fr_ap

Re. ANB - his role is there, it is clear and not many on the list can play it. I posted this in the Pickett thread. So sick of people ignoring his value: "What you're describing is exactly what ANB was to us in 2018. He was a big, non-spectacular part of our success with a number of games hitting the exact numbers you'd be looking for out of your high half forward: Rd 2 - 21d 1g Rd 4 - 22d 1g 6t Rd 8 - 23d 2.2g Rd 9 - 17 d 4g 5t Rd 10 - 23d 3g 6t Rd 11 - 25d 1.2g 5t Rd 12 - 19d 1.1g 6t Rd 17 - 17d 2g 5t Rd 19 - 22d 1.1g 12t Rd 20 - 22d 2g EF v Cats - 20d 1.3g 9t (and if you rewatch this game, he brought the heat very early and was key to our big 1st Q) For the year he kicked 27.19, averaging 1.1 goals a game at 17 disposals and 4.7 tackles. For an undersized roaming HFF, that is high output. Does he make perfect decisions? Far from it, but his ability to move from contest to contest and use his endurance to get goal scoring opportunities is unmatched in our side. Like many others, his demise in '19 was another reason we couldn't replicate our 2018 form. He needs to bring this form again and make it consistent over a period of years, but I do not understand the constant criticism of him and why people cannot see his value. "

Buckenara is a fool who the HS use for clickbait. Ignore everything he says. Knightmare, while he does get through a power of vision, is a defensive and overly elaborate shut-in who qualifies every assessment of players with caveats, ifs and buts. His descriptions published on ESPN are borderline embarrassing as he seems incapable of describing any player with single adjectives and instead lists a series of sentences as 'strengths or weaknesses': 'running through contests without losing feet, contested winning abilities in confined spaces'...he's laughable. Good on him for turning a clear passion into some pocket money but if he was any good he'd be working in clubland. It is very easy to publish rankings and cover yourself against every outcome, takes a lot more balls to make a decision and pick a player as a recruiter. This is without mentioning that neither of these guys have access to interviews or have met the prospects. All players at the elite u18 level have talent; the mentality and discipline to succeed is in my opinion the biggest factor. Goodwin described as much on SEN last week. Rating the draft immediately after based on rankings you've informed with highlight videos is as useless an exercise as I can imagine. I give us an A+

I believe they were yes. Can't speak for whether they like each other.... Clubs were concerned about Taylor's attitude and ability to adjust to the demands of professional footy plus a move interstate. Sydney is a good fit for him as they can wrap their culture around him away from the spotlight. We were never taking him after taking Kossie. People - get excited about this pick. Was meant to go top 20/top 25. Seriously good get

Completely incorrect mate, we just got away with robbery. All those who wanted Young, we've got the next best thing here and a player who is arguably a lot more flexible positionally. Was so worried they would pick Rantall, who's a butcher, or Bianco, who is undersized and quite outside.

Fantastic get at that pick. I was watching every pick and hoping like hell he would come though to us. Really highly rated by a lot of clubs, fills a need for us off HBF, good kick, good size, can roll through the midfield or wing and is from WA so will help LJ settle. An awesome get, well done dees.

I somewhat agree with that order. If all the above are gone or we go left field/absolute needs based, Brock Smith would be a very solid selection as a mid sized defender with excellent kicking skills and decision making. Very dependable player in an area where we are light on for quality depth and/or prospects given Frost's departure: Petty training with the forwards Oscar's questionable future Wagner being average depth, Hore only entering his 2nd season Ageing Hibberd Ageing NevJet May's & Lever being prone to injury KKs questionable future

Rantall is a big no go. His kicking is absolutely atrocious.

What you're describing is exactly what ANB was to us in 2018. He was a big, non-spectacular part of our success with a number of games hitting the exact numbers you'd be looking for out of your high half forward: Rd 2 - 21d 1g Rd 4 - 22d 1g 6t Rd 8 - 23d 2.2g Rd 9 - 17 d 4g 5t Rd 10 - 23d 3g 6t Rd 11 - 25d 1.2g 5t Rd 12 - 19d 1.1g 6t Rd 17 - 17d 2g 5t Rd 19 - 22d 1.1g 12t Rd 20 - 22d 2g EF v Cats - 20d 1.3g 9t (and if you rewatch this game, he brought the heat very early and was key to our big 1st Q) For the year he kicked 27.19, averaging 1.1 goals a game at 17 disposals and 4.7 tackles. For an undersized roaming HFF, that is high output. Does he make perfect decisions? Far from it, but his ability to move from contest to contest and use his endurance to get goal scoring opportunities is unmatched in our side. Like many others, his demise in '19 was another reason we couldn't replicate our 2018 form. He needs to bring this form again and make it consistent over a period of years, but I do not understand the constant criticism of him and why people cannot see his value.

I am absolutely flummoxed as to why he hasn't been taken. Pray to the drafting gods overnight that he lasts to our pick (and we pick him of course). Doubt he gets there, every team will be trying to jockey up and get him I think. Poor kid was the only one in the room that didn't get picked I think? Must be tough to see all your colleagues get picked up with polos, interviews while you still sit there

Fair observations. Robertson has a bit more natural agility and flow to his game than Swallow did though, so I'm not sure he's quite as one dimensional. However, you're probably right in this being the concern with him given he's not spoken about as top 5/10 despite his amazing statistics. I wouldn't consider Selwood one dimensional. Whilst off the ball selfless acts are his MO, he can still deliver the ball accurately and he can kick goals. Swallow couldn't do anything but run in a straight line and put his body on the line. Had no agility, no skills, no overhead prowess.

He's a far more natural footy player than Andrew Swallow, who was one of the most robotic unnatural footballers I have ever seen. How he made a career for himself as well as he did I will never know.

You're not missing anything. There is a slight knock on his kicking and I suppose his doesn't have any stand out athletic attributes - but good at everything to a good level. The Selwood comparisons are very apt. Selwood also isn't the world's greatest kick but knows his value and his limitations. I get that vibe with Deven. The interesting thing about him for me is that although he gets tons of the footy and is usually constructive, it's his off the ball work - bumping, tackling and smothering that reminds me of Selwood the most. Long term in the system i expect him to be one of the best players from this draft. Jackson at 3 with his running mate Deven at 10 will be hard to pass up. Let's hope kozzie is worth it if that's what we do!

Notwithstanding that VC didnt win the game...I don't mean any single moment, as great as that kick was. If moments are your go, Regan Clarke from WA is who we should draft, as he kicked WAs winning goal (after Jackson tumbled it to him). When I say watch the game, I mean the full game. Then decide who played the greatest role in helping the winning team win. Then watch other Vic Country games (perhaps the ones that they won), and determine how big a role Young plays in those wins. I have done this and my opinion is that he is not a particularly influential player. A nice player, who could 100% be a good cog of a premiership winning team and an elite level HBF, but not a difference maker. At a pick like 3, I'm looking for a difference maker; the guy who consistently puts the team on his back and wills them to win, or at least someone who has shown a propensity for it more than once. From watching all the U18 championship games, there is a small group of players who do this most consistently: Rowell, Green and Robertson. Anderson can do it by all accounts, but did not in the games I watched. Flanders likewise, though I am flat out not a fan of his based on what I have seen. There is another group of players who made a difference in those games less consistently, but still helped their team to win or go close to winning: Kemp, Weightman, Jackson, Henry, and even less consistently, Pickett and McAsey. For what it's worth, the game in question was won by the work of Deven Robertson, Liam Henry and to some extent, Jackson.

Can't argue with that if you've gone and watched his package! I haven't made the direct comparison myself - just raising his name as someone else we took relatively early on the basis of kicking being his elite trait. Young does appear more well rounded but not sure the comparison is a joke. Again - I would suggest SONS and others watch the full u18 championship games and focus on who in your opinion actually turns the games and wins them. That's who we should draft. Eye-catching kicking is just that.

Fair enough - though James Strauss says hello. There have been plenty of elite kicks come through the system that fail to make it. In judging draft prospects, I don't think it is the most important trait. Regardless of our need for it. People were scared off Worpel who just hacked it forward in u18s. Matt crouch same story. Both developed into more than useful kicks at AFL level. More important to me are the decision making capabilities of the player. I have a slight concern in this area as if you watch the full games, you will see Young quite often tries too much with his kicking. He turns it over a lot - pinpoint accuracy and flawless technique doesn't stop this if the decision making is suspect.

For all those frothing about the prospect of Young - I suggest you go and watch the full u18 championship games. He's a lovely kick no doubt, but he is rarely involved in anything significant and as the poster above mentioned, gets a lot of cheap kicks running past. His running game also leaves a lot to be desired in comparison to someone like Ash (though I am not sold on him either). I would still like to get him at 10 as I think he has the scope and tools to develop into a good player, but calling a phenom is just pure uninformed. He has a way to go and more than a few weaknesses.

I agree ignition - I am warning to the idea of him more and more at either of our picks. We do not have a positional need but you can never have too many prime movers. If he forces Gus and Viney to shape up that's only a positive as well.

From the little I've seen (watched the u18 grand final in a game where Henry, Jackson, Kemp, young, serong, flanders and ash all played), I would be happy to pick him up at 8. His performance that day was outstanding - all I could see was Selwood in terms of his toughness, leadership, and defensive acts. Seems to know his limitations, doesn't try too much. Can kick, but not brilliantly. Good distributor by hand. Would question whether he is a need for us given our inside mids but irrespective I would be very surprised if he doesn't hit the ground running for whatever club drafts him next year. Also thought Henry and Jeremy Sharp were very impressive in that game. Sharp in particular could be the best player from this draft in 5 years. Young, ash and serong all underwhelming (Serong will bust IMO, looks like the type to have peaked as a teenager). I was sold on Young until I watched this game. Only one game but definitely showed his weaknesses and in comparison to Ash, lack of run. Would LOVE Henry as he is everything we need. Such a shame he is academy tied. I could also see the bones of Jackson as a fwd ruck, but not a gamble I would take at 3. Would love Kemp at 3 or 8. Could be anything. Do not understand the fascination with Flanders. Might have some tricks one day but an all around meh package at the moment. Would encourage you all to watch it on the AFL website, just google Vic country vs WA.

I'll ask the question, but I can't divulge the source because whilst it is the same data set that the club's have...they do have to pay for it (if they choose - every club pays for different levels of data as some consider it more important than others), so its not *meant* to be available to the public.

By not recruiting to replace at least some of Hogan's output, apparently the FD think he doesn't struggle. All I think this analysis helps to show is that he isn't at the level (yet). To be honest I don't think Tmac is either as a #1 key fwd. The analysis of who has played on who of course has flaws...but you needn't look further than the results of these two guys this year absent Jesse. The final couple of rounds and Finals last year were relative outliers (notwithstanding Weid only played on Henderson and Mirra) - we had a head of steam and the entire team lifted. The proof is there - and if the FD thinks we can go into next year after addressing outside run and not much else, barring huge development in Weideman's game we won't improve the way they might think we will.

Absolutely, the length and breadth of our injury list has meant we've not only lost many best 22 members, but the depth that would have replaced them as well. Particularly on the positional breakdown though - you would actually prefer to be missing maybe 2 mids, one back and one forward (If you only have 4 out). The fact we have had either 4 or 3 of our front/back 6 unavailable compounds the absences...by definition your depth chart for each position can only be a couple deep. Replacing almost your entire forward or backline isn't really possible for any team in the comp. That's what we've had to deal with this year. Re. Weid/Tom Mac - that data is fairly damning I think. Yes they've both had good days against good opposition but it is few and far between. Tom Mac's level is against the 2nd best defender. Weid is still young so there is scope for him to get to that level or at a stretch, the best defender. At the moment though the data says he generally only has good games on the 3rd stringers.

I am lucky to have a close contact with access to a lot of AFL statistics (the same data set the clubs generally have available to them ). I asked him to do some digging on the Dees' season, in particular looking for anything that would prove useful in helping us all understand where things have gone wrong this year. In no particular order, this is what he found: There's been a lot of discussion about injuries, and lately, Richmond and Collingwood fans complaining they have it the worst of all. The data says we have averaged 6.5 'best 22' players missing over the first 19 rounds of the season; in total we have missed 117 'best 22' games. Richmond have averaged 5.11 (92 total), while Collingwood have averaged 3.94 (71 total). This highlights Richmond's depth as stronger than both Melbourne or Collingwood - they've got guys like Caddy running around in the VFL while we have...JKH/Dunkley/Lockhart and Coll have Daicos/Brown etc. Looking at the round by round breakdown of this - you can see that this number (# of best 22 injured) correlates strongly with form. Richmond's injuries have improved markedly since the bye and their form has peaked. Collingwood's have been unlucky with injury since the bye and they have been ordinary. Of course we've been ordinary for the whole year... When you break this down by position it confirms what we know - our midfield has stayed pretty much full strength all year, but the forward and backline have had either 3.77 best 22 players missing on average (fwd line) or 2.6 best 22 players missing on average (backline). The impact on both ends of the grounds shouldn't be underestimated and suits the narrative of our year - unable to score, unable to defend inside 50s, but still ok at generating our own (pre-game plan change in the last couple of weeks). Goodwin keeps trotting out that we've had no continuity at either end of the ground - and he's right. I've attached these two breakdowns to this post. Don't pay much attention to sirswampthing's post highlighting that Collingwood have the most 'games played' on the injuries list. Break that out and 750 of those games are from players outside the best 22 / retiring (e.g Wells, Beams, Goldsack etc.). Misleading and clickbait for the biggest supporter base. Out of players who have played at least 10 games, Frost and OMac are the two who have cost us the most scores as a % of their turnovers. Frost is ranked 12th in the league (1st = a really bad thing), conceding a score 34% of the time he turns it over, resulting in 17 shots at goal (9 goals 8 ) directly from his turnovers. Omac is ranked 15th in the league, conceding a score 33% of the time. Bailey Fritsch has cost us the most amount of points from turnovers this year. His 66 turnovers for the year (ranked equal 94th in the league) have cost us 89 points directly, which is ranked 4th in the comp. We all love his skills; but his turnovers hurt us. We're better with him camped inside 50 and our increased efficiency over the last 3 weeks is in no small part due to having a natural forward like him back in the 50. In order of worst to best, the top 8 players who have hurt us the most and have resulted in an overall negative score from turnovers and intercepts combined are: Fristch, Omac, Frost, Hibberd, Hore, Brayshaw, Salem, J Wagner. Other than Fritsch and Brayshaw this isnt surprising; our defenders can't kick. Salem has had more ball than any of these guys but is 7th on the list; so he is the best kick we have in the D50 (other than Jones when he plays there). Conversely, the players who have generated the most scores from intercepts, while keeping their turnovers to a minimum, and to have played at least 10 games, are: Jones, Petracca, Gawn, Oliver, Viney (Surprising!), Lockhart, Hunt, Tmac, Harmes. James Harmes is the only player at the Dees ranked in the top 50 (49th) for average handball receives per game, which is an indicator of outside run. For context, Richmond have 6 players in the top 50; Collingwood have 8. Petracca is mostly accurate everywhere: he is 10.8 from set shots, 5.1 on the run, 4.3 from snaps, 1.0 from mark play on, 1.0 off the ground. 5.0 from <15m, 4.4 from 15-30m, 2.2 from 31-40m, 7.4 from 41-50m, 3.2 from 50m+. He's above AFL average in all these categories, with exception of 15-30m and 31-40m kicking, which is bang on AFL average. Harmes is not accurate from anywhere. He has 3.3 from <15m, an awful 2.6 from 31-40m and 4.8 from 41-50m. Against Richmond, 14 players had less than one tackle. This was widely discussed. However, it wasn't from lack of effort. We had more tackle attempts than Richmond, but went at 25% efficiency. Poor technique, not strong enough, lazy, mentally checked out, who knows. The loss of Hogan on Tom Mac and Wiedeman should not be understated. Last year, Weideman played 3 good games - vs. West Coast in Rd 22, then Geelong in the EF and Hawks in the SF. His opponents in those games based on most % of gametime were: Brad Sheppard (HBFer, not a KPD), Lachie Henderson and David Mirra. This year, Weideman has had 3 games of 'good' output, 2 pass marks and 6 poor matches. The 3 good games he played on: Jacob Weitering, Aaron Francis, Jack Watts. Decent names but not A grade defenders by any means. The pass mark games, he played on Darcy Moore and Tom Mccartin. The poor games, he played on Harris Andrews, Griffin Logue/Joel Hamling, Alex Keath, David Astbury, Nathan Brown/Josh Battle, Mark Blicavs. Basically, when he played on good or experienced opponents, he's not much chop. Now lets look at who Tom Mac towelled up last year on his way to 50 goals: Patrick Ambrose, Jack Carlisle, Rory Thompson, Sam Rowe, Myles Poholke, Jason Johannisen, Matt Scharenberg, Dougal Howard, Jackson Trengove, Josh Jenkins, Tom Barrass, Lachlan Keefe, James Frawley. This is a who's who of average defenders/mismatches save for Barrass and Frawley (dont ask about Jenkins; perhaps Tom went back that day? I can't remember). This year Tom Mac has had to play on Tom Jonas, Mark Blicavs, Phil Davis, Daniel Talia and so on. The only defender he towelled up was Liam Jones. His best games were against Jones, Oscar Allen, Aliir Aliir. This info is available to the coaching staff. If they haven't looked at this and realised that our two KPF hopes are not capable of playing on top line defenders and that we need a key fwd to take the heat off these guys, then you have to wonder what they are doing. Oscar Mcdonald has only had one 'good' performance this year - against Nick Blakey. He has been beaten by: Josh Jenkins, Shaun McKernan, Tom Papley (mismatch), Paddy Ryder and Josh Corbett. Frost has beaten: Tom Lynch (Rich, early on), Levi Casboult, Josh Bruce, Jarryd Roughead, and Jack Lukosius. Has been beaten by: Lance Franklin, Jeremy Cameron, Jack Darling, Jack Riewoldt, Eric Hipwood. Angus Brayshaw played 90% of his time on ground last year in the midfield. This year, that is down to 60%. He has spent 24% of his time on the wing, 16% in the forward line. Of our top 5 centre bounce attendees, Brayshaw was also our most effective centre square player we had last year across a number of measures: Clearance differential (19.4, ahead of next best Harmes 11.2), Inside 50 differential (18.8, ahead of next best Oliver/Viney both 12.5) and scoring differential (8.1, ahead of next best 6.7 Viney). Brayshaw was involved in 345 centre square clearances last year. This year he is down to 215. Forgetting the top 5 attendees for a moment, our best centre bounce player by a huge margin is....Jake Melksham. His clearance differential is 31.4, next best is Petracca (16.7), then Jones, and then to Brayshaw and the rest of the regular crew. Of course, Melkham's data is perhaps limited by sample size. Melksham ranks 17th in our side for actual centre bounce attendances, whilst Petracca ranks 10th. The two are our most effective centre bounce players. Brayshaw is one of our best; but he is being played out of position. There are of course weaknesses in all of these statistics - they never tell the full story, there are subjective categorisations applied to 'good/pass mark/bad' and 'best 22' - but I found some of the above quite interesting. For me, what stands out is that the FD thought Tom Mac & Weid were ready to replace Hogan's output, but the warning signs were there if they were to look at the data. We miss his ability to draw the best defender, his presence all around the ground, and his general offensive skillset. No use crying about it now; but given this data is available to the club I find it disappointing they sat on their hands and thought the forward line was sorted even with his departure. Discuss!

His first game at Casey against Werribee he was reasonably out of place - no doubt finding his feet with the team, gamestyle etc. Not to mention Casey played terribly that day other than May. In the following games has looked right at home off a HFF with stints through the middle, sometimes in run-with roles. He's an interesting player - no particularly stand out attributes other than a very good long kick for goal - but seems to just get to the right spots and has a positive impact when near the ball. He's the type that might get on the end of a couple of errant kicks and maybe one on the lead and before you know it, has kicked 3. As a big bodied HFFer capable in midfield he has a chance to replace Vanders if he never makes it back. Doesn't have VDBs pace or power, but has a little more guile and craft. Can do things ANB is not capable of due to size although won't have anywhere near ANBs running capacity. Am interested to see how he does though I will not be surprised to see him look well out of depth. We need to give him a couple of games to see him settle in. No one has mentioned it but I wonder if Bedford is far away from a debut given our forward woes. Is raw but has spunk and has been a consistent goalkicker for Casey (well, as much as Hunt has been for MFC...)

Went along as it was close to home. Ground undergoing significant development but pleasingly there's a lot of seating that isn't up in the stand...just seats built into the terraces. Works well. Sausage was burnt, pie was good. Didn't try the lager on top but regularly buy Coburg lager from the local IGA. Its good stuff. Of the MFC boys: -Lewis. Played mostly well, it's either that the team has been told to play through him or he just gets himself open in the right spots, so got a ton of the pill. Either way, his kicking i50 was a highlight. Had a poor final quarter though, began to get caught in traffic and started lining blokes up as he is prone to do. In quite a few situations went for a headhigh bump instead of tackle and was lucky not to connect. Also squibbed a couple of high balls. A good game, not a promotion earning game, but we know his output can be good on his day. -Wagner. Always looks good at this level where he uses his speed and footskills to create. Looks like he knows his better than this and would love to see him bring this confidence to the 1s. However, his best position is definitely as a centre man and I think he's just too slight to ever be damaging at AFL level. Even in VFL, if he gets tackled he pretty much gets pinned for HTB 80% of the time. -Maynard. Opposite to CWag, holds his ground and frame very strongly in the contest and as a result is a key inside distributor at this level. You can tell he's been trained in a good inside midfield AFL setup. Also went forward and pleasingly took a number of good marks where his size stood out. However, for the most part his kicking and decision making lets him down in either finding a teammate or having a shot. But this isn't new news. Is good depth and good to have around a VFL team because he's a good player at this level. Wouldn't be surprised if Casey sign him upon MFC delisting like old mate mitch white. -Dunkley. I watched his VFL debut against Werribee and missed his day out against Collingwood...fair to say he's gotten used to the level from Werribee when he looked off the pace. For a 19 year old he has good size and the confidence to take on tacklers with a decent little sidestep. Is a long kicking player who fits a part time HF / midfield role quite well. There's something to like here no doubt, he seems to have good game sense and spatial awareness and a good inside/outside mix. Will get a game for the Ds at some point this year. He is a natural VDB replacement at a good age without the sheer pace and power, but a bit more craft. Doesn't have Hannans X factor so can't really replace Mitch in the 1s just yet. Saw he kicked a goal in the stats, must have been Casey's first as I did arrive late. Was pleased to see him blocking intelligently for Wagner at a number of stoppages to try and get Corey loose. -Chandler. Is a busy little player who seems to have a thirst for it and good ball skills, but I worry he's just not quick enough to have the weapons required at the top level at his size. A handy player at this level. May have gotten injured as I didn't see him after half time. -Bedford. With a year or two I think this kid might be playing in the 1s. Has some stuff to learn and isn't as skilled as I would like on the run on the outside, but you can see he knows how and when to use his natural pace, but in an unusual kind burst at the contest kind of way. Wins more than his fair share of contests and 1%s for a kid his size and is a willing tackler. Has some spunk and was very happy with his final qtr goal after getting a bit of stick from the very game Coburg crowd. -Bradtke. Is extremely raw in every sense and is out of most contests until the ball is in the air. Is half as thin as those defending him but reads the ball very well mid flight and takes or almost takes most things that come his way. Got the MFC boys in the stand very excited when he nearly took a mark in the goal square before kicking it over his head for a goal. Popular amongst the group it seems. -Keilty. Again, a very good player at this level and is a real leader in this team. Important all day around the ground with his marking/spoiling and tackling. Had one particularly outstanding smother on the half forward flank when Coburg were coming. Has a lot of attributes and with luck will be a Pedersen style journeyman, though his versatility may cost him like it did with Cam. Not brilliant at anything, but good to very good at lots. -Preuss. Absolutely dominated the ruck all day, a number of handy hitouts as well as a strong marking performance particularly in the 1st half. Despite this, I can see why he isn't getting a game beyond structural issues. A number of times at opposition kick outs he would sprint toward the wrong flank and the opposition would just go the other direction to avoid him. Because he only really has one burst in him he then very slowly works his way back across the ground, letting his Coburg man run off him in the process. The lack of tank is an issue they need to fix, and combine that with a bit of game knowledge. Nonetheless, a big strong player who makes the opposition worried. We are lucky to have him as depth. Whilst I don't think he deserves a call up necessarily, old Oscar Mc for Brisbane of Casey of old took a bunch of contested marks against the saints with Stefan Martin playing ruck 1, so this may be a week for Brayden to come in. -KK. Is very slowly getting back into footy. With time and space you can see he has the class and seems to have good running patterns that result in him receiving a lot of ball in threatening overlap positions. However, constantly misweights his kicks and misses targets. Conditions difficult yes, but a stark contrast to Lewis who hits most targets with a quick hand to ball drop. Isn't particularly great in the contest considering his stock but I he was steak knives for a reason. Has a way to go, I hope he doesn't get an MFC game anytime soon. For his sake, needs to have a good run of consistency at this level and hit the targets he should have the skill to hit. -Spargo. Charlie had a bit of a tough day. We know he's a good tackler for his size but when he gets it, seems to want to put a few steps on defenders with misdirection but invariably gets tackled and HTB. Happened several times. Has a bit too much instruction flowing through his head which is natural for a stint of 2nd year blues. Was called out at 3qtr time as someone who needed to give a bigger effort and he responding by Grassing a sitter in the goal square when Casey needed a goal after a well weighted pass from Maynard. Having an ordinary year. -JKH. Thought he was clearly in the top 3 on ground, was kicking with purpose and is noticeable he has better stamina at this level than most. Halved a number of contests he had no right to and generally ran hard and linked up all day, hit a lot of targets. May get a call up if a mystery injury to a mid/HFF happens. At this stage, I probably prefer him to ANB to be honest. -Jordon. Was very young when we drafted him and they've thrown him to the wolves by playing him in the guts for a number of weeks now. Gives his all against bigger bodies and is tougher than I thought he would be. The flipside is his kicking isn't what it is renowned for. Nonetheless, needs a couple of years down here and may be a player one day. Appears very coachable and compliant. Think that's everyone. The MFC boys were there in good numbers with no noticeable limps (I checked Viney as he pulled up in the last few minutes on Saturday). Frost very generous with his time to a number of passer-bys. Jetta part of defensive huddles. Baker seems in with the cool group of Oliver/harmes/petracca ....can only be mostly good for him to feel apart of that midfield. Lever there I think for the dual purpose of seeing the team and watching I think his brother Tyson no.7 for Coburg? Tyson seemed popular win the local Coburg supporters but wasn't overly impressive as an undersized left footed key back I thought.

In the corresponding game last year,if I recall correctly watts kicked 4, petracca kicked 3 or 4, Garlett 3 and hannan 2. Only one of those guys is playing today. Concerned about our ability to kick a big enough score today