Fat Tony

I think an internal review made sense for us. We did not have any viable option to change senior coach as Goodwin had 2 years left and sacking him would have left us no money in the soft cap to hire a new coach. And it would have reflected poorly on the Board to sack Goodwin after extending his contract. You don't have an external review if you already know the what answer needs to be. Teague only has one year left, so they probably can change if they find a better option. If I was Carlton, I would seriously consider making a change. The Blues list is pretty good and their defensive system is very poor.

Mostly luck I reckon. Each club spends $6m on getting 45 players up and running and the intel is shared across the league as staff come and go.

According to the report, we will have no injuries other than the 3 ACL injuries after the bye.

The finals system now is the same as in 2000. We finished 3rd that year and won the qualifying final.

I think you are correct to say that Oliver has been a bit more willing to hold his position in the contest this year and wait for other players to get him the ball. The other players are also backing him in when it is his turn to go and so he isn't competing against our own side as much. Still, I this is only a part of his improvement. I think the clarity of our game plan has really helped Oliver this year and while his clanger and turnover stats are similar to his career, it doesn't feel like he hast had as many bad turnovers that have cost us goals. In our "slow" play around the Brayshaw boundary, the rigidity of the game plan means he is being asked to kick long to tall targets on the boundary unless there is something obvious on. In previous years, we were a bit more central in our ball movement and he would win more ball in "slow" play in the corridor, where he would look to go shorter with his kicks to a free man. This meant that some of his poor kicking was costly as we were ill prepared for a turnover. This really comes through in the distance gained statistic, where he is averaging 426m this year versus 299m over his career. Some of this is coming from run, but I think most is actually mostly from having more long kicks to contests in the back half. We are also playing a taller side this year which means that he always has a long option. In our "fast" play, when we are counter attacking, he is able to use his pace and power and he usually makes good decisions.

I just ran a little analysis on the squiggle site to see how the side stacks up against our previous sides. According to this analysis, this is the best side we have had. Year Attack Defence Average 1994 61.7 59.5 60.6 1998 60.1 59.5 59.8 2000 67.4 53.9 60.7 2004 (R18) 62.6 60.3 61.5 2018 62.9 61.8 62.4 2021 (R12) 57.2 69.2 63.2

I actually think he best patch I have seen us play was in 2018 when we won 20 odd quarters in a row. Lever and Hogan getting injured might have cost us at top 4 finish and a real chance to win it that year. Our performance against the Cats in the finals was good enough to beat anyone and we needed the week off and home ground advantage to win the flag. This year we have been playing a much more defensive game plan which is focused on minimising our turnovers and playing the boundary so that if we do turn it over we are set with defensive cover. We have only kicked 5 goals in a quarter 5 times this season, so I actually think we have another gear to get to offensively. We also can do better in the centre bounces given we should be the best in the comp with Gawn, Oliver, Petracca and Viney.

Minimal changes for me. Langdon obviously comes in. Salem would benefit from 2 weeks rest. This might be a good opportunity to get his body right for the rest of the year. He is only just going at the moment. Melksham, Sparrow and Weideman would be closest to the fringe. Weideman was disappointing against the Lions but Harris-Andrews is an excellent defender. He needs to take his chances. I still want us to persevere.

Great post. This is certainly correct in the stoppages but we need to do much better in the centre clearances. When we get territory from centre bounce we either get a score and/or it gives us the chance to set up our defensive grid. I think our mids got first hands on the ball in the centre bounce a lot last night after the ruck contest but then our mids got hustled out of the clearance. I love the tactic of Max grabbing the ball because it is almost fail proof. Otherwise I think we would be better off generally with Max hitting forwards in the centre bounce and getting the surge game going. On another point, our defensive setups at D50 boundary throw ins was a bit wanting and they got goals from sharking our hits twice. Jackson also needs to think about how he attacks these contests, as his lack of strength leaves him open to his opposite number taking the ball.

Strangle the life out of them Demons!

Good fit for us on field. We could do with a stronger full forward.

It is ridiculous that they aren’t allowing AFL players who are tested regularly to play at Alice this week. And at the same time they are asking for a new team. All take, no give.

Looks like Jeremy Cameron. Hopefully he plays like him.

NT want their own AFL team but won’t let us play this Friday. What a joke!

I know binman is happy to see us lose the clearance numbers so long as we are more effective in terms of both stopping the opposition scores and scoring ourselves. I think this is generally the right approach for stoppage clearances. However, I would be more determined to take territory (and not allow the +1) early in the game when the heat is on. For centre clearances, I think we need to put a greater emphasis taking territory and be less worried about about maintaining possession for the perfect kick. We were really good at this on the weekend. I also like the tactic of Gawn trying to take the ball out of the ruck in the centre and doing a quick kick.

Switching the bye to next week makes the most sense on the chance that things settle down and it can be held in Melbourne.

Tassie have really done nothing to help during this period. I don't reckon it has really helped their case for a new team.

I would bring Jones into the side for Langdon this week given the Giants Stadium is small ground. He is flexible and can play midfield, wing or half forward. Otherwise no other changes. Replacing the Langdon wing will be a bit of a group effort. Brayshaw, Harmes, Jordon and Jones will each have roles to play on the wing. I would be reluctant to change the back 7 by shifting Hunt or Rivers. Weideman obviously needs to improve, but I am a believer.

I don't think the money will come into it if we think the player is worth going for.

I assume there is no compensation if the player is coming out of the U19 competition?

Did his father play for us?

I am a bit surprised that Bedford has not trialled playing wing at all given his speed and endurance mix and our needs.

This is definitely how Goodwin has tended to do things. But he did bring in Baker to play wing against the Kangaroos when the out was Viney. Also, I would argue that Langdon is our most difficult player to replace. Not in terms of ability, but we just don't have another player of his type, with running ability and skill. (If we did, they would be playing on the other wing.)

One too many spliffs indeed! ?

What incident?