tiers

The purpose of any entry into the forward line is to generate a shot at the goals. That might mean a pass to a free teammate, or a long kick to a one on one where we have a height or strength advantage, or a "chaos" ball that can be trapped in the forward line. It does not mean a "long bomb" to a pack or a 2 or three on one in the hope that the ball will be brought to the ground and the crumbers will swoop. There might be Jeffy, Dean K, Bayley F, Tracca, Buggy, and others but they are not consistent enough or reliable enough to trap the ball. The ball often comes out as quick as it went in. Just look at the first game of the year to see the folly in this approach. Lateral passes outside 50 look nice and resemble basketball (or European handball) but only allow the forward line to become crowded. Manic running into the forward line a la Tiges and Doggies is not our style. Time for a creative new option. Perhaps during the ring an ring a rosy outside F50, players can lead and drag their tags outside the forward line to open up for, say, two or three dominant targets such as Jesse and Tracca. Perhaps we learn to kick longish bombs (say <40) at the goals as the main scoring opportunity. Or perhaps our crumbers can stand front and square to trap the ball and not just over the back. I don't pretend to have the answers but, when we have 50% more entries and just squeak out a win, then something needs to be done. Over to the FD. Let's get ahead of the curve.

The reason Jesse is so valuable playing as an occasional midfielder is that at times his vision and disposal to advantage are elite. Watch how, when he takes a mark, he is prepared to wait and hold the ball until he spots the right option and delivers to perfection. Watch also how he runs to make good position to receive. I cannot recall a time where any team has had three highly talented players like Jesse, Clarry and Tracca who could rotate through the midfield or play as a key position forward. Let's hope that the FD can base a game plan to take maximum advantage of their versatility.

Don't you love this brave new world. We have 3 umpires on the ground and it seems that any one of them can make a decision on a contest even if 50-100 m away. If we are going to accept this, then why shouldn't they also be empowered to overturn an obvious mistake by another umpire and force a ball up instead of a free. Not perfect but if I could see from the top deck of the grandstand that none of OMac, Jake or Max infringed in the their forward line, then surely the other 2 umpires on the ground could have seen it too and reversed or cancelled the free kicks to prevent the injustice of undeserved goals being scored. It's called maintaining the integrity of the game. Sad that the AFL are either willfully ignorant or complicit in these injustices.

Goal reviews should be for one purpose only - to correct an egregious and obvious mistake by the umpires, for example the ball passing on the other side of the post, a deflection of the ball (not a deflection of the nail on the little finger), the ball clearing the line before being touched, who kicked the ball in a pack. Goal reviews should not be used to ensure perfection in umpiring. If it is, then get rid of the goal umpires and let the field umpires signal clear goals and let the video review decide on the others. Reviews should be automatic and immediate whenever the video umpire considers that an egregious mistake has been made. Otherwise, instruct the goal umpires (if they are to be retained because of their antics in signalling scores) to make decisions and stick with them.

Robbie's grace, loyalty, modesty, humility and exquisite talent were, and will always remain, incomparable. Our one and only truly immortal legend. Clarry has shown enormous potential. We should have the patience to wait and watch his career unfold without any unreal expectations. No rush and no pressure.

I go back to the late 50s. I have seen champion midfielders (or centre men as they were once called) like Laurie Mithen, Hassa Mann, Greg Wells, Brian Wilson and others but none had the same range of skills and abilities as Clarry. None had the potential to be as destructive and dominant as Clarry - a consequence of our modern game. In their day it wasn't expected so it is not fair to make comparisons.

To Dimmy. Thanks for the warning about commentators. Haven't watched the replay yet and now I will listen with sound on mute. To Dappa Dan. Agree. And he is only 20 with lots and lots of upside. To Picket Fence. As for Clarry, I would add his tackling - its like a mechanical vice from which there is no escape. And now we know he is a goalkicker. What a package. Now we need his teammates to learn how to get to good positions so that they can leverage off his skills. It's true that Daw takes a great mark over midgets but it seems that that is his only marketable skill. If Eddie wets his pants, then it can't mean much.

How bloody good was Clarry's first goal. Running towards an awkwardly bouncing ball with his opponent right behind, having to change stride and pace to take clean possession of the ball, the acceleration away from the opponent and then the kick around the body at full pace straight through the goals. If Danger or Dusty had done the same, the commentators would have wet themselves. Our Clarry does it naturally. And now he is being compared to Diesel for his handball skills. There are times when it's so good to be a Demon.

Re: waynewussel post. No Player shall enter and remain in the Protected Area. Wonder how this applies to a player who just runs through but does not remain? The 50m penalty for this so called offence is grossly offensive in itself. A simple warning and reset, if required, should be enough for incidental and non-deliberate misjudgements of 5m clearance that do not compromise the player with the ball or for minor infringements over the mark when it is clear that the player on the mark is attempting to comply. This is the rule that everyone either hates or will come to hate in time. Change the inflexible and at times arbitrary interpretation now for the good of the game. Retain only for deliberate or cynical contraventions eg. Sheedy's team in the 80s that caused the rule to be changed from 15m to 50m for deliberate and cynical time wasting. Although 15m was enough to break our hearts in 1987.

Goodwin lamented our poor defence in the first half allowing 20 scoring shots from 24 inside 50s. No argument - poor set ups and coaching in our defence was apparent early on in Q1 and nothing was done to arrest it. But much worse was his comment that "We had a lot of inside 50s and weren't really able to lock that ball in there for a period of time. They rebounded the ball 49 times from our 64 entries for the game – that's a lot. That's not a lot - it's bloody ginormous. Same old same old long kicks that land on Jesse's head with two to three opponents and a simple defensive punch to the front and centre position that we vacated and allowed them to set up and clear. It's time to move Jesse from the goal square ALL game and force our team to look for shorter leading targets within 50m arc to retain the ball and ensure a shot at the goals rather than inviting the opposition to practice sling shot rebound footy from our inept entries. 29 scoring shots from 64 inside 50s, 23 more than them, says it all. Can only be due to poor coaching, poor setups or poor directions. Don't blame the players. Notice how effective Jesse was when he was free to roam. Not that many touches but each one counted. And how good was Pedo's pass to Maxie who somehow broke free. UnMelbourne like but heartening.

There are ruckman whose main attribute is physical strength to hold position and resist opponents in static contests eg. Shane Mumford. Others rely on their combination of size, mobility and tank to be mobile and rely on timing and spring to attack contests. This is how I see Max. Dean Cox and Goldstein had this ability in their prime and so did Max in his AA year. Pushing and shoving in ruck contests does not often deliver clean supply to teammates but attacking the contest in motion allows for better quality supply. Attacking marking contests instead of standing still and fending off opponents is always preferable as it offers better chances of success. Go Max. Play your game.

Has anyone considered that Jesse's responses are not a sign of petulance but of disappointment in himself? Classic petulant behavior includes failing to maintain interest in the contest. I have never observed Jesse show disinterest or lack of commitment to any contest. It should be no surprise that when he has to compete against 2 and 3 opponents for poorly delivered and placed balls that he expresses his disappointment. I would be disappointed too! He has shown the potential to lead us to success. Allow him to develop without the added burden of trivial criticism from those who should be his greatest supporters.

Re Jack Watts. Players can be leaders in many different ways and not all of them are obvious or measured by being the best player or the most determined or the most courageous or the most personable and expressive. There are leadership skills that can lift the morale and spirit in a team without there being any overt act by the leader. There were many times in the past where Jack showed another form of on-field leadership. He was "papa bear" who would hand out pats on the back or on the head of, especially, younger players who had made a valuable contribution to the team such as coring or defending. The same players would often run to him for his acknowledgement of a valuable act. I recall David Schwarz filling the same role even when David Neitz was captain. The immediate recognition from a senior player can often be more important than kudos at breaks. Let's be kind to Jack - he might not have been the player that we expected (fairly or unfairly) but he made a major contribution to our team with his understated on-field leadership. I wish both Jacks (Watts and Trengove) personal (not team) success at PA.

If the AFL is to change the rules for runners, then the structure of the leadership group should be re-considered. Fewer messages from runners will places a greater burden on the on-field leaders to make critical decisions on structure and balance eg. to defend a small lead, zoning at kick ins, during the game.. We should identify on-field leaders and empower them with the authority to make decisions. While Jones and Viney are locks as co-captains to toss the coin and lead by example, who would be able to make good tactical decisions when needed? Apart from Lewis who was recruited to fill that rol and Hogan who has remarkable football smarts for such a young player, I can't see anyone else that stands out. I am confident that the FD will make the right choices and they might not be the from among the usual suspects.

OMac has much more potential than LRT ever had. Just be patient as he develops. Frost is bigger, stronger and faster than Sean Wight was and could, if coached well, become an outstanding 60-80m ball carrier rapidly transitioning from defence to attack. Imagine if our forwards were trained to respond to his play. Our dearly beloved and missed Sean was brilliant in his own way.

I hope that Max's improved aerobic capacity will allow him to get to the next ruck of marking contest faster than his lumbering opponents and get the best position and not be dissipated chasing midgets. A 210cm tall skillful, mobile, marking and potentially dominating ruckman is a precious and rare commodity and he should be served by his teammates.

Except for the most unusual circumstances, if Max has to chase a medium sized player like Selwood it is only because his teammates have let him down. He doesn't expect them to ruck and so they should not expect him to rove. When Max rests forward, it is not to play like Jeffie but to stretch the opposition with his height and marking ability and create a mismatch to our advantage. If, as Saty says, he might surprise us with his skills at ground level, then it will be a bonus, not the main game.

Re Roos coaching. In 2005 he built a defensive structure and game plan around Roberts-Thompson at CHB who was generally considered to be a fringe player at best. His only task was to stop his opponents from getting clean possession and then it was up to his team mates to clean up. He succeeded so well that Sydney won the flag and LRT was seriously considered by many good judges to have been a candidate for the Norm Smith medal. Of all of Roos' coaching achievements, this was his best. Each player has a role based on his particular ability and it's up to the coach to identify and define that rol and make it work for the team.

Traditionally, the role of the runners has been to pass instructions from the coach to the players, typically on position changes, match ups and not much more. With the number of interchanges, inspirational (or critical) messages to players, position changes and changes to match ups can be implemented when swapping players. On field leadership group should be encouraged and authorised to make minor changes eg. stacking the defence in close matches, setting up zones. Allow runners but only to signal to players to interchange and give the umpires the power to remove runners who remain stationary for longer than it takes to deliver a message.

The past two premiership coaches have built a structure and a game plan on the resources at hand. We can speculate on our structure and game plan but I suspect that it will depend on the availability, form and fitness of the players. What is different for the dees this year is that, with our flexible list comprising talls and shorts, inners and outers, attackers and defenders, runners and blockers, deliverers and receivers and many multi adaptable players, there are many different combinations that can be tested and used. The final structure for both the doggies and tiges did not become apparent until the finals arrived. Let's be patient and not get fixated on a "preferred" structure and let it evolve. That we will have numerous options and possibilities is a plus. The ultimate goal is to find a structure and game plan that our opposition can't counter.

Of course fitness and form are important but there are also, among other criteria, match ups, team balance, plugging holes, filling roles, experimenting and forward/future planning. Add to this the coaches assessment of what form at lower grades really means. It is not right or fair to imply that coaches seemingly play favourites without a good underlining reason. Perhaps we are not capable of knowing.

OMac is progressing nicely. He seems to suffer here because he is not what he expected to be. So ******* what. Not everyone can be, or needs to be, a backline gorilla, an intercept maestro or a slingshot. Steady and effective will do for me. He gets to a contest, he is learning how to position himself to advantage at the contest, he regularly outmarks his opponent and has the potential to make good choices. Just a young, developing player for the future.

Saty, where is Hunt? Training with the backs presumably but what a dynamic midfielder if used in bursts. There is no need to "rank" the players in our midfield rotation. Apart from maybe Clarrie, there is not a drastic drop of in ability and none of them is considered a dependable "matchwinner" unlike the Cats who drop off rapidly after Danger and Selwood or the Tiges who rely too much on Dust). Worked in 2017 but can it keep working. They will play as a unit that is able to share the load and maintain constant and consistent pressure on other teams' midfields. Overwhelm by weight of numbers. What if we played Hogan at CHF, Omac (or Frost or Lever) at CHB and Max in the ruck as the three talls in a structure with nine rotating midfielders - ie 2 HBF, 2 wings, 2 HFF and three in the square. In fact, Frost and Lever have the speed and stamina to also play as burst midfielders. Let's swarm all over the opposition and keep them guessing.

Favourites can mean players who the coach, unlike us, believes can perform to the required standard. To commit a heresy, there have been times when I thought that Jack Viney was not performing to his best standard. Obviously, the coaches thought otherwise as he has been highly placed in the B&F. Let's accept that they are looking for something else and that our perceptions are different.

Has there ever been another way to select a team? The coaches know what they expect and, in many cases, it can be different to what we expect. I am happy to leave selection and roles to Goody. Otherwise, it messes with my mind. Go dees.