tiers

Re Maxie's ripping body. Many years ago, a St Kilda goal sneak named Lockett got fit and lost weight. Like Samson losing his hair, Lockett lost his strength and was a lesser player. If Maxie is to become ripped, then he should rely on his height, leap, speed and tank to dominate his opposition. Engaging in wrestling matches could see him rapidly becoming less effective. This was Jeff White's undoing.

No. No. No. And no again. I love our dees, and only our dees, and could not care less about the other sports and the other teams. In such a group we will lose our identity and be forced to feign an interest in inferior sports. No. No. No. And no again.

I have been watching our game, aussie rules footy, for over 60 years and I will lament the loss of the bounce as a further unique feature of our beloved game is abandoned in the pursuit of some supposed benefit. One of the most endearing features of our game (and note to the AFL - the game it belongs to us, the people, not them) has always been it's unpredictability arising from the bounce of an oval ball. Umpires throwing a ball in the air removes that wonderful element of our game. For those who can, go back in time and watch replays of the game as it was played in the 80s. Not much slower and umpires were quick to blow the whistle when the ball was contested and bounce the ball before packs formed. The game was speeded up without the ugly rugby mauls and reluctance to blow the whistle. If it must be, then let's at least ensure that the umpires learn to throw the ball for the benefit of the game. Straight up and with some decent height so that the ruckmen have a chance to run at the contest, not just stand still and engage in an ugly wrestle. Many of the ball ups this year were little dinky throws at odd angles. Bounces were straighter and higher. I want to see Maxie jump over the top of his rivals. I fear for our beloved and beautiful game.

Re Pettracattack's support for Todd Viney. My criteria in selecting the team was to include those players that I considered to be skilled, courageous, attacking match winners. They had to possess both magical footy skills as well as the ability to win a match "off their own boot", so to speak. While Todd Viney was undoubtedly courageous and attacking, I never saw him as skilled or as a match winner. More tenacious and determined. In any event, there were only 22 positions available and someone had to miss out.

On 23 October I posted this comment: The very best team of the past 50 years must include the following (excluding current players whose careers have still to blossom): Alan Johnson, Steven Smith, Sean Wight; Brett Lovett, David Neitz, Gary Hardeman; Stan Alves, Greg Wells, Robert Flower; Garry Lyon, David Shwarz, Adem Yze; Gerard Healey, Allen Jakovich, Jeff Farmer; Jim Stynes, Shane Woewodin, Brian Wilson Int Gary Baker, Steven Tingay, Alan Obst, Glenn Lovett Skilled, courageous, attacking match winners. Unfortunately, the month of October coincides with the end of the footy and the onset of daylight saving and I reserve the right to review all decisions in that month. How could I have forgotten Travis Johnstone? His inclusion would make this team infinitely better as he would have the delight of playing with his peers and we would have the joy of watching his smooth, silky skills being used to advantage. Imagine Travis passing 50 to Jako. Apologies to Glenn Lovett - great player but not in the same league.

Steven Smith was a champion. Unfortunately had to play full back at a time when our team was poor and clubs were not restricted by the draft and the salary cap.. He deserves to be In any of the above teams where he would make a great contribution. Danny Hughes was all guts, strength and effort but not the same skill as Smith. Both deserve to be considered.

The very best team of the past 50 years must include the following (excluding current players whose careers have still to blossom): Alan Johnson, Steven Smith, Sean Wight; Brett Lovett, David Neitz, Gary Hardeman; Stan Alves, Greg Wells, Robert Flower; Garry Lyon, David Shwarz, Adem Yze; Gerard Healey, Allen Jakovich, Jeff Farmer; Jim Stynes, Shane Woewodin, Brian Wilson Int Gary Baker, Steven Tingay, Alan Obst, Glenn Lovett Skilled, courageous, attacking match winners.

I was standing in the crowd behind the goals in the open stand at the end to which Neil Crompton kicked the winning goal. What a joy to watch the ball sailing towards me. Still have the Football Record from the day with the scorers marked. Had a photocopy signed by all the players who were at the 50th anniversary lunch three years ago. Who thought that it would become a collectable. We expected more after 1964. Go dees.

I had been at our previous final (1964 GF) so was thrilled to be there again. Sat in top deck of the Northern Stand with wife and children who had been properly brought up. Fondest highlight was at about the 11 minute mark of the first quarter when Robbie flew above the pack and took a mark near the goal square. A wag (original meaning of the word) at the back yelled out (paraphrased): "Robbie's taken a mark. That's all I want to see. Can go home now". After the campaign to give Robbie one last chance to play in a final, this was the moment of the game and of the year. Everything else was secondary, even a 118 point victory. In that moment, it was all about Robbie. Some observations: Sad to see Robbie, Jimmy and Sean - all gone now but never forgotten. Shaun Smith (32) and Alastair Clarkson (57) for North. Goal umpires in white coats who did not need replays to decide. Field umpires in white also who made quick decisions on frees and ball ups. Did not allow the game to stall or become bogged down with ugly scrums. As soon as the ball was contested in a tackle, ball up with a bounce. Players did not need 30 sec to start their run up when shooting for goal - minimal delays to the game. Ball movement slower but still recognisable with today's need for speed. No switching and balls were kicked to contests. Overall, the game was more open and as good as, if not better than, the modern game as an attraction. No chains of multiple easy possessions and no ugly contests. Go dees.

Just proves that trying to analyse performances by consulting a plethora of subjective statistics is a waste of time. If you know and understand footy, then you should be able to determine performance based on observation. That's what the umpires use for the Brownlow and they have never picked a dud. Clayton Oliver's game is based on winning possessions in tight spaces and disposing the ball quickly to advantage. That he does this better than anyone else is not the point. Compared to his peers, he has not yet developed his game to the extent that he not only fulfills his role but he is also a game breaker. Think of how his peers such as Sloan, Selwood, Shiel and Kennedy are often credited with match winning or match turning efforts eg a contested mark, a "captains" goal, a crunching tackle. That Clayton is so good at winning the ball after only 2 seasons and at 20 bodes well for his development but he is not there yet. It will come and he has the potential, when he builds a tank and learns where to run, to be better than them all. Let's all chill and enjoy his development over the next few years. He is a once in a generation player. Notwithstanding the above, the selectors make a grievous error by not including him in the favoured 40 on exposed ability and form and on promise. But what do we expect from any agency of the AFL?

What won't work, in my opinion. Firstly, we don't have Lever and Motlop and are no certainties to get them. Let's stick to what we've got and make that work better. OMac was a revelation this year, particularly his ability to win the ball, remain calm and look for options. Frost's hard running ability and sheer speed, if properly harnessed, could be a weapon. Secondly, Jesse Hogan is far too smart as a footballer to waste at FB. He would have made a great older style CHB like Neitz or Roos with a licence to roam. But in today's footy, this is not allowed and he would also be wasted at CHB having to mark opponents. He has a great football brain (which is seemingly never acknowledged) and it would be better to let the opposition try to mark him when he controls the forward line as I have previously suggested on multiple occasions. Monoccular gets it. Thirdly, the Weed is not read yet for such an important role and would probably benefit from a change to the backline for a year where he could be more involved in the game. Fourthly, with a more dominant Hogan, Petracca should blossom as a key forward. He can mark, kick and monster opponents and, like the young Jones, if he doesn't get the ball, no one does. He holds the ball in the forward line and provides more scoring opportunities, if we are good enough. That's all for now.

Let's consider how the FD might resurrect the wingman position and game. Not sort of midfielders but genuine wingmen. Leave the midfielders' work to Oliver, Viney, Jones, Petracca, ANB, AVB, Brayshaw Salem etc. Say Sam Frost, Jack Watts and Jayden Hunt as rotating connector players dedicated to providing an outlet option for the back line and the skill/speed to rapidly transfer the ball to the forward line. Two on the ground at any time with two way running between the 50s in the space between the square and the boundary. Not down the line but wider than the corridor with a licence to run, run and run and kick long to a well prepared and spread forward line who are aware of what is coming and how. At the other end, provide a crowd to fill gaps and frustrate opposition forwards. When we win the ball, provide a moving target and become 60-80m power players who, with good coaching and a developed game plan, could revolutionise the game. Nothing to lose. Can't be worse than the current, unsuccessful game plan. Finally, let's change the tone of this topic and this site. Please restrict any comments to the merits, or otherwise of the proposal, not on the players.

We will be better in 2018 if: We do not lose Gawn, Spencer and Hogan, or their equivalents in 2019, for several weeks at the same time; We develop cohesion and system in our backline. This year we have had individual stars such as Jetta, Hibberd and OMac who have played consistently in the backline but I cannot recall any repetitive, cohesive defensive play that used to be a characteristic of recent power teams. Invariably we depended on the individual players to win contests rather than a team approach. We do not mess with TMac's mind. Given that he is a structural pin of our back line, mixing up back line, ruck and forward line play in each match has a deleterious effect on the team. Can y6ou imagine Grundy, Rance, Lonergan or Thompson being played as "swingmen" and not losing effectiveness and adversely affecting the team structure. If we need a swing man, develop someone else and let the back line settle. The great Dean Bailey used to say 70 games together as a unit. We let Hogan roam the forward line and not become a static target. He is much too valuable to be competing against three opponents for every mark and he has an incredible football brain (watch him when he has the ball up the ground) so that he can be effective not only as a goal scorer but also as a leader, ball winner and distributor in the forward line. The coaching staff work out how to use Oliver's unmatched ball winning ability and sublime distribution skills by hand to create opportunities. At the moment, Oliver's work is being wasted by player's getting too close to allow him to deliver to advantage. When his handballs travel 5-10 m longer than now he will be a sensation. As for his kicking, he is a monster kick but is undisciplined. Deft, 30-40m passes will be more beneficial than 50-60m bombs. But as always, his team mates must present. Over to the coaching staff. Jack Viney stops trying too hard. His aggression and effort are welcomed but his skills and judgement need to catch up quickly. Gawn remembers that, for his height, he is also athletic and should spend less effort wrestling and more effort at ball ups and boundary throw ins approaching the contest alone and jumping over/into his opponent. Ryder has shown the way this year with his taps to Gray what a free jumping ruckman can bring. The selection panel work to stabilise and settle the best 22 and eschew the constant chopping and changing. The fringe players from 2017 like Kent, Hannan, Smith, Maynard, Stretch, Pedersen and others should be picked to fill a role, not just because they have shown good form at VFL, and given time to develop those roles. 35 possessions as a midfielder in the VFL mean little if the role at AFL is different. We develop a plan for the forward line when we start 2 down at the centre bounces. Too many times we win the ball, kick long and watch it come straght back. The name of the game with two extras at the back is the both win the ball in the centre and retain it in the forward line. So far, no good. We learn to hold the ball in the forward line. Some times the ball comes out quicker than it goes in. Has to stop. I will conclude because it is becoming too depressing. Even with all the deficiencies that I believe we had this year, we missed the finals by only 2 goals so something must be working. I believe that we have as good a group of players as any other team but we are behind in their development as a structurally cohesive team playing a consistent style of footy. It's all up to you Goody. Only 50 more games as a group to go. Use them wisely. .

Statistics are what you want them to be. Our great game is being devoured by over analysis of mostly nonsense statistics. The only statistics that matter are the ones on the scoreboard. If we can win matches by having the least of the "good stats" and the most of the "bad stats" then I am all for staying the course. For example, if our defensive stats are "last in the AFL' but we are still wiinning them perhaps our "attacking stats" must be near the best. Who cares so long as we win. However there is one statistic that does bother me greatly and yet it seems not to be recorded. It counts the number of times a team enters the forward line in a superior position to score and then doesn't score at all and, worse still, concedes possession. It is not the same as some other more sophisticated stats such as turnovers or clangers and does not depend on the opposition. It is like a self inflicted wound and a wasted effort. I recall a kick that fell between three demons on Sunday, collected by one who could not score from 20m in front and let the opposition take an uncontested mark. Correct this one failing, and I believe that we can be more dominant in all games and dramatically increase our chances of winning.

Let us be very clear - there is no conspiracy or worse with the application of the rules. The umpires are being asked to apply stupidly conceived rules and interpretations developed by the AFL and its various sub groups. The 50m rules need to be urgently revised. They were introduced to counter the Sheedy coached technique to deliberately concede the old 15m penalty so as to delay the ball movement of the opposition. The justification was deliberate time wasting. Today it is an over technical pedantically applied rule that relies on an strict liability and is a rule that is offensive to the spirit of our great game. The 50 m against Jesse on the boundary yesterday was an egregious error by the umpire - the Brisbane player dropped the ball without any contribution from Jesse. Paying 50m not for overstepping but for standing on the mark on the wrong blade of grass without the Brisbane player being inconvenienced or affected in any way, as happened twice yesterday, is evidence that the rules are absurd. All it should have taken was a reminder from the umpire to move back a step. It's called understanding the game and exercising a discretion for the benefit of the game. No one wants to see silly 50m penalties. On the other hand, why was Jesse not given a 50m when the Brisbane player pushed him to the ground when taking a mark in the last quarter. That was inconveniencing the player and a deliberate wasting of time. It's time the AFL reviewed all the rules and removed those that are offensive to the spirit of our great game. Unlike other sporting codes, our rules were based on the contest (in the back, round the neck, dropping the ball etc) not on some technical and artificial breach of an arbitrary imposition on scoring and continuous movement. Leave arbitrary pedantic, petty and pathetic rules to rugby, soccer and netball.

One dimensional is correct. A long kick on top of whoever is there, a spoil and the ball comes out nearly as fast as it goes in. We seem to have no strategy or plan to hold the ball in the forward line so that the crumbing skills of Garlett, Petracca, Neal-Bullen, Hannan, Melksham, Tyson and Jones are wasted. It's trite to say "lower the eyes" so I won't but the players should be instructed to at at least look for other options when there is time. Neal-Bullen does this so well but he is overlooked in discussions. His pass to Garlett yesterday was exquisite and fruitful. Others should copy. Just because Hogan and Pedersen were so clean yesterday should not hide the fact that we had many more opportunities to score from entries to the forward line that were wasted in a year when percentage could be important. Better forward entry might have won games against North and Freo this year. We defeat ourselves.

In reply to rjay, Pedersen took one of the marks not because of some pre-planned strategy but because he was smart enough to stay off the pack developing around Hogan and he was able to take advantage of the defenders' mistake of focusing too much on Hogan. It might have seemed like a clever ploy but, unless the player kicking it in was aware of his positioning, which I doubt, it was a case of "kick it to Jesse" and hope. For once, we lucked out. In any event, there is too much pressure on Hogan to take pack marks when surrounded by multiple defenders and the ball is dropped on his head. The beauty of his game yesterday was that his took his marks while moving and could escape his opponents. Just like David Neitz, his greatest asset is when he is on the move, not while stationary in a pack. Give him space in the forward line to move around and only kick it to him when he is moving will bring out the best of Jesse.

Even with Hogan kicking 6, Pederson 3 and winning the ball around the ground, Clarrie gathering possessions and Hibberd cleaning up at the back we beat the bottom side by only 13 points on the way to perhaps play in finals. I cannot recall one goal scored from team play that could be considered planned - it was mostly a collection of brilliant individual efforts (Petracca, Pederson x2, Hogan), accidents and a measure of good luck. They out ran us, moved the ball well to leading teammates, showed a planned style of play but were ultimately defeated by a poorly performing but overpowering force. How many forward thrusts have to be embarrassingly squandered and even gifted to the opposition (think Hunt's precise pass to a defender after 2 bounces) before we realise that our game plan is holding us back? Why do all forwards lead back to goal? Where is a double back to secure a safe possession? Why, except for Neal-Bullen to Garlett, were there no deliberate short passes for a shot at the goals in the forward line? Why are our players slow to react and make position and create leading options when we have possession following a switch? Why are our kick ins so predictable? Why do the opposition midfielders read Max's work better than ours? Why do we not build a game plan around Clarrie's incredible ability to win the ball and deliver it at speed - its seems he has to look for attacking targets because we are not offering? 12 wins is a good year but it hurts me that we should have had more and I despair that the lessons of this year might not be absorbed for next year. Go dees.

What is a clanger? An authoritative source defines a clanger as: Any disposal or deliberate knock-on that goes directly to an opposition player. Any free kick conceded Dropped marks or fumbles under no pressure 50 m penalties conceded conceded A Ball-Up Kick In (Stepping over the line when kicking in after a behind) With our 8-6-4 structure a centre bounces, any hurried long kick into the forward line is a chance to be intercepted by an opposition player. If the players try to avoid a hurried kick and rely on quick handball transitions in the centre, they are berated for too much handball. Dom Tyson often wins the ball in the centre and with no time or space kicks long into our forward line. Even if marked by one of them, I argue that this is a better outcome than losing possession in the centre (think of rugby or grid iron). And if it doesn't go directly to an opposition player but to a contest then it is not a clanger. A poor kick or handball does not seem to qualify. The name of the game is to force the opposition to make more clangers than us and for us to be better able to take advantage. Turnover goals are a good proxy for measuring the overall effect of clangers on both teams.

In October last year I wrote the following. It still has merit. The bye and the chance for a rest and refresh for the players offers the prospect of a finals season, distinct from the H & A season and a finals series. The eight clubs are divided into 2 groups 1,3,5,7 and 2,4,6,8 and play a round robin series to determine ladder positions. The top two play off in the grand final. Finishing 1 and 2 or top 4 loses its appeal for the teams. The argument the WB benefited from the bye is correct - but don't we want the best teams to win, not just the team with least injuries at the start of the finals. Injuries can occur in the finals that will test team lists but at least they could all start even. The trade off is enhanced interest in round 23 and four matches a week for the three weeks of the finals where just winning is not enough, it's the margin of victory and its affect on percentage that counts as well. Every score could have a bearing. I would also have all four matches in the third week played at the same time so that teams can't game the system. The broadcasters would have the challenge to cover all four matches simultaneously using "round the grounds" images and reports. What a dynamic and exciting day of footy. The grand final would then be the ultimate match of the season. Brownlow, rising star, MVP, coaches and all other awards to be held in "awards week", an event in itself with daily functions with the Brownlow as the climax. What a celebration of footy. And then the finals season. Why not?

Is a misleading statistic. Does it mean getting rid of the ball or does it mean advancing the ball to the goals or does it mean delivering to a contest or does it mean delivering it lace out. Until it is defined, it is of limited value. Midfielders often have to dispose of the ball under pressure in limited space with limited visio and moving the ball forward to a contest is a good outcome. Defenders often, but not always, have more time and space to select a target. Turnovers in these circumstances are disappointing but I am pleased that TMac and OMac at least look and try to pick out a target. The intent is good and they deliver well more often than is recognised in these columns One feature that is overlooked in these discussions is the importance of players forward presenting to advantage to the player with the ball. Our forwards have been guilty over the years of standing still and waving rather than moving to space. The great teams of the recent past have had developed a playing style where the receiving player is both moving and clear of his opponent. For all of his other limitations, Simon Godfrey was a running machine who ran to space to offer. The best current example is Jack Watts who, having run to good positions, is often overlooked or ignored when on his own in the forward line as the ball is kicked elsewhere. A seriously underused talent. When commenting on this topic, please state your definition of DE.

Dean Bailey was a great coach and a wonderful person. He just ran out of time because of the ructions at the club. In his final press conference at the club, he showed more class and dignity than the rest of the administration put together. He chose his own path to achieve success - he believed in his players and in his strategy and refused to compromise and [censored] the players preferring to give the young group time to develop as a group in the long term interest of the players and the club. Sadly the club was not able to match the quality of his methods and aspirations by providing proper support. When he was dismissed, the club sank deeper into the mire. Given his sad passing, it is unseemly to be critical of his time at the club. The club let him down badly as well as the players and the supporters.

David Neitz was a rarity in footy - a champion defender at CHB and a champion forward at FF. He had already established himself at CHB until Balme sent him forward when Balme realised in the mid 90s, in the years when we were struck with significant injuries, that scoring goals was more important than saving goals. Balme's best move as a coach. Saw David once after a family day at Luna Park walking his dog - a tiny little ball of fluff. If it is true that owners end up resembling their dogs, then it says a lot about what David is in person - a gentle, genial and gracious guy. Any awards are well deserved. As for the best forward line, the 1994 combination of a pre injury Lyon (Footscray game), a pre injury Schwar (Carlton game), and an under control Pike was a good as it gets. The rules for elevation to Legend status should be checked - it is inconceivable that either Jimmy or Robbie would not be elevated as soon as they were eligible.

Two candidates. Saw both. Incomparable. Hassa Mann's goal from the boundary at Glenferrie Oval to secure top position in 1964 finals. Neil "Froggy" Crompton's goal in the last minutes of the 1964 Grand Final. Our last premiership. Nothing else comes close except for Robbie's last goal against Sydney in the semi finals in 1987.

If you want to see average disposal by foot watch no. 6 against saints. More misses than hits. TMac can run, change direction and look for good, open options that can start many attacking thrusts from the backline. Occasional execution lapses should not detract from his attempts to start attacks. There are many other clubs who would love to have a FB who could play 3 roles as a one on one gorilla, as a interceptor and and as a play maker. OMac is still learning the craft. If he copies his brother then we will have 2 top defenders who will be the envy of all other teams. It's will be like having 2 Jesses.