jnrmac

Well It's not ideal but they bounced the ball at the top of the goal square rather than 9m out from the middle of the goal and point post where the disputed mark/touch took place. That would have been marginally better but the whole thing is ridiculous and gave the Dogs an advantage that they didn't deserve.

18.11 DELIBERATE RUSHED BEHINDS 18.11.1 Spirit and Intention Players shall be encouraged to keep the football in play. 18.11.2 Free Kicks - Deliberate Rushed Behinds A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player from the Defending Team who intentionally Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Attacking Team’s Goal Line or Behind Line or onto one of the Attacking Team’s Goal Posts, and the Player: (a) is greater than nine metres from the Goal Line or Behind Line; (b) is not under immediate physical pressure; (c) has had time and space to dispose of the football; or (d) from a Ruck contest, hits the football over the Goal Line or Behind Line on the full. ok, Good get. 8.2.4 Goal Umpire (c) Unless otherwise determined by a Controlling Body, if a goal Umpire is unsure whether a Goal, Behind or no score shall be recorded, the goal Umpire may consult with the field and boundary Umpires to determine the outcome. If a decision cannot be determined following consultation, the goal Umpire shall give the lesser outcome. . If a decision cannot be determined following consultation, the goal Umpire shall give the lesser outcome. If the outcome is no score and the football remained in play, the field Umpire shall throw the football up at the centre of the Kick-Off Line. Wow. That is cooked. And needs changing right away. At worst you would say 9m out from where the disputed ball was in play NOT the top of the goal square

You are allowed to punch the ball through if its within 9m of the goals and you are 'under pressure' - the under pressure bit was brought in to stop Clarkson's Hawks walking the ball through the goals to concede a point

Yep me too. I have work to do!

I would be making a very loud complaint to the Umpiring department about that one. We are very lucky it didn't cost a goal. The umpires are now too scared to call obvious decisions like Lever's touched ball. Why did the Dogs get such a big advantage. As it was JUH got the ball and had a shot on goal which was smothered. And the number of goal reviews generally is now insane. As someone else mentioned maybe its an advertising thing. But its a terrible look for the game

OK I get your point I just don't agree that the defence recruitment of May and Lever was a "tactical innovation". He's done other tactical innovations like the deployment of our wings but fixing our leaky defence wasn't 'tactical' as such. It was an obvious necessity. And it was innovated by others. But each to their own.

Then they bounced it at the top of the square!!! Madness

I've met Oscar he's a lovely bloke Speaking of shoehorning his way into a conversation.....

The revisionism is that you were trying to make it sound like Goodwin reinvented the game and was prepared to trade a bona fide star Hogan for May and Lever. Blind Freddy could see we needed two rock solid defenders as defence wins flags. OMac and Frost were the worst in the league at stopping goals so it was hardly a revelation. As for Hogan, well its fair to say he was unreliable, troubled and not yet a bona fide star . I'll leave it that.

I said after the Sydney game that we will wither in the vine if we continue to ignore the short hit up kicks and bomb it in long to the fwd line. Footy Classified showed vision of doing this on multiple occasions and was scathing of us. Pleased to see this week the coaching staff turned that around completely. 129 uncontested marks against the Dogs v 60 against Sydney. Allowed us to control the game and left the dogs chasing tail on a hot afternoon. Lots of players were 'rewarded' with goals and goal assists. Its great for team camaraderie and confidence. It doesn't have to be that many every week but its something we practiced in the pre-season and it paid off. Go Dees.

Thy are appealing that? He upended MacGrath and kicked him. Wow.

Tommo and TMac were in the top 3 with Nibbler. They are similar in aerobic capacity with Tommo just shading him

He absolutely looks a player

He has in the past. He dropped Tomlinson after a great game and a win.

Nice bit of revisionism here. In 2018 we had Frost and your love child OMac. We were the number 1 team for beings scored against when the ball went inside 50. Blind Freddie knew we could never compete for a long period with those two as our key pillars. As for Hogan, there are a multitude of reasons the club got rid of him, none of which can be discussed on here. Its fair to say that its taken until last year for him to grow up and become the payer we all knew he was capable of being

I have always been a big fan of early momentum. Given the top 8 is typically settled after round 8 its critical to get off to a good start

Didn't we give 2 first round picks for lever and also ended up with Pick 35 - which funnily enough we recruited Petty?

.

.

In the final against Carlton our leaders failed. Its as simple as that. Lever with the ball at CHB and 90 secs on the clock. You should not lose games like that because you turn the ball over.

You must have watched a different game to me. Sydney generated a lot of their fwd play by switching from the back half. We seemed mostly unable to stop it. We on the other hand only tried it a few times but lack of player movement up the ground and slow movement from the kicker allowed the Swans to cover us. We continually eschewed short hit up kicks (as per the vision on Footy Classified last night) which is vital to 'fast' ball movement. We are obsessed with getting jamming the ball into the fwd 50 any way we can. So much so that players barely make a lead towards the kicker. If you do it 3 or 4 times and get ignored then you stop doing it. Its not working for us and shows little has changed since the finals. I'll reserve judgement until we see more after the Dogs game at the G but if things don't change it is a bad sign for us in 2024

Good vision last night on footy classified showing how the Dees continuously ignore short hit up leads in good positions to bomb it long to contests Viney particularly guilty happens so regularly it has to be instructions All on the coach

George What I saw in Sydney was the few times we tried to switch we then stopped thus allowing Sydney to move across to cover us. If you switch it has to be done swiftly with the next two or three in the chain. At worst hopefully you get a stoppage on the wing or HFwd line. At best you can cut back into the middle to enter the F50. We broke down because we were slow in moving it and/or honouring the lead up the ground. Sydney on the other hand kept the ball moving once they switched. Players like Jordon for us were masters at holding up the chain. He nearly always stopped and propped So much so that it must be to instruction. 'Don't kick to a one on one, wait till the cavalry arrive' I think that is part of Simon's defence first mantra but its worn thin and is now too predictable.

Our style of play is all about predictability to our team. Unfortunately its predictable to everyone else. We kick to Max. If he doesn't mark it we often get a stoppage outside of our D50. Stubborn Simon obviously feels this is the best way of minimising turnovers in a dangerous spot and plays to defence first. Whilst this has been successful its also easy to set up against. Geelong started double teaming Max with Blicavs leaping from behind to smash the ball fwd - and kneeing Max in the back in the process, The Swans did a similar thing. In the process Max is getting killed every time we kick it in. Our players don't bother running to space because they know it will rarely be kicked to them. They all crowd the down the line kick as it goes there 90% of the time. And our forwards move up the ground to the defensive side of the stoppage to give us more numbers. But when we get the ball and move it forward there is often no-one home in our fwd line. It wasn't until the 3rd qtr against Sydney that our fwds manned up the Sydney defenders and the game opened up. This is Simon's strategy of keeping it a tight contest until the second half Its not working any more and Simon has no other strategy.

When Sydney switched they moved it with speed and purpose. When we switched (rarely) we stopped and propped, giving time for Sydney to cover. Also, nearly every time we go to Max. Its so predictable and sooooo frustrating. (He will cop a battering this year and we are playing with the injury fire every game.) So much so that our players don't even bother to run to space. The number of times that we had a loose man for short hit up that was totally ignored was also frustrating. When leads are ignored players stop doing it. Hence we look stagnant with no player movement. Like last year totally opposite to how we played in pre-season. It's like ***** groundhog day with this team