titan_uranus

Except for when we got belted by Port. I've said this in another thread, but I don't think Weid has played poorly at all, before tonight. Tonight I felt he was outpositioned and unable to work his way into the contest. However, we will go nowhere as a club without consistency forward of centre, and we can't rely on any two of Brown, Jackson and Weideman to do it. Weideman's got runs on the board and although he was poor tonight, he goes nowhere for mine.

Lockhart or Hibberd replace Jetta if he's injured. Possibly even if he's not injured. Great effort from Jetta but his lack of pace and relative lack of forward drive compared to Hibberd hurt us. I'd keep Brown over Jackson. Not sure this is the game to bring Jackson back after a relatively long lay off. I'd get Harmes back in - choices for his spot should include Melksham, vandenBerg, ANB and Hunt. You'd presume the FD will look at pressure acts and those sorts of things, but I'd love to see Harmes in a forward/mid rotation. I thought Fritsch was OK given Haynes is an elite defender. I still don't like Smith but I'm OK with rewarding the back six for the final quarter which was super.

Critical part of that post.

There's a roughly 50-point difference between us and them (we're +58, they're +110). So, I think, the combined margins of our win and their loss need to be around 50. We'll know for sure when we play though, as St Kilda v GWS is first. If GWS wins, we'll know what we need.

[Censored] me. Preuss lays one tackle (after which he tried to kick a goal he had no ability to kick and missed entirely) and gets credit. What is it about Demonland and Preuss?

Something interesting to note. Rivers post-game said the senior players were helping the kids defend. Then this from May: Maybe, finally, some proper leadership?

Yes, but only in parts. We won clearances 36-32 overall. They turned our early dominance around through clearance work but we steadied in the fourth quarter. Having said that, as Goodwin just said in the presser, we're learning to win in different ways. Tonight we were -23 in CPs and -13 in inside 50s. A bit like the Collingwood game, we didn't get the game played entirely on our terms, yet we won.

@olisik your thoughts on the win (and/or Rivers and Pickett's games)? IMO, Pickett's first half was his best football all year. He used his pace to apply more pressure in the forward half, his touch was there, and he got involved in scoring chains. And Rivers was incredible.

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.