The Chazz

Oh well, if he manages to punch out a reasonable career in this industry, none of the above will be accurate.

Melksham vs Stewart Fritsch vs Henry Hannan vs O'Connor Tmc vs Blicavs AVB vs Kolodjashnij Hunt vs Tuohy We can play those three in the same team, but they just need to give each other space, and be quick to work out who is on top of their opponent. For example, the Melksham/Stewart math-up needs to start in the goal square. Stewart hates playing last line, so drag him back there. That means Hannan, Fritsch and AVB just need to clear out. If Stewart manages to get on top of Melksham, then Melky needs to take him out, and Fritsch is to drag Henry back, because I think Henry is the next vulnerable defender out of that group. McDonald needs to take Blicavs anywhere other than our forward 50. I'm happy for Tom to have zero possessions, if it means Blicavs is nowhere near it. Either that, or McDonald picks up his possessions high half forward. An interesting aside, looking at Geelong's bench, they have (from) Ablett, Bews, Guthrie, Duncan, Steven, Henderson, Parsons and Clark. The 3 I underlined will play, so based on that, I have crossed out the ones I don't expect to play. That only leaves Bews or Stevens, which I expect them to play Stevens. Based on their selections, and watching their game last week, this is a big week for K Pickett. Geelong couldn't stop Betts last week. Big ask for a 2nd gamer, but he has a chance to do something special this week. Our focus HAS to be getting these match-ups right and won. We win this area and it takes away Geelong's entire forward movement, and on their day, our half forwards can kick goals, and lots of them! We lose this area, it won't matter what connection our defenders have with each other, they will get belted, and so will we on the scoreboard.

They share the same sentiment as me - our best is better than theirs, but our inconsistency is crippling. That's why this week, the right match-ups will get us half way there, the other half requires us to execute. Do that, we win. Simples.

Was always going to be my concern, Ethan, hence why I was calling for Brown to be called up. What it has allowed Geelong to do is "rest" Taylor, who can be a liability for them, and bring in another hard, mature, running half back, which is an area that is of greater strength than our half forwards. The ball is going to be bouncing out of our forward line so quick that our backs will have no chance of stopping it. Hawkins will likely kick 5 or 6, and the usual suspects will be putting all the blame on May. He (May) is on a hiding to nothing in this game. I'll tolerate a loss, but if that Miers kid has a day out, I could literally throw up on my TV. Need to bring in Lockhart to shut him down, will be the only one that can.

To be fair, OD, it does look like Jetta is dancing with his annoying little brother...!

What frustrates me about this "forward connection" is that the connection between mids/half forwards to forwards should be forward leads in to space, the mid hits the target. If the ball hits the deck, smaller forwards get the crumbs. It has been like that since footy was invented. Richmond have won 2 premierships in the last 3 years by not overcomplicating things. Maybe Bennell out, Brown in? I'd live with that.

Great, does that mean Smith is going to stay in the backline? That said, he could actually be a perfect match-up on Gary Rohan. Nev to Ablett, May to Hawkins, Lever to the Rat. I continually say, head to head I think we match up better than Geelong.

Problem with this vs Geelong is that their smaller/medium size half backs are far better than our smaller/medium size half forwards. We're talking; Hunt, ANB, AVB, Melksham, Fritsch, Bennell, Pickett, Hannan vs Stewart, Tuohy, Bews, Kolodjashnij, Jordan Clark (who I rate highly) I think this area is Geelong's strength, moreso than their key defenders. That's why we must put in a lot of time working out our match-ups against them, and that's why I would be trying to pick a team that is designed to limit our opponent's strengths. The Geelong side, week to week, make very few changes, which is why they know and player their role so well.

Grimes Times, you have highlighted to be risk - "if our delivery is right". I haven't seen "right" for close to 18 months. If we go in with a Hannan vs Taylor type of match up, if our delivery isn't right we will get flogged. The Geelong defence is too consistent, especially up against our terribly inconsistent forward 50 delivery. Brown (or Weid) are capable of competing in the air if our delivery is off, which will bring the ball to ground for our smalls/medium size forwards. If our delivery is on, Brown/Weid are more than capable of taking Taylor to the cleaners. We actually need Taylor playing to give ourselves a better chance. Blicavs won't play sole ruck, they will bring in Fort. You can put your house on that.

You stop Stewart from going where he wants by getting Melksham to tag him. Melksham then makes him accountable because he is strong on both sides, is good at ground level, and can kick goals. If need be, he drags him to the goal square, and you clear the forward line out. Stewart is a very vulnerable defender if matched up right, the above is the easiest and best way to exploit this.

Damn, now we are no chance.

Interesting to hear that Teague's recipe to beat Geelong was to isolate Geelong's defenders, making it next to impossible for them to zone off and start their forward run from their half back line (which is how they love to play). With that in mind, I want to see Melksham tag Stewart and make him accountable. I want to see TMc go to Blicavs, which leaves Harry Taylor. I'd bring in Brown or Weid to play on Taylor (Brown if all the highlights we've seen are all the highlights). Have Hunt playing on Tuohy. I'm reluctant to make a change, but could see Brown for Hannan (unlucky for Mitch, I'm a fan, but I think it gives us better balance). Realistically, Geelong should be an easy team to match up on for us. We have players that should be able to beat most of theirs, but our consistency across 4 quarters is what always brings us unstuck against this mob. When we get it right, we generally outplay them.

Our best is as good as anyone. Our consistency is as bad as anyone. Our ability to let the psychological part of the game is worse than anyone. Conclusion? We need to fix the bottom one, which will significantly help the middle one, which will see more of the first one. It's a "Yes" from me (ie capable of winning a flag), but has conditions. Sadly, I don't trust our ability to meet the conditions. (I know that's a contradiction, but that's where we are at!).

Firstly, looking at your last paragraph, and a few of the things you have said to SWYL in this thread, how about you play the ball and not the man? Now, with form this year, this is where it's going to be a tricky year for some players. No VFL games to prove your improvement (or for us to observe), scratch matches that are good for match fitness and not much else (due to the reduction of players playing), so we will be basically relying on the actual seniors game (which we can only see what the cameras allow us) and form on the track at Casey (which we can't see). Our FD get to see a lot more than what you, and the rest of us, do. We can only trust they are making their decisions based on all of the "other" stuff that we don't see. Then all we can do is make our judgements based on what we see on the field (and ultimately the scoreboard).

The preseason game you referred to as part of your argument saw Weid basically play the whole game in the ruck, not as the forward/ruck that you are now wanting him to play in the seniors. I think you have chosen the wrong game to support your argument, which raises a different argument of which game could you choose to support it? Naturally we could look at the scratch match last week, but then when others have looked at more of that game than just his 5 goals, you've dismissed them.

I'm confused by your argument here. What you are saying is that Weid excelled in the preseason when given a specific role, which was to ruck, then say they are clearly refusing to play him. Given what you have just said, would that not make it that he is competing for Gawn's spot?

An interesting comparison would be to see how many games a coach coached before they won a premiership. The other thing is that while we are obviously in the game to win a flag, we can't win them if we are regularly missing the finals. This is where the Buckley situation at Collingwood is a good case study - he has coached 184 games, but hasn't won a flag. But one thing his side has done of recent years is maintained their spot in the upper echelon of teams playing at the moment. If he doesn't win a flag in the next 2-3 years, at what point will Collingwood move him on? And will that mean he has been a failure? Chris Scott is probably an even better example. If you take out his first season where he was gifted a flag, he's coached around the same amount of games as Buckley without a premiership. Most Geelong supporters I know will say that he has underachieved in his time. Part of me would love it if Goody underachieved to the same degree as Scott.

So it's fair to say he's more than qualified to make that call? You can easily argue that St Kilda underdelivered during the 2008-2011 period. Perhaps he was aware of where his side fell short and was pointing out a similar trait?

Gawn looks as awkward AF, May knew it was wrong, Viney wanted to crawl in to a hole. Shouldn't have happened. Side note, seriously hope they don't do a repeat of Hermes holding a gopro again. Cringeworthy footage at best, and something that the players should get to enjoy in the inner sanctum. We get the broadcast footage of the song, that's enough.

See Pates' response directly below yours. Had a lot to do with it, and that was amongst a few other things.

Not rubbish at all. The last time I spoke with Adem, granted it was a few years ago now, he was far from complimentary about the MFC. Now, enough personnel (both in the football department and admin) may have turned over for him to reconsider, but it would've taken a seriously substantial offer. That said, the last I checked he was still in Clarkson's box. Could this be one of those times where we are both right? I know I definitely am.

This was always going to have two sides - those that think it's nothing, and those that think it was poor. It was a bad look when I first saw it. You've got a player that has captained his first win, and two new to the club players that were having their first win for us too. I can remember few years back I was captain of a side. It was our first season in a new competition, and we lost our first 8 games or so. When we managed to jag out first win, I would've been ropable if they sang the some without me. Regardless of the strange circumstances with social distancing, etc, you don't make these mistakes. I questioned the club's professionalism last week, and this was just another head-shaking moment for mine. We ask again, does this sort of thing happen at the "big" clubs? I remember the Geelong blokes taking the wee a few years back, pretending to fall asleep during the song (think it was James Kelly and Stokes). The behaviour got squashed by the leaders pretty quickly.

Interestingly, as many times as this is brought up, Carey produced a list of the best 20 players he has seen, and Neitz isn't on it... https://www.sen.com.au/news/2020/04/06/the-best-20-players-wayne-carey-has-seen/ While there are players like Dunstall on the list, a large majority of the 20 are player that Carey would've played against. Glen Jakovich is on the list.

Logic says that; Out - Jackson, Jones, Smith In - Weid, Pickett, OMac or Hibberd (the latter two to be determined by match-ups) Reality says that Goodwin won't drop Jones (emotional choice), Smith (loves him) or Jackson (won't drop him after a week), so I have NFI who will come out for Pickett, who will definitely come in. Maybe he will drop ANB, given that he came in for Kossie before his brain fart.

Would be very surprised if Yze would want to come back anway. I know for fact that he was filthy with the club when he left, and as a "one club player", to walk out of said one club in that frame of mind would make it very difficult for him to return in any role.