Adam The God

I've been on record since just about Joel's first game as been one of his detractors. He has great athleticism, we all know that and poor IQ etc, but we may need someone to play foil for Weideman at the expense of Tom, who can barely run right now. Would we prefer Smith or Brown? Brown can get out the back for a cheapie, but can he play second ruck? It's dangerous to mix the midfield set up too much, given the lack of connectivity and understanding between Preuss and the on ballers yesterday, but perhaps that was a misnomer? I think we're going to be forced to make a move on McDonald sooner or later though.

Hang on a second. Are you really suggesting that Indigenous footballers were treated as royalty? You've got to be kidding.

Perhaps, the club can use his downtime to extend his contract, ala Pickett?

Fair enough. Let's wait and see what happens.

I agree, but this was also clearly a societal and competition-wide thing. It's very hard not to be cynical isn't it? It feels a very corporate, brand-saving sort of move to me. But at least they've done it and shows why it's important this story was written. I hope Robert gets some solace from it and I hope it causes those to reflect in football circles and the wider community. I got the sense this article is the most likely to create change. Given it's not in a tabloid, I'm sure there would have been an element of consultation in the editorial, something you couldn't necessarily control in book form or in the Murdoch and Costello press.

Well said, mate. As for the bolded bit, this is why a story like this, covered the way it has been, is so important. It makes some of us in more privileged positions reflect on the damage this sort of structural racism can have on people.

This is a devastating, challenging and extraordinary piece of journalism. I cried most of the way through it. It's been shared quite a bit through Facebook too. It shows that the AFL's corporate platitudes are just that.

I'd play Bedford, Harmes and Jones all forward of centre next week. We need ferocious tackling as you say. Stop St Kilda's run and gun off half back and convert our own opportunities and I think we win.

Absolutely no doubt about this in my mind. We're witnessing high work rate one week and then nowhere near enough the next. I think we'll make finals because of our softer draw coming home, but our commitment across the entire field seems volatile. It's frustrating because our list is currently around about where Hawthorn's was in 2008 when it stole a flag (remember all those rushed behinds under no pressure?). Hawthorn didn't do anything for a couple of years after that, but it shows you it's possible to do it this early in the evolution of the list. Richmond took a lot longer, but I reckon once it clicks for our guys we'll be very difficult to beat.

Agreed mate. On this, how far off is Jackson?

We blew Collingwood away in the second quarter last week by repeatedly going to the top of the square and to the dangerous area just in front of that. Richmond have won flags doing it. Collingwood, when on song, do it too. I think the plan is workable, we just haven't had guys that have created a contest or mids that have kicked to the top of the square at the right time. But completely agree on the practice, practice, practice mantra. It needs to become automated and feel natural.

That thinking would have seen us finishing outside of the 8 in 2018 though.

For all my defence of Goodwin today, I will say that the stoppage set ups hurt us. This has been a consistent theme when we lose. Teams carve us up on the outside and occasionally when we're on, the 'slider'/extra pushing into the contest to support or pressure is able to stop this, but there's too much margin for error. This is why I'd be up for a bit of a refresh with Benny Mathews moving on and seeing what a fresh set of eyes could bring our midfield group. Or maybe it's not even replacing Mathews, just merely adding a stoppages coach to the mix.

It's a tough one mate. We could try Weideman playing higher and see if it upsets the forward balance too much. If not, we're going to have to compromise system and look at 1 tall (that did not work earlier in the year) or bring Brown in to play Tom's role of rucking and 2nd KPF.

Paradoxically, I'd still play Weideman deep and keep Tom roaming. Weideman is starting to look dangerous deep and will begin to worry defenders the more his confidence grows.

Paging @Pollyanna. Reckon you could throw Viney in a forward pocket. Agree on Gus though. Needs to keep playing midfield.

Well, probably Sparrow and play Rivers off half back. He can even have some of Sparrow's midfield minutes.

What a zinger. Thanks coach.

Fair enough mate. We'll agree to disagree on that. Port, for me, was clearly a game where we didn't turn up. Yesterday, the midfield was terrible and the forwardline didn't bring enough pressure. The corralling from the previous weeks was gone. I'd love to get some stats on the 1%ers too. As for our ball use in the West Coast game, it was utterly pathetic. I know it's frustrating, but I think we're still learning what it takes. I had hoped it had clicked going into this game. I did say I thought we'd put in 1 or 2 more stinkers this season like every other team is dishing up too. Just thought this would come a bit later in the season.

Haha, Plapp is our forward coach, ya goose. Enjoy the rest of your weekend, Biffboy. Don't get too angry on a Sunday.

I reckon the majority of Demonland just want more out of Harmes and believe he could offer the team more up the ground.

Well done, Biffboy. You're best on ground. We're all sheep and you're the tactical genius.

Absolutely. Agreed. I worded my previous point poorly. This speaks to the strength of the defensive system we've built IMO. Switching definitely helps spread the zone, but if the defending team is on its game and works hard, the zone moves with the ball to close up space and prevents the opposition from launch an adequate attack inside 50. I agree we weren't able to pressure their mids on the outside anywhere near enough. Bontempelli had heaps of space almost every time. Our mids were getting sucked into the contest without thought for the outside and I wouldn't be surprised if whoever played on Vanders dragged him away from the contest where possible. I don't recall him impacting the contest very often.

I still think we backed our system to do more damage than theirs. And to be honest, had we kicked straight, our defensive system and set ups still would have been a major factor for the win. Our system has always broken down if we let half backs run freely. When we're on song, our half forwards are crunching those running half backs and making them kick down the line or turning it over in the corridor or at our half forward. Without that, these half backs can create attacks. The bigger question is why weren't our mids and half forwards creating this pressure? I reckon they knew they couldn't keep going down the line to contests, because on reset we'd win clearance. We'd also mauled sides the previous three games who refused to switch. Our work rate against Collingwood applied yesterday would have prevented these switches and enabled us to slingshot back or control possession leading back towards our own goal. Given our midfield dominance, we would have been able to control the game. I think they couldn't believe their luck at how easy the first switch was and just kept going to it because it was clear we weren't working hard enough. I think this is all work rate though. The zone moves across the ground naturally when we're on song and so it prevents the switch. It strangles teams eventually and with our alleged fitness (and I say alleged because we looked sloppy yesterday and tired), this should be repeatable within game and from week to week.

Great post. Where's Viney's leadership in all of this? I agree wholeheartedly with @Patches O’houlihan that we can't play Viney in the midfield mix. I can be convinced by @Pollyanna that moving him forward and enabling him to go to forward stoppages could be a good thing. I just think out of the middle he's a liability. The two standout possession for Viney yesterday were two kicks inside 50. The first one to Fritsch, where he lead to the wrong pocket and missed on a tight angle amongst the swirling breeze. The other was a shallow move barely inside 50 to Oliver, who failed to make the distance into the wind. The rest of the time, he worked hard, but undid his good work with poor possessions or upset the balance of the midfield by being sucked in to everything. I think the club has to make a strong call here. Either Viney plays the majority forward or we let him walk via FA. Many will disagree with me on here, but the evidence is mounting. Maybe it'll take a new coach to make the hard call?