wisedog

That's very fair. Goodwin is not an autocrat and certainly appears open to advice and counsel from other parties. So yes, we should absolutely look at the support around him.

The mid-season break has come at the best possible time. It at least gives us an opportunity to arrest whatever rot has set in here. We will then hopefully work back into some kind of form against a lowly opponent. We are truly at the crossroads here and I look forward to seeing who steps up to respond. The concern for me is that this faltering gameplan demonstrates that Goodwin is simply a poor strategist. He is not a dynamic thinker and doesn't appear able to adapt to changing trends or recognise our vulnerabilities - he seems to prefer a 'set and forget' model of success. We've seen large, clumsy, broad strokes to arrest our downfall; such as the recruitment of Grundy, or this latest gameplan, but then then there is the recruitment of middling, ageing performers whose presence give us no indication of how the list will be revitalised or how we will be playing differently. They appear to have been recruited simply as depth. Goodwin deserves enormous credit and gratitude for the list, culture, and strategy which led to 2021. But at this point in time, I have grave doubts over his ability to resurrect the 'era'. We'll see.

A bit deflated. Feels like there are few options to improve the team - almost as if we're 3 or 4 players short. Look forward to seeing who we can add in the mid season draft. I was hugely optimistic about Petty forward last season. But, unfortunately, it just hasn't worked so far. I can't help but feel he was rushed into the team before he was ready and has lost some confidence - this is also evident in his kicking for goal: 2 goals, 8 behinds! It may have been lost in the discussion over his lack of goals, but he actually had 13 hitouts last week and 5 tackles. The most Van Rooyen has had this year is 7. Petty also looked far more tenacious in the centre, and I do sense he is desperate to contribute. I would be happy to keep Petty forward and pinch hit for Gawn and allow Van Rooyen to remain forward permanently. It's possible that if Petty feels he just needs to pop up and kick a few goals here and there, rather than being the 'main man', he may play a bit more naturally. Tomlinson plays to cover Lever. INS: Tomlinson, Langdon, Van Rooyen OUT: Lever, Billings, Brown

I am disappointed we lost, but I'm also relieved at the way we played out the game. On multiple occasions we toiled and toiled for a goal, and Carlton responded almost immediately - to keep coming, against a very good side, in poor conditions was really significant. If Carlton ran out to a 50+ point win, the media narrative would have been relentless. But we were able to flip the script and probably also do a bit of damage to Carlton. Also, Petracca is probably the most damaging forward on our list (despite his accuracy issues). I remember Garry Lyon saying last year he was the best mark. If only we had two of him.

Misguided endeavour with Grundy and bad luck with injuries to Brown, McDonald, and Smith. I wonder if we’ve done enough to search the state leagues? Someone to do what Podsiadly did for Geelong in their era of success. I think we look the most balanced and potent with Petty and JVR forward. Seems to bring Chandler more into the game too. Incredibly unfortunate to lose Petty and Melksham late last year. Smith was commendable in the finals and so it’s a great shame that’s he’s probably played his last game for us.

But it was also obvious that Gawn and Jackson were never a ruck/forward powerhouse. I think they kicked only 6 goals collectively in the latter half of 2022. I just don’t understand why we thought Grundy could be an improvement on that or why we were hellbent on replicating that dynamic. As we all know, we were actually crying out for a competent key forward. But they don’t grow on trees, and who knows, if we had got one, we may not have had the opportunity to see what Petty was capable of.

And if 400 milliseconds is enough to create plausible deniability, then how many other suspensions fall over?

What is this evidence from the biomechanist? The game is played in milliseconds. Players turn opponents in tackles, dodge opponents when their head is down. They’ve even learnt to drop their shoulders when anticipating contact. I’m sure lots of elbows have been raised within 400 milliseconds as well. But no, the players are seemingly not conscious of their decision making?

Probably the last comment I make because I’ve spent too long lurking in this thread expending emotional energy. I just don’t understand why THIS is the flashpoint that emboldened so many past players to speak out… as if the soul of the game is at stake. Unlike other decisions and rule changes that have forced players to adapt their games - the decision to suspend Maynard will have virtually no affect on how the game should be played. To me, it is so clearly an act of thuggery, that reading the weight of opinions to the contrary has been sickening. It all reeks of a boys club mentality between the 2000s era past players in the media and obsequious journos. So far the only past player I’ve heard in support of a suspension is Leigh Matthews. Although his own career was at times marred by accusation of thuggery he’s old enough and strong enough to not be affected by the likes of Kornes and Lloydo, Barrett and their Justice for Bruzz crusade.

I wasn’t sharing it, I was quoting a poster, but I don’t understand your point. I went back and watched it after your reply, and Kozzie is approaching on his exact line? That is to say, he had much the same opportunity to inflict damage on Hoskin-Elliot as Maynard did on Brayshaw. Either way, it’s far more helpful than those comparisons posted by journalists and past players attempting to downplay the significance of Maynard’s hit.

I think that sums it up. If this was an innocent “footy act”, we would be seeing it a dozen times a game and multiple players concussed every week. The vision of Kozzie show how players attempting to smother normally approach the kicker - that is to say - how players respond when they haven’t already decided to hit the kicker as hard as they can.

I don't know how the AFL can allow the precedent to stand. It essentially demonstrates a way to legally injure an opposition player without consequence, and this could be weaponised by every thug in the game. If the AFL are consistent and serious about protecting the head, then Maynard must go. Unlike rule changes that have fundamentally altered the way players attack the ball and tackle, the changes that will come about as a result of a suspension here are negligible. Simply, if you are going to collide with a player who has no ability to protect himself, perhaps don't try to hit them as hard as you possibly can? Give that a go next time.

In my mind he absolutely deserves to be suspended, and for weeks - and if he isn’t, the next player who does this will be. If he isn’t suspended, it becomes entirely plausible that any player could launch themselves at the kicker, make a feeble attempt to smother, and then lay them out. No case to answer. The AFL cannot allow that precedent. For what it’s worth, I feel the natural movement to protect yourself and the other player would be to press off them with your arms. If what Maynard did was merely a footy act we would see players getting knocked out cold this way every other game.

Incredibly frustrating to enter another final series with a forward line in shambles. One of Smith or McDonald need to go and Petracca needs to spend some serious minutes in the forward line. I know he will be missed in the midfield but I feel it’s the only card we have left to play.

Max Michalanney. Strangely, McVee didn't actually show up on their weekly top 8 rookie rankings until Round 17. I dare say they realised the oversight and went back through his performances over the entire season. Shows just how much he flew under the radar in wider footy circles.