Wiseblood

Yep. The only good thing is that he is leading up to the ball and providing a target. Just have to hope he starts clunking a few for his confidence.

Fair dinkum. That's not a bad goal.

Liking Tom Mac outside of 50 at the minute. Really giving us a target and allowing us to move the ball better.

Good composure there. Nice to see for a change.

Love it. Saints played one good quarter and then fell in a complete hole. Their fans would be super disappointed with that. Freo stunk it up in that first term and then got their hands dirty in pulling out that win. Full credit to them. Plus I love seeing the Saints get rolled.

Right now, which club is this? Would the Suns or Saints trade a King for Gus? No chance in hell. Name the tall forward who is gettable for a Gus or even a Viney. I'm interested to see who you think is gettable.

This is the main part I agree with. I don't agree with trading Viney, but we need to do something a little different in our midfield. I think Goodwin has at least tried to do something, and in one instance it has worked - Trac playing more midfield minutes has been the perfect move. However, as we all know, we're a little one dimensional in there at the minute and it hurts a bit. I think the move of Harmes to half back had merit, but it didn't really work. At least he had a crack at changing things up. To me, we can only have two at most of Viney, Brayshaw, Harmes and Oliver running through the midfield, especially at centre bounces. Does Goodwin look to change it up further - does he throw Salem in there? Does he give someone like Kozzie Pickett five minutes a term in there to spice things up? I think we have options, but we don't need to pull trades for no reason to make it happen. I'd even try Melksham in there to freshen him up - why not go Oliver, Melksham and Trac with Gawn at the first centre bounce? Either way, I'm against trading Viney as I don't think it's the answer.

Saints have kicked 6 in the first term, which is double what the Hawks could conjure up in an entire game last night. No doubt the Saints are good to watch and well coached at present, however Freo are pretty terrible.

Dees by 4 goals. Weid to kick three, Bennell to have an impact and Clarrie will respond to the criticism with a vintage game in the middle.

What do you want them to say, OD? What are you missing out on?

A few years ago you would have been keen as he showed plenty of promise. However, he hasn't done much for a while and seemingly just coasts through games. As LT said, I'd look at him at a bargain basement price, and then only if Weideman shows little this season and we move him on. Even then, I view Jackson as a far better long term prospect than Wright.

Fair point, although you can see why they might have shifted him there. I've seen others mentioned as well, but outside of Harmes and Gus, I don't think they are valid Hunt, for example, lost the plot across half back (in fact he has never been the same player since he got knocked out against the Crows) and they have tried to resurrect his career as a forward. You could argue that the club are trying different things there to see what might work. Salem is a strange one - does he have the capacity to play as a mid? I feel like we haven't found his best position yet. He doesn't strike me as a wingman, and you can't blame them for wanting his kicking skills to be used across half back. Not convinced he is a forward either. Having said that, I'm with @binman - players should always put the team first. If they coach needs them in a certain position, then they roll with it (unless they stick Max in the back pocket and have Nev rucking).

Some strong sentiments there, Doc. I'll address each one as best I can. As for the first paragraph. If there are problems, and we have no idea if there are, then of course we should know about it. The last thing we want is for things to go belly up at board level. However, there is no indication of this at all, and people are merely trying to connect dots but doing nothing more than putting rumours out there that can't be supported. The only thing I dislike around posting things they've heard is that it is super easy to do - I can say I've got contacts within the club who tell me that everyone is on the same page and that they are determined to turn things around on field and continue to be stable financially off it. I can just say that I can't share who I got the info off and boom, I'm covered. It's not necessarily as harmful if it occurs during trade time - people post all sorts of wacky rumours then - but trying to almost stir up a bit of trouble within the supporter group seems disingenuous. Of course, there are enough people here who take the info with a grain of salt, but it only takes a few others to start referencing them in other threads all the time and the rumour has legs. As to the last point, what do you want Bartlett and Pert to do right now? How are they both treating us with contempt? That seems such a strong, and strange, comment to me. I'd much rather they continue to work their backside off behind the scenes to ensure the financial security of our club moving forward. That is their job. The job of Mahoney, Goodwin and the players is they are seen far more, talk about the on field stuff, while we might get an update here and there from the others. I'm just not totally sure what you expect to hear from them on a regular basis. I feel as though the club have stepped things up, especially during all the COVID stuff, and are giving us as much access as possible. Let's be honest though, and I feel like SWYL for typing this and it makes me feel dirty, but wins are the thing we should be focusing on. Right now, we don't have them, and the pressure is beginning to mount. I'd like to see Goodwin and the team lift their game over the coming weeks, while I'd like Pert and Bartlett to continue to focus their time on ensuring the long term future of our club, especially during such a difficult time.

Lions would be much better if they had any decent tall forwards. Hipwood and McStay are very average. If you keep Cameron quiet then you go a long way to beating them. We have actually played some decent teams to kick off the year. It's no excuse in terms of our skills and so forth, but I agree that if we can fix up the skills enough then we'll win more than we lose.

How well am I going: Backed in Smith - he gets dropped. Backed in Rivers - he gets dropped. If anyone wants someone dropped just let me know and i'll be all over it for you. On the other hand, really good to see Bennell and Weideman in the side, and I think Nev will bring in some experience as well. Bit meh on Oscar but I'll be hoping he does well.

Are we talking the third party information? As I said, that's not evidence. And who are these players who are being 'played out of position'? Outside of someone like Brayshaw, I don't think I've seen anyone being played out of their main position. You could go as far as saying players like Trac got their wish - he put in more effort over pre-season to build his fitness and he has been rewarded with the midfield minutes he craved. Strikes me as a bit far fetched. But hey, that's just me, as you said in your post we can take out of what we wish.

And the evidence is... ?

Okay - but what does this have to do with any tension or cliques or whatever? I think the club isn't doing too bad re: finances considering the current climate, and while I agree about on field performance, I hardly see how that is down to Pert. I'd lay that at the feet of Goodwin more than anyone else. He's the man in charge there who has been given the players he wants and he hasn't put it into place enough for our liking at this point.,

Until they come out and say more and you want them to get their heads out of the media. Can't have your cake and eat it too. As far as I'm concerned I just want them to run the club well - keep the finances in check, keep the memberships and sponsorships up and keep the problems to a minimum. Outside of on field performance I think they're doing pretty well.

And how do you know that? Got any hard evidence? This is not directed at you OD, so please don't think it is, but all these insinuations and assumptions that get thrown around on here are disappointing. This site deserves better. People come on here with the 'well I heard this' or the 'I heard that' and then when enough people get hold of them supporters end up believing it. It just shouldn't happen. Too many people can't back anything up, other than they 'heard' something. Well, you know what? Great. They should keep the [censored] measuring to themselves. From where I sit, there is no evidence whatsoever of cliques or factions or whatever else. It's just hearsay and unless someone can back it up with evidence it should be deleted. Now, if you want to talk about our on field efforts then fine - it's been well below par and things need to change drastically. We have the evidence of that right now. Our on field results and output for the last 18 months has been terrible and we know we are capable of better. However, claiming that there are issues off field when there is no evidence at all of this occurring is poor form. As far as we can see, Bartlett and Pert are actually doing a decent job through all of this to keep the sponsorship coming in and finding ways to raise the cash to ensure that we don't have to go to the AFL for handouts, and thus we are able to continue to invest in a variety of off field things that we need to. As I said, this is not meant to be directed at you OD, but pedalling off field problems without any evidence is not something this site should be condoning, as Andy has pointed out a few times already.

We are around four hours from fans finally agreeing with selection, or many of us losing the absolute plot if the changes aren't ones we agree with. I've got the popcorn ready.

And it's a MASSIVE if. There is zero indication that the culture has 'regressed' or that there are cliques and friction at the club. On field we need to lift our game, but it seems like we're still headed in the right direction off the field. Bit of a disappointing thread really, although supporters have sunk the boots into everyone else so I guess it's just Pert's turn.

He will be better once the players around him work out how to use a bloke out on the wings. They haven't had one of decent quality in a while.

All I want to see are a few changes. I'm a fan of the continuity aspect, but I think we are carrying a few and we need to give some others a crack. We need an extra tall forward, and we need to freshen things up inside 50. I'd be giving one of Weid/Brown/Jackson a crack, and I'd also look at Bennell and ANB to slot in there somewhere. So, for me it would be: In: Weid/Brown/Jackson, Bennell, ANB Out: AVB, Hunt, Melksham

All fair and good points, dazzle. I wanted to highlight this part of your post. While those above are already playing senior footy, and in some cases (Young) contributing well, I think the club eyed someone like Rivers who could do the same thing long term. While he was quieter on the weekend, we've already seen what a confident, dashing half back he is, and he uses the ball by foot quite well. He may not be playing to the level of a Young, but he is showing some really, really good signs. It's harder to find a Jackson further into the draft, which is why they may have gone for him so early. Max isn't going to play forever, and by the time he is coming good, Max will probably be on his way out. He can learn from one of the best ruckmen in the game, and then play there for the majority of his career in much the same fashion Grundy does. For me, I think the club did a really good job with our drafting. They identified need - the modern tall, the zippy, creative and clever small forward, and the dashing half back who is already showing that he understands how to play both defensively and offensively. Your points are all valid, and of course time will tell down the line, but I think at the moment we made the right decisions.