Jump to content

Copuchas

Members
  • Posts

    364
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Copuchas

  1. One aspect of our post season surgery count that warrants further investigation is the extent to which they were collision related injuries attributable to an aggressive contested game style. I liked the contested brand the Dees played last year but found myself wondering what the physical toll would ultimately be. It would be an interesting analysis for someone to undertake a very crude cut of contested footy ranking versus non-soft tissue injuries. I also wonder how sustainable it is to have contested footy as your one wood....or even worse, your only wood. You need look no further than West Coast to see it's not natural to be able to bring that level of commitment week in, week out.
  2. You and CBDees and others keep referring to the oval as if that was the only component of the proposal. It was the six storey building over the railway line that fundamentally alters the Wellington Pde streetscape and vista that was the fatal flaw.
  3. I agree Chook but I suspect the plan would call for the ball to be put in the hands of Hibberd, Salem and Lewis whenever possible (in much the same way as is the case for Frost and Omac). The key issues here are the height of the West Coast forwards and the bigger bodies. Smith with his leap and bigger build is better placed to contend in the air than perhaps Fritsch is. It's a very tough call but I'll certainly understand the thinking if it goes that way.
  4. Do you mean Stevic or Rosebury? Meredith wasn't umpiring HAW v MEL last Fri night.
  5. Saw a dead cat bounce of a rebuild last Friday night and looking forward to returning to the G to witness a second tonight. Bury these smug, arrogant pissants Dees!
  6. some speculation on the Hawks Big Footy board that O'meara might not come up.....
  7. there is incompetence when it comes to AFL umpires and....well....then there's Nicholls and his officiating of MFC games. His sustained bias against Melbourne rules out incompetence (which is random) and leaves you with the unpalatable options of corruption or hatred. I haven't to date been able to postulate a credible theory around corruption so I am left to conclude it is a deeply rooted hatred of the MFC that has a conscious or subconscious manifestation in his match day officiating of MFC games. But make no mistake, it is REAL and he is a cheat. On the flip side, it was pleasing to see Rosebury tell Howe to get up after the push from Caddy. Clearly it should've been a free kick but Rosebury is an experienced umpire who was clearly aware of the niggle being deployed by Howe so let it go. That augers well for Friday night as there'll be plenty more of that from Howe and Sicily as they try it on our young Dees. I hope Aaron smashes the pair of them Jordan Murdoch style....
  8. Margetts was dropped for not paying the foot fend off by Greene..... And I just read on Hawks Big Footy that Stevic is one of them.....so solve for 23!
  9. You forgot Harmes!!!! It will be Harmes v Dangerfield I suspect....he's been in the best form for them and he's possibly a bit quick for Jack.
  10. Are you just being contrarian to seek attention? Or really haven't thought your way through it? Viney is not returning from a soft tissue injury with the concomitant risk of breaking down in-game if returning too early. He's returning from a stress / hot spot in his foot (toe actually) for which there is a long term implication should he continue to play in defiance of ongoing soreness but which will not be a factor for a four week finals campaign. His core skill set is around the contest for which touch is not a factor. So where's the risk?
  11. easier to envisage Hawthorn going out in straight sets than the Tiges so am hoping for a Tiger victory tonight....
  12. Preliminary final even, semis are this weekend.
  13. As a frustrated MCC member who can't get MCC visitors tickets, I'll be buying a few kids tickets using MFC memberships that haven't seen a shot in anger all year and then getting pass outs from the MCC reserve in to the public reserve so that we can keep our group together.
  14. I was there, albeit briefly. Big crowd present, gorgeous morning with a spring feel in the air. There was a noticeably positive vibe amongst the whole group. The focus during my time there was on skills with one drill involving a coaching staff member throwing the ball at a player whose task was then to side-step a tackler, brace for the tackle, fire off a handball to a team mate whilst being tackled whose job was then to snap for goal (Goody was running a session about 25-30m in the fwd pocket). The rehab group had Viney, Hunt, Joel Smith and Baker in it and all seemed to be moving well. Viney didn't join the main group in the time I was there. I don't believe Hibberd was present at all. The only guy who looked to be disinterested and going through the motions was Dion Johnstone. It's previously been commented upon that he's unlikely to get a contract next year.
  15. Swans with Sinclair, Eagles with Lycett and GWS with Lobbe......yawn. Give him a rest for a week or two and get on with it.
  16. Deespicable, in the footy I grew up watching, it's not a free kick. But my biggest gripe with AFL umpiring is around consistency of interpretation and on that score, the process applied and the resultant free kick was at least consistent with what they've been doing on the unrealistic attempt front this season.
  17. Possibly you've misread my post? I didn't opine on the virtue of it being paid a free kick, I simply provided insight as to how the AFL are umpiring the "unrealistic attempt" decision, which is not as far as I am aware, even a rule within the Laws of the Game. You'd do well to vent your frustrations at the AFL rather than shoot the messenger who's shone light on what you were unable to decipher on game day!
  18. It was not a push in the back free kick per se, it was an unrealistic attempt at a mark free kick and as with everything AFL they have introduced a formal process to assist the umpires in the adjudication of the decision. That process dictates that if you fly for the ball, make contact with the player in front and don't get a finger on the ball, it is a prima facie unrealistic attempt. You may disagree with that process but it was umpired 100% correctly with this season's interpretation of that rule.
  19. No!!! We don't want West Coast finishing 2nd and hosting two home finals. We need to win to play in finals, irrespective of who gets the last spot in the 8. And if we can't win two more games, we shouldn't and won't be there.
  20. Not this Demonlander. Absolutely hoping for a Norf win as I don't accept WCE have 2nd spot (and home finals) locked away, nor that a top 4 spot is beyond the Dees. It is pointless us hoping for everyone outside the eight to fall away, just so we can fall in to finals. Someone will be there with 13 wins. We need to win our way in to finals and strive to get a double chance, hopefully with as many Victorian based clubs in the top 4 as possible.
  21. One factor that hasn't been mentioned is the weather...the forecast is for dry conditions but with a stiff northerly breeze continuing in to the evening. Maybe it drops out later in which case it will be a good toss to win. Our ability to modify our game plan and style to the weather conditions (rain / dew / wind) hasn't been compelling over the last 18 months. I watched on initially with amazement and ultimately disgust in Hobart last year..... I really hope there's some thought going in to this aspect and that the Casey curtain raiser opportunity means there's ZERO possibility of getting it wrong. We can absolutely win this game if we avoid rookie errors in the planning and match day coaching decisions. Over to you Goody.....
×
×
  • Create New...