deanox

I think there would be uproar in this case. In 2019 competing clubs got an allocation of 17k for members. I can't imagine that more than 5-7k of those would be sold as GF Guarantee, it's too risky otherwise. So unless we are have capacity of 25k or less, I think we'll be fine.

Yeah fair call. I think there is a big gap between those clubs and the top 4, but under pressure some will come good. I do prefer our fixture of lower tables and top ranked teams. Although I wish one of Geelong or WCE was at the G.

Geelong have a pretty good run except from Freo in Freo, and us last round (they play middle tables teams like Saints, GWS and Richmond). I'd actually like to play them in the finals as I think they will be very beatable with our fitness. We've got a touch run with dogs, WCE and Geelong. Win 2 and we should finish on top I think, but results could really change it, it's tight at the top.

The Superintendent.

They would be a perfect fit for Clarkson.

Impossible task this week. 6 Petracca 5 Petty 4 Oliver 3 May 2 McDonald 1 Pickett Apologies to Hibberd, Gawn, Salem, who all could have had votes.

Mind boggling. Leave him to intercept like he does best.

I think there via setting to be said about playing a team that is trying to beat you vs playing a team that is trying to minimise damage. Sometimes the later can bring the game down to their level, while the former becomes a battle of skills and systems.

Is pressure points measured as actions that effectively apply pressure? While I agree that we have looked off with pressure, my question is "is it laziness or is it a structural/game plan thing"? What I mean is, early in the year our zone was dominating. Opposition players kept kicking to spots we were defending, so it was easy for our players to apply pressure, and thus earn pressure points. Adelaide beat us structurally by kicking a shallow kick to where May/Lever weren't, forcing them to move out of position and therefore the opposition created opportunities to score. This could look like a lack of pressure points on the stats sheet, because our players had less opportunity to apply pressure. I thought GWS played a game out of their D50 where they chipped short to the HB line before going long or cutting 45 back into the centre. This meant our players were regularly out of position, and therefore couldn't apply pressure. So is the issue that after 10 weeks the other teams have started to crack our structures in a way that means we can't apply pressure? Or are the players not working hard enough to apply the pressure? Or both?

I think after the GWS game they decided they needed a tall forward for PA, so picked Brown as the one to play part game time for Casey and stay rested.

Cause or effect? Was his low game time because the coaches didn't give him time or because he didn't have the fitness coming back from injury? Given we sent him for a mini preseason it would suggest the later?

Both Leigh Newton (1997-1999) and Michael Newton (2005-2011) who played for the MFC were nicknamed Juice, in obvious reference. I am not sure if Ben Newton (originally PA then MFC 2015-2016) got the same nickname.

A top of the ladder finals contender drops a couple for games, a couple of ladder spots and looks shakey. A debutant is not going to fix it.

Personally I've always thought body language could be better or a thanks used. But I Ivery loosely know one of the Melbourne trainers and was talking to them last week in a general conversation. I wouldn't expect this person to say anything bad about Melbourne or the players - because it is the trainers workplace too - but this person did comment to me about the players being a good bunch of people and generally pretty friendly to be around. No need to say that if they didn't mean it.

Shallow inside 50s but also (without evidence) my feel was that they kicked shorter out of defence, meaning they were able to get it outside the D50 before kicking down the line or cutting into the coridoor.

Agree. Definitely under the microscope right now. In his favour is that he once again converted the 2nd most ground on field and had our most sprint efforts, meaning he is probably playing a big role in our system. But his stats and impact have levelled off, and he needs to start having a bigger impact again. For me he is the anti Melksham. I don't think Melksham does enough or works hard enough but there are a handful of times a game where he is devastatingly effective for us with respect to setting up a scoring opportunity. Can we afford to carry both Spargo and Melksham? Two players who probably don't do enough work but create scores? Who else can bring the tank and system role that ANB brings?

I agree with this. I think. Weid is competing with TMac for a spot. They both like to cover the ground a bit more, and when Weid is stuck at home he often struggles to get the the ball drop for while reason. Coincidentally this was the 2018 set up that worked too. I think Jackson fits in this just fine because he is versatile, good below his knees, and his primary role is 2nd ruck / resting forward. I know forward connection is a bit of a joke but connection is built on leading patterns, consistency and trust. At the moment every week it's a different set up and it's hard without a "bail out option" when nothing else presents. Brown's straight line running and leading should straighten us up and give a first target for the eyes. His long leads will create space behind and around him for players like Fritsch and Jackson to drop into. And while he may not be a strong pack mark he at least is a stay at home tall, which means there is always something to hit, instead of trying to spot up Spargo or Pickett. The lack of VFL has really made it hard this year, so I hope we haven't left it too late.

Lose it badly and I agree. But if we turn it around and play a good game but lose a tight one, I think they will be able to recognise the change in form. Losing an interstate match off a short break to another top 4 contender isnt a disastor.

If they wanted the "in" to be fresh for Thursday then yes, they had to make up their minds below the game so they knew who would only play a half. How is that ridiculous? For mine the Weed plays a similar role to TMac, roaming around the ground, so BBB is probably the right alternative foil.

I wonder if the late announcement of the Thursday night game through planning out? ie teams were picked for Sat arvo already (not including Brown or Weid), then Sat arvo happened and they decided that the forward line needs changes, and with the short turn around they decide they want the "in" to be fresh enough so they don't have time to wait until after the game to decide so choose Brown and only play him for a half.

Didn't Weid have 20+ touches and kick 1.3 or something last week too though? In thought I read he played week just didn't finish.

Surprised a local club didn't make one for them like the swans did for us.

We are the fourth highest scoring team in the competition. And the 2nd best defence. What more do you want?

Any chance that was their first win at the G?

I was comfortable with that goal. The ball has to be all the way over the line before it is a score. So as long as some part of his foot touches the ball before the ball is all the way over I think that's in the spirit of the rules (I don't know of technically the ball needs to leave the footy to be considered a kick).