titan_uranus

Always a pleasure discussing things with you, jnr.

What rubbish. Round 23 2017 was nothing like last weekend. Round 23 2017 was indeed "everything to play for". Round 1 2020 was a maelstrom of stress with potentially nothing to play for, if the season can't get re-started. They ran out there last week with significant job and financial uncertainty. A game that could have had plenty of importance turned into an odd shell of a game that could literally mean nothing when the ink dries on 2020. And I don't buy the "West Coast were switched on" argument as if to say they were on some other level to us. They weren't exactly dominating. The game turned on a 5-minute patch at the end of the first quarter where they kicked 4 quick goals. For the rest of the game it was quite even. Incredibly different to Round 23 2017.

This is a problem in itself. Why are we setting up scoring chains with players like these delivering inside 50? Particularly Hibberd who is a half-back. Why is he galloping up the ground and bombing it 50m repeatedly? We need players delivering the ball inside 50 who know what they're doing. I won't write Langdon off after one game but we all know Hibberd and Viney stink at it so we need to change the way we're setting up and the way we're getting the ball from the back half to the forward half.

If we had a game this weekend I'd be looking at dropping Spargo, ANB, Hibberd and Brown and looking at bringing in Jones and Salem if they were fit. No idea who else would come in. If Goodwin cannot get these players to lower their eyes and deliver the ball at leading forwards without resorting to up and under bombs, then we're going to finish bottom 4 again (if there is a season 2020).

It's hard to know what impact the announcement of the season suspension had on the players. There's a significant degree of uncertainty about what happens next: staff members at the club may lose their jobs, financial position is unclear. I don't think it's fair to say that the players should have been able to put it all behind them and perform at the top of their games. Having said that, there were some extraordinarily disappointing signs that have me more worried than I want to be. The kicking inside 50 looked exactly like 2019. Exactly. Hibberd, Viney, Gawn, Oliver and Brayshaw (all "leaders" to certain extents) were guilty of lazy, thoughtless, up and under bombs. If this is what Hibberd is going to produce in whatever's left of 2020, I don't want it. Langdon's positives are important: his two-way running and link-up down the wing is critical to us improving. But he joins the aforementioned players in being an appalling kick inside 50. Still too many turnovers. 15m kicks under no pressure missing targets. Handballs to the opposition or to our feet. Dropped marks. Fumbles. Missed tackles. I don't know how critical to be of the forwards: TMac kicked 2 but was nowhere for most of the game, Brown was woeful, Melksham largely ineffectual. The commentary on Fox suggested that at times TMac and Brown were leading to the ball carrier but being ignored, so I suspect part of their struggles was the poor delivery. The defensive unit held up well I thought. Credit to Oscar, Lever and May for working together well to quell their tall forwards. Loved what I saw of Pickett, Viney's game (inside 50 kicking aside) was excellent, Brayshaw got better as it went on, Bedford got involved in the fourth. Otherwise, incredibly disappointing.

Twitter suggests our game will be played but then the season is shut down until 31 May at the earliest.

I don't think this counts but anyway: We've never won an interstate Round 1 game. We're 0-3 (Sydney at the SCG in 1982, West Coast at Subiaco in 1991, Fremantle at Subiaco in 1998).

I actually think the reaction will differ depending on the premier. If we win it (same deal with a team like St Kilda or even Carlton/North Melbourne), there will be sections of the media/public who will say that it doesn't really count (e.g. we beat sides on the road because there were no crowds, levelled the playing field in favour of small clubs like us etc.). But if, say, RIchmond or Collingwood or West Coast or Geelong wins it, I can see the story being "champion teams find a way despite whatever adversity is thrown at them".

The two big surprises to me are Brown over Weideman and that we're playing a side with all four of ANB, Spargo, Pickett and Bedford all in it. Still, possibly ANB aside I see why they're picked.

Should be a rather different looking 22 than what we were putting on the park last year.

At the end of 2018, both Kent and AVB had played 35 games in their prior four seasons. Kent played 20 in 2016 but 4, 6 and 5 in 2015, 2017 and 2018. AVB played 14 in each of 2015 and 2016, 0 in 2017 and 57 in 2018. If Kent wanted more than one year then he wanted at least two. So the difference you've cited is an extra year for AVB in circumstances where, going into 2019, they were essentially equally flaky in getting on the park. I suggest AVB is, when fit, better than Kent. As such, I don't see any irrationality in picking him over 3 years over Kent at 2 years. The fact Kent went on to play 13 games in 2019 doesn't mean our decision at the end of 2018 was wrong (hindsight etc.).

What were the questions and his answers?

I have no problem with people refraining from buying memberships because it's a difficult financial decision for them. Breaking it down into "two coffees per week" is not a fair way of looking at it - it's one of many weekly expenses and for some people those two coffees need to go towards a bill or another household expense instead. I do, however, have a bit of a problem with people who have the money and can afford a membership but chose not to buy one because they want to make a statement or something like that. I accept that doing this (i.e. making a statement by not buying a membership) is important for some people but IMO it is counterproductive and unhelpful.

Good stuff. The focus in the meetings on the enjoyment the players got from being -60 in possessions in a low-scoring practice match is good to see IMO. Do you mean the camera angles (with the behind the goals camera from the North game)?

The action should be what is punished, not the outcome. If Viney's tackle was a dangerous tackle, then he deserves punishment. However, the fact that it appears the tackle didn't impact Stratton at all means a fine should be the maximum punishment. Any punishment of Viney will, though, make Crouch's lack of punishment stand out even more.

Don't agree with the OP. I don't need the coach to sit in a presser and explain what we're trying to do, down to a tee or at all. All Goodwin's saying is that we want to have an identifiable brand of football that we, as supporters, will appreciate us applying in all 22 games this year. From what I've seen so far, we're focusing on slower ball movement and picking the right time to play on and move quickly. We also seem to have a more defined back-half structure (the fact we have our first choice players back there might be as big a difference as anything though) and it looks like we're trying to keep forwards in the forward half to ensure someone is leading up at the ball carrier (but from what I've read from those who have seen more than me, this isn't working well enough). I'm a fan of these changes and, when coupled with the addition of Tomlinson/Langdon on the wings and better fitness across the board, we're able to run harder to push back into defence when we inevitably turn it over from what remain sub-par foot skills.

The three things I'm most pleased to read are the positive comments over Langdon/Tomlinson, the way in which the back six are working together as a unit, and our fitness in running out games. We all know why we need proper two-way running through the middle of the ground. I'd prefer all of our back six to be good kicks but IMO it's more important that they are working together as a unit to deny opposition scoring attempts. It seems that is starting to come together (May mentioned it in a post-match interview, talking about him and Lever working out what each other are doing). Hopefully being fitter will see us run over the top of sides but even if not, if it just gives us the confidence to think that we're always capable of fighting back then that's a positive. Looks like we're starting to develop competition for key spots as well (e.g. Lockhart and eventually RIvers vs Hibberd, Pickett vs Spargo vs ANB vs Hunt (I suppose), Jackson vs Weideman vs Brown).

So is vandenBerg injured?

I have quite enjoyed reading this thread. Thanks, as always, to those who provide reports.

I understand why we're trying it, and I can see the logic behind it, but I have a gut feeling it isn't going to work.

Really happy with this. The no leadership group thing is probably inconsequential other than the statement Mahony made about it - that it's up to the whole group to inspire leadership, not to an appointed few. If that's the messaging that's actually being put to the players, and To Hell and Back suggests it is, then I'm all in favour.

Enjoying this greatly.

My view is this is the best call for the club. I don't agree with @jnrmac all that often but it is important to remember that Viney can show leadership without being captain. My view has always been that he is a poor captain. There is more to leadership than putting your body on the line (not that I've ever once considered Gawn to lack that capability) and I've always had the impression Viney's just not suited to captaincy.

Having not seen the game, I'm pleased to read mostly positive comments. As with any pre-season game, I can't help but query how much it means for the season proper but I listened to vandenBerg's interview and he mentioned that we know that it's important for us to start instilling values for the home/away season now, so I'd like to think today was a sign of what we're hoping to show in Round 1. Love hearing that Lever and Langdon played well.

I'm surprised at the strength of the squad we've named given the injuries we've had. I never follow pre-seasons closely so I'm not particularly qualified to comment, but I'm nevertheless surprised Hunt can't get in the squad for our opening pre-season match.