deanox

At the 'G I usually sit Level 2 behind the goals which gives such a clear view of the tactical set ups and battle. The subtle shift of a zone left or right, the spare man at the contest and the positioning of the loose man. Defensive/ offensive positioning on the far wing, etc. None of this is apparent on tv. The wider shots help a bit, but not a lot. I'd love to see the tv change to behind the goal views more often, maybe with a close up inset of the play.

Zone defence was introduced which meant those forwards no longer had space to dominate on their own. Instead teams need to work hard around the zone, making individual scorers more valuable.

I would agree with this. He was the reason we were able to experiment with ideas like the 4 man "diamond defence". He does a great job of leaving his man at the right time to hit the next contest, covers ground quickly and he spoils high in the air well. Hw is also a reliable kick in defence. He isn't great in a muscle fight. But not many defenders are in 2020, because then they probably aren't great at zoning, closing, chasing etc. The reason he has been whipped is because of tv viewing angles: -When he is caught one out, and out marked, that's usually because the ball has come in too easy. -Beaten on a lead? Often because his opponent had too much space and there was no pressure on the ball carrier. -"His" opponent gets an easy goal out the back? Oscar has left to cover another loose man and the mids didn't work hard enough to get back. Is he perfect? Nah. But a lot better than he gets credit for.

Smith is young, developing, versatile and has good attributes that serve him well across the ground, but hasn't baked it at AFL level. I think primarily, he provides us great back up to Lever, who has had injury issues. Following that he also potentially can fit in as a KPD if one of Oscar or May go down: you always need back ups on your list. And, given his pace, he could potentially fill a Hibberd style role as well, offering competition to Rivers in that space. I don't see how he fits up forward. He will never be a KPF and we have a lot of mid forwards with some runs on the board, so he is down the pecking order in that space bit could fill it if AVB and Hannan got injured and Melksham was dropped. I think he represents depth/coverage for now. Hibberd and Jetta are 31 by the end of this year and Melksham will be over 30. So I think Smith has a role to play over the next 2 years as a more mature body filling some of those roles so that we aren't plugging kids in immediately. If he steps up the position could be his for 4-6 years. If not, he will be a reasonable stop gap until someone overtakes him. Right now he isn't best 22. But we have no injuries either.

No worries: it was a mistake I made for years after hearing TJ described that way and I was surprised to learn I was wrong!

I think quietly deleting and releasing a statement has been the go to move for years and it hasn't worked. We are now at a stage where: a) public shaming is considered a reasonable outcome (how many people write these things thinking they will remain anonymous?); and b) showing the exact tweet or comment draw attention to how even something small is racism. It doesn't have to be a long offensive statement. I think this helps define what isn't acceptable better than ever before.

I know people used to call TJ "laconic", but I'm not sure it is for the same reason you think they did. Laconic means "using very few words" Perhaps languid ("very slow and relaxed") would be a better choice?

Successful clubs playing finals allow players to get there a bit easier. An average of 2 finals a year over a 15 year career (this is Jones' 15th season) means a possible 360 games.

Good post, a couple of thoughts: 1) The AFL, like all big corporations, have a massive marketing department. They have the finger on the pulse of society because it costs them millions of they get it wrong, and unlike political parties they don't have ideology. When organisations like the AFL start taking a cause seriously, you can be sure that public sentiment has shifted that way and it is now the majority position. Until now it has been lipservice, but it seems now the tide has turned. Posts like the one the MFC made today (naming and shaming racists) demonstrate that. 2) Can you think of another social utility that is 100% owned by private companies with zero regulation? Because I can only think of social media platforms. Social media is this century's version of public spaces, roads, plumbing, sewerage, electricity, telephone lines, media (newspapers, tv broadcasts, radio), internet, etc. But it is the first in which the people have no stake. Perhaps it's time for either strong regulation or a government owned social media platform competitor to provide choice (ie if you are happy to live without certain bells and whistles, you can retain ownership of your own data)?

One aspect that I think is important to note in discussion of racism in different cultures, is that the racism we are confronted with in the "western" world is rooted in european colonialism, which resulted in significant systemic and power related racism. In other cultures, the racism we see directed to foreigners (including white people) who have travelled to those countries today is often more about exclusion and xenophobia (fear of others), rather than historical oppression. Of course this isn't an absolute: minorities within geographical areas such as the Middle East or Asia, are subjected to racism within the bounds of state based oppression, but it isn't the same type of racism we are seeing here with Bennell or other first nations footballers.

It's almost as if even though we haven't been flying, it's not that bad?

DC, having read your post I was a bit confused and then having read mine again I think I am to blame for some ambiguity, and as such apologise: I was not meaning to suggest that you were signalling. I was referring to "you" the troll. I probably should have said "they" and for clarity I have edited my original post. Can you please let me know if it makes more sense now? However I really dont understand your last paragraph. What about my post implied triggered or not being part of the discussion? I felt I added to the discussion by not allowing it to be excused as "not really racist, just trolling". However, if you want to discuss further why racists think they can hide behind "trolling", the same way people have hiden their privately held discriminatory beliefs behind "its just a joke" for decades, we can!

Even if they don't believe it and they are just trying to get a reaction, by using that language they contribute to the systemic oppression and vilification of the target group. They signal to others that it is ok to speak or act that way or believe those things, even just in secret. They signal to that group that they need to be on the look out for attacks. That makes it racism. It makes them racist. It needs to be called out for what it is.

It's still racism, even if it's just trolling.

I can't agree more with this sentiment. BUT Oliver is regularly punched and hit off the ball by his opponents, multiple times every week. And they are real punches targetted at gut, kidneys, solar plexus etc. too, not just a little flailing arm push like Oliver did to Rankine. I'm not saying any of it should be acceptable. But you can't penalise teams with shots on goal for the soft ones, and let the others go. Oliver has become an umpire target unfortunately. He didn't get the frees for holding the man but gets pinged at the slightest touch the other way. It's a disgrace.

Aggree with this. We wouldn't want to tweak too much would we? But also, I understand what Jaded is saying: it would be nice to have 2 or 3 kick out plays we can successfully use.

But he didn't actually touch him, that's the problem.

I thought Tom had 1-2 moment's in each game, but I thought Weid looked more threatening and physical today. I do think Weid is better deep and TMac is better between the arcs.

Weid crashed packs in a way that TMac hasn't all year.

I don't think id play Jackson as one of the 2 kpfs yet. Similar to my above comment: play Jackson as a mobile flanker instead of Melksham. A third tall so runs around.

Interesting idea. I'm not sure if he is big enough for the no 1 or 2 role up front either. Could consideration be given to replacing TMac with the 196cm Brown and using Smith as a mobile forward instead of Melksham?

TMac averages 8 disposals, 0.8 goals, 3.4 marks, 2.6 score involvements this season. Today Weid kicked 2 goals from 7 disposals, took 3 marks and had 3 score involvements. TMac hasnt been in form but if he kicked 2 goals per week we'd have been happy. In addition, although Weid didn't take many marks and also ran under the ball a free times, I feel he hit and halved contests much more often than TMac has over the last 4 weeks, creating more ground ball opportunities.

Its just a one man monologue.

TMac for Brown if injured. If Melksham goes it, surely Hunt or Jones get first chance? He'd be the only change for me. Maybe Lockhart for Rivers, but you can't fault Lockharts endeavour or effort.

Im wondering who got left behind then? My guess was the following 12: Kolodjashnij Jordon Nietschke Baker Petty Chandler Wagner Wagner Bradtke Hore Sparrow Dunkley But if Sparrow is there, someone else stayed (Preuss, Bedford, Spargo?).