Little Goffy

It is when someone is in trouble and you feel no sympathy that you really understand that you don't like them. Watching the Pies/Saints games and the cuts to Malthouse in the box, I just couldn't get past the feeling that there was a guy who was realising that he'd believed his own hype, taken a big arrogant risk, and blown it. Now he has the rest of this season and all of next season to just go through the motions of coaching, knowing that he is not going to be able to bring home the cup, and knowing that after that he has to spend three more years as football director at a club going through an 'intensive rebuild' because he chucked in the draft picks and gave games to good-average players in the delusion he could get elite-champion results. Or maybe he'll buy out his own contract and go coach the Western Sydney Blowflies once they realise Sheedy has gone completely bonkers.

I gotta admit I couldn't really be bothered having hard feelings. But it was really annoying the way the commentators noted 'Mclean has been having a great game' every time he touched the ball for the first two weeks. That's not Brock's fault, just a product of cheap commentating where they run with a them no matter what. Thing is, those first two weeks, nobody was on him. This week against the Bombers he was matched up on a few opponents, and did nothing against the lot of them. My honest hope is that from here on he plugs along accumulating games and making a reasonable, unexceptional contribution for a while. Just long enough for the commentators to have nothing to talk about. Once the dust has settled, and Gysberts is showing enough for everyone to accept it was a win-win, Mclean is welcome to help Carlton along on the path to another elimination final loss, if they can even manage that this year.

Sylvia in for Newton. Dunn to stay forward. In effect a little shuffle. Newton may be hard done by, only getting one game. But he isn't going to be given solid chances until he can shown some of his VFL at AFL level, and has to deal with that because it is simply fair enough. Rivers (if fit) in for... I guess Bennell, leaving Bail and Bartram to stay as the small defenders, since they are actually defenders and the message of preferring their ethic is important. (No hard feelings at Bennell, I just think he needs time spent at the lower level focusing on defining his role)

We're in danger of being 'hit on the rebound' just like we hit Collingwood. Adelaide have a LOT to lose this week. 0-3 means major problems for any top-4 chances which Adelaide might still pretend to have. Still, if we come in thinking 'we've got a chance to hunt this lot down', we might just do it.

It's hard to tell from 1000km away, but on screen Bate looked like he was struggling to accelerate and to get involved. I was surprised by his reasonable stats at the end of the game. Certainly one thing that the cameras don't pick up is the negating role where a player simply sticks with someone so they aren't a good option for the releasing kick. I did think Bate gradually worked his way into it, and I'm reasonably confident he'll offer a bit more potency as he gets back some touch after missing the last 'leg' (ha ha, me pun bad yuck) of pre-season.

Unfortunately, he wont be available for the father-son selection as he has already been selected under the expansion rules, to join the Palembang Orang-utans Football Club. Let's take a moment to wish him all the best in his career with the men in orange. But seriously, happy birthday kiddo. Not a bad time to start growing up as a Demon. Edit: Matthew Jack Green? Seriously? Another Jack? Might as well just put him on the list now.

Something that crossed my mind the other day, when we do chalk up a win, just how many first-win players will be crammed into the centre of the circle for the song? Scully, Trengove, Strauss, MacDonald, Bail, to start. Did McKenzie get a win last year? I remember slapping the hands of a young guy, beaming like crazy, coming around the boundary after a great win late in the year, but not sure if it was McKenzie or McNamara.

I'd tip 40ish. 2 goals a game based on the occassional bag supported by the fact that he always contributes something. He'll also get that many assists; that the part that makes me dizzy. I think he had 4 goal assists this week, which is just phenomenal. Remembering that Jurrah is also a player who delivers as many goal assists as goals, and that Sylvia and Morton are as much about inside 50s as goals themselves, you'd have to think that even as Petterd's role shifts away from being the focal point later in the year, he'll still be kicking one or two goals a game.

I would think that Joel MacDonald will be the benchmark Garland has to pass before he comes back into the side after the long layoff. Garland can fill that role, while also having half a dozen extra centimetres. Which is good, because it means MacDonald will be playing knowing he has to keep it up. The other one is Rivers - if everyone out there this week continues to perform, who comes out for Rivers to come in? The only worry is the small, speedy defender. Even though Medhurst was held very well by Frawley, it would be great to see one of Bartram, Bell, Bennell, Jetta or Bail step up to be an absolute first-rate small defender for locking down the dangerous crumber. I've not included Strauss as I'm thinking more of that lock-down than the attacking defender role I expect will dominate Strauss' career.

Courage can be learnt. If not courage then habits of action which exactly resemble courage can be learnt. Just over a half-century of modern military psychology has tested and tested it, and the results from combat speak conclusively.

Yep, Crows next week at the 'G is winnable. The fans, coaches and players will know it. It is even possible that we will have a load, parochial, one-sided crowd. How 'bout that?

On the one hand, the time to Melbourne's glory days was (obviously) a long time ago, and there have been huge changes in society and the pattern of football following since then. Richmond managed to have something to show during the TV years. Melbourne have never had a 'great' era on television, which really does translate into awareness and 'branding' (yurk). On the other hand, it's a generational thing - their glory days were just recent enough to still hold the codgers in good stead, and for parents to raise their kids as Tigers. The height of cruelty, I don't think many of the next generation would be prepared to do that to their kids. Except as a result of the 'generational vicious cycle of bad parenting'. If they can't get something back on the field in another decade or so, they are in for trouble. There is, after all, a Richmond in Sydney!

Looking forward to seeing a few link ups with Blease and Scully in complex packs. Whether or not either (or both!) end up a champion, a couple of good players capable of ridiculously 'catch-me-if-you-can' moment swill be a valuable element in confusing oppositoin onball groups and having little morale boosters mixed through a game, no matter how well or poorly other things are going.

Oh, geebus horistos. Guys, guys, I didn't mean it! Is it that bad around here that a post that repugnant can be thought of as serious?

Right now we're behind them by 1.19%, but clearly the Tigers are our match for pessimistic outlooks for this season. I thought I'd throw out a few comparison questions to see where people see the Tigers and how they see us comparing to them. RICHMOND FIXTURE Rnd 1 Carlton MCG Rnd 2 Bulldogs MCG Rnd 3 Sydney, SCG Rnd 4 Demons MCG Rnd 5 Fremantle, Subiaco Rnd 6 Geelong, Skilled Stadium Rnd 7 Adealide, AAMI Rnd 8 Hawthorn, MCG Rnd 9 Essendon, MCG Rnd 10 Port Adelaide, AAMI Rnd 11 St Kilda, Etihad Rnd 12, West Coast, MCG Rnd 13, Brisbane, Gabba Rnd 14, Sydney, MCG Rnd 15, Fremantle, Etihad Rnd 16, North Melbourne, MCG Rnd 17, Collingwood, MCG Rnd 18, Adelaide, MCG Rnd 19, Melbourne, MCG Rnd 20, Carlton, MCG Rnd 21, St Kilda, Etihad Rnd 22, Port Adelaide, Etihad.

Also... Bailey obviously doesn't have the passion. Neither does Lyon, or Shwarta. They're fare to critical or balanced in the media. Gardner clearly never cared. If Neita was serious, he'd be the forward line coach. And why didn't Viney even put his name seriously up for the senior coaching position a couple of years ago. Daniher, pfft, obviously only cared about his next job at Freo, with his old Essendon mates. And Connolly, well, come on, he spent two decades away from the club for no good reason. Ian Ridley, obviously all he ever wanted was the club to become the Hawks. Let's face it, Barassi is only our number one ticket holder because nobody else would have him. And Norm Smith hasn't done anything for us for decades. EDIT: Yeah, uh, this post was put up because I'm sick of hearing the moaning that borders on this kind of drivel. I don't mean a word of what is written here, and picked the comments specifically because I thought nobody would take them seriously. Surely the 'nobody else wanted Barassi' was a giveaway?

Hmmm... I'm thinking about the tactical layout and the way Bailey wants to have the ball moved, and had an odd thought. Is it time for a little bit of a restoration of players holding to positions? Particularly up forward. My reasoning is this - As we come out of defence and down the wing, or ideally up the middle, we set a group of runners off together. Their goal is to keep the ball moving forward while firing off handballs to eventually realease a player into enough space and time to deliver a quality long-medium kick into the forward line. At present, it falls down partly because some players are poor at 'spreading' to space on the run, some players are poor at timing their release to draw an opponent in without actually having the handball affected or simply ahve poor awareness of their teammates position. Each of these shortcomings feeds the other, to create the miserable stretches of play we've seen too much of. By keeping a few forwards in position permanently, we not only offer a continuous target to kick to, but also open up the vital space to work in for that run out of defence. Rebounding is a moment in the game where square metres, not number of players, are vital. What have I missed here? Any thoughts?

Uhh... no. No hashish here. I just dropped in a short comment about a player, based on an MFC selection article, which seemed relevant to the thread in terms of both who might be playing and how a player was going. But yeah, I appreciate your constructive feedback and look forward to further insights.

Huh? 'Looking Muslim'? What does that even mean? Seems a bit more circumsized lately to you, does he? Clearly you know him a little better than we do, then, so I'll trust your judgement. Although, come to think of it, Mclean has been looking particularly Roman Catholic since moving to the Blues.

Hopefully, as one by one the kids develop and earnestly push for selection, the pressure on the older players will push them to lift their game. Miller will be hard up to keep Watts and Jurrah out! Gysberts will be putting pretty direct pressure on Bruce's spot, for instance. And when Morton comes back... hmm. Any of the supposed hard nuts not performing as Sylvia come back in would want to pick up a bit, too. By mid-year - Under extreme pressure - Bruce, Miller, MacDonald, Dunn. Under pressure - Rivers, Bate, Jones, Moloney. That second group of players would seem capable of lifting again and being integral to the side for years to come. But those in the first group have real 'career problems' coming their way.

Aparently, Newton snagged 29 posessions and kicked 4 goals and is in the side for saturday. How 'bout that? Let's face it, as much as we've already been driven mad by the tastes of wonder he sometimes deliver and the chewing cardboard at other times, we're all quietly, secretly, happy that he's had a red hot go and is getting a chance. He is, after all, a Demon, so best of luck to him.

Kids just can't be expected to have the kind of stamina for punishment that adults have. Though there have been a few stories offered on here that remind me why the Demons have the highest support-to-member conversion of any club. You don't support the Demons because it's the easy option, that's for sure! My best suggestion is similar to Demon Tragic, above. Invest in some classic games. Get yourself the 2000 Qalifying and Preliminary Finals. Get one of the great Queens Birthday wins, from just a few years ago. Tell them, and SHOW them, that it isn't always like this, and that we're coming back. Tell them that Ron Barassi is the greatest AFL person ever, and that he is a Demon. Tell them that the Norm Smith Medal is awarded in honour of a Demon. Tell them that we were the undisputed greatest. And we're on a mission to be the greatest again.

Seven wins, approximately 10% improvement on percentage from last year. Nothing has changed, numbnuts. We got caned by a top side. Not as badly as Adelaide got caned by Freo! Interpret at will. EDIT: For the record, I'm not entirely delusion. For mine, Miller and Bruce have announced their retirement early. I'm not thinking Joel MacDonald will be with us for an extended period, either. A few others deserve some benefit of doubt given their 'returning from injury' status. But a few more seemed to just be doing enough to still be playing football. Like they need to be on a roll before they'll really fire up. A mentality rife during the previous era of long runs of losses and wins shaping a season, which doesn't seem to hav e been erased.

Hmm... thinking about the age/games comparison of Hawthorn and Melbourne. Another one of those cases where the use of average just makes a mess of things! Left to run the course, a team gains 484(+finals) games of experience in a year. Plus 40ish years of age (1 year each, yeah?) Here's a scenario - If McDonald and Bruce retire at the end of this season, that'll be about 450 games and 28 years of age taken off our list (assuming replacements are 18. One more delisting, say of Bell or Johnson, would mean that on paper we have a less experienced team next year than this year. Either of those guys would also bring the 'age' drop to 35. So the average team age would go up by... about a month and a half. If Danny Hughes, at 23, doesn't kick on from the rookie list, we'd be younger next year than this year. The most likely scenario is that, at the end of NEXT season, we will have added perhaps ten games per player, and maybe four months age. On paper. On avergae. But that time will see most of Watts, Scully, Trengove, Grimes, Jurrah, Strauss, Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, McKenzie, Garland, Bennell, Wonaeamirri, Maric and Petterd all going from very few games to around 50 or more. So the broad stats tell a completely different story to the reality. Today's stats lesson - don't trust averages. Always break your sample into segments.

Carlton, well in debt and under pressure to even pay off an AFL soft-loan on time, still manage to have tens of millions handy for a redevelopment. They have been able to pursue a high-risk business model because they are the proverbial 'too big to fail'. They should be sponsored by CitiBank. Meanwhile, Melbourne is running the lower risk, methodical, steady growth model. 'Debt Demolition' at Carlton would have immediately been spent on the next available competitive advantage. I'm assuming people are aware that Carlton are sitting on several million dollars of debt. Different attitudes. Different ways of reaching a goal. We might not 'pass' them on the field for two or three more years, but when we do, they will never climb back above us again.