titan_uranus

Wait, is it October already?

Source?

Looks a lot like what I want to see. My only query is whether Frost plays or not. Do we need the extra tall against GWS? We appear to have really worked on our running fitness over the pre-season but if GWS is going to beat us it will most likely be due to their run through the middle and off half-back. I'm inclined, though not convinced, to go with M Jones over Frost for extra run and back Watts and Pedersen in as the assisting tall forwards for Hogan.

He has an intuitive goal sense. He crumbs packs well, he gets out the back when he sees it will work, and he finds himself in the right spot a lot of the time. His forward pressure is also going up a few notches. One of our most important, and approaching best, players. Love having him in the side.

20 scoring shots against Port, 22 vs the Dogs, 29 against St Kilda. We only had 29 or more scoring shots last year once - Round 1 vs Gold Coast (30). Indeed, we only had 14 games where we had 20 or more scoring shots.

The same goes for the entire team. This season is much about lifting our best as it is about lifting our worst. We are going to lose games this year but I sorely hope we are past the non-competitive, start-to-finish beltings where we don't look like we care or try.

On NAB form, if Pedersen plays does Frost play? Is he adding enough?

Disagree. As much as I detest Dwayne Russell, Sandy Roberts is horrendous. For mine there is no worse commentator. He has no idea what is going on, he doesn't even know the players' names. Russell is annoying but does at least know who's out there.

Also worth bearing in mind we had no VDB, Brayshaw, Dunn, Lumumba, Trengove, Petracca or Dawes, and 22 vs 24, against a side at full strength which most "pundits" think are certainties to be better than us this year. At Etihad, against an Etihad-based side. Only a practice match, but a result to be happy with at any rate.

Another 15 goals and 100+ points. Clear intent to move the ball faster, more corridor-based movement too. Impressive games from Oliver, Bugg and Kennedy, too. Dumb skill errors are still a huge issue but the pre-season has at least delivered three wins and clear progress on the attacking front.

Please don't tell me, after all these years, we still allow Grimes to attempt switching the play in the back half.

Salem and Tyson playing poorly, too. I like that we're getting a lot of drive out of Bugg, Kennedy and Oliver - new players that are showing us they're going to add value to the side in 2016.

He absolutely did leave the ground. Regardless, though, it was off the ball and he has no defence of "no reasonable alternative". He elected to bump, made contact to the head, potentially severe contact too. This is the kind of act that, if you stuff it up, you deserve to miss games for. At least one week.

Cameron deserves at least one week. Clearly leaves the ground, but more importantly was nowhere near the ball and did not have to do it - the severity of the injury will determine how many weeks but even if minor impact that deserves one week.

Notable absentees from the notable absentees list - Brayshaw, VDB. So no Brayshaw, VDB, Dunn, Petracca, Trengove, Dawes or Lumumba (so that's 4-5 best 22 missing plus a few handy others) against a Saints side which is missing...? McCartin? This week, unlike last, we're the ones with more players missing so a win today should be an extra confidence booster heading into Round 1.

I can see us being anything from 5-0 to 0-5 after the Richmond game. I think 3-2 or 2-3 is more realistic, but it all starts with GWS in Round 1.

As has been said, I think with the psychological baggage the majority of the players carry (as well as the supporters) the start to the season is critical. Ironically, I think that pressure will be on the players as we go into the GWS and Essendon games. To me, they are so crucial. Get both wins, go 2-0 for the first time in 11 years and hit the North-Collingwood-Richmond stretch full of confidence with the genuine chance of going 4-1. If we drop the GWS game, I can see this club dropping the Essendon game and the season being over after Round 2.

Another reason yesterday's game was not all bad. The main event will come in the home and away season, though. A win over GWS in Round 1 will be huge but a win (more importantly, not a loss) against Essendon in Round 2 will be better. We're in Tasmania in Round 3 but if we can be 2-1 and playing decent football heading into the Sunday arvo MCG away game against Collingwood that could be a great game for us in terms of media attraction, memberships, and positivity.

I lean more in the camp of those who don't think the game was a total disaster, but I have no idea why anyone would try to argue against the proposition that the Dogs' team was anything other than a second-rate VFL side. They had, quite literally, their 10 best players not playing. It's not a question of experience or age, it's a question of quality and their best players weren't playing. However, I don't believe that fact alone means the result of yesterday's game is necessarily a poor one. For one, as has been suggested, Goodwin/Roos/the coaches may have used the game to try out new tactics or strategies. Most clubs seem to use the final NAB game as their fully-fledged practice for Round 1 so it wouldn't surprise me at all if we rotated players even when they were winning match-ups, or held players back or something like that. I don't know, but it certainly wouldn't surprise. It's no "myth" that this club needs to win matches. The winning vibe around the club is invaluable, even when it's practice matches. I'd certainly prefer wins to losses, no matter what style of win it is. That's not to say I want to see us playing bad football, but the winning feeling is important. Edit: we also played great footy last week against a better side. Does yesterday's performance make that game disappear altogether? As is often the case on Demonland, it's all black and white. You either loved yesterday's performance or you hated it. You either think Tom McDonald is AA or shouldn't even be playing. Etc, etc. It's all too rare on here for people to balance positives with negatives at the same time.

Classic Demonland. We lose, we complain. We win, we complain.

Last year we played Essendon in the final NAB game. They were missing a bunch of their best players (due to "the saga"). We lost. At least this year, when faced with a side missing players, we managed to find a way to win. It's those kind of games we lost last year and have regularly lost since 2007 - games where we are favourites and/or know we have a chance are the ones we often stuff up. We let them get ahead, twice, and we fought back both times.

It is frustrating that, after another pre-season, McDonald is still turning it over by foot on a regular basis. Not sure how that relates to Garland, but whatever.

In 2012 we beat Brisbane in one of those "lightning" games (where you played back-to-back mini games), then the next week we beat Collingwood. That's the closest thing we have to consecutive wins since we last did it properly, in Rounds 13-14 of 2011.

20 scoring shots last week, kicked 15.5.95. Opposition had 18. 22 scoring shots this week, kicked 10.12.72. Opposition had 17. We are, at least, generating scoring opportunities so far this year which hasn't, yet, resulted in us leaking scores at the other end. Poor skill level is (hopefully) something that will wear off as we work towards Round 1 but a scarily high number of clangers is very disappointing. As has been mentioned though, at least we scrapped out a win where last year we would have lost (like we lost to Essendon's under-manned side, and Carlton too).

I've only been listening for about 2 minutes but in that time we've already turned it over about 3 times.