SFebes

22 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

My Pie supporting mate says he heard / read an interview with Graham Wright, he apparently said that should Grundy be traded that they are no longer responsible for part of his wage. Citing their deal was with Melbourne not a third party. I wouldn’t have thought it mattered. Do the Pies have a case on a technicality in his contract?

I think that would be correct. We'd then take on the remainder of what his new contract is.

ie; $950,000 is the apparent figure

New club $600,000

We pay $350,000

Collingwood $0

But I'm probably wrong. Its still a lengthy contact too from memory?

1 minute ago, old55 said:

I think there's no doubt that the FD prefer May, Petty, Lever in the backline and the hope was that when Ben Brown completed his "mini-pre-season" he'd be able to come back and perform effectively.  That's why Petty went back and Tomlinson went out, not because we "abandoned the idea of Petty forward".  But it clearly didn't work, and Tomlinson showed some form, so the Petty-forward option with Tomlinson-back was the best card we had to play.  Goodwin has repeatedly said we're open to trying different things to improve.

From memory, Tomlinson got dropped while in-form and playing a blinder. That to me tells me he gave up on the idea, as Tomlinson should never have been dropped in the first place. But, we all see it differently and thats OK :-) 

So these are the things I wanted to take a look at yesterday morning.

1. Well it speaks for itself. Credit to Goodwin for trying Petty again again considering he looked to have given up on the idea recently himself. JVR is getting game time and his confidence is growing. I just wonder if taking Petty from the backline is also a big negative as well as a positive. Suddenly and strangely, Tomlinson and/or Smith become very important players to us from here on. Do they move him back when Fritsch comes in, who knows, that will be interesting.

2. We definitely took the game on and played with more flare up the corridor. Whether this was just because Richmond also did it or was tactical who knows, but credit for Goodwin changing it up after half time. Of course our form and taking the game on also coincides with playing 3 very good offensive teams as well, but when the heat is in the kitchen in a final, i think we have that over the top 3. If we can absorb the pressure better defensively (unlike the middle patch v Brisbane) I think we can go all the way. But its also up to our mids to defend better up the ground, we saw how much heat our backline was under yesterday in the first half.

3. Now this is what I find interesting, I tried to keep tally of entries and players as best I could while I minded the kids, of course this is just opinion and not factual. We had 73-45 i50's. There was definitely a massive improvement on the direction of i50's with what I would consider only 8 kicks to the pocket, which has been a real issue for us for a while and massive improvement. It's that forward connection (not loading) that many of us have been wanting to see and the real reason behind our form drop earlier. I reckon we lowered our eyes and looked for a target on 22 occasions which from the naked eye seems like a huge difference to what we are used to.

There still was many bombs into 50 though even when not under pressure, Viney (5), Langdon (4), Gawn (4) (cant fault his second half) and Petracca the worst culprits. With Viney, Langdon and ANB in the (what I considered poor entries) group with the most poor entries in that second category. ANB provided a lot of drive into 50 in the first quarter but boy does he let himself down with poor kicking, can't doubt his endeavour. Tigers entries were sublime at times with Dusty (was he coaching McVee at one stage?) and Bolton. If i was a recruiter I'd be specifically targeting half forwards with elite foot skills, or as some suggested, move Bowey or Salem up to HF.

Anyway just a bit of fun, I always choose a few things to look at each week like this so miss plenty and in no way am I right, everyone would've had their own criteria and standards.

I don't subscribe to the "I told you so posts" about Petty as a forward as even Goodwin had gone against it nor do I believe training loads or fatigue were a factor for our form, which has seen the same forward connection issues for a long time. We seemed to run out games fine during that period. What I will give credit to (which I'm usually sceptical) is the growth of Goodwin to turn around our form. His decisions of late has been THE major contributing factor IMO. 

Petracca majority forward was ballsy, Pickett to the midfield, dropping Grundy (yes he wasn't "rested") and putting trust in to JVR as backup ruck, persistence in Melksham, Brayshaw tagging Neale, May to Dusty in second half after a poor first half, change of gamestyle to take the game on more, the Petty re-experiment, extra goal kicking practice programs, straightening up forward entries away from the pockets, faith in Rivers-Sparrow-Pickett in the middle, giving Brown a chance, giving Gawn a rev up and overall growth to actually make some in-game changes when needed.

I don't think we should be resting players in-form either, flaunting with danger. We can manage them with TOG or via the sub. Carlton and Sydney will also be a good test for us, not easy. Anyone done a ladder predictor yet? ;-)

You'd think Harmes, Jordon, Woewodin are on watch especially with Hibberd, Oliver, Fritsch to come back. I think Goodwin will reward Hibberd this week at the expense of one of those 3. I can't see Grundy coming back now unless Gawn is injured. They even gave away the experiment at Casey yesterday where he played the last half in the ruck after looking lost early.

We look a far better team when we play with flare and bring everyone into the game. Go Dees.

11 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

4.3 to 1 point in the final quarter and still losing to the abjectly bad last placed team.

Gonna be a long flight home across the Nullabor for the Kangaroos.

Now I'm trying to figure out if percentage could matter at the bottom of the ladder.

Hmm... West Coast have scored 150 fewer points than North and conceded almost 300 more. It would take a few almighty beltings for North to drop that much.

I for one endorse the Demon's heading down to Launceston and making the wooden spoon race interesting.

Tankathon by North. Cant be winning when you want a PP now hey. 

They won't bring Oliver back vs North Melbourne in 12'C in Tasmania you'd assume. 

IN: Hibberd (form rewarded), Sparrow (automatic selection)

OUT: Harmes, Woewodin

Smith for Tomlinson perhaps...

Kozzie and Viney seemed very quiet that quarter. Pickett and Petracca needs to play more in the middle with Oliver and Sparrow out

Live ladder in Q2 FFS 

Is it just me, or does MAY look very ginger the last week or two?? I think he's playing injured

1 minute ago, praha said:

We are playing a highly offensive game against a team ranked 1st for F50 efficiency. We need to lock this down.

Exactly. Unsure why Goody would want to this against Richmond but they are on of very few I wouldnt be trying this against.

Just now, dazzledavey36 said:

Yeah he's been exposed unfortunately 

What we get in Petty up forward we also lose in defence. 

Tomlinson looks very shaky today

That was atrocious Langdon, you learn not to do in mini league

I wonder if Petty forward outweighs missing him in defence...

We are definitely playing more through the corridor today, Richmond is one of a few sides I wouldn't be doing this against, so poor coaching and Goodwin needs to change it up a little or they'll hurt us on turnovers. Not sure why we want that gameplan today. Tigers' forward entries are the standard we should be aiming for. 

ANB has 4 x i50's for 3 poor entries for those praising him.

Pretty good win by Williamstown to be fair. Grundy moved into the ruck after half time. Good to see Hibberd push his stakes.

Grundy has 7 disposals so far.

Ben Brown 2 kicks

Spargo 3 kicks from his 9 touches.

3 minutes ago, Nascent said:

Is there any website that shows overall VFL stats? Was trying to look up goals kicked for various players over the year but can't find anything.

I used to use SportingPulse, unsure if that's still a thing?

2 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Think I prefer Max as the number 1 ruckman.

The Grundy experiment just won't work. Watching him right now at Casey he looks completely lost and his leading patterns is non existent.

Feel for the guy because we all wanted it to work but no doubt he'll be at a new club next year as the number 1 ruckman.

Definitely looks lost. I actually feel a bit sorry for him, this wasn’t the pitch that was spun to him. 

2 minutes ago, sue said:

I can't see how anyone can get a handle on Grundy's 'forward craft' or lack of it in these conditions.

It’s pretty easy to gauge, don’t just look at stats, look at positioning, leading patterns etc. not rocket science to work out. He looks completely lost even from a non statistical point of view. 

Just now, picket fence said:

Experiment OVER! Either he Rucks or BUST

Well either that or Max needs to fulfil his side of the pitch to get Grundy, that is that Max plays mostly as a forward. However both are number one rucks so I never was a fan of the move in the first place, as Max just isn’t a forward. 

Hmmm, I know it’s windy but got to say that whatever Grundy is doing is certainly nowhere near any forward craft or positioning as I remember playing it. Got to feel for him a bit I think. But he looks lost. 

Not a good day for key forwards or learning forward craft by the sounds of it

11 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

They are 2 great gets. I managed to get back to equal first last week. This may sound stupid but from what I can work out the person who was leading purely takes the home team if they are the favourite.

Sometimes leading the tipping when its close late in the season can be the worst! All you do is pick the favourites, while others around you pick roughies that normally get up at this time of year.