Akum

Trengove

The one that causes him to seek a transfer to a better club.

There are big problems with all three of those options. The best option - Frost, who was brought in to cover just this situation - isn't available. Jamar solo would be far too great a risk. Sandi was largely responsible for Freo being 48 points in front of Sydney at half time. Whoever supports Jamar will be on the ball for 20% game time, and in the back pocket against Clarke for 60-70% game time. Neither of them fill anyone with confidence in that scenario. Spencer is better on the ball, but in defence??

Getting more used to the idea of Fitzpatrick as Jamar's backup while defending against the resting rucks - if Zac Clarke & Sandi play forward when they're not on the ball, we simply don't have another physical match-up for them. Unless the plan is for someone like Dunn to run off them as much as possible, which would be a big gamble. Spencer playing most of the game in defence would just be too great a risk. Tho' Frost could have been perfect for this game. I don't like T.Mac on Pav, not to start anyway. He won't be able to risk running off Pav, but he should be able to run off Tabberner. If our recent games against Freo are any guide, we'll need everything we can muster to avoid getting strangled, and this will include T.Mac's run out of defence. Considering Garland's been in such great form, I'd like him to get first crack at the Pav, though it does takes him away from the resting mids. It may have to be Dunn.

Could he slot in to Tyson's place if Dom can't play this week??? Then we slot Matt Jones into Newton's place. Something to be said for a left-footed mid at the centre bounce. If anything, his disposal by foot is better than Dom's in recent times, tho' Dom at his best has this amazing ability to find space.

Nailed it perfectly.

Apparently Mundy plays deeper these days & spends 60% of his time on the ground across half-back as a defensive mid. He's apparently taken his game up another notch & generating a lot of drive for them. If we're to avoid getting strangled yet again, we'll have to nullify him, and stop him generating drive as well. Mundy wouldn't have had many opponents who could match him for speed, height & strength & are even more aggressive. So he might be a better match-up for VandenBerg. It's a massive ask in his 5th AFL game tho'.

Michie made a huge difference when he came on - 19 possessions at the coalface in a little over half the game. He was one of the major reasons for us getting 6 goals to 1 after half time. But by all means, judge a player's performance purely by one or two mistakes. It's definitely not how the coaching team does it, though.

There were another couple of shockers that involved a Richmond player coming towards a Melbourne player who couldn't avoid contact, & getting a free. One was the ball rolling towards Michie who got low to trap it. Cotchin was following the ball, tried to kick it away from Michie then fell over him. Michie, who was more or less stationary, was penalised for taking out Cotchin's legs. This free is supposed to stop the Gary Rohan situation - the player sliding in and taking out an opponent's legs. It wasn't for someone running towards a player low down on the ground and then falling over them. This was the occasion when Michie got a knee or boot to the ribs, and why he was struggling to breathe afterwards. The other one was a Richmond player (Graham?) bending down for the ball deep in their forward line, then staying down while running forwards into Lumumba, hitting their head against his hip and getting a free for high contact. Again, when it's the player with the head down who's moving and they run into an opponent head first, it's either play on or incorrect disposal. Both should depend on who's moving towards the contact. Instead of it being paid as a reflex against the unfavoured team.

Was Jeffy practising his set shots? Was Watts doing OK with his tackling drills, or not? Was it just him doing the tackling, or was it also about breaking tackles or standing up in tackles? Any hints as to who might take on Fyfe?

Fair enough. They would plan in a general sense - in the past 2 games they've clearly been trying to move the ball quickly, to play thru the corridor, to kick long unless there's a definite short option. They'd never go in without any plan or purpose. Their stoppage work seems to be better organised too. In the past 2 matches there's been far less of the spectacle of 3 Demons going for the ball at a stoppage, while 1 opponent gets the ball out to a teammate and we're chasing. Or expecting Jones to win the disputed ball in heavy traffic and then get a clearance. They seem to be working as a team within the team, and combining better. That was enough against Tiges, but it won't be enough against Freo. We'll need a specific plan to avoid getting smashed at stoppages, possibly without Tyson, one of our best clearance players. Lyon will tighten up the corridor so we won't be able to use it as easily as we did last game, so we'll need to plan to move the ball quickly with a more congested corridor, or we'll just end up getting strangled the whole match. Freo's forwards will put our backs under more pressure so it will be harder to launch attacks from half back while having to counter their dangerous forwards. So that's what I mean when I say that if we take this like any other game, it could get ugly. Our only chance of beating Freo is to plan specifically for where we are at risk of falling apart.

Fair enough.

I'd like to see them go into this game with a plan of how to win it. What the plan actually does is less important. This one might work or it might not, but we need to try something. I'll be really disappointed to hear after the match, "Oh, we just prepared like any other game, we didn't have anything special pre-planned. We just took it as it comes." That equals a 10-12 goal loss.

Calling all bogans! Hey, guess what? AFL coaches are fair game! You can scream anything you like in their face - hell, you can maybe even spit on them - and they can't do nothing! And if they do anything, their stupid club will even make them apologise to you. So you can just keep nudging them and screaming in their face until they crack! And if you catch it on your mobile, you can make heaps by selling it to TV, and even get it to lead the evening news. And as long as you're not a member of a footy club, nothing bad happens. Even if they find out who you are, they won't tell anyone. So it's now open season on AFL coaches. This has been handled appallingly by all concerned. Except the bogan - in his wildest dreams it couldn't have worked out better for him so far.

It's not just Sandi, it's Clarke as well. Jamar can't take them both on. Jamar relies on his strength and body use, but he's no match for Sandi physically. If Jamar gets smashed, we get smashed - like 2nd half vs GWS. We must have another option, even if it's not a great one. In general I'm a big advocate of the part of your post that I've bolded. If Jamar can hold his own and the back-up ruck isn't that good, we're far better to go in with an extra runner. But it's horses for courses, and Freo are the big exception to his general rule.

Could we have the likes of Howe (in defence) & Watts (in attack) going third man up against Sandi all day at every single ball-up and throw-in? If they make it known to the umps that they were going to do this at every opportunity, do Freo have the right to block them without giving away a free? What are the rules with third man up? And could we have Spencer at centre bounces just crashing into him with knees & elbows for the first half or first three quarters? Spencer would have to be training like crazy with Stafford at hitting hard with physical contact but not infringing. Being bigger and heavier than anyone else, it's just too easy (competitively and physically) for him to stand his ground and wrestle at stoppages, so he never gets crunched. Spencer, who has a good tank, could also run him around as much as possible, and Sandi should be tackled to the ground as much as possible when he has the ball, so that he has to pick his huge frame up off the ground twenty or thirty times before contesting a stoppage. I don't know that Sandi's ever been put under that sort of physical pressure. I get the feeling it won't bother him and he'll smash us anyway, but you never know. You can't wrestle him, you can't jump over him, so why not try this and put the "bruise-free" tag to bed for good?

Does it worry you that Spencer played great & got 28 hit-outs, while Gawn was awful but got 26 hit-outs? Is this right? Can anyone clarify who was against Minson most of the time? Plapp's player reviews will be interesting reading.

On the other hand, Freo would know Port & Cats & Sydney inside & out. We're more of an unknown quantity. They'd know Jones, Vince (tho' not as a tagger), Dawes, Jamar. But they wouldn't know vdB, Newton (can he play the Tyson role?), Brayshaw, Salem, and they can only guess at Hogan. And the likes of Lumumba & Garlett are now playing different roles than before. And what's been good about us is that after our smashing by GWS, we improved a lot against Crows & then improved more again vs. Tiges. We're starting now to gel better as a team, and that can only improve. When we do click as a team, we'll be dangerous against anyone. The Doggies clicked against Crows: why shouldn't it be our turn next? If we can improve again over our Tiges performance, we could go close. And we'll hit them hard. But we'll be under much more pressure, and we'll struggle to see as much of the ball.

You're kidding, right? OK, I'll make it really simple. Clarko should be held to account for what he did. And the cretin should be held to account for what he did. He wanted media attention, he can't now hide behind anonymity. Figured it now?

And of course it's not just the number of tackles, it's the quality. Nobody but nobody gets the ball out when he puts the clamps on them. And nobody but nobody ever breaks the tackle.

You left out a couple of steps. If that happened to a mate of yours & you were there, wouldn't you at least step in between them & separate them? If you got decked doing it, THEN you've got a serious assault case. Channel 7 should find out who he is (and it would have been him who gave them the footage which they've probably paid for, so they should know), splash his name & face all over the media, let his family & employers find out. This guy deserves having every shock-jock and narcisso-journalist in the country down his throat for the next 4 weeks or more. Remember what happened to that 12yo girl who called Adam Goodes an ape? She probably copped too much in the end. But this guy deserves all that 10 times over.

If we can nullify their strengths, we could be in with a good show. In the recent past, we've been taken apart by Pav, Fyfe (or Mundy if we cover Fyfe) & Sandi. With Vince, Cross, vdB & Newton, I'm more confident that we can do better against their big-bodied mids. VdB had some great quarters in the first 3 games, because he's an unknown quantity and oppositions can't plan for him, and he's such a difficult match-up. He still struggles to stay in the game over 4 quarters, but he's getting better at that every week. Newton seems to have the tools to be Tyson Mark II, if he's given Tyson's role he could do OK, given that Tyson hasn't been at his best. Pav is going to be a problem. He's a difficult match-up for TMac, and we'll miss some drive out of defence because Tom won't be able to run off him. It will fall back to either Garland (who's started the season in great form, but he'd have to be right at the top of his game) or Dunn. On the other hand, McPharlin will have his hands full with Hoges, and like Rance, peeling off Hoges to try to run off him or to go third man up is too much of a risk, so they'll lose a lot of drive. Sandi & Clarke are the big problem. We saw what happened against GWS when Jamar has to battle alone against a top-class ruckman who can go all game. And Sandi also has a very good back-up in Clarke. No way we can rely on Jamar & Dawes to do the job, we'll have to bring in another ruck, even if it's Spencer or Gawn, just to provide a physical contest. For the first time for years, I think we can cover Pav and the big mids, and match up with them fairly well elsewhere. But there's a massive danger of Sandi getting hold of the game and being the difference.

For those who were at the game, what is the prospect of Spencer coming in for Kent to assist Jamar with Sandi & Clarke? Sounds like Spencer was better than Gawn, but was he good enough to compete reasonably against the best in the business?

Just heard the Port CEO (I think) on the radio news criticising the guy & promising that they'll take further action. Well done. What Clarko did was dumb, but St Francis of Assisi probably would have snotted the guy.

In general I'd agree with you. Bombing it long is the lowest-percentage play imaginable. The one exception is on a fast break to get it in quickly to catch the defence out of position. Which is exactly what he did, by kicking it hard & reasonably low.