Accepting Mediocrity

One from left field: I'd like to see us win a game with a goal after the siren. AFAIK we haven't done it in our entire history, which is crazy seeing as it happens almost every year (often against us!)

In a nutshell, that's why I still have faith - the first 3 points you've listed are all things that should improve with fitness & development (speed perhaps less so). The things he already does well are the hardest traits to teach. Injury aside, I reckon we'll know by mid year if he's up to it as a forward. If he stagnates, it's hard to see how our forwardline will be much of a threat against good sides. If we can get 35 goals a year out of the Weid (alongside a fit TMac), suddenly we look a lot more dangerous.

And very solid the following week against the hawks - 5 marks (2 contested); 2 goals; 4 tackles. Yes he has weaknesses, but he's got some nice traits as well. He tackles to hurt, has a great set of hands and is a beautiful kick of the footy. Until last year, he'd shown about as much as you could realistically hope for from a 21 YO key forward. He may or may not make it. But aside from a horror (and injury affected) 2019, he's shown enough for me to maintain hope.

Granted he was terribly disappointing last year (with mitigating factors), but that's revisionist to say the least. If getting BOG in a final doesn't count as a step forward, what does? He's shown signs. Make or break this year, but I hold hope.

I get that we've been burned before by certain players seemingly restricting their good seasons to contract years, but this post pretty much sums up the Petracca angst on here. He's damned if he plays well, damned if he plays poorly. Worth remembering that he was one of very few on our list to show improvement last year - it's not like he only plays well when we're 10 goals up. He does things that very few players in the league are capable of. We'd all like to see more consistency, but I don't think it's laziness holding him back.

Fair point BAMF, but if you go by demonland, Oliver is basically a better version of Voss and Fritsch is a modern James Hird (but better overhead). Ridiculously overrating dees players is kind of our thing. On Hannan, he won't win a coleman, but at his best he's more than a handy contributor in an area we lack. He averaged 1.5 goals a game in 2018, which is a rung below elite but pretty good for a small forward. Statistically speaking, his output is comparable with players like Liam Ryan, Daniel Rioli and Jason Costagna. When fit, I think he's an important cog in the forward line. Plus he kicked the sealer in the EF against Geelong, so he gets bonus points for that.

I get these write-ups are space-fillers, but I'd have our back 6 well down the list of pre season priorities. Depth (especially talls) is an issue, but May, Lever, Jetta, Salem, Harmes & Hibberd is a solid starting line up by any measure. Provided we don't get decimated with injuries again, I think they'll gel just fine. I think there's much bigger question marks surrounding our forward line & ball movement.

You set a hard pass mark, there aren't too many small forwards in the comp that put up those sort of numbers. I'd settle for 25 goals and consistent, manic tackling pressure (strong user name to posting content correlation!) Agree that Spargo's not the forward pocket answer though. I reckon it's probably the hardest position to teach - good forward pockets are purely instinctual in my view. You've either got it or you don't IMO, and I don't think Hunt's got it. Quick in straight lines, but he's not particularly evasive or creative. He's at his most damaging streaming inside 50 rather than crumbing a pack IMO.

Good to see we're all keeping our expectations in check In the build up to the draft, I struggled to see the value in picking him at 3. On the basis of some youtube highlights and fluff pieces in the media, I'm now convinced he'll be a star. Being a footy fan does questionable things to one's psyche (especially in the off season).

We don't really have a specialist crumber (I think Pickett, Chandler & Bedford will probably be a couple of years away), but then neither do Collingwood or the Giants and their forward lines go alright. Hannan for me. Regularly kicks those 'something out of nothing' goals that we sourly lacked in 2019. Goes missing for periods, but there aren't many small forwards that don't. Currently our best option IMO.

The amount of blatant misinformation that has been spread by certain sectors of the media (not to mention social media) truly is a disgrace, even by their usual standards. The fact that no-one gets held to account for publishing such demonstrably inaccurate information is a joke. Lots of these myths get rehashed after every major fire, but it seems to be out of control this year. The thing is, most of these myths, regardless of political leanings, can be dispelled using simple logic that doesn't exactly require a PhD. Yet somehow, these myths still gain widespread traction. A few of my favourites: It's arson: As others have said, even if a substantial number of fires were started by arsonists (which they demonstrably weren't), why did so many arsonists suddenly crop up in 2019? It's staggering that some people still trot this out. Banned cattle grazing in the high country: Ignoring the science that cattle do SFA to reduce fuel loads in NP's (it's not very often that you see a herd of cattle devouring a gum tree), there are more big herbivores grazing the bush now than ever. Populations of deer and, further north, feral horses (heritage listed no less - don't get me started on that wisdom) have exploded in recent times. They're currently in far greater numbers than cattle ever were. Why aren't they slowing the fires, and why would cattle do anything different? Banned firewood collection in NP's: Seriously? Millions of hectares have been burnt - exactly how much firewood were you expecting people to be collecting? It's the Greens fault for stopping planned burns: Even if they did oppose planned burns (which they don't), how are such a minor party so influential in managing bushland? Lack of backburning: Anyone who brings this up doesn't know what backburning actually is. End rant

While 4 data points are hardly enough to definitively say it's a trend scientifically speaking, various analyses of the frequency of fires in Australia do show that yes, the frequency of fires is most definitely increasing. Again, the reasons aren't necessarily straightforward, but obviously climate is a major factor. While I agree that it's something of an elephant in the room, I'm yet to see the topic of climate change lead to considered, measured discussion on any online platform - the discussion generally degenerates to mudslinging, "globalist leftist agendas" and personal attacks faster than a Demonland Jack Watts thread. Sadly, some people have very strong pre-established opinions on the topic, and are unlikely to change them based on something they read on a football forum. I think this thread would be better for all if we stick to the directly topic of the current bushfires.

For the most part, you're right - the vast majority of the Australian landscape has evolved with fire. The vegetation (namely eucalypts and acacias) has adapted to cope with droughts, floods and frequent fires. But not everywhere. Substantial areas of rainforest (particularly along the Great Divide in northern NSW and QLD, as well as SW Tasmania) have not. Rainforests don't spring up overnight - millions of years is not hyperbole. If and when they burn, they are out competed by plants that are adapted to fire. And yes, we are seeing fires push into these areas. Please don't misunderstand me - I'm certainly not some tree-hugging greenie crying over trees while family and friends are worried about losing their homes. But if that's not evidence that we're in an unusual bushfire season, then I don't know what is. Nah, we're not. It's certainly earlier than usual. The bush (at least most areas in NE Vic and Gippsland) is usually still fairly damp through December. Most of our major bushfires have historically been largely restricted to a single, 'perfect storm' catastrophic day. Black Friday: Jan 13th. Black Tuesday (Hobart): Feb 7th. Ash Wednesday: Feb 16th. Black Saturday: Feb 7th. Like I said, fires are far more complicated than most people think, and I'm not certainly not pointing the finger at anyone or any one factor. The word 'unprecedented' gets thrown around a lot to the point that it's virtually lost its meaning, but I think it fits here.

No argument from me. But blaming arsonists (who should be locked up for life IMO) is missing the point. Most of the current fires started from lightning, but yes, a small percentage were deliberately lit. But we've always had arsonists lighting bushfires. It's not new. Fires are always going to start, no matter what. Whether its arson, lightning, farm machinery or power lines. Each summer, hundreds of fires will start. It's inevitable. Usually, you won't see them on the news though, because they can be quickly contained before they spread. Right now, containing fires is virtually impossible.

That's true enough, but not like this they haven't. Those of us from the bush haven't seen fires this widespread in our lifetimes. Bushfires are a part of life, and something we plan for each summer. We've had plenty of bad fire seasons before. But without wanting to sound melodramatic, the scale of these fires truly is unprecedented. Much of the Australian bush and fires go hand in hand, but areas of temperate rainforest that simply aren't meant to burn are currently being torched. These areas have been unaffected by fire for quite literally millions of years - in terms of both natural and human-caused fires. These ecosystems simply do not evolve in the presence of fire. This is not normal. Sadly, the fact that the debate quickly turns political is only natural when people are angry and looking for someone to blame. But managing fires and fuel loads is far more complicated than most people realize. It's easy to point the finger at a lack of planned burning, but in reality, this isn't the silver bullet that some people make it out to be. Under some circumstances, planned burns can actually lead to thick re-growth and make the situation worse. Further, burning is only possible when conditions are just right - it's simply been too dry to burn safely in many areas. Fingers crossed for rain!!!

And people actually want this bloke to be captain! What great leadership - putting himself at risk of injury for the sake of an exhibition cricket match! On a serious note, thanks for sharing - stories like this are what makes Demonland great.

I'm all for off-season musings, but this is a bit of an outdated and simplistic way of analyzing lists I reckon. Even very good sides typically only have a handful of superstars and maybe another half dozen clearly above-average players. The bottom 6-10 players in good teams aren't world beaters, but play a role that utilizes their strengths and doesn't expose their weaknesses. In that sense, most of Melbourne's best 22 would at least be in the frame of Richmond's best 22. Oliver is probably a better player than, say, Cotchin, but would replacing Cotchin with Oliver improve Richmond? Doubt it. Our list is good enough on paper to go deep in finals. Pretty much anyone that knows footy accepts this. Getting it to click is the hard part. On topic: Gawn Oliver May (GC version) Tmac (2018 version)

You're right actually. Thanks for giving me the excuse to watch this to clarify. I'll stand by my main point though: all key defenders have bad days at some point. Rance got beaten far less than most, and was the most influential defender of the last decade (but I firmly agree with the Demonland "w*nker" consensus).

To be fair that's pretty much the intended purpose of the Cat B rookie list. No doubt he's extremely raw and a very long way off, but has at least played some junior footy, and the potential upside is massive. Coming from a similar background, he can look to Stef Martin for inspiration (hopefully he sticks around if/ when he comes good though).

This bloke is the most intriguing prospect on our list IMO. Decent chance he never plays a game, but could be absolutely anything.

Our Robbo kicked 7 on Matthew Scarlett one day as well. Name one key defender that never got beaten. Saying Rance can't defend one on one is a bit like saying Buddy is overrated because he's not the best overhead mark - doesn't mean he's not a bloody good player. I don't like the way he staged for frees and dished out cheap shots now and then, but he is the best key defender of the last decade by a mile. Credit where it's due. We'd all have loved him at the dees.

To be fair to the coaches, our disposal in the backline was Neeld-era diabolical - sticking Fritsch back was a move made in desperation but at least made some theoretical sense. Agree that they persisted with it a few weeks too long though.

Pretty much nailed it I reckon. I think we have enough talent spread over the rest of the ground to match everyone but Richmond. On paper, there's a lot to like. I can't see us playing finals if TMac can't get back to something resembling his best. Structurally, he's as important as Maxy IMO. When he's on, we're a completely different team and the rest of the forwardline falls into place. I rate the Weid and Petty, but I can't see either of them having a comparable impact just yet. Jackson will probably be a few years off. I can't remember feeling as absolutely clueless about our prospects for an upcoming season. I feel we are just as likely to finish top 4 as bottom 4. But it sure beats knowing for certain we'll be sh*thouse!

Assuming you have a 50/50 chance of 'winning' the free kick count in any given year all else being equal (conservative estimate as a drawn count is also possible): Chances of 17 consecutive wins = 0.5^17 =0.00000763, or 1 in 131072

FFS, I love bagging umpires as much as anyone, but in reality maybe 1 game in 100 is decided in any meaningful way by controversial decisions. It's a bloody hard game to umpire, and good umpiring doesn't equate to a 50/50 split of free kicks. Could it be better? Of course, but umpires aren't on the long list of reasons we haven't won a flag since man first walked on the moon. I love how these lists provide conclusive proof that the likes of Collingwood get an armchair ride, while we conveniently ignore the fact that the equally feral Essendon and Richmond fans don't seem to influence umpires in their games. I'll concede the WC trend is clearly fckd though (for those interested, the chances of obtaining a positive free kick differential for 17 consecutive seasons are roughly 7.5 in a million if umpiring is unbiased).