rpfc

Spencer just played an intra club as first ruck against our beanpole toddler King. Gawn played but was predominantly forward and Jamar hasn't suited up yet. Spencer is winning this race to be first ruck in a canter at the moment - the others haven't left their gate.

Just on this 'Hogan not ready for Rd 1' stuff... We do have over a month to go and practice games against Geelong and Hawthorn... This period we are in now - this period is the 'getting ready for Rd 1 period.' If he is playing in this period, he is going to be a chance for Rd 1.

I have wondered this myself, and I think he may benefit from the possible inability of a ruckman to stamp their claims. If Clark comes back it seems he may be used as first ruck, at the moment Spencer has that spot but if he doesn't impress, Roos has the opportunity to give it to Clark and that will free up Fitzpatrick to play his role in the forward line. Dawes, Hogan, Fitz/Clark and Howe can work but I don't think all five can work.

Yeah, I have little problem with the 'taking out the legs rule' I don't think the fact that one has the ball a split second before another should allow them to essentially (and dangerously) trip another player. There are some grey areas and marking the ball in that situation is different but I have not seen that rule applied to a mark so it probably is irrelevant here. But there is merit to it, and the rule should stay.

Dom Barry?

Yeah, and Watts has plausible deniability if any reporter is stupid or bored enough to ask about it. 'You are asking me about what an anonymous poster on a fan site said about some comments I supposedly made?' 'Are there any real questions?'

Spencer and worry about it in 3 years time are my answers.

That's not a shock...

You have to remember that as a player - the bloke taking training for a few months of a season is remembered as a coach. Frawley would have had 7 of those voices.

The gameplan is protection of the football. The players that live up to that ethos will play. Both Bail and McKenzie lived up to that on Friday. Their form will dictate their presence in the team, not our preconceived notions about how they would play based on how they played prior to this year.

I am not going to give you any time stamps, but Trengove worked hard and played in Roos' system well. A system that really suits him. You may say that some of his touches didn't affect the game much - of course they didn't. How many of 445 touches do you think is going to be 'important' - especially in a game where we only had 40 I50s and 14 goals? But when you add up the 'ineffectual' touches from Trengove, Vince, Grimes, Cross, the Jones', and a few others it reads complete domination of that football game.

There was a marked spike in some key stats from when Craig took over. It matters little now, but being a caretaker coach would have to be one of the worst jobs in the world.

I was about to bump an old thread but I felt reading through two years of masked (and sometimes unmasked) disappointment it is a bit pointless - we know where his form has been. So I thought I would begin another after his promising start on Friday in Roos' first game, and mention that his 29 touches came in 64% game time. That's about 80 minutes. For a measure - Jones played 78% (approx 95 minutes). The modern midfielder never plays above the 90% threshold but there is another 15-20 minutes that this endurance runner will be able to give when his match fitness hits its peak.

I kind of just want to move on - I know Roos is an improvement, I am not surprised the players agree.

That was last year.

Maybe because you were commenting on it.

As per your note - it's like love and marriage. You can't have one without the other.

Bump. I just remembered this thread from a few months back, and I thought I would bring it back after our 331 Uncontested Possessions on Friday. It's an interesting discussion, and I don't mean to pick on jabberwocky here at all. Friday was just a good illustration of how Uncontested Possessions can allow a team to control another. I am also inspired to do my measurement threads of some key statistics so that we can gauge the improvement of the team (now that I am convinced we will markedly improve).

Having a decent forward line won't change the gameplan. You only have one gameplan - what you saw on Friday; possession footy with hard running into space and honouring of that running. If we have tall forwards to kick to - great, we might actually kick it in the 50 more. Tactics change, gameplans don't - or shouldn't... Our players were surprised that Roos was teaching them only one way to play because his predecessors evidently had a myriad of instruction for the players:

After we won the flag? Can't afford Fyfe now...

I think they are interstate teams and they struggle comparatively when away from home. There is more room on the G, more space to work into, if the blokes stick to it and don't have tier belief sapped by their own early troubles this year, I think they will surprise themselves. I hadn't seen us dominate a game like that for years in any form of footy. We nearly lost too, which should temper expectations of wins while this is in its infancy.

Ok, you thought I was being serious? About it being a scientific fact? Jeez... Don't watch Anchorman... And I know what the B+F results are - I also know that Frawley is better than Terlich. Who doesn't know that? And only you can make yourself feel inferior.

The simple answer to this 'debate' was what happens, and will happen - if you don't have two born in 1993 or later, you forfeit those keepers. This 'forcing people' to have players is unenforcable - if you don't pay attention - you won't have eligible keepers. The answer - pay attention.

No, you have to have had picked one up last year before the end of the season. Thems the breaks, and will be again this year.

Bail was good. I am tempering my thoughts a tad waiting for more exposed form but he has started very well. He is a bold worker who runs all day - he can play. We just haven't seen enough of it for varying, and worrying, reasons.