deanox

I think the description of ANB as "coaches favorite" shows personal bias unfortunately (this isn't just you either!). The coach likes him because he runs better than almost anyone and generates lots of chances at goal. The coach picks him because no one else has been able to offer those qualities in that position. When other players go past him, he'll get dropped.

If Hogan played, we wouldn't have had May tie down Patton. And regardless we won by 5 goals. Why would we need another forward?

I didn't realize Bedford nailed the time trial. Is he capable of covering the distance ANB does? If so that really places some pressure on him and his role. I think the reason Kossie is favored is because he seems to be that natural opportunist rather than general "hard running small forward" which the others are. He is the only true goal sneak on that list, I think.

It's early interesting because they are all so different. ANBs strength is his endurance running. Does have Langdon and Tomlinson negate the need for this? He also generates a lot of shots/ chances on goal. Doesn't always take them but it's involved a lot. Spargo doesn't necessarily have the gut nor the knack of creating chances close to goal, but he seems to create a lot of scoring chains from up the field. His touches add lots of value, but there aren't heaps of turn. Bedford seemed to have good spark and pace, and apparently had good endurance. If he keeps developing it will be interesting to see where he goes. Kossie has power, explosion and opportunism. In limited exposure he seems to find the goals, and hunt opposition. He is more of a goal sneak at this stage. What roles do we want them to play? Creator? Finisher / goal sneak / opportunist? Chance generator? Edit: I probably fence sat so he are my thoughts: I'd probably start the year with ANB and Kossie based on exposed form. I think primarily, ANB is under pressure from Spargo, and Kossie from Bedford, and it wouldn't surprise me to see three of them in the side at times this year. It's a great problem to have given we've struggled in this role.

Oscar is playing round 1 because that's how our back line structure works. May takes the biggest and strongest, and will tend to stay at home. Lever is floating, reading the play, intercepting. He'll roam around but if his opponent is trying to drag him out of the backline, he'll switch opponents so he can be closer to goal. Omac is the inbetween, with the ability to play either role but not excel at either. He can step up if we need a second large defender but also isn't limited to only playing on the big guys. But his main skills are excellent zoning, and playing to team rules/structure. He allows Lever the flexibility to come and go where and when he needs. He provides the close to home support that May need to execute his role. I know most will call Lever the 3rd tall, because he will float and intercept, but I think that Oscar is the real third tall because his role requires the flexibility.

I'm glad someone else is noticing Spargos creativeness. I've always felt he "adds value" meaning the person he gives the ball to is usually in a much better position to use it than he was. He doesn't get heaps of it, but his touches are often high value. It's something really good to work with.

Let's say that's our best available right now. Salem gets back in, with Brayshaw and Vanders on the bench, there is only one spot for: -Hannan -Smith -Kosi -Jackson -Spargo -Hore -Lockhart -Brown -Bedford -Jordan -Sparrow -Hunt -Wagner -Rivers -Dunkley -Petty -Baker There is a lot of pressure on the ANBs and Weids, Hibbards and OMacs to play well to keep their spots. We have at least one depth in every position except ruck (waiting on Preuss to return) and probably the wings, and we perhaps dont have the spread of "star" quality or "match winners" across the 22. As long as a large number of key/top players don't get injured, we seem to have decent depth.

Weid got 20+ touches playing in the ruck and is smashed on here. Frost is spotted in Hawthorn colors and Omac gets whipped on here. It's not great.

Langdon was a name recruit. Langdon has finished top 5 in freos bnf the last two years. Tomlison was 7th inthe GWS bnf in 2018 before falling out of favor this year. I don't think he is as big a name as Tomlinson but he was a regular player in a finalist for a number of years.

The ball was well gone but at pace the contact was inevitable given Over tried to shepherd and Crouch wanted to go the man: blocking is legal and at full pace he only has a fraction of a second. He absolutley propelled upwards, which was the reason the elbow came up too, so I have no problem with getting a week. But I really don't think there is much in it. It's sloppy, and a bit worse than May's was, which I think was think was made worse by the fact that Berry didn't look where he was going.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but Crouch was largely stationary and the bulk of the force of the contract came from Clarry, who definitely turned towards Crouch to block (the correct thing to do after giving a handball). However Crouch's elbow came up, and to me that's what makes him culpable. So I think 1 week because that rule was careless, but otherwise it should have been nothing. For context, I also think May's should have been nothing, because I don't think made an action towards the head of Berry.

Im not so sure about this. May was standing still, the Berry ran straight towards him, and May took 1-2 small steps and braced. Berry didn't look where he was running or prepare for contact, which was ridiculous because he handballed because he knew May was there and then kept running to potentially recieve the 1-2 handball. Did he expect May to let him walk past? He has to be responsible for being aware of players within his immediate area. If May didn't bump, the Brisbane player would have ran into him. His only other option was to step out of the way, which is ridiculous. Here are multiple angles: https://wwos.nine.com.au/afl/may-matera-banned-by-afl-match-review/86301d85-8072-4571-8b03-2a86dcf4c755

I really like that the home base is on there. The is much we can't control - particularly the premierships - and i feel the club would know they will be judged very harshly on this, so will want to go easy on things that can't be achieved. So this indicates to me that they think this is very realistic.

I would personally agree with that assessment, but I'm also aware that those who are pro Frost would read that as a loaded/bias assessment, so instead chose adjectives that describe him at his best to illustrate the two styles as contrasting, rather than good/bad. I wish he was able to rein in the so his flair could be emphasized, but he never got there at Melbourne. His ability to close on a lead was second to none however he next mistake was always too costly in the style of defense we are trying to play.

It's a pretty good description. He is dour, positional, and plays to team structure and rules. His main attribute is endurance running. Frost was exciting, free form and creative. His main attribute was electric speed. Both have their place, but I think Tomlinson fits our needs and our game plan better.

If he plays the role I expect him to, those watching at the ground will think Goodwin's a genius and those watching on tv will have no idea why he is getting picked every week because he hardly gets near the ball, especially compared to the excitement Frost brought! If he plays a different role than I expect (eg as a KPD), I think he'll struggle to add a whole lot of value.

You mean about how Tomlinson doesn't get much of it? Honestly, this section of the article fell down when the author suggested Tomlinson was moved to the during finals, when he has played the four the last 3 years at least. The contrast between Langdon sneered Tomlinson exists for a reason. One will be attacking, streaming forward. The other will be defensive, blocking holes and forcing the opposition to mean up so they don't have a loose player. Tomlinson might not get that many touches but he will be playing a defensive role for our structure. Watch for that.

In 2019, 11 games for 11 goals, with at least 1 goal in 9 of them. Around 10 disposals per game. Average stats are very similar to his 2018. He has actually been quite consistent. He did struggle for form but he really struggled for a run at it. Played the first 6, then dropped to Casey where he kicked 2.3 and took 7 marks but got injured, came back through Casey where he kicked 3.1 and he was named in the best, promoted for 5 more games in the MFC before injury ended his season. Not great form but I think he deserves a solid run at it. If he plays 22 games and has a 3 goal match once a month he'll finish with 30-35 goals. It's those 3 goal games he's been missing. Edit: tl;dr: he was poor this year in his interrupted year but still named to consistently kick a goal per week. It only takes an injury free season and 4 good games to turn a 25 goal a year forward into 35 goal a year forward, which is probably what we'd be content with right now.

I think Tomlinsons value to us will be what he adds in defensive (and offensive) structure through running hard, covering ground and providing options. He may not dominate stats or attacking wise, but as a club who constantly gets exposed "out the back" or on the wings, his presence should improve us.

Thanks, and I agree this is valid to some extent, but it is also circular and a poor analogy because TV shows don't "develop" live on air: Young, developing player has not yet played well therefore he won't develop into a player who can play well. So you can claim this and be right both ways. If he doesn't develop: see told you!, but if he does: well he hadn't shown anything then so the development was a surprise. What about his poor performances make you think he won't make it? Or do you think he has already reached close to max potential so is not developing? I'd say he had two "young development" years in 16 and 17, showed a bit and broke out towards the end of 18 (only 10 games for the season) then struggled with consistency due to both a bit of increased pressure and injury (hip and concussion) before a calf injury followed by a broken jaw finished his season by round 16. Yeah, this year has a bit of pressure on it, especially if uninjured. But I'm not sure he's had a clean run at it too day he has chronicly under performed.

I swear this is the best summary of Weid I've read. Ask the evidence I've seen points to "it should click at some point", and reports from inside the club suggest attitude and application are correct. That doesn't mean he will make it, but I haven't seen anyone articulate why they think he won't make it with evidence apart from "doesn't do enough". My fingers are firmly crossed.

We have an open list spot that we may as well fill. Unless it is a serious set back or is looking unlikely to respond favorably to training, I suspect he'll get a 1 year contract so we can see him through the full rehab. We don't expect him to play until half way through the year, so why would we pull the pin in Feb after a minor set back or simply soreness?

Tomlinson will be one of the first picked every week. AVB if fit is easily best 22. Weid if fit is almost a lock to get a game. Strange comment.

I suspect he was a back up for the last list position if Bennel fell through to Geelong.

It might be too specific, but I'd love to hear his thoughts about Pickett vs Weightman. I'd also be interested to hear about: - science vs stats vs gut feel when it comes to drafting. Are certain stats non negotiable or very strong lead indicators? How strongly is biometric information considered? Ie expected height based on family data? - draft night process. Do we rate all players in the draft in order then pick the highest available? Do we rate groups of players collectively so that we can pick sliders? Who makes the call to trade live picks vs draft what is available?