pitmaster

Folks here have done a pretty good job of covering the night so I'll only add a couple of clarifications. Pert said the proposed social club and other facilities were wanted "within walking distance of the MCG", which probably kills the Bartlett oval speciation. His speech is online so no need to go into anything else here except he stressed the Alice Springs game would only come home when it made financial sense. We're there for at least the next four years. The clown who ripped into Oscar identified himself only as "Ian" and said he went to the football with his brother. Goodie in response pointed out that Oscar had double hip surgery off season, missed four months of training and was unable to build his strength to the level he needed to do the job being asked of him. He said Oscar would not have been satisfied with his year. Goodwin finished with: "I have unwavering faith in Oscar McDonald becoming the player we want him to be." The question why keep Oscar and get rid of Frost had already been answered, sort of, when Goodwin talked about players needing to have cohesion and the ability to know what their team mates were going to do before they did it. That rules out Frostball, I reckon. The most telling part of the presentation was Mahoney's chart on the time midfielders spent in pre-season. Apart from Gawn none of the regulars with more than 48% prep time. I also liked Goodwin's response to the Plan B question which might raise a few eyebrows here: "There are not too many clubs with a Plan B: you get Plan A right you are a successful club" (Not an absolutely direct quote. I missed a few words there but that's the gist.)

I'll be there and will report but not before Wednesday.

A Night At The Opera sounds about right. Stateroom scene.

mmmm...actually appears human

Lockhart?

Cornes overstates his case. He makes it sound like May and Lever have finished their careers. Those deals can't be deemed fails for some time yet. But that's how you make a career in the footy media if you're not a professional, with selective reasoning and cherry picked facts.

Three out of state games in the first five weeks...and bloody Geelong and damn Hobart again! Giants and Tigers on short turnarounds in the first six weeks. Set up to struggle. Hopefully Burgess has us fit and ready to fire - we're gonna need be ready.

Correct, as in "Woolloongabba".

Our recent record over there is good. Their old geezers will be that much older...ripe for picking. Could be a huge win. At the least I'd expect a massive effort pushing them to the line.

I am a bit surprised that in the trade wash-up there is much talk about our lack of small forwards and no talk of Lockhart as a possible answer. He has dash and in his first year found the goal consistently if not spectacularly with 9 goals in 12 games in a team with a non-functioning forward line. He could not have had a more demanding debut year than 2019 with us yet showed promise. He's early 20s so close to mature and will only improve with a serious pre-season.

Good points. The centre bounce ruck rule changed, robbing White of the chance to use his leap. He should have been shifted to the forward line where his leap would have been a weapon and we should have gone to a beanpole first ruck.

Not taking it well, then? Never mind. I love dogs and I'll file that under 'Compliments (Unintended)'.

Hee Hee. Pitdog I like it. Yes, I have read the thread and offer my gratitude to Bushie and the Pennant for pulling you up (a little more politely than me). Yeah, I'd pull you up on that in person too, no real guts required. The "whaaaat?" I opened with was a genuine reaction because I remember going to that game fearful that, like so many milestone games, we'd stuff it up, fail to honour his memory. I walked away very proud of the way our boys stood up. (Only after writing the first half of my post did I visit the records to check the detail.) My further comment goes to the fact that, to put it politely SK, you are a glass half empty kind of bloke. That's putting it kindly. If I wasn't being polite I'd say you are a fountain of negativity. Think about the mistake you made, or that your memory made. Maybe that glass half empty thing is invading memory too. Try to be open to some positivity because if footy does not give us hope it gives us nothing.

Whaaaaat? What game was that? I remember the Troy Broadbridge Memorial Game as a triumph over Essendon and I have checked the stats and memory serves me right: 15.13 103 to 8.9 57: Melbourne by almost eight goals. You're a serial whinger SK and I am glad to have caught you out. Now I'll read the rest of the thread to see who else did not buy in.

Thanks. That's very helpful. I think I've got it.

Can someone explain the umpiring blunder in the NRL GF to someone (me) who does not know the rules. Six again? And how it led to the game deciding try...

At 178cm you might be on to something. Prefer a little more height thanks.

Close. Former Fairfax shareholder.

Sorry, not really so. Fairfax shares no longer exist. Fairfax shareholders were reimbursed with something like one Nine share for three and a half Fairfax. Nine is running the show, as anyone who works there can attest.

Catch up. Nine bought them months ago. As for Hipwood, tease is almost all he has ever done, bar 10 minutes against us this year.

OK I can let some stuff pass by without comment...like the 'had ofs' instead of 'had haves' and 'loosing' for 'losing' but this is in a thread title. It should be 'Who BEARS the most blame?' Bear in this case is not an animal but a verb meaning 'to carry' or 'support'. 'Bare' makes no sense in this context unless the originator reckons whoever is most responsible should bare their [censored], but even then I don't think it works. As to the answer, the midfield and the forwards, for failing to connect and failing to convert inside 50s to genuine scoring opportunities, with a further burden of responsibility for whoever decided we did not need a goal kicking/kicking coach.

Take another look.

An interception with a gut run out of defence and no one able to run him down does not count as a spectacle in your world? OK. But it does for me. The problem with Frost is what happens next. And Jeremy? Brilliant mark followed by turnover. There. I've spelled it out for you.

This is looking increasingly like Jeremy Howe Mark II. An occasionally spectacular player with flawed skills has a strongish year, an ambitious manager and a hankering for a bigger payday. In Howe's case his manager basically talked him out of the club and the kid fell for the fairytale he could go play forward at Pie Park. Frosty also seems in thrall to his manager. He has not set any guidelines for his manager and seems to believe his own pr. If he stays I'll be ok with it. If he goes, I reckon it's because the club has a clear view of his relative worth, and I'll be ok with it, but a bit sorry for what is says about the game.

Go ahead and bag Goodwin all you like but to say he had no Plan B is total horse sh*t. If you took any notice this year - and you might be forgiven for ceasing to pay attention - you'd have seen that we changed our game style completely mid-season.The manic running, play on at all cost through the corridor (for which we did not have the skills to execute) was abandoned for a slower, more deliberative controlled play. If that is not a Plan B, what is?