Skuit

This article is a bit meaningless. Petracca has better early stats than some people who turned out good?

I would, but I'm afraid that Clarry would know my precise whereabouts and my girlfriend will find out.

Not at all. I read it again just now and it came off as very harsh indeed. And apparently I'm writer by trade. It's time I learned how to use that cheeky Demon emoticon.

My sincere apologies Dappa Dan. I certainly didn't intend to offend. I was playfully referring to the chaos it caused when you referred to Oscar MacDonald as 'Ozzie' in a previous thread. Ironic, as part of that mock-rant spoke of effective communication and I'm afraid I failed miserably in having my tone understood. I don't think you're a troll and I'm sorry again to have upset you.

Do you mean they had the name 'Ollie' next to the name 'Wines' on the bench, as in the footballer named Ollie Wines sitting by himself? Or that Clayton Oliver, universally known by the nick-name 'Clarry', was on the bench next to Wines? I'll assume that you're trolling again, or else misunderstand a basic fundamental in the development of language; namely that the words we use have to be consistent in meaning and understood by both parties for there to be such a thing as communication. Anyways, yay for Choo-Choo!

And yet for all their supposed peripheral vision, the Hawks certainly didn't see 1-5 coming.

But then they become unaffordable anyway and after you've invested in their development (though I suppose you get greater trade returns). Anyway, I wonder if this same mentality led us to Weid contrary to what Roos had previously said about not drafting key bigs early.

I think Liam may be in with a decent claim for that title.

The problem with Hibberd is that he's really driven home how deficient we are in key areas of the game. That, and his moustache.

Bernie a shoo-in then. (Please note: Vince doing the former was a welcome tonic in the second half v the Dons - please let him remain forward-of-the-ball from here to retirement).

There's a strange equal-opportunities affirmative-action sentiment developing here regarding Clarry's handball-to-kick ratio. Like any player, I would like Oliver to be a good decision-maker, such that he should kick when it's the best option and handball when it's the best option. Otherwise, he is extremely damaging and aggressive by hand, and I couldn't care less if he only gets five kicks a game no matter how good he is by foot. I also couldn't care less that by improving his kicking numbers he could better his chances for a Brownlow.

He would be better off throwing it and too fast to catch. It's the unorthodox contortionist efforts that come across as suspect and get pinged.

He's clocking elite stats now. He's played 18 games. But beyond that, it's plain to see that he's nowhere near yet touched the surface. This is not just some kid who has adjusted early to AFL with a big body. His ceiling is absolutely enormous. If he had played like he did on the weekend just five matches ago we'd be ecstatic, but we've already come to take it for granted. He did four or five things vs. Richmond that would ordinarily be staggering - like no other individual in the AFL could; yet now I just get a quiet little smile.

I'm pleased in general - and obviously in hindsight - that we took the exact opposite approach to Gold Coast. Once we identified Oliver as our target, we left nothing to chance regarding how high he would bolt and simply went out and bought the dice. Love that GC probably thought we were maneuvering to secure Parish.

I liked this OP not for its content but for its posting. @Rafiki - I'm not some wise old guru but I've been through a lot of it myself until recently and am happy to have a chat to you or anyone else via PM if they feel like they want to talk about it. Edit: The one thing I should I add, it's important that you don't let yourself feel any regrets or anxiety about posting what you have.

I must be in the very small minority who isn't particularly fazed by what has been perceived as an overuse of handball. Except I think Tyson has been a bit of an offender. Most of our players are hand-balling at speed and moving it around in an attacking manner. Tyson seems to prop and search for a handball or short kick target as the first option rather than look to attack goal-ward. And this where we get annoyed for flat-footed fiddling. I'm probably making too much of a few instances, but when placed alongside our other aggressive or creative centre-mids in Viney, Oliver and Jones - you can understand where the broader perceptions arise. My other theory: Dom Tyson isn't very distinctive-looking. I remember the clangers but otherwise I'm usually a little surprised when I check the disposals column and see Dom with 28. * His goal-kicking radar has also been well off of late - 5-10 since midway through last year.

I think both (as well as having great hearing). But his ability to hit a player blind suggests he has a pretty good idea of where everyone is and is moving before he collects. He's like Clarry-Anne Moss in the Matrix.

And he spends it before he has it but is an uncommonly prescient investor.

Sounds odd, but I've noticed how well he keeps his eye on the ball in the scrimmages. Like a Kelpie when you play 'fake' fetch.

I can't express how lovely it is for my inner-peace having Michael Hibberd in our back-line.

Shouldn't be a question of valid bumping as this thread should be pinned. Anyways, at one stage in the Saints match I vaguely recall Viney hit a Saint who careened off another Saint and left them both splayed on the ground - reminiscent of the Tom Lynch-Alex Georgiou carnage. I don't have access to replays. Think it was after half-time. A still would be appreciated here if anyone has the time . . .

And you didn't even mention the worst aspect of that play. That that single mark and goal are responsible for sparking a dual-ruckmen argument that just won't go away and die.

Wow. They are pretty big endorsements from the back-bench.

Pay-wall. Care to summarise?

Btw - cheers for your responses. Demonland after Dark can be a rewarding place on occasion.