Lord Nev

Mate, we don't know where the Weid is at (other than 5 goals in a scratch match) because we're gifting games to a kid who isn't ready yet. Weid has just had his first reasonably uninterrupted preseason, they've given him a clear role, he's done it well (see the preseason game where he rucked) and they're clearly refusing to play him. Not even an emergency this week. As it stands it's looking like another case of the MFC draft obsession. Why tell Weid he has to have a 'sustained period before he plays' and then turn around and tell Jackson he gets a few for free? That's what Melbourne has done for years when it was a trash club and you want them to do it again. You tell me, when has Jackson played 2 good games in a row?

But Jackson can keep getting games at senior level without performing to 'get a taste'. Double standards.

How to destroy team culture 101. 'We picked this guy to get a taste' 'But we won't pick this guy because he hasn't earned it' You of all people, the king of ranting and raving about our culture and history, should understand the damage gifting games does. Make them all earn it.

He did. Old mate Pickett posted a training report that had Weid in it, and he was doing extra work too.

Would be very lucky to get a late third rounder for a talented key forward that we've stuffed up so far.

Maybe, will depend on what happens with the key forwards in our game and if there's another scratch match for Weid. (Is there?)

Yep, fair, but I'm not using that as an example of an amazing game, I'm using it in contrast to our current impotent forwards. Weid can only play against what's there.

Nibbler had far better forward stats, including score involvements and inside 50s, than both Jones and Melksham. He was also a key part of the play that won us the game. The point is, we can't be selecting the team on potential rather than performance.

Yeah, but he also kicked 5 goals and not sure it's fair to judge his performance based on Carlton's highlights video. I'm a big Jacko fan, but he should not be playing ahead of Weid this week.

Holding off on the conditions I reckon. At this stage I think Kozzy and Hibberd for Jones/ANB and Smith. But if it's looking like a wet slog then Hannan and vB come in for Jackson and Bennell.

Feel for Weid. Felt strongly he should be picked this week and be given a run of a few games.

Appreciate the amount of work you've put in here mate. From that list, a common theme I'm noticing is interrupted careers. Whether it's injury, new players or changed/undefined roles, a lot of the players listed haven't had much continuity. For mine, I can see May and Lever being the big movers upwards. Playing together, heck playing at all, will see them gel with each other and get used to what the players up the ground are supposed to do. I highly rate both and hope that once we settle the backline and crack the whip on the mids with their running a bit more we might see a truly elite back half.

Thought the same. I know it's a different kettle of fish, but in the preseason games we did look pretty fit but so far in our two actual games we've seemed flat, so I wonder if it really is at least partly a mental thing? One thing to be able to run, another to be willing to. Think I read here somewhere that someone heard one of the players post-game saying they had 'a bit left in the tank'. That's a pretty disappointing thing to hear after the lack of run we saw in the second half.

Yep, I think to me the main thing I've noticed lacking since we added in that conservative element to our style was the spacing. Players just aren't running without the ball at the moment. It's all a bit stagnant and standing next to their man. Moving without the ball has always been my thing I bang on about and the thing I liked about the chaos ball was that it pretty much forced players to keep moving. With our increased speed and ground coverage and our apparent much improved fitness it feels like the stage should be set for a bit of a throwback to the 2018 style.

Is it possible that the head knocks have started to impact his footy? I mean, we've all kinda moved on from it in that way, but there may be impacts being felt by Gus now.

I might just add too, I didn't mean my post as a discouragement btw, I really appreciate the amount of work you put into your analysis posts, even if there's bits I don't agree with, you can't argue with the effort. Without going to broad or in-depth, what's your thoughts on us going fully back to chaos ball ala 2018 style? Feels like that was our best footy and since we've tried to add the slow down game to it we've been lost in two minds.

"Reasonably serious" quad injury in the gym apparently.

Mate, it's training, maybe they were working on something in particular? I'm as worried as you about our form and deficiencies, but this is maybe a little over the top for a 5 second clip from training.

Don't mind it too much mate. Originally I didn't have vB coming in, but other posters are starting to convince me that maybe the conditions will suit him. I'm not 100% sure they'll consider him fully ready this week though. Definitely not against it if it happens. Hibberd for Jetta a chance I guess too, more so if Orazio doesn't play. I might lean more towards Lockhart than Hibberd if he does however, just for the run and pressure he brings if Jetta comes out. Yep Smith out. I like him, but the backline mix doesn't seem right atm. Weid in for Jackson IMO. TMac on thin ice, but the opposition, ground and conditions maybe tips the balance just. Kozzy 100%. He's my fave. Not sure for who though. Thought ANB's game was ok, especially early, his goals and score involvements were crucial to us winning in the end. Perhaps Kozzy for Jones? TBH I've shifted on the changes a few times, so many things to balance. I personally would go (have already changed my mind a few times tho): IN: Weid, Kozzy, Hibberd or OMac (pending rain report) OUT: Jackson, Jones, Smith What I think will actually happen is: IN: Kozzy, Hannan, Weid OUT: ANB, Jackson, Jetta

Interestingly, this article from the club makes it sound like maybe only one out of Harley and vB will be selected. "Similarly to Harley Bennell, vandenBerg has had a luckless run with injury, so it will be interesting to see if there’s room for both Demons in the same outfit." A chance to return: Who’s in the frame for Round 3? Also sounds a bit like Kozzy will be straight in, Hannan a good chance, Weid a possibility and Lockhart maybe only if there's a defender out with soreness or injury. (That's reading into it of course)

I was quoting the original post there to highlight how making excuses for Goodwin based on things he controls seems like a cop out. See below...

Perhaps if you focused more on the football talk and less on the snipes and snarky comments there would be less 'misinterpretation'.

Sure, but I was addressing your point that we made a prelim but then apparently had a "mini rebuild". I agree we've seemingly improved our list, but I think "mini rebuild" is going a bit over the top and to feels like another excuse to buy Goodwin more time without getting pressure.

I'm not sure where in my post I made personal comments or attacks against you so I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack people in your posts, notably in your OP before anyone had even said anything. You completely missed the point that the "challenge" Goodwin needs to address is of his own making. Let's address some of your points. You said: "In Max's comments on 360 he has alluded to the players thinking too much about the above instruction and when they were challenged by Carlton instead of adapting to the new rhythm/pace of the game they simply stuck to their instructions." Then you said: "I didn't say anything about making the players doubt themselves" So players 'thought too much about instruction' and didn't play the way they should have, but they weren't doubting themselves? You said: "we had 9 players who had played less than 20 games together, 3 that were playing in the side for the first time, should I go on. You seem to think that the side should instantly be like Richmond and everyone should be on the same page." Nowhere did I say I expected instant cohesion. In fact, what I said was Goodwin only has himself to blame for lack of cohesion because he doesn't pick a settled lineup. Then, you say this lack of cohesion you're saying is the main problem will be 'fixed' by changing the team. That goes completely against the whole point you're trying to make. You said: "if he is given as much time as Buckley and Hardwick some of the issues should resolve themselves." On this I challenged you, as I believe things don't just "resolve themselves". You then backpedalled to make it 'oh, now I meant Goodwin can resolve it'. It's not what you said. You said: "I'm not suggesting Goody be given a free ride" You also said: "if he is given as much time as Buckley and Hardwick" I'm not in favour of simply waiting for things to "resolve themselves" or just "staying the course". I'm in favour of Goodwin, his coaches and our onfield leaders showing us they've made the practical changes necessary to address the consistent issues we've had in Goodwin's tenure. I'm in favour of a coach who will use his half time and 3/4 time addresses to deal with what is happening on the field effectively. I'm in favour of our leaders actually leading for a change and showing they can deal with a shift in momentum. But hey, I want to see a flag, you're just happy to "stay the course" so maybe I'm in the "97%" that want the team to succeed.

You can't say the game plan is great because we made a prelim once and then back it up by saying we've just had a "mini rebuild".