deanox

I don't mind having lawyers. The problem is that there is a lawyer in the prosecution, a player advocate who can't bring up precedent or external evidence (just the vibe), and a tribunal panel of players from an era that means they probably have brain damage. Make the same three lawyers the tribunal every week, and allow precedents to be used in prosecution and defence. If the judgement they reach is not what the AFL wants, ask the tribunal to advise what changes to the rules they would need to get that result in the future, make the change and move on.

I came here to say he would be an upgrade on TMac right now. The ability to rotate him and Jackson would be great. He has potential down back post Steve May too. The squad would know if he was a positive or disruptive influence. If he isn't too bad an influence, his talent is worth a late pick in a confused draft.

Its all lip service. I'd bet they have legal advice that says something like: "In order to avoid liability in a future compensation claim for brain injuries, you should have a visible record of punishing every instance where a player is concussed to demonstrate that concussions were only caused when other players broke the rules i.e it is their fault not the league's."

A few years back someome was plotting winning/losing margin vs uncontested possession differential. The correlation was amazing, and the outliers had very obvious explanations i.e. a losing team with more UP actually had lots of them in their d50 while they chipped it around unable to make ground instead of bombing long and losing possession. I wonder how hard it would be to pull this data this year?

Honestly, that's what I thought he was trying.

I was thinking of it being a good way to get players 33-50 on a list and paid, rather than just to the game. I think at the moment a lot of the tier 2 footballers are lost to the game. They aren't in the best 25, and they aren't in the developing 12 kids, so they are cut. This means the reserves comp is full of developing kids not the second best 22s. If we can find a way to retain the second tier players in a single comp instead of spreading them over 50 clubs in 4 leagues, the elite kids will have a higher standard to develop in, injury replacements will come from a more concentrated pool of quality players, and late bloomers have an opportunity. The best way to do this is really big or really small lists. Hybrid lists (small list plus a large, interchangeable supplementary list) is a good compromise.

This is a great move. An AFL seconds comp is very important for development of juniors, form of reserve players and retention of "second tier" players who can plug spots. I don't understand why all three of "stand alone", "allign" or "spread across teams" are an option. With 10 Vic and 4 interstate teams, this should be a 14 team competition, with each AFL team being able to either field a stand alone (i.e. Carlton) or a joint team (i.e. Casey Demons). All other existing clubs should also play in their respective VFL or NSWFL style comps, and any allignment clubs should be able to field a "seconds" in their local comp too. So Casey "reserves" can play in the existing VFL, providing top up to the Eastern League where needed. This is an opportunity to change the list sizes in a good way: smaller AFL lists (say 33 players) but longer supplementary lists that can hold development players and potential top ups, who play in the seconds comp, but can be "upgraded" throughout the year, either based on long term injuries (any time anyone is injured for say 4+ weeks) or on a form up/down thing (i.e. a maximum number of changes can be made over the season, but they can be made at any time).

I thnk this sums up what I was trying to say about "best 22". Viney is best 22 but can only play in the guts. If he was on the wing, forward or back we'd be having the same convo about how he was playing poorly. So put Harmes in the guts move Viney to a HBF (? won't work), HFF (? maybe). So who gets dropped? Not Fritsch or VDB. So probably Jones/Hannan. I'm OK with trying that, but it is a balance. We now probably have an underperforming mid at HFF that we'll complain about.

Again, which of Oliver, Truck, Viney, Brayshaw is he ahead of for a midfield position? Or does he take Sparrows role as bench warmer (he played 55% tog last week despite us smashing the pies)? If we want him on the park he plays HBF or HFF. At HFF there is plenty of competition: Hannan, VDB, Fritsch, Jones, and the resting mids Brayshaw and Trac. At HBF the competition is Rivers.

Agree with this 100%. I'm not saying we've got it right but I don't think it's as outrageous as people make out. The versatility of mid size positions in AFL vs say soccer or cricket makes this difficult. The value gained or lost by changing Harmes' role needs to be considered with respect to the other roles that the change would affect. If Rivers was available as a game day emergency then that would have allowed the reshuffle, but given at selection it appears Jones/HFF and Harmes/HBF was preferred to Harmes/HFF and Rivers/HBF it probably wasn't on the cards. FWIW I would have prefered Harmes/HFF and Rivers/HBF.

I don't understand smaahing Goodwin over this. Is Harmes in the best 22 players on our list? Probably. Is Harmes in the starting 3 mids? No, he isn't even the first rotation in. Is Harmes the best half forward option? Probably not. Fritsch is ahead of him, Brayshaw and Truck are resting there, Jones, Hannan and VDB are playing there, but can't play anywhere else. Can Harmes play wing? No. As the 5th best midfielder and 3rd best (and more versatile) HFF, but still in the 22, he finds himself at HBF because he is capable of playing there, in a way that others who he is competing with can't. So Goodwin is "stubbornly persisting" because he is trying to play the best players. The only real option is to drop Harmes for a specialist like Rivers, but then he would be leaving talent in the shed. It's pretty clear what he's trying to do and why. It isn't working so he needs to reassess: but when you can't play talent into form in the reserves, persisting may be the best option.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/teams/melbourne/how-melbourne-stumbled-on-a-gun-tagger-in-james-harmes/news-story/d09d859f1cc5c6c9c507473a5fc0e49b Harmes went into the midfield with Viney out and Petracca forward. He is behind Clarry, Truck, Viney and Brayshaw for a spot in there.

I'll be surprised if Jones comes back, quads aren't 6 day injuries, and his punch suggested more than just cautionary tightness. Harmes has been very poor down back, although I'm unsure if they'll drop a senior player. Id like to see Rivers take his spot. Bennell will come in for Sparrow if Jones isnt right. His disposal at least adds a point of difference. Also, any other change options will result in reshuffling (ie Omac in, Tomlinson to the wing). Gawn back if fit. I think Preuss has given us more than TMac has the last two weeks, so i'd drop TMac and try to use Gawn or Preuss forward of the ball. Melksham has been terrible but does keep generating scoring opportunities, so will probably hold his spot. Out: Sparrow (inj.), Harmes, Preuss/Tmac In: Bennell, Rivers, Gawn,

Leave him there!

That rule changed this year, and it is no longer considered prior opportunity.

Oliver burst out in the first few minutes but then got blanketed. Throw him forward?

He has looked a likely type an be I think he has the capacity to rotate through the flanks as well as inside mid. Am I right in saying we got him with the pick we got back from Hogan? So we got May, KK and Sparrow for Hogan? Pity KK hasn't made it back.

We got Preuss for Dom Tyson. To think Preuss has played 8 games to Tysons 3 since that trade. I also think he's worth more to us that other clubs right now, without sufficient exposed AFL form, so the trade probably wouldn't happen. He is there because we need mature cover for Gawn while we think there is a genuine chance of finals/premiership. But then with Jackson coming on, maybe he isn't that critical and we would consider taking overs for him.

We've got a tight fixture between 14-17 with 4 games in 15 days, but it looks like our opponents are the same. - GWS (r17) play on the same day as us in both r14-16, so neither side disadvantaged. - Freo (r16) have 1 day extra break from r15 but they need to travel to Cairns, and their r14 game is the same day as ours, so we both play 3 in 9 days (rr14-r16) -Swans (r15) have the same break as us from r14 Pretty happy with this, because the uneven breaks have caused one sided contests.

In 2018 Spargo averaged 5.2 score involvements from 12.2 disposals per game. Let's call that 4.2 from 9.8 in 2020 due to shorter games. This year he is ave 4.0 from 9.0 from 3 games, so very close. This year 84 players average 4.2 or score involvements per game and at 4.0, Spargo is top 90 in the comp. That's only 4-5 players per club who are that much involved in their teams scoring as much as Spargo. Let's say elite in this category is 5 (only 22 players average more than 5 score involvements per game this year). Spargo only needs an extra 2 disposals per game and he'll hit that. I rate score involvements as a concept stat because they show how well you create attacking opportunities through your disposal, either by hitting the score board or by combining with your team mates during scoring passages. In Spargo's case he creates opportunities to score by adding value. He disposes to the advantage of his team mates in a way that frees them up. Even when he isn't scoring, those around him score.

Didn't Koz have a week off recently?

He has been OK and will struggle to get back in while we are playing like this. But even if just in glimpses he has shown qualities that we don't have in any other player. He has time and space with the ball, and finesse in his disposal. He adds a bit of silk that we otherwise don't have. Hopefully his body holds up, and he learns to trust it, such that he can impact games with those qualities in the future.

I think Rivers is competing with Hibberd, Salem and even Harmes in the medium back defender role. Given Hibberd is 31 before the start of next season, I think there will be a transition period over the next 12-24 months.

I'm assuming talking points get released sometimes. Journos and media can then write their pieces during working hours, and publish immediately after the press conference, instead of waiting til 4pm to start writing articles. I also wonder of early release of info to journalists is part of a the "media deal". Jounos pay money to be accredited. In return they get leaked bits to get clicks, views, followers etc.

That's just not true. In 2020, he is averaging 4.0 marks (1.8 contested, 3.0 inside 50), 2 goals, 1.2 behinds, 5 score involvements, 8 disposals. Factor that for only 80% game time and is the equivalent of 5 marks (2.25 contested, 3.75 inside 50), 2.5 goals, 1.5 behinds, 6.25 SIs and 10 disposals. 2019 was 4.2 marks (1.5 contested, 1.5 i50), 1 goal, 0.7 behinds, 4 SIs, 10.2 disposals. 2018 was 4 marks (1.8 contested, 1.2 i50), 1 goal, 0.5 behinds, 4.2 score s and 11.5 disposals. He hasn't gone backwards at all, he is taking more marks and kicking more goals per minute of game than previous. There is nothing to support your "stuffed up" comments, except for your feel. My comment about learning from the ruck is pure conjector. I have no idea if it's true, but it has more basis in reality than your unsupported claim.