deanox

Sounds like he kicked 1.2 and had a few goal assists which is good. Wil probably depend on his intensity around the contests including defensive efforts.

sore is not what we need.

Ive been thinking this for a few weeks too. It has probably been messed around by our injuries and suspensions. And ever probably cut it a bit fine. But yeah it wouldn't surprise me.

I actually think the solution to all this is for umpires to pay holding the ball quicker. At the moment, players get ages to dispose to the ball. If in a typical situation when the player has had prior opportunity, holding the ball was paid as soon as the player is tackled and retarded (as per the laws), players wouldn't be so keen to wrap the arms info the tackle. The laws of footy only give allowance to a player to dispose of the ball if he hasn't had prior opportunity, even though it isn't umpired that way.

Has anyone seen video footage?

We'll make minimal changes this week. 1 at most outside suspension/ injury. We have been a very unsettled team the last 6 weeks. We have finally got our best squad info the park, the squad that looked did good earlier this year. We need to give them time tho find form individually (6 of our best Jones, Gawn, Viney, Salem, Vince and Watts have all missed football). And we need to give them tinge to click as a team; to get their roles working again, to cover each other, to bed info the right spot. Also, I think that venue change still be very important for our game plan. We didn't adapt well to the suburban ground sizes and winds, perhaps partly due to our game on and partly due to our youth and inexperience.

yeah fair call. I figured they'd probably be cashed up and bring "desirable" types into your bar, but you know your business! As far as the drinking etc. goes, Im surprised they do. It has such about effect on recovery and performance it must be noticeable at the top end.

I'm not sure why you'd risk business from these guys by outing them on here and stating your position so publicly.

Hogan is a god contested mark, when he has a bit of form behind him. He isn't the strongest overhead; that is Weeds thing though. Weed attacks the ball high info the air. Once he gets the pace of the game he'll complement well.

Having Gawn and Hogan out for most of the year has really hurt us in this department. But looking at it subjectively, we are the 6th highest scoring team in the competition; the lack of marking hasn't hurt our ability to hit the scoreboard.

this plays out well for us if hawthorn hold on.

Trengove on the field, JKH on the bench. Do we read anything into that?

Thanks for good discussion. Im not sure that Im rating Trenners that high yet (if it was purely 1v 1 id probably go JKH on form). Im trying to be objective and look at it structurally (ie position) instead of on favourites but that isnt always easy! Your take on midfield minutes is just as valid as mine, and no idea how the coaches will see it. What I do know is that Trenners didn't do anything special. No attacking drive, no creative play etc. So my gut says her didn't add a whole lot of value. But when I consider his steady possessions, his good positioning which led to a reasonably good defensive job, and his on field leadership (directing players, structural control etc) I wonder if those things are more valuable given we have a lot of creative types in defence already. Did those structural directions and leadership help us have our best defensive half for the year? Im not sure. But we rarely had opposition players out the back or loose, something that has plagued us this year. Maybe there is something to be said for on field positioning over creative flare sometimes!

Although I understand what you are saying, for me the answer to "why not?" is that structurally it doesnt make sense. Trengove played deep defense yesterday, not defence rotating into mid. Even if Jones rotates through mid and backline, one of the mids gets reduced minutes to share the midfield time with Jones, and thus they need to play another position. JKH won't be doing that (going to defence), but maybe Lewis spends more time back to accommodate the skipper in the middle? Team balance tells me swap a mid for a mid. We play a 7 man defence most of the time and had 8 defenders in the side yesterday including Lewis and Salem, who both take midfield minutes, I can't see Trenners going out unless one of Vince, Wagner or Smith return or Melksham is shuffled back again.

We aren't bringing Jones into the backline this week, so someone goes out from the midfield, either dropped or they move to the back flank and Trenners goes out, or moves forward (and Melksham goes back and Trenners goes out). All those players you mentioned played today in the same backline as Trengove did so I dont see that as an issue.

Im not so sure. Who from the midfield drops back to HBF to cover Trengove? I think JKH goes out for Jones. Trengove out for Vince the next week.

Agree entirely that Melksham has a spot. I meant is Jack competing against him? Melksham was a HBF but has moved forward recently. Will her stay forward or go back? Jack is playing HBF. Long term, Jack is competing against Smith and Wagner, is he behind Melksham too?

I'm not sure the speed is that big a concern because a) most players aren't fast enough to run down other players, and b) we probably won't pay him on their fastest small forward. The Telstra GPS stats put Trengove as: a) the second highest average moving speed on the ground; and b) the third highest distance for "distance covered at high speed". *In both categories he was Melbourne's top ranked player today with only PA players above him. So he may not have a great top speed but he has a tank and very high work rate. He obviously keeps on the move to maintain his positioning as the play moves too. Possibly more important than speed.

Interesting that those Telstra GPS stats put Trengove as: a) the second highest average moving speed on the ground; and b) the third highest distance for "distance covered at high speed". *In both categories he was Melbourne's top ranked player today with only PA players above him. So he may not have a great top speed but he has a tank and very high work rate. He obviously keeps on the move to maintain his positioning as the play moves too.

My thoughts from match discussion thread: I watched Trenners pretty closely today from level 2 behind the goals. Most of the above are spot on but ill add some thoughts: - he only played 90 minutes (of the >120 minutes), about the same as Mellsham and Salem, with JKH our lowest at 82. -he effectively played on the left back pocket on Sam Grey for 90% of his time on ground. Picked up Boak a couple of times. - Acted as a structural general, pointing and setting players and positions constantly - Didn't attack much: only left his place in the zone when his direct opponent ran into the contest. This happened less info the second half. - Mostly got possessions linking across half back either when we switched our as a safe option. Got involved a couple of times when he was in the play. - I saw him get beaten by his specific man twice. Once by Grey up the field on the HFF (the ball went out of centre bounce, Grey got their first, and got an inside 50 that resulted in a goal) and once during a run on play by Boak I think, as a chain of possessions caught our structure out - He obviously isnt fast. That didn't matter when our structure was working. He wasn't going to chase guys down but was fine in general play. My thoughts are he offers more than many. I think there is a role for him when Vince and Lewis decline but unsure where he sits in the coaches eyes behind Wagner and Smith in the longer term. Does Melksham fit into this group too or is he a forward now? Trenners didn't play mid, and he didn't attack much, so it's clear to me what his role is at the moment. Just wait and see if they think he is handy depth.

I watched Trenners pretty closely today from level 2 behind the goals. Most of the above are spot on but ill add some thoughts: - he only played 90 minutes (of the >120 minutes), about the same as Mellsham and Salem, with JKH our lowest at 82. -he effectively played on the left back pocket on Sam Grey for 90% of his time on ground. Picked up Boak a couple of times. - Acted as a structural general, pointing and setting players and positions constantly - Didn't attack much: only left his place in the zone when his direct opponent ran into the contest. This happened less info the second half. - Mostly got possessions linking across half back either when we switched our as a safe option. Got involved a couple of times when he was in the play. - I saw him get beaten by his specific man twice. Once by Grey up the field on the HFF (the ball went out of centre bounce, Grey got their first, and got an inside 50 that resulted in a goal) and once during a run on play by Boak I think, as a chain of possessions caught our structure out - He obviously isnt fast. That didn't matter when our structure was working. He wasn't going to chase guys down but was fine in general play. My thoughts are he offers more than many. I think there is a role for him when Vince and Lewis decline but unsure where he sits in the coaches eyes behind Wagner and Smith in the longer term. Does Melksham fit into this group too or is he a forward now? Trenners didn't play mid, and he didn't attack much, so it's clear to me what his role is at the moment. Just wait and see if they think he is handy depth.

He didn't play on Boak. He played on Sam Grey (46). Twice all day did he pick up Boak (when Grey was off the field).

Has done everything asked of him in a defensive role so far.

Trenners hasn't put a foot wrong, directing traffic in our defensive set ups, no obvious problems at this level, playing on Sam Grey.

Nicholls hates us.