tiers

It has always been the best position that the 23 who played on GF day deserve to be acknowledged and this should, inter alia, include being on the team photo forever, being on the ground at the end and receiving a premiership medallion. It has always been the best position that those who didn't play but contributed to the team's success, be it players who either played in the 22 in at least one match or trained with the squad, on field support such as coaches, runners, physios, doctors, trainers, water providers etc, should also receive some form of recognition as contributors to the teams success. This could take the form of a ring, special certificate, inclusion in official photo of the club or some other momento. Personally, I like a ring that can be worn with pride and fellowship.

Trapper's sublime skill (never seen in another player) was to be able to kick to a position on the field that would drag the player to the ball. That he did not fulfill his promise was due more to the inability of the coaches and his team mates to recognise and play to his strengths. As for talent - no one comes close to Robbie. But Trapper is in the next group.

So Schache is at least a proven goal kicker - neither Weid nor Brown matched this number. Cross fingers.

We have often commented on how May and Lever provide in game on field leadership to the backline. Who might provide similar on field leadership to the forward line? Tell players when and where to lead, create space with blocking, direct passes from upfield and possibly many more. Just stating that a player has to "compete more, show more heart" doesn't solve the problem if he does not know how. All the skills in the world cannot replace a footy brain. It's time we anointed someone for this role. Maybe a more forward line oriented Maxie? In the GF I noticed a number of times that ANB was giving instructions to team mates. Is he the one? Who else can be considered?

What seems to have been missed in these discussion is the admission by Bassat and co (is he really the CEO of Seek the employment people?) that they had not provided the best environment that they could for Ratten to be able to excel eg. poor drafting, poor trading, poor back office, poor everything else. What a joke they are. Even worse than we were. At least we tried, albeit without wit or wherewithal. How was he expected to perform well if the club could not perform first? Send the sainters to Tasmania until they show they are worthy of our respect. Better still, exile them to Tasmania forever. They give Victorian clubs a bad name.

Both toiges and catties are old teams with plenty due to either retire or hit the wall in the next couple of years. They are trying to poach and warehouse replacements for old tired bodies. But the new ins are not as good as those going out. Our "ins" are not selected to replace old tired warriors but are selected to enhance our current list that apart from maybe Hibbo and Milkshake will be playing on for some time.

Yes. The key is injuries that hurt us badly in 2022. Even when stricken at the end of the year we were still able to lead in most games but could not persist and prevail. Even a 50% improvement in injuries will put us at the top of the heap. As for changes - Schache at least played some games (and was selected in their top 22 for the GF) whereas Weid played very few and was never in the top 22; if Hunter plays to his potential it will free up Angus for other roles (midfield or HB); Grundy is a better ruckman than dogga, 10cm taller, can take marks in the forward line and will have his mind on impressing the coach, not going home. All systems go. GO DEES

I have read recent speculation about the imminent introduction of a five man interchange bench. If this come to pass, then the Maxie and Brodie combination could be greatly enhanced. Imagine a fully rested ruckman at nearly all contests and less interference to our key forwards by Maxie flying for marks in the forward line when resting. For once the AFL might get it right.

1. 1964 grand final 2. 1987 qual final against NM 118 point smashing after missing finals for 23 years. 3. 1998 v lolly blues when Ox kicked 5 goals in a quarter in comeback from 3 knee recos. 4. 2008 v freo comeback and Aussie's celebration 5. Any game with Robbie.

I used to rely on chronology and alphabetical order - Brad was appointed before Chris. Now it will be reverse chronology. Messes with my mind.

Adem skipped a bullet. Who could have confidence in a football club board that can decide to investigate a potential coach's availability on Monday and have him appointed by Thursday? After putting other candidates through the mill. Unseemly and rude. Do I smell a Gil interference here?

A recently released AFLPA report deals with this issue. The Dees did well in 2021. My best guess is that culture and winning go together and have overlapping development. Start winning, culture goes up, leads to more winning etc etc. Winning is the key.

In the past, successful teams have been described as having a "good culture" that embraces the whole club and leads to the success. Without passing judgement in any way, the recent revelations about the dorks while winning three in a row would seem to discredit this correlation. Very sad. Our culture after winning the flag in 2021 that involved the whole club while also embracing as many supporters as possible with cup hugging opportunities bodes well for our future success. GO DEES

In line with current usage, it refers to anyone who identifies as aboriginal and is accepted as aboriginal by other aboriginals. Can be very broadly interpreted.

If after all this time the bumbers start chasing Scott, then Adem should tell them to get lost, I want to stay with a professional club and coaching team..

As I stated in my original post: For any panel to be both credible and independent it should eschew the appointment of any person who might be seen as having, to use the legal term, an "apprehension of bias" by the public and the football community. This principle would exclude any club officials, discrimination officers, aboriginal members and coaches representatives and also any attempt to introduce a gender balance. A truly independent and credible panel should be comprised of independent outsiders who have an open mind, no preconceived notions and the ability to frame their investigations and questions to all participants with a view to establishing the facts.

I don't ascribe to anything other than a fair, independent and credible investigation. In the context of this issue, a clear, unbiased and open mind is to be welcomed. Those with perspective are therefore limited.

Judges don't have to understand perspective. Royal Commissioners don't have to have perspective. They are selected because of their particular skills to find justice and or solutions. That they could be ignorant of the issues does not mean that they would be ignorant of the correct, fair process of investigation and understanding. This panel is not, on the face, as serous or important but in the context of footy in the community they might be even more important. As I stated, those that have perspective should be available to provide their knowledge and understanding to the panel members who can then apply the correct weight to their opinions. My great fear is that a panel consisting of those who "have perspective" might not be able to reach an adverse report due to their perspective. That would not be fair to either the complainants (who might not accept the report) or to the coaches (who might not be able to rely on the report). A totally independent panel's report will carry much more weight and will more likely to be accepted in the community.

Not many. Although I expect that there would be any number of experienced senior people with a judicial, administrative or management background that are not connected to footy who would qualify. I don't believe that the AFL would be looking in this direction as they seem to be looking elsewhere. Pity.

For any panel to be both credible and independent it should eschew the appointment of any person who might be seen as having, to use the legal term, an "apprehension of bias" by the public and the football community. This principle would exclude any club officials, discrimination officers, aboriginal members and coaches representatives and also any attempt to introduce a gender balance. A truly independent and credible panel should be comprised of independent outsiders who have an open mind, no preconceived notions and the ability to frame their investigations and questions to all participants with a view to establishing the facts. Once the facts are established, all those who might otherwise have seemed worthy of a place on the panel, ie. those who might be seen as biased, should be available to provide background and interpretation for the benefit of the panel. If, as reported, the complainants no longer want to proceed with a further investigation, the investigation by the panel must still go ahead if only to protect the coaches' interests. Gil and the AFL board have to make it work.

Everyone needs a rest. It just depends on how it is managed. When White and Stynes played together White would start each quarter and play about two thirds and be relieved by Jimmy. Silly and rigid I know but it was Neale's plan (sadly it denied us the opportunity to play both on the ground at the same time to stretch opposition teams most evidently in the 1998 prelim final). But it gives us a guide to how to manage Max and Grundy. Maybe not as rigid but, to adopt the head ducker's model, start Max on the bench each quarter, rotate him around third to half way and rotate him off near the end of each quarter so as to add the break time to his rest times. Max should just ruck, not play forward where gets in the way and interferes with BBB, TMac and Fritta. Imagine a fresh, rested mobile ruck tag team combination for a whole game. Worth a try if Grundy arrives at the dees.

Natural justice or procedural fairness (interchangeable) requires that the accused be given an opportunity to know their accusers and to be able to adequately respond to the accusations. The dorks' report was not empowered to do this and, so far as I understand, has not been released or made public so that the risk of any action against the dorks, AFL or Egan, at this stage, would appear to be negligible. However, the abc and the journo, who appear not to have relied on the contents of the report but interviewed the accusers separately, might not escape being sued if the accusations are comprehensively or substantially refuted following further investigations and the evidence of the accused. It is a long process but, sadly, the three accused, if the accusations are not found to be credible, will never be able to clean the stain from their reputation. Even if these accusations are "in the public interest" it is in the public's interest for such accusations to be thoroughly investigated from all sides before being released to the public in order to maintain an fair society where people's reputations cannot be impugned by unproven or unproveable accusations. A difficult time ahead for our great game of footy.

Undisclosed injuries or incomplete recovery from injuries gels well with the reasons for the poor second half performances in the latter half of the year. For example, Maxie had what was considered to be a four week injury but resumed after two weeks. In hindsight, it didn't help much. No players were rested for "general soreness" and similar issues. Why not? BBB and Salem were struggling for long periods. Introducing VFL players in the finals would have been a recipe for more failure. From the outside looking in with fogged up glasses, there seems to have been a lack of foresight and too much reliance on "the system". That's why the coaches are paid the big bucks (and we get to call the shots in the ether).

I don't know if Clarko is innocent or not but. if the review commissioned by the dorks did not approach him with the allegations and include his response in the report. then the report writers were negligent and the report loses significant value and meaning. It's called natural justice and if it is good enough for a brownlow medallist then it should be good enough for a coach accused of racist behaviour. Clarko and Fagan standing down makes good sense.

Was it only aboriginal boys who suffered like this? Could it also have happened to non-aboriginal boys who had to break up relationships? And is it restricted to only one club? Still happening? Lots of questions that need answers. Soon.