Adam The God

I'd actually play Harmes on Gray.

I'm happy with Rivers coming in, because if it's experience we want, that is because we'd expect composure in important situations. The goal Nev gave away was the complete opposite. Nev's one of my favourites, but I'd be happy to have Lockhart, Rivers, Hibberd and Salem as the small/medium defenders, supporting Oscar, May and Lever. Lockhart is a reasonable kick. Rivers is a nice kick, Salem is a nice kick and Hibberd is a good dasher, so those latter three offer nice defensive rebound, something that was so strong in our 2018 game. May is similar really, so I like what we're building back there and Nev, unfortunately doesn't seem to fit that role anymore. I'd bring in Rivers and keep Nev as a back up. We'll definitely need Nev with the condensed fixturing this year, so maybe a fresher Nev picks that ball up last night? As for being in almost every stat, they didn't edge us in clearances. They mauled us. And our clearance game is what we pride ourselves on. I have no doubt even in 2018 (let alone 2019), if we'd been smashed in the clearances like that, we'd have lost by 7 or 8 goals easily. So our team defence has definitely improved and to me it's because we've got the balance of two tall KPBs and a tall interceptor in Lever. When we're losing clearance, our defenders (and I know this is hard to say but...) need to be bolder with their ball movement and taking the game on. This will generate scores for us despite losing contested possession. I remember watching that great Geelong side under Thompson. The team had such confidence in itself that no matter the situation, their defenders would take the game on. Once they've spent more game time alongside each other, that's the next step in our defence's evolution.

Pretty much my exact thoughts. I'm surprised we don't use a cluster up the ground, whilst still maintaining our defensive zone inside 50. It's not something I'd try every time, but if we can clear the ball to the middle of the ground and at the very least hold it up, that's a massive win and takes the pressure off our backs. Anyway, doesn't seem like we're interested in that sort of play and maybe it's too easy to counter if you do it too often. Completely agree. I actually think we can afford to be more attacking from forward fifty stoppage and occasionally from centre square stoppages, but everywhere else, we need to lock down. To be fair though, the times where we were horribly out of position that I recall were during stoppages inside our forward fifty. If you're going to attack from stoppage, your defenders need to be set up well behind the ball, which for most of the night we were. It's a hard adjustment to make around stoppages, because if you're not attacking with your stoppage set ups to your own dominant ruckman, you may as well pack it in to a degree. I've almost argued against myself there...

But this is the thing. They might have kicked straighter in the second and third terms, as could we. I'd argue we got the ball to much better spots to convert and [censored] the bed. Whereas, they were often shooting from acute angles and from distance. RE: the smothers though, that's the sign of a side that is on top of their defensive game. It did my head in how often we'd be smothered. This only works if our players are set up to defend on the outside. If Max was to smash it forward, but one of their half backs is waiting there, you may as well give them the clearance to start with. But I agree we need to use this as a weapon at the right times. I agree mate, but I think Goodwin's philosophy is to back in our guys to do more damage. This is very Geelong circa Mark Thompson and Hawthorn circa 2013-2015. I think if we can start winning these types of games, the players belief and confidence to always get back in the game will become a weapon for us and backing in our guys might be the best way of going about it. Completely agree that we needed to tweak the extra at the stoppage, but we had the extra behind the ball, which enabled us to set up stronger defensively. It's a hard one. He was okay, I don't think he was terrible, but he gets outmarked too easily at times and for a guy who can be a beautiful, penetrating kick, I think he plays it too safe sometimes and then takes the gamble at the wrong moments. Not saying he's horrible, but I'd say I disagree with those pumping him up. He's just going at this stage IMO. I'm hoping more games together with Lever and Hibberd will enable them to gel even more. I remember Hibberd 1v1 in 2017 and he just wouldn't be beaten. That to me is what I would hope May can bring on the bigger blokes, plus more attacking with his kicking.

I thought Fritsch and Hannan were both terrible for the majority of the night. They brought a bit of pressure in the first quarter, but after that fumbled and slipped about. Even in that chain they were both involved in that ended with a Melksham goal, they both did their best to slip over or almost fall flat on their face's. Hannan has been far too inconsistent throughout his career thus far. Fritsch's set shot kicking this year has gone off the boil in a big way. He used to be so assured, now he's more likely to miss. We can't continue to carry two inconsistent performers in our forwardline every week, particularly when we're basically playing Bennell forward to increase the kms in his legs. That's half your forwardline that show the occasional thing or two, but then massively fade out of games. Bennell I get, the other two, not so much.

I suspect he'll get a call up, but I think he gets in the way of our forward set up and I wouldn't bring him in. That's just me though. I love him too but I'm not expecting him to rip a game apart. I'm happy with his competing in the air, at ground level and his smarts. He doesn't need to rip a game apart to be doing a good job in our structure. I'd certainly welcome it, but it's unlikely at this early stage.

May is super overrated at the moment IMO. Often gets outmarked too easily and usually kicks it to a contest or a howler turnover like the one that pinged straight back for Brisbane's first goal. I reckon we need to be far more creative with his kicking and look to really gain territory.

As I said in the Oscar thread, I think this game was clearly lost in the midfield. We weren't brave enough with our ball movement, but I also hate watching us play in the wet. We've been a hopeless wet weather side for years, because we seem to play like it's dry by overcomplicating stoppage and we slowly readjust throughout the game. A lot of our stoppage set ups around the ground were poor too, I thought. We failed to cover both sides of the contest too often and the difference between Neale and our entire team was his cleanness. He would pick the ball up cleanly and dispose of it cleanly. Our guys [censored] the bed for most of the night. However, I think keeping Jackson in was a very good selection. I'm really excited about this kid. He makes the right decisions, has pace and creates a contest. It's hard to say whether Tomlinson would have brought more offence to the game than Jones, but Nathan's defensive game or rather his legspeed, caught us out a few times. I think until Vanders is ready to go again, it'll be a case of balancing Tomlinson's defence with Jones' offence. I thought Viney was outstanding for the most part, as was Lockhart. I see what people are saying about Jay. He works really hard to provide an outlet and makes pretty good decisions with ball in hand. Langdon is another that works really hard and is incredibly important already to how our game hangs together, but his kicking is still an issue. That was definitely Melksham's ball and Jake would have nailed that shot. I think the most frustrating part is for mine, Brisbane are very pedestrian. Neale is an out and out star with his cleanness and his ability to win and dispose of the ball effectively. Cameron is always a threat in the forwardline, Andrews is good if you let him be, but the rest of the side is bog ordinary. But their pressure was excellent. Of course, Hipwood always looks like a star against us too, but he is flakey at best. Make no mistake, we play four solid quarters and we win comfortably. Meanwhile, Clarry is getting there despite some wayward kicking and was also very good. I thought our forwardline functioned quite well in the first half, but we resorted to kicking long to contests in the second half. At least, we managed to keep the ball in our forward half and play territory a bit more than in the earlier rounds. Healy kept saying they were better during the game and I think in terms of cleanness from stoppage and around the ground, absolutely, but we fumbled, bumbled and kicked into Brisbane players hands (some were good smothers, others were downright careless on our behalf) when we managed to win a lot of great contested ball. On Healy, I was surprised by how buoyant he was about our prospect of making finals at the end of the game, because I think at 3 wins, 4 losses, with a reduced fixture, I can't see us making finals unless we come out and beat Port and go on a run (ala 2018), and other results really start to go our way. Let's hope he's right.

At times our defenders were ordinary, especially in contest, but our zone defence for much of the game was solid and there's no doubt our team defence has improved since Oscar's been in the team. IMO, the game was lost in the midfield where we failed to capitalise again on Gawn playing a nobody (see the Carlton game too that was almost thrown away). You can't play two quarters of football and expect to win games and our mids were guilty of going to sleep in the second and third quarters, and going into their shells from stoppage and with our ball movement.

Essendon would have to be the worst top 5 side or even top 8 side I've ever seen.

Gee, the St Kilda ball use is ordinary. We reckoned ours was bad but under no pressure they fail to hit targets.

Loving the Lockhart commentary in this thread everyone. Very enlightening. His development isn't that dissimilar from Nev's. Started up forward, but then moved back. Didn't get a heap of it, but was solid. Thought he struggled with the tempo against Richmond (or was it Geelong?), but since then he hasn't seemed to have coughed the ball up. Seems like a good coaching move to me.

Fair enough.

I'm happy to back Weideman, Jackson, TMac and Petty for the moment, but Richmond just won a flag by spend big $$$ on Lynch.

Nah, I meant more that people always give at the end of the tax year, so it's clever to give them a tax deduction. That's where I try to raise much of my private money as people / corporates in my case, are much more likely to give. But they'll be able to claim across both tax years.

Noticed today that Proud to Belong, Proud to Give is being auspiced by the Australian Sports Foundation, which provides this fundraising effort with DGR status and would have enabled the club to raise much of the money before the EOFY just gone. Clever. It's little things like this that makes me think we're pretty well run off field. I guess that's the business acumen at our club.

Jones for Vanders makes sense. Good move. Glad they're backing in Jackson again.

Yep, it's why many of the top EPL sides try not to rotate the squad, but when they do, it often leads to slip ups. Liverpool kept the same back 4 for the majority of the season and usually played the same front 3, enabling rotations through the midfield positions that require arguably greater fitness anyway (even though the attackers need great fitness too as Liverpool defends from the front 3). I'd be going with no changes at all if we can help it, because as you say, don't mess with the chemistry. Only if it's clear your mids are tiring would I make any changes to the midfield (outside of an injury of course). I think the most important area of the ground not to mess with is our defensive set up and I think we need to play these guys together as much as possible. So for mine, the forwardline personnel can be tinkered with depending on the opponent, but I think it's pretty clear that we need to play two talls, with Weideman being one of them, playing deep and across half forward. Then Jackson playing second fiddle, with TMac as back up KPF. I find it interesting that we're thinking about playing Tom on a wing. This would suggest strongly that we see Weideman and Jackson as ultimately working and that Tom needs to carve another niche for himself. If he can kick goals from the wing and gut run hard both ways, that is going to give us an additional weapon that is very hard to match up on. I wouldn't mind seeing Fritsch and McDonald rotate between wing and half forward as well. We constantly need guys willing to lead and run again to create space for others. That's a key to the shorter kicking game we implemented in particular last week. It'll be fascinating to see what we do if we can get through this congested period without losing and without injury. Will we look to mess with team chemistry on the other side of it to freshen things up, or will we want to keep the chemistry going? I think ultimately where we want to get to is to play a system where as players can be plug and plays as possible. The Bulldogs premiership side of 2016 was brilliant at this and big on system. Our 2017 side wasn't too bad at that either, when he were missing Gawn for large chunks. So Goodwin has shown himself to be big on systems, but it's whether our team can get to that level of consistency and understanding of team roles, that is another matter.

Hasn't he already been playing a mixture of wing, half back and midfield this season? I'm pretty sure I've seen him play off half back already.

Agree with much of this post mate. The thing I will continue to debate is Oliver not being a damaging handballer. You cite Bennell's handball as being damaging, which I agree, was damaging, but contextually completely different to many of Clarry's handballs. The majority of which are contested possessions in stoppage situations, not in space by himself in the forwardline as Harley's was. Nothing against Harley's brilliant handball, but I still disagree with the notion that Oliver's handballs don't hurt the opposition. Yes, sometimes he'll handball to a Gawn standing still (see the Hawthorn game), but the majority of the time, his handballs release team mates into space and help us win clearance. I think this part of his game is being hyperbolised. As you say, the area of his game that can get better is his kicking game. And I completely agree with you on his kicking. I think he's a very good and creative kick. His draft kicking test results speak for themselves. I also like the comparison to Judd's pace, in that it's explosive from clearances, but not as quick in other situations though IMO, unlike Judd, who was always lightening. I think many of us are acknowledging Clarry's elite traits, I'm just not convinced what he actually does brilliantly is being recognised. Not that this matters really, as we're just supporters over-dissecting a player's game. I agree though that I think Clarry's development across 2019 and 2020 will put him and us in very good stead moving forward.

Yep, I'd go for Fisher. There's a bit of a knock on his defensive game, but could be another good wingman back up and play forward if need. Looking forward to seeing what Jordon can offer. One of my mates coached him at Caulfield Grammar and has big wraps on him.

I'm genuinely intrigued to see how Trac goes in the remaining games this year. With the insane hype around him, opposition sides will pay more attention to him, as they have done with Oliver for many years. Can Trac keep his game going, whilst being targeted? As for match ups this week, I agree with @Lucifer's Hero. I'd have Harmes or Viney tag Zorko and go Petracca and Oliver, head to head with Neale. I'd also be giving Neale a bit of physical attention around all the stoppages. What a [censored] I am.

We're usually on the same page mate, but I just cannot agree with this bit, if I've understood it correctly. Andrew Gaff is in the same company as Oliver? One is a legitimate contested bull, the other is a hard running accumulating outside mid. They're completely different players. Oliver is an A grader, no question for me, but he could be an A++ grader if he can become more damaging with his disposal by foot. That bit I agree with, but his handballing more often than not is incredibly damaging IMO. If Clarry had managed to get to where he is now at the age of 28 or 29, I think we'd say he was an A grade star. The fact that he's only 23 and has been doing what he does now (and winning AA rep and two BnFs) for a few years, shows how big his potential is. What's scary for opposition's is he's still a few years off his best. So our coaches work on getting him to balance his handball game with his kicking game in 2019 and now in 2020, it's about being more damaging with his disposals by foot. The fact you don't rate him as an AFL star at this point, I think, could be as a result of the level he has set for himself pretty much from his first game against GWS off limited minutes, where he didn't look at all out of place against an A grade midfield.

Great post. This was the same with Sam Mitchell.

The Petracca / Oliver comparison reminds me a bit of how Sam Mitchell would constantly fly under the radar in his early career, because Buddy Franklin would take the spotlight. Franklin is the flashier player, but Mitchell was a genius. Oliver's kicking isn't as solid at this stage, but Mitchell often kicked short, which meant his DE appeared to be much better. Absolutely, Clarry has some things to work on, but I'd argue Clarry and Trac both need to work on their defensive games. You'll always remember Trac in a game because the way he plays is with flair. He also cost us two goals in a row against Hawthorn because his defensive work didn't cut it, so there's definitely improvement left in both of their games and neither are even mid 20s yet, so there is plenty of time to work on their game. It's wonderful we have them both in the same team at once with one of the most dominant rucks in recent memory.