Nairobi_Demon

Not going to blame the umpires, it should never have been so close. We’re too reliant on our defence

I think I may be only person to have have selected other ? I don’t really see Jackson as a real forward. Don’t get me wrong, he’s done a fantastic job with Brown and Weid out. He kicks the odd goal and has brought the ball to ground but his real damage is functioning as a mid around stoppages (and freeing Gawn in the early rounds). And am still not convinced we can play Brown, TMac, Fritsch and Weidemen in the forward line with or without Jackson in the side. Could we replace his mid role with Sparrow, let TMac ruck in the forward half, and let Gawn handle the Center Bounces and back half stoppages? Given Jackson’s incredible versatility, I guess it depends on which of his roles we really need to replace to match up with the blues. I don’t think we need his forward role. The Sparrow option wouldn’t free up Gawn, but it would give us more options to rectify the centre clearance deficit. Majak would be my second vote. Frees Gawn and avoids too many changes to our forward line.

Bravo A F. I read every word of this and learnt a lot. Thanks!

Perhaps Binman is having a Sparrow-Swallow moment ?

For me, I click on stats in the top bar and then click AFL StatsPro. I think that’s what Binman is referring too. I’ve also not been able to find ProVision - perhaps that was an earlier name for this tool?

Harsh DS, but I agree that our midfield is just not working. It has regressed in the past two weeks. We’ve mostly corrected the bees at honey tendency this season, but it seems that with Viney out everyone is a little unsure who goes for the ball. Perhaps that was Harmes’s role today but he just doesn’t make good, fast decisions when he gets it (I’d like to watch every centre bounce of the game - perhaps that’s possible on the AFL StatsPro site). With Viney out another week, we need to try something a little different next week. Unbelievably it’s the weakest part of our game.

Surprised and disappointed that Harmes is coming in ahead of Sparrow. All reports indicated that Sparrow performed much better in last week’s Casey match.

Agree with this. Keep it simple. Petty takes Tomlinson’s role. Sparrow takes Viney’s position in the middle. Baker wouldn’t have played last weekend if Sparrow had been available.

6 Salem 5 Trac 4 May 3 Jackson 2 TMac 1 Tomlinson

Amazing game. Seriously good. Tough to talk changes on Sat night but next week is a good opportunity to try a few changes. BBB has to come in after another 4 goals in the VFL. He is highly likely to be part of our best 22 and so he needs to start getting comfortable with the team. I’d bring in BBB to FF, move Jackson to Jones’s position on the interchange (he’s so versatile). Let Jones take some time off to make space for others. I doubt he’d mind that. Plus I’d rest anyone with any niggles.

Agree While 7 goals is impressive, I’d like to see more consistency from Weidemen before bringing him into the team. Assuming all are fit, I’d prioritise BBB and Fritsch this weekend. Let the team adjust to BBB and let Weidemen show the selectors that he can consistently deliver goals at the VFL level before bringing him back into the AFL team.

Hi Demonland Partly because I want to support this insightful site and partly to remove the ads, I’d like to buy a subscription. Unfortunately, I don’t have a PayPal account. Largely because I have found maintaining a PayPal account as an expat quite difficult when one moves country. Is there another way to make the payment? For example via debit card or BSB bank transfer? Thanks and Go Dees!

Hibberd has been named for the VFL game but not Melksham. Surely Melksham won’t be played as the sub two weeks in a row. Perhaps they’ll rest Jones as the sub?

Don’t all those explanations apply equally to the two matches on Thursday and Friday that were full capacity? Those supporters face the same transport system, COVID risk, ticketing system, etc. Of course it was never going to be full capacity at our game with one inter-state team

Asante sana IHW ?

Last year I had the teams divided into four main groups: - Top 4: Port, Lions, Cats and Tigers. These teams were at a higher level and could beat each other on the right day. - Gunning for the 8: Dees, Saints, Dogs, Pies, GWS. Anyone of these 5 could have ended up in the 8 but 2 had to miss out. I had West Coast on their own. Definitely not top 4 but a cut above the “Gunning for the 8” group (context helped them). - Having a go: Freo, Blues, Dons, Suns, Hawks, Swans. Big group with some showing more improvement than others towards the end. - Hopeless: North and Crowd. Demons: When the FULL TEAM turned up to play FOUR FULL quarters, we could beat all the “Gunning for the 8” teams and give the top 4 teams a run for their money (but we weren’t at their level of skill, intensity, team work, strategy, etc). But when half our players made a poor effort and we fell asleep for full quarters, we’d struggle to beat “Having a go” teams. See Cairns. A lot could happen this season, but my baseline scenario: - Crows move up a group, hawks down a group. - Carlton and Freo move up a group, Pies and GWS to move down and Eagles to become part of the “Gunning for the 8” group. This group will expand. Some will miss out by definition. - Saints to move up a group, and Cats floating between top 4 and “Gunning 8” groups, like eagles last year. Where does that leave Melb? Realistically, we’re in the same Gunning for the 8 group as last year but if our forward line works and the FULL TEAM turns up to play FOUR FULL quarters EVERY week, we’re towards the top of this group and knocking on the top 4 door. That’s a big if. My two cents.