but all constructive and much more encouraging. I have no problem with reviews like this.

I've got three weeks til I get away from this [censored]. Pumped I'll miss the Hawthorn match but the only thing to look forward to this year is Hogan and I'll miss that.

What was the free kick against Kent for?

What happened between McDonald and Hartman?

Has been good but needs to be tighter defensively. He extracts the ball well.

Really? I didn't think he'd been to bad compared to others. Was surprised he was subbed except for the fact that Terlich had to come on in the back line.

Picking up a loose bouncing ball on the half back flank or wing is a "contested ball". Maybe you mean "hard ball gets"?

No umpires in that.

That call against Tom mcdonald was ridiculous.

We are pushing extra players into the stoppages to try and win a clearance leaving free men behind the ball.

Not true unless they changed the rules in the past 2-3 years. I have seen it called "out of bounds" when a player moves of his mark while over the line. Problem was the field umpire didn't call play on until after the ball had been kicked, meaning that the boundary umpire couldn't call out of bounds.

Bails shot was the right option. Poorly executed but the right option all the same.

If you are out of bounds, play on sideways and drop the ball surely that is a throw in?

2 terrible decisions that I cannot fathom.