Nasher

If he plays well, it'll be interesting to see what happens once Jackson is fit. I don't think it's implausible that he holds Jackson out when both are available, in the same way others have held him out.

I'll never be able to bring myself to chant Weed like that at the footy. Reminds me too much of that ugly bastard Wayne Weidemann who played for Adelaide, and later Devonport in the local Tassie league when I was a kid.

I’d never considered the aspect of player salaries inflating over time meaning that, relative to the TPP and average player salaries, the salary of players who sign long term deals actually shrinks as time goes on. If player salaries continue to grow in the way they have historically, it could be like the Lynch situation where it’s not that high a % by the end of the deal. I wonder if the club has structured the contract to be as front-loaded as it afford? If I was Petracca I’d want that - access to more money earlier means I can start investing earlier and can build my wealth quicker. Obviously the club would benefit too with reducing salary cap pressure as the years go on.

21st century radio show.

Nice post, but you're tough to single out Brayshaw - his win/loss record is 50-52 and he's only had two seasons in his career where he's played in more losing games than winning ones, one of which was his first one, the other being the car crash that was 2019. I don't think he qualifies as a player who's a bit used to losing. Really the only ones on our list that were there for the really dark times are Jones, Gawn, Viney and McDonald; three of which are leading the resurgence.

It was really interesting listening to Petracca talk in his interview with Lyon and Watson (available on the MFC website); he talked about how they sit down every season, discuss and map out the things they want to deliver, the way they want to play, the culture they want to set, and so forth. Petracca said the difference between this year and previous years, was that they actually did what they said they wanted to do. One of Paul Roos' closing speeches when he left the club was to tell the players that whatever happened from that point forward was up to them. As a bloke in my late 30s now I can vouch for the fact that for young men, sometimes it really does take a long time for the message that your future is in your own hands to get through. It's easy and natural to fall in to a habit of relying on others to get you there. It can be a lightbulb moment when you suddenly realise: it's up to me. You could have been told that by senior people 1000 times and think you understand, but it's not until it clicks in to place mentally for the individual that you really buy-in. There's no way to force it to get through, you just have to wait for the maturity to take hold. That's what I think has happened to this group of players. There's a lot to be said for maintaining consistent leadership with a constant focus, too. One thing Goodwin has in common with recent dynasty coaches such as Thompson, Hardwick and Clarkson is that he had the blowtorch put on him by the footy media and his own club supporters, right before the side came good. The administration of our club (and those other clubs) remained patient and committed, and are now benefitting from the rewards. Compare this with the administration in 2011 who shat the bed, panicked and set the club back years. We're going how we're going because the club backed Goodwin's leadership, his (and their own) ability to tweak and tinker to get the right personnel in place, including players, coaches and administrators, and they didn't panic and deviate from the master plan when there were bumps in the road. It's a massive team effort, of which Goodwin deserves a good slice of the credit. All the stuff listed in the OP is, with all respect to the OP, complete bollocks. Those are just tweaks on the periphery. Where Goodwin deserves credit is just for doing his bit, which was to continue to lead the implementation of a coaching and development programme that was agreed to and put in motion all the way back to when Roos and Jackson were running the show, and absorbing all the heat in the process. On a side note, I really like listening to Petracca be interviewed. To me, in listening to the subtle changes in the way he speaks now, you can tell the difference between the young man who was eagerly regurgitating what the coaches said to him, to a player who has absorbed and processed the message, and putting it back out there with his understanding of it. He gets it now - it's clear. It's not that he wasn't trying to before, it's just taken that final maturation step for it to click in place. I can't wait to see what the next few years brings for him, because the sky really is the limit now.

What a shock that a person who would pin the arms of a 19 year old while his mate punches the kid in the throat would endorse violence.

Yep, exactly. We were all young and stupid once. I don’t really blame the players at all - I just hope they’ve learned a lesson from it. It’s the 40 and 50-something men acting as if this was an inevitable/honorable outcome that really presses my buttons. We should be showing young men the right way, not reinforcing boorish, dangerous behaviour.

MFCSS has me screaming to find a spot in the team for Weideman so he doesn’t crack the sads playing in the VFL and leave. But logic says he’s just going to have to wait. I think he’s a kid with a good head on his shoulders who understands how it is. His injury came at a most inopportune time, he’s behind two legitimate AFL key forwards. His time WILL come - we’re only 1/3 of the way in to a long season. Surely, he sees that he’s valuable, and he wants to be a part of what we’re up to in the long run. Would he prefer to go to a non-contender for game time that comes more easily, or does he back himself to break in to the team here?

If there are tools harassing your partner, report it to security. If they do nothing about it, they obviously don’t want to look after their patrons, so leave. It’s really, really easy to avoid getting in to fights. Attitudes like picket’s belong in the 1970s. Defending women’s honour - please. I’m sure Bolton’s girlfriend is stoked he’s got a broken wrist, which he depends on for his livelihood, and a broken reputation now, all in the name of her “honour”.

All clubs are in this situation; you can’t cover your best players. I doubt Richmond’s 25th best player is that much better than our 25th best, and he sure as hell doesn’t hold a candle to Dusty or Petracca. All you can do is hope you never have to find out how big the gap is.

The only players who might need resting are the young players who have found themselves playing every game just as Jordon, Pickett, Jackson and Rivers. Even then though it’s only a strong *might*. I would expect a senior player to be able to play the whole season without being rested for games. There are other ways the club can manage workload, such as light weeks on the track, or even a few days break mid-week. I wouldn’t want to see us putting weaker teams on the field.

Love that he’s got the recognition. Great little bit of development by the club I reckon - this is his third season on the list, but he just simmers away in the background until he’s ready, and makes an immediate impact when he forces his way in. Really enjoyed his year so far and looking forward to seeing how far he can take it.

I don't think so. In both games I think Max comprehensively out-tapped his opponent. Plenty of the taps seemed to go where they were directed by Max, they just went to a contested ball which we lost, or to a space that suited the Sydney mids (particularly Parker). Hickey's getting a lot of credit for his game, but I can't see anything to suggest he's actually any good as a ruckman. Maybe it's an unfair comparison against the best one in the game though.

I don't even have an excuse! Just my curious nature and an obsessive need to satisfy my curiosity once I latch on to it. I would have dwelled on it all day if I didn't have a look.

The hard part about this is that your centre-square setup is at least in part determined by what your opponent does. For example at one point we lined up with Petracca at 2 o'clock, Jordon at 6 o'clock and Oliver at 9 o'clock, which was a unique setup that I only saw once. Each player was manned up by the opposing player. So who decides who's going to stand where - is it the Melbourne players, or the Sydney players? Neither midfield combination seemed prepared to say "you do you your thing and we'll do ours, let's see who wins"; nor did that happen in any other of the games I watched.

Let's acknowledge that we're supporters and that we don't need to concentrate on anything, and are free to dream and speculate as much as we like, because nothing we say or do affects the fortunes of the team.

I love the way Lever behaves in the face of frustration - you could tell that decision tested him to the max. A bounce on the spot and a vigorous grimace, watch the replay, then back on with it. Never argues with the umpire - recognises that it's a completely fruitless practice and a waste of energy. I hated that free kick, but was over it by the time an identical one was paid at the other end for Pickett a bit later. At least they were consistent.

Having had a look at a game where we sucked in the centre, I decided to have a look at a game where we were competitive in the centre clearances and see what looked different. I picked the Geelong game - it was a game where all our mids had very high clearance numbers. One thing that was obviously different was how far away the midfielders were from the circle, at every bounce. There was only ever one, or sometimes none in close. Whenever Max tapped, it was always to the space in which our midfielder would fill. The mids always knew exactly where the tap was going to go, so the right player was charging in at pace, the other two were preparing to either spread or defend, depending on which way that contest went. It was random who the nominal receiver was, but Oliver and Viney in particular got themselves in to the right spot, in space, to receive the tap heaps of times. I barely saw this happen against Sydney. I reject the assertion that Max's taps are too predictable. When we set up well, one of the three mids will be anointed to receive the tap. It could be any of the three. Or the plan could be to punch it to space. How could the opposing midfield possibly know in advance? They have a one in four chance of guessing correctly. In the Sydney game our mids lined up very close to the circle at nearly every bounce. I'm now convinced Sydney forced that. Whenever Max tapped, it was always to a pair in a flat footed contest, or to space, but there was no player there to run on other than bloody Parker, who had a field day. I watched thinking it might be the Viney factor. Having now watched two games worth of centre bounces, I don't think Viney is particularly any better than Oliver or even Harmes for winning contested ball in this scenario. His point of difference is that he tackles like a warrior. If his opponent gets a clearance, you can be sure that he has earned it at maximum price. We're definitely better for having him in there, but we've still got enough inside firepower that we should be able to get by without him without getting smashed in there like we did on Saturday.

Try following the context of the conversation.

This thread was started in 2015.

Copy cat! Seems we had the same idea (see page 3). Nice work though mate. Really interesting read, especially having been through the exercise myself, to see where we might have drawn different conclusions, but there wasn’t much difference. I did mine in the morning. In the afternoon I watched bits of the Carlton and Bulldogs game, and the Brisbane and Freo game, and found myself wishing the players would hurry up and kick a goal so I could observe how they set up at the bounce. One thing I noticed the Blues/Dogs mids do that I never saw in our game, was for both sides to have two wing side mids and a defensive side one, ie both clubs having one man each unopposed, going head to head. We were man-on-man at EVERY ball-up - not sure if it was us who forced that or Sydney. It will be easy to tell with watching more centre bounces. I’d never analysed a clearance in my life before, but I don’t reckon I’ll ever stop doing it with every one now.

You might be right, but I’ve held my understanding for a lot of years, based on Sam Newman giving a demonstration on it of The Footy Show in the early years of it. His example was almost exactly the one you said - you could run back and forth over the same 5 metre patch of turf and never need a bounce. In hindsight it’s probably a rich assumption to assume Sam knew what he was talking about, but I was only young at the time ? Probably a moot point as I still think Harmes was clear in both cases. He definitely didn’t run 40 like someone asserted

I watch most games on TV and would appreciate not being lumped in with numpties with obvious biases.

I'm with you. Here's where he collected the ball to where he disposed of it. The fact that he took an arc to get there is irrelevant - so long as he is never more than 15 metres from where he started. To put it in perspective, if he'd kicked it to Jackson, who is the same distance away as collection point, absolutely no doubt it would have been called PLAY ON, NOT 15, so getting called too far is ridiculous.