Jump to content


Life Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


titan_uranus last won the day on June 14

titan_uranus had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

8,657 Excellent

About titan_uranus

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

14,411 profile views
  1. This is sinking to new lows of hindsight stupidity, even by your horrendously low standards. Pickett was taken in a mid-season rookie draft at age 28. Every club, including Richmond, passed on him previously. He's played one outstanding game in the GF, where Richmond's opponent didn't exist. He otherwise averages 12 touches a game. Hardly "tearing it up". And he was dropped earlier this year. Middle of last year we were heading towards the bottom 4. How does an unproven 28 year old flashy player help us?
  2. My gripe with dropping OMac isn't that I think OMac played well. He didn't. It's about structure. I think our best long-term plan is for OMac, or someone else who can play that role better than him, to be the "second" defender (May is the "first" defender, taking the opposition's best key forward, and Lever is "third", zoning off, intercepting, playing a little freer than the other two). We've seen plenty of examples of asking Lever to be the "second" defender which haven't worked. We've also seen examples of asking Frost or Smith to be the "second" defender: because they're both unreliable teammates, that hasn't worked well either. OMac has flaws, indeed some significant ones that IMO mean he can't be a long-term candidate for our best 22, but the structure with him in the side has had the best look to it. And our defence has been our best performing part of the ground for the past month with OMac in it. So I'd prefer us to be playing to our preferred structure, even if we're unhappy with OMac, unless/until there is a proper OMac replacement to play in his stead. And that is not Tomlinson (nor is it TMac).
  3. I just posted this in the Gameday thread: tonight's game will be our 9th, and our 7th different venue. By comparison, Adelaide will have played 10 games after tonight and only at 3 different venues. I wouldn't mind seeing us get some stability in our fixturing in the remaining games to come: some repeat games at the same venue (presumably Metricon or the Gabba) would be nice.
  4. However, before we get to tonight's game, I wanted to post a few devil's advocate thoughts, just to get them off my chest before we (possibly) lose. Tonight will be our 9th game. We'll playing at our 7th different venue. By comparison, Adelaide has only played at three different grounds (Adelaide Oval, Gabba, Metricon). Adelaide also appear to be a better side at home than away. Other than the Showdown, their losses in Adelaide have been to Sydney (3 points), St Kilda (23 points) and Essendon (3 points).
  5. I can't shake the feeling that we're going to lose this one. We shouldn't. We should win by 6+ goals. But I can't help but feel Adelaide will pull one out, knowing this may be their last chance to win a game all year.
  6. If we lose tomorrow night, this thread will want 90% of our list traded or delisted.
  7. If we lose, this board will go bananas. If we win, even by 100 points, this board will shrug its shoulders, dismiss it as an irrelevant performance, and expect us to lose to North.
  8. The backline was, by far, the best part of our side last week. Lever was a stand-out part of that. Rest of your post is anti-Lever biased guff. Agree re: Hannan. In recent weeks I've seen footage of Melksham giving huddle speeches and revving up the kids. I've read somewhere that he's a leader of sorts and I think that is part of why he's kept his spot. He's also improved the last few weeks, to be fair. He should have been dropped a month ago though. Melksham earlier this year, and Harmes/Brayshaw right now, are the biggest examples of favouritism we're seeing. In all three instances, we've seen players woefully out of form being persisted with. TMac, OMac, ANB, Hunt, Smith, Bennell, Jetta and Hibberd have all been dropped this year after having had fewer chances to perform than those three. I don't know if it's cliques, it could simply be Goodwin's stubbornness on show: doubling down on his method, and therefore the players he sees as "core", because he thinks that's the only way out and/or doesn't know any different.
  9. Two thoughts come to mind following that game. The first is maybe that 4 day breaks are a factor: Brisbane was off a 4 day break, Richmond had 6. Although to counter that, Brisbane generated plenty of scoring shots, so it wasn't all one-way traffic. The second is that the comp remains very even. Brisbane were pretty poor in most facets after quarter time. Pretty much every side has had a stinker of a loss so far this year. Indeed, every club except GWS has lost at least one game by 30+ points this year (side note: a week ago, there were three other clubs who with GWS had not lost a game by 30+ points. They were Brisbane, Carlton and...wait for it...us).
  10. Lever was unquestionably in our best last week, but feel free to maintain your bias. Frost and wrecking go well together, though.
  11. I agree. I think @Bring-Back-Powell's idea that Goodwin might resign is wishful thinking in the extreme. If the club isn't going to remove him, Goodwin will, completely fairly, back himself in to get the job done. If we're bad enough that he has to go, the club will make the call.
  12. Thinking this through, surely Tomlinson is going to play defence. If he does, we have a back six of Lever, May, Tomlinson, Hibberd, Salem, Lockhart. Jones/Harmes (vom)/maybe Sparrow seventh defender. Forward six then is Weideman, Jackson, Melksham, Fritsch, ANB, Bennell. vandenBerg/Jones/Sparrow maybe seventh. The rest are midfielders: Gawn, Oliver, Petracca, Viney, Brayshaw, Langdon. Harmes/Sparrow/vandenBerg rotating through as needed. If Tomlinson plays wing, we're short in numbers and height in terms of defenders, and we then have too many players trying to fit into the limited minutes we can give to the five non-Gawn midfielders.
  13. I don't get it, and I don't like it. Oscar was poor last week, but we've had a settled and functioning backline since he came in. Last week we had a disgusting drop in pressure and increase in turnovers, so it's no wonder the back half performed worse than it had the previous month. Adelaide has a relatively tall forward line (Himmelberg is 198cm, McAsey is 197cm, and Walker, Fogarty and Lynch are all 193cm). Was this the game to throw the third tall defender out and, presumably, rely on Hibberd to play on someone 7cm+ taller than him? Or are we sending Tomlinson into defence when he hasn't been training as a key defender all year? Or are we really dumb enough to put Fritsch back into defence after the abject failure that was Fritsch in the backline in 2019? It doesn't make sense to me. Meanwhile our midfield last week was poor and we've made no changes. All of Sparrow, Jones, Brayshaw and Harmes retain their spots. I don't mind Bennell and ANB changing up our forward half mix, and I absolutely agree with TMac being dropped, but I'm concerned that we're going to disrupt the improvement and progress we saw in our back half. Maybe it's MFCSS, but I can see one of Adelaide's talls doing a Kent Kingsley and bagging 5 against us, making Lever and May look woeful as they repeatedly find themselves out of position trying to cover too many talls without support.
  14. Why do we need to think outside the box? Our four best players last week were, in no particular order, May, Lever, Lockhart and Hibberd. The midfield and forward line applied about 1% of the requisite effort and pressure, for whatever reason. So quoting the 23 form 47 stat doesn't say a whole lot about the individuals in the backline. Says a lot more about our team approach to defence. In each game from Carlton through to Brisbane, our defensive half set up has improved. We've seen Lever and May get better at working alongside each other, and for a period OMac looked decent and may have assisted (or may not, jury's out a bit on that). In the hierarchy of problems we have, the backline sits well behind the midfield and forward line. And if you were going to make a change, "thinking outside the box" is a nice buzz phrase but what are you actually trying to implement, and in what way does TMac help? He's slow, unfit, out of form, and hasn't played defence since 2017. And you've suggested adding him to Lever, May and OMac. Why do we need to go taller? Why do we need to go slower? Who makes way for him? I don't think there's a solid argument that TMac should be a defender and should replace OMac. I think there's even less of an argument that he should be added to the backline.
  • Create New...