deanox

Tyson set all that up with a fantastic long range handball.

8 afl seasons, 46 games, 6 ACLs. But 1 premiership medal so it's probably worth it.

I agree with this half way! I thunk his athleticism is perfect for our game plan. His ability to close a gap quickly and pressure a player when the ball is coming in fast is a perfect attribute for that position. BUT his turnovers with back in hand, often in simple situations, due to both skill errors and poor decision making leaves us very vulnerable to a counter attack because of the way we set up. This is why we like player Hibberd, Salem, and Lewis down back, plus Jetta and OMac are reliable decision makers. Interestingly early in the year we potted Lever's performance but his defensive game was fine it was his disposal that made him look bad. Frosts other issue is that he doesn't track back to position well. So once he gets involved in the attacking party, he loses his place in the structure and struggles to get back in. That too is catastrophic to our game plan. Hopefully he can improve those elements, because I'd love him to cement a place in the team.

I'm interested in the playing Vineys role you mention. What makes you say that? Personally I felt Tyson had been playing that role in the starting midfield, while JKH had been playing as a defensive winger (a similar role to Stretch (when he was in the side), and Salem and Vince have both played at times) and a high half forward (shortcoming to ANB). At stoppages he stays outside, defensive side of the contest, stopping the run of any player (usually his direct opponent) who gets around the back of the pack, but also being the first long spread/switch option when we get the ball. He pushes forward up the far wing when we win the ball so it's often the option wide or shallow to half forward. He has covered a lot of ground in transition. Some differences are illustrated in stats, for example in games this year: Viney has had a higher contested possession ratio; more inside 50s, lots more meters gained and clearances. Viney has a very even distribution of ball around the ground with lots of possessions in the center. While JKH has had more rebound from D50s, more intercept possessions. JKH has more of his possessions near the flanks.

I'm not sure we're can miss if we win one, unless crazy results go against us. If we win one game then three of the following would need to happen for us to miss: -Geelong would need to win 2 by 85+ points. -Port would need to beat both Collingwood (mcg) and Essendon (AO) -North would need to win all 3 of Dogs, Adelaide (AO) and St Kilda. -Sydney would need to win 2 of Demons, GWS (spotless) and Hawthorn (SCG).

Winning any one or two games will leave us 6th, with Sydney beating Hawthorn looks like the only real possibility* of us finishing 5th. And assuming we beat Sydney tomorrow, they will be out of the race in round 23 unless they beat GWS. Win 3 and we will finish 3rd and have an away final against WC. I must admit I see lots of value in the second win because it means beating another finalist on the eve of finals, helping to create that belief which I hope translates to finals. Someone said earlier this week that a win tomorrow could set us on a roll towards late September but a Los could see us miss entirely. I agree with this. * the other possibilities involve Collingwood losing to Freo or Port.

Ive had a quick play and from here: -Win all three and finish 3rd -Win any one or two games and finish 6th (i think there are a couple of permutations where we drop to 7th and one where we're climb to 5th) -Lose all 3 and miss finals I'm sure there are some scenarios where that doesn't play out but they will require major upsets.

This is blatantly wrong. Plenty of people know that the rule has always been within 5m of the ball. It's not an interpretation, it is - and has been - the written rule. The is no such thing as "late". That is a common "interpretation" of how to judge the 5m rule. This is correct. The issue here isn't that it was after he had already disposed of it, it is that the force of the bump was significantly more than the player was expecting given: that the player had slowed, that he was not moving to a position to be involved in the next phase ofplay, and he was clearly not expecting contact. In those circumstances, assuming the ball was within 5m, Brown could bump with lower force, e.g. sufficient enough to hinder Saads run towards the ball, but not such that he cleaned him up. Its really simple, and it's clearly in the rules. I don't understand why some people don't get it.

Gotta feel for Bernie. Hasn't had the best year by his standards but has contributed and was stiff to lose his place. An injury that sees him out for the year could be the end of his career, which would be a dissapointing end to a stella career. Hopefully he makes it back to play VFL finals.

Going forward we need him more. He is 25(?) and Jones is 30+. He is the perfect replacement to that position and we're need to transition it rather than lose them both 12 months apart. I think he is worth more than Watts because he is a ball winner, not a up and down finisher. For a lower ranked side with an average midfield, he would start in the centre. Early 20s at least.

It's mostly Melbourne supporters.

I've actually really enjoyed oppo watch too.

This is the problem. He didn't murder anyone. He didn't mean to maim his face and knock his teeth out. He didn't mean to cause permanent damage. It was all an accident. He just meant to hit him, too take his frustration out a bit and to incapacitate him long enough to run off. And he is a good bloke, and this is out of character. Never before in 20 years of sport. He has such a good track record. BUT This action could have killed someone. Maybe not on a football field, but on a footpath. Or in different circumstances. And in that case we would be crowing "coward punch" and "thug". If the action has that sort of potential for harm, it shouldn't be acceptable and should be called out. Worse is that it is on tv, in front of an audience as a role model for kids (whether we like that or not). The outcry is justified as is the punishment. Because society needs to see this view of behavior as unacceptable, whether the victim stands up and walks away or doesn't.

He is currently 5th on the AFL coaches association champion player of the year award leaderboard. The top 4 are Mitchell, Gawn, Cripps, Oliver. He is definitely that good and would easily be one of our top 5 players, albeit he will start to decline in three next few years.

The following quotes from three key people at carlton tell me that they should not be given a priority kick, even if they ask for one: Blues chief executive Cain Liddle said in May: "The reason it (priority pick) wasn’t even thought about and that we’re not interested in it is because we’re really confident in the plan and the kids we’ve been able to bring in." Blues football director Chris Judd even said in May the AFL should no longer award priority picks. Bolton said this season "had thrown challenges that we probably didn't expect as much". "Some are those challenging realities around turnover per games of players. We have had players in games get injured and then each week four to five changes - a big injury toll and that coupled with a young list," he said. "That's made it really challenging and made us not only coach the tactical side of the game and the fundamentals but also really clearly the dynamics of the group and the way and the vibe around the club. It's not that it's been a challenge that we haven't been up for, we have done it, but it was one that was unexpected that we would need to do it to that level."

That's a bit narrower than the G. Not as bad as Kardinia Park but it's the same as Etihad (129m wide).

I think it helps that we're entering premiership mode and could also very much use an outside gutrunner with good skills.

They are lovely numbers. I think Richmond comfort and familiarity with their own game plan, compared to our players learning, means they shade us at the moment. But over the next few years this could be alot of fun.

Why do they bother with a 22 round season?

Good points. I suppose I draw the line on "football act". Cameron's elbow was horrible and brutal but he was within the rules to attempt to mark or spoil (and contract associated with those acts is consensual), and despite how clumsy, negligent, reckless etc. he was, I think anyone would be hard pressed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to elbow him like that. Gaff threw a punch. Off the ball. Punches are never part of the game (unless an attempted spoil, which this wasn't). A push may be consensual in this case given the players were jostling to make position (and that "may" is enough to ensure charges couldn't be laid for that act) but the punch was deliberate. He looked at him and swung with a closed first. He may not have deliberately hit him that hard, or deliberately hit him in the head, but the decision to punch was intentional. The punch was against the rules and not part of expected play, which imo would make it non-consensual. Does that explain my position?

I wonder when (if) we a) last beat all teams at least once in the same season and b) last won our most recent match against all teams.

Great point about Victoria v WA! But the legal contact associated with football is consensual, punching isn't: "In Western Australia, an assault may occur by, for example, striking, touching, moving, or applying force of any kind to another person, either directly or indirectly, without the person’s consent."

Agreed RE what warrants and what doesn't warrant. The issue is it will be used for accidents, that won't warrant. Also if the poster red carded can't be replaced it will be 21 v 21, including the interchange, but 17 v 18 on the field. Statistically, you are better off giving away a red card to save a certain goal than letting the goal get scored, as long as it isn't in the first 15 minutes (or something close to that). I don't think this is manageable in AFL. Our game doesn't allow us to play one less forward and count attack, because there is no offside rule. (I can't think of an international sport with a send off rule where there aren't some form of player positional/movement restrictions). How would this play out if they enforced minimum players in the zone at stoppages?

Exactly. This isn't a crude spoiling attempt or a mistimed bump executed at 30km per hour. We're aren't talking body on body bumping or pushing. We are talking about deliberate strikes, irrespective of to the body or head, that are designed to hurt, intimidate, incapacitate and have no other relation to the game. Hawkins on Fritsch. Rance on Watts. Steele on Oliver. None of these acts were football related and if they are accepted, it isn't surprising that occasionally one of these goes horribly wrong. These guys are peak physical specimens, taught to play on instinct and aggression, making split second decisions rather than pausing to assess consequences. It is a fine line between a pec bruise and a broken jaw. The problem is the act not the outcome. And the act should be punished regardless of how bad the impact is.

I think getting out of WC and starting fresh is probably good for him. But maybe not into the Melbourne media fishbowl. Personally I'd have him at Melbourne still. But I'd want to seriously consider his mental health in the fall out of this incident.