titan_uranus

Agree with this. We should have been 20-30 up at quarter time but we weren't 3 goals better than them in the second. I think you've got that the wrong way around. We had at least three that quarter (high on Viney, high on Oliver, and one in a marking contest late). Plus Collingwood's only had 7 for the match.

He's been excellent for the last month. Two big mistakes tonight to be fair, but hasn't yet undone all the good work he's done the last month.

They've had 7 scoring shots from 20 inside 50s (we've had 14 shots from 20). Our defence is being put under too much pressure from centre bounces. We're doing better when they're trying to rebound from their back half, they're not tearing through us too often. Oliver is starring and Petracca and Brayshaw are playing well, but we definitely need a lift in the middle. Grundy, Adams, Sidebottom and Pendlebury are walking out of the middle too much, and Varcoe and Noble are pacy off half-back.

Umpiring is awful again, but this time we're getting the rub of the green a bit (the free to Viney was correct though, that's not a slide below the knees, that's someone going for the ball harder than his opponent). This is not how I expected this game to play out at all. We do well to kick 10 goals in a normal game but to put 10 on the board against a top 8 side which happens to have the second best defence in the comp (albeit missing Howe and Roughead) is a strong effort. First quarter I felt we should have been further in front. That quarter, oddly, I felt like we didn't play well enough to extend our lead by 3 goals. We're obviously doing incredibly well inside 50 but we're losing clearances and inside 50s are level at 20 apiece. Collingwood look dangerous when Adams, Pendlebury or Sidebottom get near it. 32 points is a really impressive buffer and we look good, but I'm still very much concerned about whether we can keep this up. Loved Spargo's quarter. Oliver is dominating. Petracca does a lot right but is making mistakes. TMac worked his way back into it. Weideman keeps competing, really important for our structure.

We should be further in front. Really should have kicked 4 or 5 goals, Fritsch should have nailed his and the one where TMac had a snap we should have found a goal too. vandenBerg has already turned it over two or three times. TMac genuinely looks done. Petracca's having a poor game so far. Oliver dominant, Brayshaw playing well, defence holding up pretty well.

Four games this year we've kicked 3+ goals in the first quarter (Carlton, Richmond, Hawthorn, Adelaide). I believe we've only won 3 of our 10 first quarters so far, which is bad.

6.

Huge game for the club. I have no confidence, I expect a loss.

Nice work, @Lucifer's Hero. Richmond's draw means they probably only need 3 wins, will put them on 9.5 and that will put them above any 9-win side no matter what percentage. At any rate, I see them winning 4 of their last 6. Essendon's draw means their low percentage doesn't matter any more, but as you say, good luck to them finding 4 wins in that bunch. The season really is in our hands though, given who we play. If we make it even to 9 wins, we'll have had to beat at least two sides who are competing with us for their 9th or 10th wins. The percentage we built in the Hawthorn/Adelaide/North games, after losing so much to Port, could be important too, if we get a bunch of sides finishing on 9 instead.

Yes, his toughness is a good thing. But don't we get the same sort of attitude from Viney, Gawn, Oliver, May and Hibberd, for starters? Like, vandenBerg isn't unique in our 22 for being tough.

Nope. On current form, Oliver gets first dibs on midfield minutes, whether we like Brayshaw or not. IMO it's Petracca and Viney who should be sharing midfield minutes with Brayshaw, with the former two spending increased minutes in the forward line to make up for it, and Brayshaw's other minutes either on a wing or on the bench. I'm somewhat comforted to read that it was click bait! I hope we trial a set up that sees Brayshaw spending more time in the middle with Viney in the side. We need to know how it looks. If it doesn't work (either because of Brayshaw or because of Viney), then we need to know. And if it does work...well, that will be good.

Well, a lot of the crisis-deeming comes from us. And we do it every year, and sometimes more than once. However, there is a point to be made: every club has lost at least one game by 30+ points (bear in mind shorter quarters). The Port loss is our only such loss for the year. Indeed, 14 of the 18 clubs have lost one of their last four games by 30+ points (the four exceptions are Geelong, Gold Coast, West Coast and Richmond). If Tomlinson had kicked that goal, we'd have a win over a top 4 side, we'd be 8th on the ladder and playing for a temporary spot in the top 4, and we'd have a significant degree more credibility. But we didn't, so we're not, and we don't.

I'd like to see the pressure acts stat, which I'm sure the FD is big on for both these players. I'm guessing it shows vandenBerg higher than Hannan. I'm not suggesting that's sufficient for him to retain his spot, though. Just a hunch as to what they're basing it off. I think they think Hannan's not doing enough when the ball hits the deck. My main issue is the like-for-likeness of the swap. Obviously Preuss/Jackson and Lockhart/Rivers are like-for-like which leaves Viney for Hannan. IMO, Viney would be better suited to slotting into vandenBerg's role than Hannan's, based on how both played vs North. That issue aside, we've seen some players this year keep their spot despite poor form (vandenBerg, Melksham, Brayshaw and Harmes) whilst others have lost their spot when their form hasn't necessarily warranted (Rivers, ANB, Bennell and arguably OMac and Hannan are the names that spring to mind). Goodwin is stubborn, we know that, and I think he views that former group as best 22 and wants them playing together as much as possible. Maybe the latter group is either not best 22 or might be in 2021 (Rivers/Bennell, for fitness reasons).

Total number of venues played at to Round 17 (it's possible some clubs may see this tally increase by 1 for their Round 18 game, or in the case of Hawthorn/North if they get home games shifted down to Tasmania): Adelaide - 3 Port Adelaide - 3 West Coast - 3 St Kilda - 5 North Melbourne - 5 Fremantle - 5 Bulldogs - 5 (including 8 out of 10 in a row at Metricon) GWS - 6 Richmond - 6 Collingwood - 6 (including either 5 or 6 straight at the Gabba) Brisbane - 6 (all games in Queensland from Round 8-18) Carlton - 7 Sydney - 7 Geelong - 8 Essendon - 8 Hawthorn - 8 (including a home game against Adelaide, in Adelaide!) Melbourne - 9

Hannan didn't do enough to force Goodwin's hand, but I still consider him unlucky to have lost his spot when Jones (no influence since he came back) and vandenBerg (continues to make awful errors) are in the side. Lockhart deserved to come straight back in so I'm OK with Rivers making way on that basis. Viney replacing Hannan will make the most sense if Viney plays more forward than middle. If he plays more middle, he'll be forcing Petracca forward more and/or Brayshaw back onto a wing.

Here are some preliminary thoughts I have: Collingwood doesn't leave the Gabba until the final game, in which they are the home team, so feasibly won't leave the Gabba for the rest of the season; St Kilda play every game except one at the Gabba/Metricon from Rounds 9-17 (and as they are the home side in Round 18, are likely to stay in Queensland for that game). Over the same period we play games at Alice Springs, Cairns and Adelaide, in addition to Gabba/Metricon.

Did anyone get behind the paywall to read this: https://twitter.com/superfooty/status/1294061172933767168?s=20 Edit: thought that would embed, sorry. Text says "Simon Goodwin is frustrated by speculation over the future of Angus Brayshaw but the hard nut is set to be pushed out of the centre square again against Collingwood"

I'm glad we've gone with Preuss to replace Jackson. Put TMac in Jackson's role and see if he can at least give us the same level of contest that Jackson was. Meanwhile Preuss has to make sure he's not letting Grundy dictate the hit outs, and has to stay with him around the ground. Grundy's been off, badly, the last few games bu if he returns to form, he could easily be the difference.

Long run I don't think Essendon can compete for a finals spot. They've got too many games to come against the strong sides and I'm not convinced, at all, they can win enough of them to get to 10. And yes, I was hinting at Round 23 2017. This isn't as important given it's not a clear cut of "win and in", but it's still the most important game we've played this year.

A win doesn't guarantee us a spot in the 8 - if Essendon beat St Kilda they'll take it and we'll stay 9th (with GWS 10th). Doesn't change the fact that this game for us this weekend is huge. Hmmm. When was the last time we had such a massive game with a lot riding on it against Collingwood...?

GWS is missing Greene and Davis, but yes, with Sydney missing Franklin, Kennedy and Heeney, this is a major upset.

GWS losing is obviously good for us in the short term: we beat Collingwood, we pass GWS. But it's a reminder that we can't just assume we're going to bank the Fremantle and Sydney wins.

GWS looks like us at our worst. Tonnes of inside 50s but cannot score, and conceding far too easily out the back. Sydney winning is a great result for us if we are genuine about our finals chances.

Possibly, where costs were allocated at normal capacity levels. Maybe not, if we can reduce costs given we know only a limited number of people can attend.

My preference is for Preuss to come in and play 1st ruck, with TMac playing the second tall forward role. There should be 1-2 other changes around the ground (e.g. Viney/Lockhart/OMac may come in, vandenBerg/Harmes/Tomlinson may go out) but it's the way we structurally respond to not having Jackson or Gawn that is critical IMO.