DeeSpencer

If we offered Tracc a 5 year deal the only way he probably signs it is if it’s at 1.2 a season. That’s how he gets his 6 million minus a hefty tax bill. By going to 7 years at 900k he gets his 6+ million, loses less in tax and we get 300k per season more in cap space. The entire strategy with Gawn, Lever, Viney, Harmes, May, Salem, Langdon, Tomlinson is to have all those guys signed up on long deals so each takes less per year. Oliver’s done a short term re up then probably gets a long deal when he’s at free agency age. Fritsch the same. If we save anywhere between 100-300k a season by going longer deals on 8 or so of our big names we can then bank 1M to put towards the next generation and any recruits. Kane has this idea that the short deal would save us cap space. It’s nonsense. That only works if Petracca plays poorly or we trade him. The long term deal is how we save cap space.

Even with the new rules providing some relief it's really hard to be an unathletic key forward. We already had 2, and for some reason decided to add a 3rd. There's some hope with Tom McDonald recapturing his leap and ability to find space on the lead, but he still can't turn or change direction quickly. Jackson and Fritsch don't really provide any solutions because Fritsch is still meh defensively (if somewhat improved) and Jackson does his best work up the ground as a forward or in the ruck. More ruck minutes for Jackson = more Gawn forward = another even less mobile tall forward target. The best combination with Jackson and Fritsch is just 1 genuine tall in a CHF role. That's what Tom's provided and why it has worked well. Can Tom keep it up? Who knows. But he's more likely to do so when given more responsibility in that role than trying to share it. Can Brown do the same job - yes, although he has to embrace doing more dirty work and realise he's not the 60 goal full forward. Can Weid do it? Well, maybe if his tank is at full capacity, and he did it last year before he ran out of juice late. Brown, Weideman, Jackson, Fritsch. It just isn't going to work. The quicker we stop pretending the better for everyone. I've maintained all along that Brown will cost us Weid, and maybe that's ok and we just accept it. Brown could be the better player for the next couple of years and Weid could maintain his level of just marginal AFL talent. So it might be the opportunity to actually find a long term replacement.

Petty's second half against Hawthorn was pretty good too. That Hawthorn game had 3 tall forwards and the pressure didn't work then either. I think Melksham for another pressure small will be considered but overall I think Melksham gives us 5 on ballers (Petracca, Oliver, JJ, Sparrow, Melk), which means the 4 of those apart from Oliver can all play a decent amount forward and contribute to the pressure whilst keeping fresh. The forwards chasing and harassing to create pressure only works when paired with the mids covering all the exists, so we can't get too light on for mids.

I still have big doubts on the Brown/McDonald/Fritsch/ruckman combination, especially if it's a slippery night. My guess is one of those guys - likely McDonald - takes a spell on the wing for at least some part of the game to mix the forward line look up. Sparrow and Petty for Baker and Tomlinson seem the likely changes. Given he played practically a full game last week I'd have Jones as the medical sub and give the young guys a good run at Casey.

Tom Browne's report pretty much was based around other clubs saying they've asked about Petracca and his manager has said 'he's not interested'. Personally I reckon there's probably a lot more to do to complete a deal. Petracca will want to stay and the club will have a rough ball park of the money he's worth but after that there's so many factors on how to get the deal done. The Dogs right now are negotiating with Bont who is 1.0001 to stay and to get a huge deal, but they are working through all sorts of factors with the structure. There's a long way between Petracca indicating he's happy to stay and the club indicating a ball park figure and everything getting signed and sealed.

If Fritsch doesn't try to fend they both clash heads and both end up in the concussion protocol. An unfortunate accident but no damage done.

Depending on your definition of top liner I wouldn’t be 100% sure on that with either of those guys, but particularly Jordon. He’s a late birth date just eligible for the draft, and his rate of improvement from years 1-3 has been quite outstanding. Clearly he’s built his tank a lot but I reckon there’s still plenty of scope with his strength and power. He might lack the traits to be a game changer but that’s true of most mids. There’s a clear path for him to become a very solid midfielder and from there who knows. The Brownlow top 10 and AA team are full of mids who started from humble beginnings. Club best and fairests even more so.

I’ve long been a Salem in the midfield guy but really the high half forward and high half back positions are roles that require midfielders and see players play in the middle of the field! Salem gets more disposals and with as much impact at half back as he would in the middle. Rivers and hopefully Bowey are options to grow in to Salem’s role but I’m not in a rush to see it. Maybe a little look at Brayshaw to half back, Salem on ball, someone else to a wing could be an option if we want a small sample but it wouldn’t be a priority.

I thought he was a mixed bag, but Tommy was completely out of the game and we didn't move the ball from half back or hold possession by moving it around either. I don't think we need Fritsch, the ruck and 2 talls. At least until Brown is settled in the side and we can evaluate what he brings and his team mates learn to play with him I'd rather lean on the side of going smaller. He's got a big tank, he can come up the ground more, or lead over the back more like Fritsch does. The speed with which we spread when attacking makes hitting targets and far easier and opens room for our mids to run through. Going smaller isn't all just about defensive work rate, it's in attack as well.

IF Fritsch gets off: Out: Tomlinson, Baker In: Sparrow, Chandler Tommy Mc plays back. Brown/Fritsch/Jackson forward line. If Fritsch suspension is upheld/unchallenged: Out: Tomlinson, Baker, Fritsch In: Petty, Sparrow, Chandler FB: Hibberd May Tommy/Petty HB: Hunt Lever Salem C; Langers Petracca Gus HF: Spargo Jackson ANB FF: Pickett Brown Fritsch/Tommy Foll: Gawn Oliver JJ Int: Rivers, Sparrow, Chandler, Melksham

There was no forceful or deliberate striking motion. Purely a fend.

They both put elbows out to attempt to break tackles. Neither expected their opponents heads to be below shoulder high

It wasn’t a strike. There was no striking motion. The elbow was purely to fend and protect from a tackle. He can’t be charged with striking if it wasn’t a striking

I think I'm as negative as anyone on here about Ben Brown, but I wouldn't be making a call on his place in the finals - in 17 weeks time - based on his first up performance. That's about as useful as saying a horse won't win the Melbourne cup based on its first up run. The same goes for Tom as a defender. I wouldn't have done it, but he's just played there for a half and did a good job, and we need to go with a more mobile forward line against the Swans. If Tom got first crack at filling Tomlinson's role whilst Petty gets a bit more match fitness at Casey I wouldn't say it was going to be a disaster purely based on Tom's form in 2017 before he went forward. Matty Lloyd was an all time great but he was also a player who failed to adapt to the way the game changed. Both Tom and Ben can adapt if they are trained up correctly

The mcg does give more width but another factor might be even a night game under lights could be more friendly than the sun on Sunday! They were planning for too many sunny days when they decided to play footy on a ground that runs north-south. May in particular really struggled but it wasn’t easy for anyone facing in to the sun

I assume the points are based on the above formula. The chasing, closing and physical pressure all are vital in forcing rushed disposal from the opposition.

The midfield just weren’t winning the ball but at the same time a smaller forward line pressuring to lock the ball in and spreading to move the ball provides cover for the mids and backs. The forward line with one less tall in the second half moved the ball and locked it forward more efficiently. Obviously North tired pretty badly but we went from giving up 9 goals in the first half to just 2 goals after half time. Keeping that pressure on has to be our first priority.

Brown also means we can’t rest Gawn forward efficiently, the two of them in the same forward line is a disaster. So we have to either ruck Jackson less or decrease Gawn’s game time. Having a key forward who does absolutely nothing after he contests just limits the structure. The counter is he kicked 2, had one touched by an inch from outside 50 and had easy chances - mostly that one in the last. But if he doesn’t pressure he has to be a great lead up forward and start getting the ball up the ground. I’d drop him, but we’re 7-0 and he’s a 60 goal a year forward so maybe we stick with him to see how he improves and how we play around him.

In that last 3 weeks he's had a grand total of 2 tackles. He's moving well against VFL opponents but he's a poor pressure player, we've got years of evidence of that.

If Brown and T Mc was top heavy and didn't function why is anyone signing up for the idea of Brown and Weid together at AFL level? Even if Fritsch is out that's 2 big lumbering forwards which is at least 1, probably 2 too many. Have you all been living under rocks for the last 4 years and missed Richmond winning flags based on pressure?

Spot on. Danger punched the ball, left his elbow out and KO'ed Vlastuin in the grand final and it was fair game! Accidents happen but a core of the game is that the ball player should protect himself from copping injury and that everyone else works around it. It's the half a step that Fritsch takes from the gather to contact and the fact both players were down at knee high that makes it a pretty reasonable reaction to contact and not a reckless play. A player as lean as Fritsch is a monty to get sling tackled if he doesn't protect himself too. A fine to caution Fritsch I could understand, but more than that and you have to start picking all sorts of contact that results in injury. Brown and Walker split their heads open colliding and everyone is understand that it's going to happen and has happened for 100 years with no medical supervision, no care, no research and largely the game has gone on.

The big disappointment was how bad our senior players were playing. Gawn was flat out abysmal. Hitting it straight down North players throats, little pressure, flopping around for free kicks, making dumb decisions with the ball (please never kick short Max). It was everything that he hasn't been in recent weeks. Oliver and Petracca weren't winning the ball nor defending. Cunnington is going to win his share of the ball but he's pretty easy to force in to scrappy disposals if you pay him respect. The forward line pressure was unsurprisingly a mess but Tommy Mc didn't show any intent to take advantage of his match up with Walker by getting him way up the ground. Moving him back was just as much about getting him in the game as it was filling Tomlinson's spot. Lever was trying too hard to intercept rather than stick with his man. And May was doing the same only worse! Plus adding a degree of flopping around like an [censored] too. Our leaders have had a great first 6 weeks, but it's disappointing they were the ones to have the huge mental let downs not the younger players. Jackson, Pickett, Fritsch and some dumb luck kept us in it for a half really. North were both clever and good. They tagged Lever with a physical forward in Zuhaar and dragged him deep. They put speed in the midfield. They sat on Salem. They sent Simpkin out to a wing to tag and work off Langdon. Ziebell did a great job intercepting - and a less great job defending Fritsch (he's very Lever like). They moved the ball from side to side and hit up their leading forwards rather than bomb long. Certainly a tick for their game plan and execution for 2.5 quarters.

It was comically bad. Like he'd forgotten the rules or forgotten how to dispose of the ball. All progress with taking the easy option, not fumbling and making clear decisions was lost. It was the 2nd worst thing I saw all game, just behind Petracca waddling off the mark and getting called to play on repeatedly.

He certainly popped a few up today and whilst they were worrying they did land safely! He can flatten them out too - mostly on going for goal. He's certainly not a great kick but he does have upside there. He got on the burst a few times, didn't exactly break it open but there were times - used and unused - where he was running. He certainly has acceleration that Gus doesn't. But yeah, his kicking was better than anything else he did only because it was ok not bad. Otherwise I totally agree that he was poor and isn't high on my list, I was shocked he was picked. But short on Rosman going from fringe VFL player to AFL player in the next 10 weeks there's really no one else who can bring pace on the wing. Maybe that's ok. We've got Langdon. We've got Hunt at half back. We just live with some combination of Gus and maybe mix in some Harmes, Sparrow, JJ etc. Marlion Pickett and Liam Baker both created big openings against us. I can see why the coaches were thinking let's use this chance to have a look at Baker now, then we can try it again later on.

I thought his kicking was the best part of his game! Had a few nicer kicks dropped and didn't fluff many (or maybe any?). He's constantly half a second slow to react and pressure and he has very little idea on how to contest. I'd like to see him played at half back at Casey to develop his contested game. His run and carry and penetrating kick could be a weapon if he developed the rest of his game.