Skuit

I haven't once checked Hibberd's tackle-stats. Not sure why anyone would feel the need to.

Plenty last year as well. Don't think it's a recent phenomenon.

This is mostly bs. But anyone here who thinks it's all bs is as blind as the video-maker. Almost every decision in the 4th went our way. We were better in the last but without a doubt had the run of the green. Absolutely felt it watching it at the time as well, because, well, it's unusual and stood out. Don't think it would have been the difference, but it invalidates genuine complaints about the umps when you don't accept when it falls in your actual favour. And, as we should appreciate, it's not always the balance of unfairness during an entire game, but when and how the bad calls are made. We got lucky. Be humble and hope it's a sign of things to come. Free kick, Melbourne.

Huh? Willing to give him the benefit of the doubt re. the pre-season knee injury, but it's clear as day Tyson has lacked penetration in his kick all year. Trenners is a decent comparison.

C'mon mate. Poor Skuit? I'm not even sure what that means. He may well have a history of being micro-critiqued, at times unfairly. No reason to draw the shutters thereafter. Refreshing would be the ability to discuss Jack like any other footballer. Anywho. At the risk of being considered a pretentious [censored], I enjoyed the win and loved Jack's contribution in the bit I watched.

Get off it Jumbo. A poster can be critical of aspects of Watts's game and acknowledge his good traits and also when he exceeds those particular criticisms without it being on-or-off a supposed bandwagon. This is the sort of nonsense why people don't feel comfortable even mentioning Jack's name with even the slightest hint of criticism on here. I was happy for Jack yesterday. Thought he didn't go hard enough at times vs. GC. Where's the divisiveness in that? It's Jack's apologists who are engaging in the trench-mentality.

Put in the yards to effect an important spoil in the 4th. The mind is willing . . .

That's great mattjm. So your opinion is that we go in with what we consider our best 22 for the remainder of the season? That's fine, if so. It's also a tactic. I was simply asking in what ways we may be able to mitigate some of the burden of the fixture, a la Hawthorn and the Saints and Freo and Geelong during their recent grand-final years by resting/managing payers etc. to gain an advantage over the competition. Apologies if this is considered precious rather than proactive.

They do have the list: clear beneficiaries of the expansion concessions, and have managed it with enough nous and luck to keep that advantage rolling for the foreseeable future. This year is clearly a stand-out though in terms of spread and lack of outstanding teams - the question I can't answer is whether it is due to an all-round poorer quality of football? If so, my thesis is that that dilution will benefit the handful of teams that were on the bottom at the time - five years later - rather than those on the top as expected. And that those teams now will continue to drive the advantage home for a while yet. They may lose Kelly, and Sheil, or whoever, but they will be duly rewarded by desperate opposition teams. Perhaps we too, when our talent hits that five-year mark, when the elite is spread more thinly per team rather than the bottom six-to-eight as expected.

I've been a Pedo-backer from way back, but I'm not yet ready to gloat. He's doing exactly what I thought he would given the opportunity - being serviceable and competitive without setting the world on fire. Big question is whether he retains his spot when Hogan and Gawn come back in, and I'm not so sure. I think he should, essentially bumping Weed from the starting 22 from the start of the year (while providing reasonably empty back-up tap-ruck seconds to hold our structures), but I expect Goodie is keen to get back to what he thought was the best set-up pre-injuries. That's Hogan as our KPF and Watts as back-up in the ruck with an otherwise mobile and versatile forward-line. Still not sure if Pedo has a spot going forward.

Mattjm: occasionally some of us like to have a discussion about tactics without the bs ppl like you look to bring to every thread. Reflect on the point or move on.

Random post: but a feature of this odd, even year has been a lack of stand-out teams - though I haven't seen enough football this year to be certain that it's entirely down to poor quality. What I have watched though has been generally sub-par, (and why I've been on the Dees' bandwagon re. their best being as good or better than anyone's) with very few massive games between two super-strong opponents. Are the AFL's expansion endeavours finally having an true impact? We all suspected that the entry of GC and GWS as the 17th and 18th teams would dilute the competition. They've now been in 5/6 years; the time it takes generally for an AFL player to reach their peak. Is that dilution coming to fruition in terms of the AFL's elite players spread per club? We bemoaned getting stuck behind Hawthorn etc. during this period of expansion and draft concessions, but are we in a huge position to capitalise over the next five years and beyond due to scoring an above fair-share of that elite talent coming through at this particular time?

I'm talking re. the fixture we have for the remainder of this year as to player management. Probably many surprised that we didn't bring in Spencer when we had the chance. Personally, I think this is putting a huge extra burden on our players - one we've managed to overcome on a couple of occasions due to being a pretty-decent team, but not without a residual impact. But from here? Bulldogs have no ruck - do we go again with our set-up? And then send Gawn on a road-trip? Does Pedo go perm forward? Do we have the luxury of resting players on occasion? How do we manage the impact of the Darwin sojourn? Etc. etc.

Rollo - please rejoin the permanent fray - this site is lacking in death-threats somewhat and especially in conspiracy-narrative. Do you think Comrade Neeld may have been in cahoots with the Russkis? If not directly, I think it's telling that when you google 'Mark Neeld', the predictive auto-fill comes up with 'Mark Neeld's daughters' or 'Mark Neeld's family' - clearly a man under serious duress.

I think the staggered bye is ridiculous, but the fixture is the fixture. What would you do to mitigate the impact deeko?

He kicked it a lot more in the bit I watched as well - boot-to-ball move-it-forward Vince-style. Not sure if it was ideal, but many of them in were in very tight situations and I expect it would have been a directive.

It was rhetorical, but Richmond. They got the last five. Carlton we let them peg back the four-to-five goals, and Essendon I've stricken from my memory.

With a young team and a wide-open field, I feel pretty certain that this is an important subject with not just our run to the finals but also our potential to impact deep into them. But what would you do if you're Simon Goodwin? And had the chutzpah? We have (bracket to consider): Bulldogs (six-day break - no genuine oppo ruck). West Coast (consecutive six-day break - lack of ruck, big cross-country travel). Sydney (back-to-back-to-back six-day break coming off big travel - Friday night game under the lights). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . Carlton (eight day break at home). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . .. Adelaide (in Darwin, six day break, top team, travel and draining conditions). Port (a similar game set-up but at home - against an interstate ladder contender). Roos (interstate regional travel). GWS (interstate regional travel - against an interstate ladder contender). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Then: An extra day break and a run of three matches at the G' in the lead-up to finals, inc. the Saints, Brisbane and Pies. ?

I'm going to be one of those types who just says no. If we need fresh legs and rotation, Stretch is waiting in the wings (perhaps literally).

This is one of the ways in which I don't feel qualified in discussing Melksham. Same with Tyson. Some players go about their business without getting noticed much, while others are somehow front and centre in what they do. What I did note, in the latter portion of the match I watched, was how crazy influential/important Oliver was - and for all his plaudits this year, I still don't think he gets the recognition he deserves. Small, barely perceptible touches were absolutely crucial in the last.

Haha. I missed that. Was mostly noticing a couple extra unheated but unnecessary shoves in the pack on Dunn by Jones and Viney toward the end. Oscar ran over to hug Lynden? Embarrassing - unless he whispered in his ears, 'cheers for the spot, old chum . . . p ' at the same time.

Our fans showed respect, but our seniors? Dunn was very magnanimous in his comments when he was squeezed from our club, but in the pre-game trash-talk and during the match there was a hint from the like of Jones, Vince and Viney that there may be a little more behind the scenes than what we've accepted - i.e Lynden wasn't getting games last year due to not fitting in with our game-style. It wasn't outright hatred, or concocted rivalry, but it certainly wasn't a Joe Daniher welcome-hug. A sense of no great love lost, which surprised me.

Hasn't been able to cement it with finishing touches but I believe Bugg has been slowly nailing down a spot over the last few weeks. Didn't quite stick them all today but his contested marking has improved dramatically up forward - gets to the right spot, gets enough elevation to get clean hands on the ball in contested marking situations, gets the tick from me. But it's a pretty close three-way between him, Harmes and Hannan, and at least someone will have to come out for Hogan - maybe two if we choose to go with Pedo up forward when both Hoges and Gawn are back (which, unlike others, I don't think is a given in Goodie's intentions). Tim Smith the other likely loser in all of this. Seems a long road back into the seniors for him atm.

After the decent standard of umpiring in the Alice match I reluctantly theorised that perhaps female umpires might go about it with a fraction less ego. Same for the special commentary? She's the exact antithesis to the general complaints in the Ling thread. Though I have noticed Daisy's accent gets a bit more boganish on occasion next to the more boorish callers . . .

Because every game pretty much feels the same this season with a few slightly different final-quarter outcomes - may as well merge the the threads into a giant Post-March Discussion. (Rhetorical: is there a match yet where we haven't been down by exactly four-to-five goals at some stage? ).