titan_uranus

Rubbish. Hindsight just confirmed how bad of a decision it was. In what world is Preuss a forward? Particularly given the weather conditions we knew was coming (we picked the side 24 hours beforehand). Brown mightn't have been amazing against St Kilda, but he wasn't terrible either.

It beggars belief that with a wet windy day in Cairns forecast, we dropped him for Preuss to play Preuss as a forward last week. If you want to reduce the season down to one major mistake, that maybe is it.

6 - Langdon 5 - May 4 - Petracca 3 - Rivers 2 - Oliver 1 - Pickett Honourable mentions to Spargo, Baker, Lever (huge fourth quarter but mistakes earlier) and Gawn.

Shows us that he knew the pressure was on us, knew we were not good enough in Cairns, and knows it's not done yet. Funny - if he's going on about how great we are people would criticise him for overcelebrating, wouldn't they?

Maybe leave this emotion to tomorrow?

I really did not see that coming. Lever made mistakes early but he and May in the final quarter were huge. Rivers is a gem. Spargo certainly did his job. Pickett much improved. Baker gave us a second wing. Keeps hope alive for one more week at least. And was a great game to boot.

We should be further behind than just 7. That's the positive. Since our three goal lead they've stepped up at stoppages and around the ball and we can't get enough ball forward of centre. Some critical free kicks going the wrong way for us but ultimately they're too strong in the middle for us. I maintain my view that Smith is not a footballer and shouldn't be playing. Just has no idea. Melksham's also having nowhere near enough impact. Rivers is a gem. Langdon is excellent. May has been solid (but gave Cameron that last goal). It's been a good game, we haven't been that bad, but just beaten in crucial areas. Would love to see us fight back here with an early couple of goals to take the lead but unfortunately I don't see it happening.

1 goal, and 1 pick when you look at the value of what we got back. Also has repelled a number of Giants forward entries. Yes, the turnover was appalling, but on the whole doing well so far.

We were struggling all quarter with clearances and CPs. Our first quarter dominance disappeared. We defended well for the first 3/4 of that quarter but from the Lever turnover onwards we just couldn't stop them. Had our chances (Fritsch's late miss and ANB's infuriating failure to run closer to goal before kicking) but if we don't get back on top in the middle we won't win.

Good start. At times excellent start. Gawn's late turnover was terrible. No game awareness and a bad option to boot. But he's creating so much through the middle. Mumford's a [censored]. Let's hope we can keep this up. 5 goal quarters and 3 goal leads early are nice things.

In his last two seasons at Adelaide they finished 5th (16-6) and then made the GF. It's a bit chicken and egg, but I'm sure Lever's stats were easier to accumulate in a winning side than in this year's 2020 side. Plus those stats don't take into account the 20% reduction in game time. And the last bit about "taking hold and springing from the backline and setting up our mids" - since when was that Lever's role? But more importantly, he's actually been good for us most of the year. There is a large anti-Lever bias on here: people disappointed he isn't reaching some sort of god-like level of football or want a draft pick back or something, without actually appreciating the reality that Lever's played well.

Don't agree with the Geelong point. Good clubs make poor drafting/trading decisions all the time. I think this is what is being missed in the current discussion. Right now, the only suggestion is that Viney's considering his options. Not that the club is shopping him around or not offering him a contract. Yet many on here are arguing the club is making a bad decision.

Petracca did it a fortnight ago. But yes, our big list problem is a KPF to play alongside Weideman.

Love your work @Demonland but we had a Jones thread kicking around last week - maybe could consolidated this article into that thread to continue the debate? FWIW, I don't think I agree with the article. I don't think Jones has shown enough this year to suggest he could be a meaningful best 22 contributor in 2021. Which is sad, as it would be a fitting reward for Jones' hard work and determination if he was able to get to 300.

Doesn't it fit in entirely with one of your other major criticisms of Goodwin: he's a poor and inflexible tactician? Built a list and game plan to do one thing, rule changes prevented it and he's not been able to adjust.

IMO, play like we did pre-Cairns, we win. Play like we did in Cairns, we will get belted. No one should be checked out. A win tonight puts us in the 8 (if only for a night).

I have to agree. Sometimes the changes in isolation, week-on-week, make sense (and this week they somewhat do). But as a broader picture, our selection has been all over the shop, indicating as many on here have said that Goodwin and the FD don't know what our best 22 is, don't know how we should be setting up or structuring our side, and play favourites with some players to the detriment/expense of others.

I don't agree on Weideman, other than that he needs to do better when the ball hits the deck. He has no key forward support. Whether it's an unfit/out of form TMac, Brown or Preuss, he's not just the number 1 forward but the only key forward our opponent has to care about. He therefore cops it unless we're moving the ball quickly and getting him in space, which against Sydney and Fremantle we never did. He's being sat on in packs and double-teamed, he can't get space, and he can't get into the game. He continues to present, he continues to make marking contests where he can, and he's averaging nearly 2 goals a game. IMO, if we had someone at or near 2018 TMac, Weid would improve considerably (but as I said, I agree that he needs to show a bit more by way of defensive pressure). Again, all roads leading back to missing a second tall forward of any competence.

Presumably Jetta does. Smith might get a job on one of their three tall forwards: Finlayson, Cameron and Himmelberg. Although Tomlinson might get the third tall instead.

So is this another Tom Browne special?

Dropping Preuss and Bedford is the right call. Replacing Preuss with Brown rather than TMac is justifiable but questionable. Have to query where TMac is at. Replacing Bedford with Spargo is fair enough, it's not like Hannan was in any better form when he was in the side. I love Neville and am glad to see him back but there is no reasonable way he should be in front of Lockhart based on 2020 output. It doesn't make sense for us to be naming Lockhart as an emergency if he's injured or unfit. I do not understand the Lockhart omission and continue to disagree with it.

PS: did anyone else notice this comment in the (yuck) Damien Barrett sliding doors column today: https://www.afl.com.au/news/498678/if-essendon-needs-another-quick-half-time-laugh-then IF ... Viney is considering options and Brayshaw, too, gets another offer he needs to deeply consider .. THEN ... the Dees will have even more massive problems added to those which have already ruined another season of football.

First and foremost, there's no evidence or suggestion that this is club-led. This appears to be Viney-led: he's a free agent and he appears to be considering his options. Having said that, the fact he's even considering leaving means that the relationship between him and the club could be better. Emotionally, I want him to say, without question. He's Melbourne and the thought of him playing somewhere else is difficult to accept. Putting that to one side, I think this is a tough debate to have. I think there are arguments on both sides. In Viney's favour, his effort is unquestionable and the same, regrettably, cannot be said for all our players. He has shown previously that he is capable of lifting the side on his back and taking us with him, and he has real talent both in stoppages and the forward line. However, one of our biggest flaws is the way in which we move the ball forward, and Viney has consistently struggled to change the way he moves the ball. He is a repeat offender at kicking without looking and making poor choices by foot. He has also struggled to curtail some of his natural instincts to take the tackler on when he should instead be releasing the ball. That's not all his fault of course, as some of it comes down to coaching, but IMO the reality is Viney is not the complete package and has flaws. Ultimately as an RFA Viney gets more power than we do here. If he has a good deal somewhere else and he wants a change of scenery, and if another club is fronting up a big contract, the risk we have is that in matching that contract we keep someone who isn't 100% committed and we have to spend a lot of salary cap on him. If, instead, letting him go nets us a first round draft pick, there is a reasonable argument that it's the best result for everyone.

Thanks. As I suspected it's complete garbage. FWIW, if we know TMac's issues are fitness/injury, I'm all for re-starting him at FF in 2021. Getting him back to his 2018 level will change us more than any other single player could IMO.

It's now in the three dots in the top right of your post.