deanox

I wonder how much the extended period of dominance at Casey has meant that he has been able to flourish at AFL level this year? He should have confidence in his abilities, plus he had a taste of AFL level so experienced the difference and was able to work towards that over the offseason.

He has lost a yard of pace this year which might be why we have been playing him as a third tall instead of on the smalls, with Bowey, Rivers and McVee doing the smalls.

Yep it's mental isn't it?

So every clubs supporters should have booked players like Nathan Buckley, Jeff White, Scott Thompson, Tom Boyd, etc? Or is JHF the only player that every supporter of every club should boo? Be passionate about your club, not others.

I think Petty for Schache is likely, even though I'd like to see it as just Petty for Hibberd, and Petty going back. Spargo is a potential sub option.

I thought he was serviceable tonight, and did enough for the role. He isn't our target going forward: that's Fritsch, or Roo, or Gawn, or Grundy, or Pickett even. So when Schache was our target it was a bit like kicking long to Ben Brown and hope it's neutralised. What I thought he did well though was when he marked on the flank, too far out to score, he wheeled quickly and kicked very well to a target. The ability to move it on quickly with good foot skills from that position can't be overrated: holding it up is costly. He finished with 9 disposals for 5 score involvements, including a goal and a goal assist. 4 marks, all outside 50, and 3 i50s. He had 2 stoppage clearances as well (from stoppages he was ruck) and is credited with 2 score launches: I'm pretty sure both of those clearances resulted in shots at goal. This from 76% game time. I think that's a serviceable first game back in the firsts and think he is worth persisting with. His ability to take forward ruck work means that the undersized JVR doesn't do it, and Gawn and Grundy can both set up a kick behind play. TMac can't do this, BBB can.

6 Petracca: complete performance today as an attacking midfielder 5 Chandler: Unbelievable forwards game, the running of Pickett with truly elite kicking and decision making 4 Oliver: complete box-to-box midfielders game. Extracts and wins our ball all day. 3 Brayshaw: a giant turning defence into offence. Intercept game was so strong that, really turned it on for his 150. 2 Pickett: the spark threat lit the fire early. 1 Hunter: could have gone to a few others but not only did he run hard and hold our structure but he used it very well. Apologies to Grundy (great in the ruck, marking improved), May (back to his best), Bowey and Rivers, Landon, Viney, Sparrow, Fritsch, and ANB, amongst others.

Can I suggest that it is possibly more likely that Jackson was a bit of a pawn in this, with Freo adopting predatory behaviour and his manager being an accomplice? From everything I've seen Jackson is a simple fella, just going along with life.

We might have booked Scully but the rest of the comp didn't. It's bloody stupid unless you're north supporters.

I only watched the last quarter, but At Kilda lacked a lot of composure, they didn't look like a quality side to me.

Hold on Gather Round, come on down Gamble Round! Just ship the whole comp off for a round.

I reckon the last page of this thread has the pantomime just right! If anyone gets to boo Jackson it's us, but we'll defend him against Kane Cornes because he is an MFC premiership player and just a kid.

Lots of players evey year end up become very good/elite. Top picks are more likely to do so, but top 10, top 15 and top 20 picks all have ended up in that category. It really comes down to whether you: -Combine 3 picks to get the best in the draft (highest potential, but untested at AFL), or -Draft 3 first round players and see which one (or more) develops into an elite player. As @Jaded No More said, they are clearly hoping to find the next super star, to give our list another 5+ years and potentially extend that window. Obviously each year the depth of talent is different. But personally I would have thought two top 10 picks gives a lower risk than pick 1. And I hope we have some info on any Tassie team, including the types of concessions and consider this in our choice.

It's almost like Hardwick doesn't realise we kicked 10 of the last 13 goals! Jokes aside though, if those votes are correctly assigned (ie votes to their caster), then Hardwick felt that poor performance and effort by his players in the second half lost the game, rather than strong performance by the Melbourne players. i.e. he has given no credit to Melbourne, and given votes to his players who he thought played well, despite their teammates efforts.

I do agree with this. I wanted to fit him in my 6 but couldn't. But Grundy into the ruck, freeing up Max to go forward had a big influence on the game.

It was 10-17 Tigers way at half time, meaning we got 13-10 after that point. Its a correlation/causation question in that sometimes you lead the free kicks because you are first to the ball and win the frees for holding the man, too high, etc. and other times you lead the game because the umpires are giving you all the momentum. In that kind of case, momentum from free kicks is often about ground position and who had the ball at the time. I thought in the first half they definitely helped Richmond's momentum.

I won't boo LJ. He seems a special sort who wanted to be close to family. And we weren't held to ransom in the trade (even if it may have felt like unders). Plus I think he is coping enough from the media and his own supporters. The pantomime isn't fun in his case, it's really just bullying.

I think even though we might boo players who jump ship and chase success, that is very different that despising or true I'll will. Often players are only booked against their old team but those same supporters would still have a soft spot for them when playing against other teams. And just as those players might be booked, we would probably go a bit over the top in support of a player who crosses over to us, especially when playing their old mob. Help them stand tall a bit. As I said, it's all a bit of a pantomime. Until it isn't.

Agree with all this.

Really hard tonight because I don't think anyone played a complete game all day. A couple accumulated and did their thing all day without breaking free, others burnt very bright but for a short period of time only. 6 Petracca. The most complete game for me, 26 touches, 12 i50s, for 609m gained, 7 score involvements (including 3 GAs). I thought Petracca was involved all day, but also added some real power and burst at times. 5 Viney. I'm not going to quote stats. They were good but Vineys votes are based on effort tonight. He wasn't as influential with the ball as Tracc imo 4 Gawn: 6 contested marks (Richmond took 8 for the game) and led is for contested possessions with 13. Also snared a goal. He was the dominant big man on the ground when forward. And Grundy looked much better in the ruck. 3 Oliver: Another all day warrior who didn't truly dominate to his standards but was clearly in our best. Disposal was scrappy at times. However his clutch goal on the siren was the spark we needed: it gave us the momentum. Set shots aren't his game, but he worked hard to nail it, and I think that gets it extra credit. Had no love from the umpires when being held. 2 JVR: it was a 15 minutes cameo, but you could argue he won us the game. Strong contested marks in packs meant he learnt those goals himself. No one else stepped up like that when needed. 1 Lever: 10 marks (2 contested), 10 intercept possessions, and the only player to play 100% of game time. I don't know how to find stats for spoils. But I thought he was our best defender overall, reading the play and impacting contests. Special mentions to Langdon, Chandler, Grundy, McVee and Brayshaw who I thought all played pretty good roles and could have nabbed a vote. Also shout out to Bowey who (apart from one shocker used the ball well and defended very well, including that top notch effort and smother near the end of the game.

I'll take 2 goals down. We haven't played well enough to be any closer. Yet it could be closer: they have had a couple from frees/50s and we effectively had one taken off us (Fritsch mark).

We're not going to win today. AFL has ordained it.

Terrible free against May then. Didn't get the arms just a contest.

Ambit claim to prevent free agency getting more beneficial to the players I reckon.

I think that booking is ok when it is part of the theatre, the pantomime, of the game. It can add to the atmosphere. Traditionally it's been the "villains". The players who gave it back to the crowd as well, and seemed to thrive off the interaction. In that situation it is two way and is good for the game. Players defecting to other clubs, particularly rival clubs, become pseudo villains for that match. A good boo from the crowd early in the game is balanced by it waning as the match goes on, plus the friendship between ex-teammates after the match. Again in this situation it is largely two way. Recently booking seems to have become a bit more mob/pack driven. The booking of Goodes clearly got out of hand, it clearly wasn't two way. The Horne-Frqncis situation is frankly bizarre: being booked by clubs not involved makes no sense. And booing players who were cut/delisted/traded out (such as a Mitch Hannan or Weid) makes no sense either. I'm not sure at what point the crowd lost understand of its role in the pantomime, but it is disappointing.