Jump to content

Discussion on recent allegations about the use of illicit drugs in football is forbidden

RedBlueandTrue

Members
  • Posts

    99
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RedBlueandTrue

  1. 1 hour ago, Cyclops said:

    The sub has to come from the 5 players named as interchange. That is Ben Brown cannot be named as sub.

    The sub has to come from Windsor, Hore, McDonald, Petty or Oliver.

    I think Petty.

     

    Nope, they've changed it this year. Eg Tsatas sub after being named on field.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2
  2. 21 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

    Billings reminds me of Jack Watts - talent to burn, smooth mover but sometimes lacking in intensity.

    If he comes cheap then I’d take him.  He has many of the attributes that our list is lacking.

     

    When he finally did move, it really looked for a very short period like Wattsy could've finally put it all together at Port before injuries struck. 

    Would love to draft an 18 year old Jack Watts (or Jack Billings for that matter) into our current development set up.

  3. 3 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

    Petty = Mihocek
    JVR < McStay (youth)
    Fullarton/J Smith < Cox

    ANB > Ginnivan but only equal to in form Lipinski
    Fritsch = Elliot (could be better if he defended)
    Pickett > Hill (but has to back it up)
    Chandler/Spargo << McCreery 

    McAdam < Schultz

    Are J. Smith and the fossils as useful depth as Ash Johnson and Frampton - probably not.

    Does either side have great youth coming through, Jefferson and Reef McInnes both have talent but otherwise not really.

    They’ve got the advantage for experience and depth of useful talls for now. But with time that can change.

    In theory Petracca can go forward more easily than De Goey as we have a more explosive midfield mix. 

    Probably about spot on based on this years form for mine. Petty, JVR and J Smith have a lot of scope to improve though through consistent playing time together. Just have to have those fingers crossed that we can keep them on the park and keep building their understanding.

    If you get that, then Koz just needs to have the glass shatter moment where he realises that he actually has an extra second to compose himself and our perceived 'weak' fwdline because a wonderful strength.

    Same with the other high calibre teams, if you can keep your best players on the park building cohesion, you're going to be very tough to beat.

    • Like 2
  4. 4 minutes ago, BrisbaneDemon said:

    💯 we have a forward line issue, BBB & Tmac and add Petty can’t be depended on due to injuries, JVR is only young and is inconsistent, our small forwards can struggle to impact, Gawn can’t kick straight and that leaves us Fritsch and Trac.  


    then we have a system issue were we have unlimited forward line entries to no avail or we mark it on the boundaries.  We never seem to get out the back goals like Pies/Lions/Port do as we’re a defensively minded team.

     

    if we continue to enter our forward 50 like we have over the past 2 years and we don’t have another tall who can clunk marks and kick goals….. we’ll go out in straight sets again or struggle to make top 

    Golly I really don't see a forward half issue... biggest issue for me is lack of precision kicks which means that if we try to pick passes inside 50 rather than bomb or kick to flanks we run risk of turn over on the op d50 line. The collingwoods and Brisbanes then sting you on the counter. 

    Collingwood were the ones playing extremely defensive against us in that final and they were able to punch us on the break enough to get over the line despite our territory game being in great form. It's this defensive game that allows them to score goals out the back but they also won't generate as many opportunities.

    Of course if all of our better forwards are injured then it gets harder to score goals but the king brothers haven't been any more durable than Petty over the years and charlie has only really got his body right the last two years. 

    Our ball wining and territory domination is our greatest strength (along with turnover - particularly fwd half) which has put us in a great position to challenge 3 years in a row. I honestly believe that once you have the system and players good enough to be top 4 (preferably top 2) then the rest is luck with timing of fitness, injuries and where those injuries are on the field - our forwardline was crucified, take daniher and McCarthy out of Brisbane's fwdline and suddenly they don't look nearly as menacing.

    I still think even with our injuries that if you played the finals series 100 times we would probably win at least 30.

    Sorry for rambling and getting off track, I think footy is a funny luck based game past a certain point and there's no golden fix for our perceived issues that doesn't hurt our game in other areas and decrease our overall ability to compete for the premiership. Looking forward to rolling those dice again next year with Fulla and hopefully McAdam for some more flair and fun. Wouldn't mind a classier user in the mids, but you don't want to reduce our ability to win territory despite being undermanned at stoppage... go dees

    • Like 14
  5. 3 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

    Apparently Tim Lamb is coming up on trade radio at 12pm.... I may break my rule this year of not listening to any trade radio to just catch what he says.

    If you aren't hearing the ads ringing in your ears as you drift off to sleep you're not doing it right 

    • Haha 3
  6. I'd be very suprised if the offer was anything more than 10 + 20 + McAdam, which I don't think we accept. If fogarty or THRILLTHORPE are involved then you have to look at it, but I would be shocked if this is the case. That sort of trade just doesn't really happen. While we know how good Petty is, we are also likely undervaluing the potential of someone like thilthorpe in the same way other clubs and non-dees following media figures undervalue Petty.

  7. 11 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

    This is true, but the different ranking of players by clubs means that the benefit of moving up from #14 to #11 is less certain. We might have sold two second round picks to get the same player at #11 as we would have at #14.

    yes, but we also may know Sydney and St Kilda are after the same player that we are, it's just impossible to know. All we do know is that we generally do pretty well with this sort of thing so whether it's a further swap or a particular player or class of players, there is probably something else going on other than just upgrading by 3 spots for the sake of it.

    • Like 2
  8. You just can't know what's really going on here so it's impossible to judge. Recruiters might believe there's a big gulf in talent between player 11 and 12 in the draft. Impossible to really know the value of the draft picks without knowing what the recruiting team are thinking. 

    • Like 3
  9. By all reports we as a club do a lot of work on goalkicking and kicking skills in general, more so than the average. Teams go through bad goalkicking patches and always have. A balancing act because putting more of a focus on it can invite further pressure and have a negative effect. If we can keep generating chances it will eventually turn.

    • Like 1
  10. 16 minutes ago, speed demon said:

    That's the thing. Some people think the last three minutes of the third quarter of GF was how played for the entirety of 2021. Recall the loss to GWS. Their midfielders waltzed out of centre bounces and our forward line was anaemic (picture high kicks to Spargo matched against two tall defenders...). Re-read the postgame thread; midfield rubbish, Fritsch to be dropped, Goodwin to be sacked. 

    Form fluctuates. Sustained success is hard. Premierships are a possibility not a certainty.

    Absolutely! See also the essendon win, hawthorn draw, loss to the bulldogs (stats were ok but we were really lacking connection), even the wins against West Coast and Adelaide at the end people were not very comfortable with. We played a lot of footy similar to last night in 2021. 

    • Like 3
  11. Obviously a scrappy game, but a great step forward in a lot of ways. We switched the play quite often and created some good opportunities. Defence looked really good, sad about bowey, our smaller types are really finding their groove. Fantastic to see Lever and May having a big influence.

    Hunter is a gun. He may not be a pacy silkmeister, but he processes situations quicker than any other player and consistently turns what should be 50/50s to our advantage. Up there with highest footy iq in the afl. 

    Trac has gone to another level of consistency. Best in the comp this year? Certainly very close. I'd usually have Clarry above him but wow, Trac is having a GREAT season. Hopefully spurs Claz to go super saiyen. All I want is a tied brownlow from them in a premiership year, just a simple wish. 

    Feeling very positive this morning about our chances, we just need to keep building on our connection. Wish Petty hadn't got injured just as he was starting to hit his straps, had he of kept going from strength to strength we may have had another 2 wins in our pocket.

    Extended break now, boys will probably get some time off and recalibrate before the big one. First time in a while we won't go in as favourites? If defence keeps continues to build we're a big chance! Go Dees

    • Like 4
    • Thinking 1
  12. 1 minute ago, Lord Nev said:

    Hang on, you said before that increased fitness was responsible for run and spread, but now it's better for contested footy?

      

    No, I don't agree with that entirely. Our game against Collingwood in round 21 had very low metres gained for both sides, yet that was an intense, pressure filled game.

      

    Round 15 (expectations from posters were we'd be flat) - Huge metres gained.

    Round 21 (expectations were we'd be hitting our straps) - Very low metres gained.

      

    Don't roll with the strawman stuff mate. Nowhere have I said increased fitness isn't a factor in increased performance. I'm simply pointing out using metres gained as an indicator of fitness is flawed.

      

    Incorrect. Go back to the post/page I've already linked and see the predictions were we'd be flat.

      

    I have no idea what this is meant to mean. I firmly believe in loading and that we've been doing it. I just don't agree metres gained is an accurate metric for it and have provided data to back up my argument.

     

    That's all a bit much for me.

    I will respond to first one though. As I said before, improved fitness helps ALL facets of the game - it's certainly not binary in that it only helps either spread OR contest as your logic seems to imply? Weird one. Anyway have a good one go dees!

    • Like 2
  13. 3 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

    I reckon the argument has flip-flopped based on results week to week tbh, which is part of my problem with many of the arguments made in this thread.

    You'd have to go back and check out what people were saying at the time, but I reckon you'd also find many have changed their thoughts across the journey.

    If you go back to the famous loading expert's post here he implies our fitness will mirror that of 2021 when we were flat for a few games after the bye. He agrees with another poster it "could take several weeks after the bye to see the effect", yet that first game after the bye there we are with a huge metres gained number.

    Yeah well I wish I could be bothered going back, all I remember is that I have been supremely confidant of a big win exactly 3 times this season - and made sure all my mates tipped dees for them. Brisbane, Freo, Brisbane. Extremely anecdotal and not of much use to others but it's enough for me! 

    • Like 2
  14. 2 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

    But you can also kick it long to the boundary, then get a clearance from the throw in and kick it again... Doesn't mean anyone is doing tons of running. Just way too many holes in this argument.

    Sure, and with increased fitness you get more numbers to the contest and increase the likelihood of winning the clearance. The reality is that high metres gained is an indicator of good performance in a match. With increased fitness comes increased performance. Increased performance = higher metres gained. 

    If you don't think that increased fitness is a massive factor in increased performance then you won't think its the reason for metres gained either, so we go in circles a bit.

    There's been 3 times this year when BEFORE a game there have been predictions that we have deloaded and will destroy the opposition. First Brisbane game, the freo game and the second Brisbane game. It's been like clockwork! 

    Is it coincidence and all a bit magic? I don't think so but I can only analyse based on the facts in front of me - maybe it is!

    • Like 2
  15. Just now, Lord Nev said:

    You get the metres gained whether you hit a target, kick it to the opposition or kick it to grass. Quality of possession doesn't come into it.

     

    Yes it does because you get more metres gained as a team when you hit an effective kick 50 and mark it and then kick it another 50 = 100 rather than kicking it 50 to a turnover. On an individual level of course it doesn't matter but it does for the team total.

    • Like 1
  16. Surely metres gained would trend upwards strongly with increased fitness? With increased spread from contest, kick down field hits a target instead of turnover or handball therefore further metres gained from the next possession. Also improved fitness isn't just about running, it's about all facets of the game - more contests won - better quality of possession - better avenue to goal - more metres gained. I would've thought it was clearly a good indicator of fitness. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...