deanox

Ah the old forum post count, are we able to bring that up in the way back machine somehow? RE HT wannabe that absolutely made my night. PS congrats Andy et al on a fantastic site and big part of my week for many years!

No it is 100% the responsibility of the players. Impresa have ti run into the best position to view the play, and players have to be aware. Especially at bounces when three umpire gives an indication of where they'll be running.

Frawley.

6 Rivers 5 Trengove 4 Gysberts 3 Martin 2 Jones 1 Maloney Apologies to McKenzie who missed out as I forgot Maloney. Green finished well but didn't influence the game enough otherwise for me.

Beat me to it! Out: any/all of Bennel, Jetta, Warnock, Morton, Bate, Petterd, Newton, In: anyone who has a half decent game for casey tomorrow

6 Jones 5 Watts 4 Rivers 3 Martin 2 Sylvia 1 MacDonald Only 6 who came close to holding their heads up. Apologies to Frawley, he didn't do enough when he had chances although the delivery to him when he presented was woeful, and Maric who tried again.

My only problem with the contested bal l start is that it isn't what it sounds. Any lose ball get is contested ball, as it is in dispute. If you play 20 m lose and keep picking up the lose ball you could get 20 contested possessions for the day. That being said, it is a measure of how often you take possession when it's in dispute.

We are currently lacking on field leadership. Players who stand up when they need to, do the team thing, drag everyone along with them. Green and Davey are't doing it. Kerr, Cox and Embly did it against us. Everyone at Geelong is still doing it. This is a major area where we are struggling. Personally I don't have any problems with us letting go of Miller, Junior, Bruce et al. There were reasons for letting go all of them, and Junior was the only one of those three who actually displayed on field leadership. Our We currently have 5 players over 27 (Green, Davey, Jamar, Moloney, Warnock) and only 3 more over 25 (Rivers, MacDonald, Sylvia). Of those 8 players, Jamar and Moloney are the only two playing consistent football. None of those players scream leadership when the chips are down. In 1999 we lost our first round draft pick, in 2000 we lost our 2nd and 3rd round picks. Those players would now be 29 or 30 years old if still on our list. Add Luke Molan, Daniel Bell, Nick Smith who were all first round picks in 2001/02, and the fact the Scot Thompson (1st round 2000) and Brock Mclean (first round 2003) both left, we have a 5 year hole where we basically didn't add anything to our list. While there is a good chance none would have made it, that little bit of extra leadership and experience would sure be helpful around now. I think some of these numbers are worth putting into perspective. 21-24 year olds don't tend to win you flags. They might add flair and skill and help win flags, but it is typically a senior core of players 25-28 who are winning flags, with a few quality older players doing their thing. We don't have this group of players. I hate to think that until we have this then we can't expect the side to be true contenders. There are two ways I can see that we can influence this - keep drafting young and wait 3-4 years for us to really hit our straps or accelerate the process with some strategic recruiting. I think we will go down the path of some strategic recruiting, maybe end of this year, maybe the year after. I am happy we haven't done that before now because I don't think the rest of the team was ready to step up, and I think any recruiting should be at the icing phase, not the development phase. Any thoughts on this deficiency in our list?

Last week he was selfish. He had been under the pump all week and he made sure he got all the stats. I noticed it then, and he didn't back it up today. I like Green, but he needs to work harder, like they all do.

Should be straight to the supreme court tomorrow for an injunction. Don't care if it is ultimately unsuccessful but we need to make a stand. The afl have always shafted us. I want its to fight it.

wont be a problem this week :S

at least we'll have some ripping excuses when we get done the next two weeks! I had pegged us in to win 8 more games for the season, including the next two. This could be much tougher now. On the up side, defintley a big chance for some others to step up - Martin in the ruck, Newton gets an extended run, Bate won't get dropped, Gawn might get a run in casey 1s as no. 1 ruck, and some others have to step up to cover grimes and trenners.

There was a definite difference in the way we played today. Some of it was skills, some of it was intensity, some of it was game plan (i.e. going up the guts). A lot of it is due to the players - Bailey can't make them kick goals or hold marks. But what is up to Bailey is motivating them to turn up and tackle and be aggressive as well as making sure they are following team plans w/ respect to tackling, pressure, game plan (i.e. up the guts). Currently the players have two states - up or down. We saw today the game plan works against an average side. We saw last year that the game plan works against good sides. We now need to get the game plan to work every week, and for the players to get up every week. Form and confidence in a young group must be very hard to control, especially compared with older, wiser teams with more self belief (i.e Geelong players expect to win, they've been doing it for years. When we get off to a bad start we don't have the same expectation). If Bailey can't get the team to perform at that intensity every week there is one of two things wrong - the players aren't up to it, or the coaching isn't up to it. As outsiders, we can't tell which that is.

DeeTermination, you would be naive if you think that members who have a track record of posting over a longer period of time, and who have a known history of being reliable, are better believed than an unfamiliar member with limited posts, particularly when they post such a comment, and then fail to respond to follow up questions. This doesn't mean that new members are less reliable or credible, it means the rest of us are unaware how credible they are. Think of trusting a 4 year old friend versus a recent acquaintance. You may not rule them out, but if unsubstantiated so may not trust them straight up.

31 touches, including 21 kicks, 8 marks and 10 inside 50s. By far his best game for the club. He plaed more as a midfielder than as a forward pocket but that is fine. He used the ball well, and found space and time as well.

The game resembled our footy o last year. We still did the reload off half back and run and carry it up but like last year, we ran it up through the guys rather than wide around the wing. We haven't really done that this year, we have stayed wide. Our skills were better today - less fumbles than the last couple of weeks. We ran harder for our teammates i.e. leading, when up the ground or off half back. Our forward pressure was much better than previous weeks - we really tackled and did our best to keep the ball in. I think we pushed up the groud to keep it in more than we have in previous weeks - this is a definite tweek compared with last season. We also played our short/mobile forwards deep (Petterd, Wonna, even Dunn) and our taller forwards further up the ground (Watts, Bate). I believe this was done to keep Johncock deep in defense and run Rutten around up the field. It worked successfully.

Have fun! Let us know how it goes.

If you turn up in jeans you'll be under dressed. Wear a proper shirt amf some slacks. Note I said wear a demons tie. The tie wasn't meant as a fashion statement, it was your corporate supporter gear...

Shirt and a demons tie. You're not going to the footy you are going to an official lunch!

Martin is a bit soft body on body I think, I wonder if that has anything to do with it? The weeks theme seems to be tougher players.

How has Jamar improved on his last season all Australian performance? How have scully and bate performed better than mckenzie, when none have played games yet? In fact how is bate -1 when other players who havent played a game are closer to -5? How is petterd 0 given he had a good year last year until injured, and has done nothing this year? Subjective numbers like this are nothing but that. This scale means nothing about where we are at. All it does is highlight that across the board players are under performing, which we already knew.

Nothing in it at all. He laid a bump that was 100% legitimate in football in every way except it was more than 5 meters away from the ball at the time (say 10 m). As a result it probably should have been a free kick. All this talk about low/medium/reckless/intentional etc only applies if he commits a reportable act. In this case the contact was legal so none of these apply. If you applied those things to every contest in the game people would be reported all the time. Think a typical high tackle - high contact, reckless action, low impact. Everyone would get 70 points every week just for turning up.

One thing I think is a major difference between this year is Mackenzie, and to a lesser extent Scully, in the middle. Last year, these two players were often the player who straightened us up through the guts. They both played down the centre of the field, either passing it in board or presenting in the coridoor. This year we have played the coridoor far less than in our good patches last year. I wonder here if the difference is the change in cattle on field or a change in game plan i.e. has bailey told us to play wider this season? (out of interest, last years premiers play wide, not through the centre, have we tried to play more like them?)

Correct. Didn't think it had been deleted was just trying to work out where it went! For some reason I could see the next few posts after mine (including the one that quoted me) but not mine. Tried reloading, refreshing, reopening etc but wasn't there! Strange.

Any idea where my post went???