The Jackson FIX

There is multiple games they roll through in the NBA play-in which makes it a bit more like a handicapped mini-tournament and there is a decent enough volume of games to make it a revenue spinner. 2 extra matches in the AFL ain’t gonna make it that meaningful on the revenue front… the other argument is it increases interest in matches at the back end of the year but it doesn’t feel like a material-enough change to bother changing what is already a pretty good system

I’m typically not in the camp of ‘avoid interstate players’ like some Demonlanders still aggrieved at Jesse & Jack departures, but I would’ve thought that any young guns from Tassie are abnormally-high risk of going home because of the unique scenario of the first ever team getting started down there? Not comfortable spending a top 5 pick on a boy from Tassie right now.

Maybe but I don’t think that Chandler falling off a perch was part of the plan so they may need to reconsider that one…

Never thought I’d see the day that I was looking forward to Carltank thumping a side…. But here we are.

Broadly how I feel about the current state of play. If our game plan was consistently being exposed by opposition I’d be more worried, or we were playing a style of footy that couldn’t hold up in finals I’d be more worried. The issues are kinda superficial and you can see how they can disappear with a bit of luck and a bit of confidence. Belief that can happen? Our run into finals last year and some chronic cases of MFCSS aren’t helping the belief

Very much enjoy your analysis, probably because it is actually grounded in sensible data points (take note AFL media). Faith somewhat in tact, our inability to correct course last year is the niggling factor in the back of my mind

Field kicking issues aside, we have a forward-line game plan that exacerbates our goal-accuracy issues - we deliberately kick to contests with the aim of bringing the ball to ground which means shots on goal consistently come with pressure. Yes sure, that means we have a better shot at retaining the ball inside 50 for repeat attempts but if the repeat attempts are consistently inaccurate (because of our kicking deficiency x pressure), at what point do we look to change that strategy to at least see if there is another way? Or is the answer, we don’t change, we just hope luck swings our way soon?

Poor kicking team noted @binman. I’m looking at Frit going down as an opportunity to look at some more radical options to fix our forward line efficiency. Will Goodwin experiment or just swap Melk for Frit and hope our kicking woes solve themselves naturally?

Anyone know when/where training is this week? Keen to take the Billy lids down for a look

+ Brad Johnson has been feverishly been making updates to his ‘rolling-All-Australian-illness-affected-team’

Certainly am noticing a lot of Doggies supporters’ aggressive dislike for all things Melbourne nowadays… if only their players could’ve channeled that aggression at about the 20-min mark of the 3rd quarter of the 2021 Grand Final

Appears that golf buggy killed off some of his few remaining brain cells.

Unconfirmed reports: Trac -“you have a face like a capful of covid mutations”

Don’t understand why teams don’t assault Cox in/before a marking contest like they do Gawn?

Also ticks the required box to have ‘beaten someone up with a crutch at Zagames’ before

Did they also mention we are 23-12 if they went back another 10 weeks? No, because there is no story in that. Footy media in May & June is the worst, too much content required and not enough to write or talk about.

Remembering our game plan (at present) isn’t to isolate talls, it is to create contests and bring the ball to ground. Not a particularly attractive proposition for ‘talented’ key talls. We’ll struggle to attract experienced KPF talent, regardless of our recent form.

As an enormously-superstitious person, seeing this thread just ruined my year.

He ain’t getting outta that

Jeff Gleeson has left unbelievable, law-based opportunities to appeal in the two most high-profile tribunal cases in recent memory (both involving contact to the head). He either isn’t very good at his job or there is a conspiracy to get these players off (Cripps for finals/Brownlow reasons, JVR for common sense reasons) whilst also being able to demonstrate the AFL had done everything within its power to stamp out head contact. I’m not a conspiracy type of guy but it is curious such an experienced legal type is making such enormous errors.

The rationale for overturning the conviction is epic, basically says: dear AFL, you probably should’ve updated your laws to reflect what you want to happen, instead of trying to use a confused and innocent future-premiership CHF’s actions to do the job you should’ve probably done over summer.

Sorry if I’ve missed this on here (busy of late frantically studying the law) but; a) isn’t David Neitz a tribunal member? and b) David Neitz has, overnight, slid three spots on my list of all-time favourite Melbourne players.

Sadly, hypotheticals aren’t particularly effective/welcome in a legal defence but you would like to ask them if Chol also gets two weeks had Bowey heard a ‘click’ in his neck and got stretchered off, only to realise there is nothing wrong with him.

If the ‘football action’ argument is unsuccessful, are we then allowed to argue against the ‘level of impact’ rating’? Feels like the arrival of the stretcher heavily influenced that grading but we’ve since found out he is actually fine and, arguably, calling for the stretcher may have been an action influenced by the fact he had already had a head knock that night (whether that be him being sensitive to another hit and over-imagining the ‘crack’ he heard or the medicos panicking that they sent a bloke back out onto the field who had already had a knock). Not saying they shouldn’t have sent a stretcher out, just suggesting that there is an angle to argue that has unfairly influenced the grading of the impact.

I'm not quite sure how to get an image down to the really low file limit required for this site (help anybody?!) but regarding the video from behind the goals that Jonny Ralph claims 'proves' JVR had eyes on the man, if you actually pause the video just before the ball is about to enter Ballard's hands, it shows JVR is looking directly at the ball and he is in fact either touching or very close to touching the ball. It's just the vibe of the thing. Case closed.