Little Goffy

I got some inside mail from the club: apparently it was a selection headache.

Officially the longest injury list, at 15, with only a couple of rivals at 13. We've also already used 34 different players, which is a number typical for the end of a season, not slightly before halfway. Start by adding Vandenberg, Lever, Smith and Hannan, who are likely inclusions when fit and haven't yet played a senior game this season, and we're up to 38. Let's imagine that Kennedy-Harris and Maynard get at least a dip at the last-chance saloon. That takes us to 40. Nietschke and Walker (what does 'indefinite' really mean?) are injured for the season, leaving only teenagers Chandler, Bradtke, Bedford and Jordan available for a season-debut. So, Casey-watchers, of those 4, how many might get an AFL level game? Throw in the possibility of a mid-season draftee who, if drafted, would be likely to play given the selection would lean towards immediate need. 41 + the four teenager possibilities. If there's any comfort, Richmond made it to 42 players used in 2016 on their way to just 8 wins and rubbish percentage, before winning the 2017 premiership. So perhaps 'testing the depth' and a chance to examine what you've got is a secret advantage. Hee hee ho ha ugh.

A while back I noticed that one of our players bears a striking resemblance to Sebastion d' Avis, the last great king of the Avis dynasty of Portugal, who legend has it will one day rise again on a foggy morning, to restore the glory of Portugal. I present to you, his royal highness Clayton d' Oliver! (c1570)

Viney has been having a poor season by his standards and definitely has limitations which prevent him from being a superstar. But I seem to be going through a phase where I am just getting fed up with hyperbole and egofarts. A player with 32 Brownlow votes in his first 98 games, can we at least accept that there might be a range of valid opinions about his past, current and potential future contribution, and that it is not necessary for one particular perspective to be declared THE ONLY TRUE FACT THAT EVER THERE WAS HEAR ME FOR I AM YOUR LORD. Seriously, try a little humility.

I've not let go of 2019 yet, but the thought of a mental reset, the right reviewing of our coaching/conditioning, and (touch wood) a clearing of the injury load, yep, that has me strongly anticipating 2020. But nevermind, I still think there's a six-game winning streak on the cards going into and after the bye, to reset the whole scene this year.

Wow. Mumford got off? Completely? Not even a 'reckless'? Yep, for the sake of the game, he needs to be pummeled back into retirement. And I'm sure any regulars on here know I'm no fan of any unnecessary roughness. It was a clearly deliberate hit, by a known repeat offender, with no approach to or eyes on the ball, against the exposed flank/torso of a 30cm shorter player who was already low to the ground and facing the other way, which sent the target to hospital with broken ribs. If the AFL is going to let that wash, then I really think the players have a responsibility to step in. At best Mumford spends the game sore, distracted and limited, at worst it slows Mumford from his own sniping. I think everyone -except- Gawn should be taking opportunities to casually bump Mumford at every chance they get. Gawn should be 100% focused on beating him in a purely football sense. Team instruction: bump, harass, sledge Mumford any time the moment comes up. Line in the sand, for us and for the game.

The argument for Preuss in is that GWS don't quite have a handle on the really big forward targets, and Preuss in would allow he and Gawn to rotate between beating up a second-string ruckman (using two massive bodies as bludgeons) and forcing one or more oft he GWS defenders to be that extra bit accountable instead of playing their favourite zoning off and rebounding game. Also, I'm not personally sold on Smith, just yet, so it seems a simple positional swap.

Can I start a petition to the mods that this expression and its variations be added to the [censored] list? I wonder, if we went back through a few years of posts from absolutely everyone, indiscriminately, on occasions where they had included this expression, would we find that the whole damn lot of them could be deleted without removing a single helpful or interesting contribution. You could even use it as a kind of modernised 'reducto ad hitlerum' for determining when an in-thread argument his digressed enough to be worthless to everyone except the pepole in the argument. Whatever the particular observation, this expression demeans us all.

Having sat through up close the horrific GWS-Carlton game, I can say there are a couple of things to be sure of in team selection. Whitfield can never be left alone. I have never seen someone be so effective at knowing where to be to give teammates an option or to just be in the right spot when the opposition stuffs up. Our vulnerability to the fast counterattack is like providing a swimming pool full of children to a Whitfield-shaped shark. He just can't even be left alone. Similarly, though Heath Shaw isn't the Supercoach machine of the past, he is still a potent rebounder and has easily the most running bounces in the game. Put a forward on him to really lock him down and hope for the occasional lucky turnover, otherwise just accept this is an effective way to 'spend' the effort of a young player Also shockingly, horribly visible was that Carlton were allowing GWS to swap the ball around, switch play, take their time, wait until the disorganised and depleted Carlton defence got out of position and a hole opened up. Six GWS players had more than 10 marks (18 for Whitfield) on their way to 154 total, just mind-boggling. This actually speaks in favour of keeping that 'press' going a bit, not giving them quite so much time to wait and see, maybe forcing a few errors. If they are given time, they can find one of their top users/runners in just a little space and CRACK they gain a clean 70m and your whole team is out of position. Better to hunt them than wait to be picked off. Fact is, the final scores greatly flattered Carlton, as Carlton supporters around me fully acknowledged with deep sighs. If GWS had kicked better at goal (including three out-on-full or falling short just int he last quarter) and kept their foot on the pedal, it really would have been 186+ territory. This is hard to reconcile with the GWS of the previous week, struggling to kick a meaningful score. But the main thing I'd argue is that Carlton let GWS feel comfortable and play at their own pace and make their own choices, while Hawthorn got up in their faces and forced them to move without getting all nicely set up. We should expect to have a burst or two of rapid scoring against us, any time our pressure efforts drop off. But we should also expect to gradually grind ahead any time we do have the psychological initiative - they are far from invincible. Ont he bright side, Carlton somehow managed to kick 7 goals despite only having a grand total of 4 marks inside 50 and most of their 35 entries being true rubbish. Harry McKay kicked 3 of them, suggesting that GWS don't quite have a gorilla-keeper on hand. So Preuss might be a worthwhile addition. So, my ins would be Preuss and whoever the hell we think can stay with Whitfield, and anyone prepared to work hard all day on pressure, even if they aren't super-brilliant once they have the ball in hand.

What an 'interesting' mess of a season. Keeps the possibilites just that little bit alight. Excellent to see Adelaide still not quite getting it together. Keeps my 'on the hunt' dreams alive for the NT game. I'll be at the Western Sydney / Carlton game tomorrow and will try to report as much as I can on GWS from up close. On another note, 'our' Bernie Vince seems to be going alright on the MMM commentary panel, currently doing Geelong-Bulldogs.

All still going to schedule. One small delusion at a time.

Four years ago we would've been quietly celebrating another good prospect getting their first game under their belt, and looking forward to the future. I know the urgency of getting full-AFL-level performances out of our best-22 overrides that a little, but at a personal level for him, and as a note for the future of the club, I'd say we've got a live one here. Thinking in ludicrously optimistic terms, but this current form slump and injury horror show has allowed a whole lot of young and fringe players to be tested or to get a little experience. It helps answer a lot of questions that might otherwise have only been faced once some of our current core players begin retiring.

Personally, I think the yips is actually something pretty deep on its own. Has practically ruined whole seasons for star players. Remember when Brad Johnson started running around the mark for shots, even if he was supposed to be line up from about 30 out? Anyway, probably cost us a game, so I hope they are getting their best mechanics and shrinks onto it fast.

I'm concerned about his injuries and managing them because I want 'top rate' Jack Viney out there, because at his best he is seriously A-grade. Not too worried about his personality though.

Petracca clearly not happy about the responsibility of taking the shot. Aaaand there it goes. Still, in 4 minutes we've outscored our entire Prelim Final first half...

Gee, Tim Smith will be feeling the pressure. Will probably get text messages at half time from Preuss, saying things like 'I hope you're enjoying borrowing my spot, just bring it back with the tank full'. Honestly, I go into this game with a 'nothing to lose ' attitude. The whole AFL world will be expecting us to get a whacking, and even my plan for an incrementally delusional path to later season greatness doesn't include a win tonight. Still, y' never know. And a win tonight would completely turn the story around, our early season horrors would be declared just that, and people would start praising our character and maturity. And of course, when you win, you can mention your injuries whenever you like.

Inside or outside?

Oh! That was him!? The same person? I knew there was a reason I was confused. Really does look totally different, body and head. That's what happens when you rely too much on the online radio.

Carlton may yet brew up something respectable, even dangerous. It looks like they've got a No.1 pick exactly right this time, and adding such a complete midfielder to their mix makes a huge difference. Right now they could do with an extra big body or two to take some of the contested pummeling, but overall their existing young midfield quartet (Cripps, Walsh, Dow, Petrevski-Seton) has real potential. I'd argue they need to bring that up to six instead of four, with the extra two being chunky types. As we all know, all too well, it is much easier to find solid, hard-working extractors than it is to find dynamic users. They recruited their talls first on the obvious theory that talls take longer to develop and they wanted everyone peaking at the same time. Injury (defence) and form (attack) issues have certainly proved that right, but the structure is there. I really think they could rise again to their heady heights of a few years ago, where they were successful also-rans in a couple of finals series. Meanwhile, I think Melbourne are two fit key defenders, a couple of in-form tall forwards, and slightly improved kicking effectiveness short of being the dominant team of the competition. Can we make those things happen in time to salvage 2019? From where we are right now, all it takes is six players finding their way to their best. (Lever at his best) + (May at his best) + (McDonald at his best) + (Weideman at his best) + (Brayshaw at his best) + (Viney at his best) = Monster winning streak and premiership favourite. It is a lot to ask, but also not much to ask, in the grand scheme of things.

More solidly built than I had the impression of. Maybe I just got distracted by the talk of speed and flair, normally reserved for the skinny types, or Riolis! With a little luck he can be our Dean Kent replacement. HA! ?

I wonder if this can be merged into the 'worst team kicking inside 50' thread, as it would seem relevant. If we only retain posession 1 time in 4 from kicks inside 50, maybe there's no harm in taking the literal long shot once in a while. If it falls short, well, there's still the possibiltiy of a contest at the drop. The unrealiability of the torp becomes a variability, an unpredictability, which mixes up our attacks and makes things just that little bit more chaotic. If our strategy going inside 50 is to have so many happening that the defenders eventually crack and their system breaks down and we come through in 6 goal waves before they are organised again, surely adding that extra factor to consider just adds to the useful chaos. New team rule: if you take a mark, are within 80m of goal, don't have a clean option, and not too close to the boundary, feel free to launch a torp and see where it lands.

I think there's a typo. Actually the clubs have to bid to NOT get an AFLX licence.

666 - Centre bounce clearances become more important, and players have to be more alert during the transition from the 'forced' start positions to the 'true' play positions, and can get exposed with a little bit of confusion. My guess is, especially combined with runner restrictions, this is most of all a problem for young teams, both in body (crunched at the stoppage) and mind (out-positioned in play). Well, that is to say, young teams and imperfectly drilled teams. And especially players who are both skinny and dumb! Extended kick-in; the trouble with encouraging people to play on, is that once you start running off in whatever direction you pick, you've signalled where the ball is goign to go. So an extra couple of meters of run is basically worthless because who cares about being two meters further from your goal-line when what matters is where the ball is going and what the contest will be like there? 100m penalty rule; roll dice to see who and when this affects. Just idiotic. Stoopid stoopid stoopid. 'Solution' to a non-problem, that creates a much bigger problem. And just for the sake of feeding the conversation - here's an interesting article that actually uses example clips of what happened in pre-season. ABC March 21 Rule Changes article

I knew a guy who was connected, had a top lawyer through family in the Serbian Mafia. He reckoned he had been let off for a 'first offense' driving about six times. I wonder if Ablett's perfect record might be a little similar. Judd's record was remarkably clean, two time brownlow and all that, considering he was actually a pretty dirty player all things considered.

Step by step, one small delusion at a time. Seriously, anything is possible if you keep each delusion small. Remember last week when Sam Frost was a match-saver? And this week when what-the-exploding-kitten-was-that happened in the last minute? Clearly delusional, but small, so they slip through the net.