Little Goffy

Ricky Nixon has a problem with her (other than she's older than 14 and doesn't do cocaine). Glowing recommendation. That guy is like some kind of jumble sale of messed up vicious ego idiot. But in all seriousness, she might just be the best new commentator introduced in a decade, or who knows how long really? Especially to be so good so early. Doesn't waste words, sticks to her job as boundary rider providing current information and then interviews searching for a bit of character in the breaks, rather than going on long and boring BTs... I mean, inane rants.

I recall being nervous about the ruck situation, and shocked that people were suggesting moving on Spencer without a replacement. Well, now we've stepped in the poo twice at the same playground, such is life. I'm in the 'Pederson deserves more respect than he gets' camp, myself, and with Smith also now injured only some kind of vendetta from the coaching panel would stop him from getting a run. Battling insomnia last night, I pictured Melbourne Rucks being a little bit like the guys they send into the cave to retrieve the grail, in Indiana Jones. Not good times.

"Nankervis has been all over the stats (supercoach) sheet, but has shown no accountability and let Spencer sneak forward again, to kick a third goal." "Vince has tagged Cotchin and completely stalled his impact on the game while collecting a few valuale clearances, in a beautiful return to form in what much surely be his primary role again" "HOGAN!!!!! AGAIN!"

Yep, the AFL is digging themselves a nice little hole of stupid here. Of course the headband is fine. It is less dangerous or brand-damaging than a man-bun. Of course the hijab should be ok, it's got no impact except possible credit points towards elevation to a higher state of being after you die. But that has no effect on kicking skills now. But now the AFL has moved itself into a position of picking which teacup it wants to keep it's storm in.

Two different ways to approach evaluating a game. I'm a big fan of the 'not picking out a whipping boy' approach.

We should hold a rally in support.

They're European aristocrats, you could pick any two at random and they'd be at least cousins.

But you wouldn't want to see penalties for - a sober driver, within the speed limit, driving safely, who crashes into someone after a bird flies into their open window. While you would want to see penalties for - a drunk, speeding driver doing their own imaginary slalom course during pick-up time at a primary school, who manages to miss everyone. And yes, I do think penalties for drunk or dangerous driving need to be seriously boosted.

'Important' is a complex and nuanced term, isn't it? Not only is 'what is important' subjective, but even what people mean by important. In the sense that it will be highly scrutinised, and a lot of people will judge us on this game, it is definitely very important. Probably will have a financial impact, on future attendences, viewers and memberships. Will probably be the only Demons game that certain media spuds actually watch, so it will become the reference point for all their pronouncements about our problems and potentials. McDonald kicks reliably for 120 minutes? All Australian discussion. Stretch has an off day? Still not ready. Viney has a big day? He's been holding this team together and Jones is past it. But the most important thing, in the end, is that a win keeps us in the 8 and a loss puts us back in the general pack. Which I hate to say, looks like the situation we'll be in most weeks this season. It's gonna be a stressful ride. .

The use of 'consequences' in grading penalties is ridiculous. I can see it now, police pull an erratic driver over, do the breath test.. "oh, you should probably be in hospital with that blood alcohol level, but everything is fine, you didn't hit anyone today". Meanwhile, at the MRP - "Oh, you threw you weight into someone's head while they were looking the other way? No problem, they got up. We'll check again next time to see if you've killed anyone." And up on the peninsular - "You launched a spread of nuclear missiles at Seoul and Tokyo? Oh, they all failed to detonate, so it's fine, just promise not to improve your fuses."

Surely it has to be the Pencil, for about 12 weeks.

Security have a tough job that, generally, they don't do especially well. Very poor discernment of when to use a light touch and when to go heavy. Almost always in favour of heavy. A favourite - they were ready to cart my mother off to an 'interview room', separated from her sons, because she made an error scanning her barcode coming through the gates at *Head stadium. Couple of overstuffed sausage rolls in uniform, and they were clearly shaping to actually physically grab her. Do y' think she was being loud or abusive? Another favourite - a group of three Collingwood fans in the top level of the 'G, had clearly brought in their own alcohol (unless the MCC has endorsed sale of whole bottles of cheap bourbon), rapidly drunk, even faster began the most vile streams of abuse at the players, the umpires, and Demon supporter nearby. A father a few rows in front turned to ask if they could keep a lid on it for the sake of the kids, which got the all too predictable response of a torrent of personal abuse and later being used as a target for food scraps. D y' think security did anything? No, I guess it's just good that my then girlfriend, all 160cm of her, switched on her teacher-voice and gave them a solid lecture. It was a phenomenal effort, they got confused, subdued, and moved at the next quarter break. But had security been any use at any point? HA! So, no Saty, I'm not going to go along with your 'authority figures should be assumed right' position. Not for a bunch of subcontracted, untrained, poorly instructed thugs doing a bit of sidework from beating up punters at Crown.

HAAAAA ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! I take a small piece of pride knowing that it was definitely Melbourne that finally cracked them and made them come crumbling down. Before Melbourne beat them - 9 wins in a row, just two losses for the season to round 18. Since Melbourne beat them - 2 wins, 7 losses. We can pin this one up next to Melbourne breaking Essendon, way back in the actual drug-cheating season. Before losing to Melbourne, Round 10, 2012 - 8 wins, 1 loss. After losing to Melbourne - 3 wins, 9 losses. As a club, we achieve two things for other clubs. Getting their kids rising star nominations, and intervening on behalf of the football demiurge.

How are we doing on the stat for 'getting numbers into defense when there's almost not time left to go and we're holding onto a tiny lead'? Has it improved since the Saints game (Rnd 11 2015)? Wow, funny how some things just keep stinging. That one still feels like it was near the end of last season, just a few games ago, not some 20 months ago.

I noticed last week was a big week for key forwards, with multiple bags kicked. The way I see it, Jesse owes us at least 3 for each round he missed, plus the 'Rance is overrated' premium for this game, so should kick at least 10. I also like the opening post's prediction of Kent to have a day out. He's been dangerous out there and one day soon it'll all come together at once and the rest of the football world will ask "Where did that come from?" and we will all get to sit back and be happy that we knew first.

Viney down from 12.8 to 9.6 contested possession a game. Tyson down from 10.4 to 8.0. Jones also down a tick but that looks more to do with role than form. We could really use Brayshaw out there, in form. Alongside Petracca, is one of our few players who can really punch holes in a game - he's got a highly disproportionate rate of goal assists, score involvements/launches and all that good stuff, per disposal.

I agree that it has been a season of volatile, 4-5 goals bursts and most clubs have copped them. There have even been multiple games which have featured big surges going both way - as you say, part of the modern game. What troubles me is that the teams which have copped those bursts are overwhelmingly in the 'loss' column for that week. In fact, flicking back over the score-worms for games so far, it looks like about 3/4 of games have been decided by these bursts. It is common, but a negative, and a problem that it has happened to us every game so far this season.

I especially worry about how that scoring comes in uncontrolled bursts and without a single goal against the flow. * 7 goals in a quarter by Fremantle. * 5 Goals in barely 10 minutes of play by Geelong. * 5 goals in a row for Carlton, from mid 2nd to mid 3rd quarter. * 5 goals in a row for St Kilda, midway through the first until early in second. So that's a third of the goals scored against us over four games, coming in unanswered runs.

Of course they keep being paid the full salary. With all the chaos and luck of AFL, it's only fair because there are so many different ways to miss games. I mean, really what they are being paid for is not the games so much as it is for the 24/7 professionalism required to be a competitive player at the top level. Oh... wait...

After the Geelong game I felt ok because I could see that instead of being a team that should lsoe most of the time, we were now a team that has to have a bad day to lose. After this game I described it as 'Goodwin's first crisis'. I actually stand by both statements. We are a capable team, but right now we are at a pivotal moment that could shape or near-term and longer term development as a team and club. Maybe 'crisis' around the Demons has come too much to mean 'oh god, oh god, we're all gonna die'. In this case, I mean 'how you act in this moment is going to have a massively disproportionate effect compared to normal times'. Times like this are the coach's proverbial 'shot on goal after the siren'.

The only way I can see this being a positive is if it makes the club take a good hard look at itself, like the way a couple of big losses in 2006 'woke up' the talented but underachieving Geelong team. Goodwin's first crisis, I'm sure I'm not the only one watching intently.

Hands up everyone who expected Spencer to be the one to straighten out our kicking for goal? And now.. hand up everyone who is thrilled for him!

So the big question is, do I have time to grab a quick cup of coffee? And also... Can our sheer volume of competent mids/half forwards/half-backs overwhelm the exceptional 'first choice' midfield Scythe noted - "Sandilands, Fyfe, Neale, Mundy and the two Hills". I'm pretty confident that the forward pressure of Kent, Harmes, Hannan, Nibbler, Petracca and Garlett can deny Fremantle too many easy exits from defence, and lock down the space that the Hills like to run into. I like that our tall forwards are just Weid and Watts, I think it suits the situation, but they also really need to do their jobs and not let Freo have too many easy intercept marks in defence. At least our defence should have a relatively good day, as far as match-ups go.(He said, nervously).

Apologies if it has already been mentioned, but does anyone else think we need to put as much thought into Mundy as we do Fyfe? Not playing down the danger that Fyfe presents, just thinking about it in terms of how effective Mundy has been, and how effective some close checking might on one of them or the other. Mundy doesn't get quite as much of it as Fyfe, and quite a bit less contested, but he has actually been more damaging with it - kicking goals, creating goal assists, inside-50s, even wining more clearances, than Fyfe. On the other hand, Fyfe simply isn't troubled by getting it contested, in close or through contested marks. Is there really much point having someone hanging off him if it will just add to his free kick count? Personally I would suggest giving Dom Tyson the job on Mundy. Doesn't give away too much in height and arguably needs the clearly defined stopper responsibility to work himself back into some form.

Who's Wowee?