Fat Tony

I like Breust as a target and also think we should be going for players who are deadly in front of goal. But you are being a bit harsh on your list. Fritsch has kicked 28.13 this year. He was ordinary last year but he has been excellent this year. Weideman kicked 19.8 last year and he has had the yips this year. He has kicked 49.29 for his career. Pickett and Jackson are second year players and don't appear to have fundamental techincal flaws. We should be confident that they will be at least average in front of goal. Gawn will always be 50/50.

I know there is a push for Ben Brown to come in, but I think the best solution to bolster our forward line is to play Petracca as a forward 65/35. I think he should continue to attend centre bounces and drift forward like Martin and Stringer. He is the best forward out of the midfield group and seems to have fixed his goal kicking woes. While this will weaken our midfield to some extent, I feel we have good cover in the guts with Oliver, Harmes, Viney, Jordon and Sparrow strong enough to win clearances.

We are 42% from the set shot and 46% from general play. We are slightly below the expected score given the difficulty of our shots. https://www.statsinsider.com.au/afl/shot-charting

My post was just that he might pull up sore given he has not played for so long. I would not be surprised if he misses. You can only do so much work to prepare for a game of AFL football and he looked to be very tired at the end of the game on Saturday.

Usually we are on the same page 55 but not this time. Fritsch is very frustrating but is also our most productive forward. Brown's biggest hurdle is that Max is spending around 30% of the game forward at the moment and we can't ever have both Gawn and Brown in the same forward line. I am also not sure we need another big marking target. Our game plan is very structured for slow ball movement situations and we look to "narrow" the ground by going along the boundary. Because TMac and Jackson are so mobile, they are generally able to cover enough territory to get to the next contest in time if we win the first one. (Watch how often they are in one contest and we take a mark or get a free and then they are the long target the next time.) On the counter attack, Fritsch's mobility is much more valuable than Brown's marking. Brown/Weideman would get more opportunities if we were willing to use the fat side of the ground, but this is taboo and our strategy would need to change to allow this. The reason we are so cautious is that we are concerned about getting opened up on the counter attack. The defensive running of the midfield and wingers, May and Lever and the cautious way we are moving the ball is why our defence is so strong.

Viney played his first game for 9 weeks. If he is right to go, he is right to go. But I would be surprised if he isn't sore. My feeling is that we will need to nurse him through this year and particularly the next few weeks. It is really about getting him in tip top shape for September.

Obviously there won't be an issue with crowd numbers assuming no more outbreaks. Does anyone have information about sale times? MCC and other members?

No change for me with Petracca spending more time forward after the centre bounces. Viney could potentially need a week off and could be the sub with Jones coming into the 22.

My take: Jones was exceptional. Definitely the closest small to the AFL 22. Ben Brown was good but I am still not convinced he would add to the side. Jackson and TMac are so much more mobile. Weideman is badly out of form and had lost confidence in his goal kicking. Bowey would be playing AFL at most clubs. Classy and quick. Bailey Laurie will need to get a lot fitter to be an AFL player. Looked a bit overweight and lacked pace.

Viney had 34 pressure acts vs Essendon. Only Jordon vs Carlton (37) has had more all year.

Why not stay in contention forever like the Cats?

Our centre clearances have been awful really. If we can get them right we will be very difficult to beat because we are so tough to go end to end on. I think our strategy needs to be more surging forward and we over possess it too much. And even when we do get it out of the middle with a clean break, we are not good enough at hitting up a leading forward inside 50.

I don't know where you are getting this information from. There were no Pfizer doses ordered until November last year, after the positive vaccine trial results. See the governments own website on this: https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/covid-19-vaccine-government-response/australias-vaccine-agreements Pfizer Doses for Australia In November 2020, the Australian Government announced an agreement to secure 10 million doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. In February 2021, Australia purchased an extra 10 million doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. These extra doses means Australia will now receive 20 million Pfizer doses in 2021. . In April 2021, the Australian Government announced purchase of a further 20 million doses of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines. It is all well and good to say hindsight is a wonderful thing. But there were many experts saying that we should not be putting all our eggs in one basket and we should have been doing multiple deals. The decision on Pfizer was made due to a mid-level bureaucrat haggling over the cost with Pfizer, albeit noting that the mRNA technology was unproven at that stage.

When will the tickets go on sale? For MCC?

There was no criticism at the time because it was not told to the Australian public. The decision not to order the Pfizer vaccine on 10 July 2020 was not known until 15 April 2021 when it was revealed by the ABC's Dr Norman Swan. The decision not to order the Pfizer vaccine (40m x $19 = $760m) will go down as one of the greatest government blunders ever.

We definitely could go smaller in the forward line if Weideman goes out. But we should go more like for like IMO i.e. more of a forward like Melksham or Chandler. My thinking is that we have been playing with fewer numbers around the ball at stoppages this year, so we don't need as many midfielders. If the opposition push up a forward at the the stoppages, we are happy to leave Salem or Lever as loose defenders, so even if we lose the clearances we have structure behind the ball to win it back. If we are even numbered at the stoppages, we rely on Gawn, Oliver, Petracca, Viney, Harmes and Jordon to dominate the clearances. I think Sparrow is a midfielder only at this stage. He lacks forward craft and so he is the most obvious out for Viney.

While I really feel for the couples who have their weddings postponed, on the flip side, for many it could be viewed as a stay of execution.

https://twitter.com/cstanaway/status/1407122975128621059?s=20 Clint Stanaway indicating crowd capacity could be as high as 50%.

I still favour Weideman over Ben Brown but potentially neither are in our best side. That said, Weideman has been disappointing in the last three weeks. If he is going to get such few chances, he needs to convert in front of goal at 70%+. To be fair though, the games have been on smaller grounds meaning he has not had many one-on-one chances and he has had strong direct opponents the last two weeks in Harris-Andrews and Moore. I am just not convinced Ben Brown fits alongside our resting ruck. With Jackson in the side and Gawn's endurance, I think Gawn needs to be able to play as a forward for 20-30% of the game. (There are times we benefit from Jackson's energy around the ball.) And our pressure is non-existent with Brown and Gawn in the forward line. Viney comes in for Sparrow for mine. Sparrow was excellent against the Lions but just gets caught holding the ball too often. Melksham for Weideman would be the other change worth considering but only if we want to make a structural change. That said, Weideman would be expected to perform better on the MCG against a lesser defender.

The government overreach on outdoor activities has been ridiculous.

Viney only slowed because the ball had bounced into Lynch's hands. For Mackay, the ball was in dispute and he had every right to attack it. Not a big difference at all in my view.

I see a lot of the Jack Viney incident in the Mackay. Both players going for a ground ball and collision being inevitable due to the bounce of the ball and the proximity of the two players going for it. You can't have a 360 degree sport where possession is able to be contested and then completely avoid these types of incidents. This could have even happened in basketball, which is a "non-contact" sport with a round ball. On Mackay's speed being too fast, this is ridiculous. There is no rule about running too fast. And Mackay was not to know how the ball would bounce. It was just unlucky it landed in the middle of the two players after bouncing twice. Had the ball landed on the end, it could have landed straight in Mackay's hands. A suspension would change nothing in the way players attack the ball and would be a gross misjustice. Players like Selwood, Oliver and Judd are lauded for the speed in which they attack the ground ball. They are not going to stop and there will inevitably be another incident. There is no point sending a message if only a few players will hear it and even if they do, they will be confused as to what they should do. While I don't think you can ever completely reduce collisions in the game, the only way I can really see that they could be reduced is if they reduce the number of players on the field. The other thing to note is that by banning the bump, it increases the potential for head on head clashes.

We have someone’s second round pick I think.

On the Road to the Draft podcast, Cal Twomey said he felt Mac Andrew was pretty likely to get bid on inside the top 20.

Older players at clubs outside the premiership window should be targets. Players like Sidebottom, Breust and Seedsman would give us some outside class and complement our strengths.