DeeSpencer

I’ll take them on face value that their assistant was changing careers. And maybe even that they aren’t worried about Finnigan leaving, a chance to freshen up. The Hawks are still one of the best at recruiting though, so he must be respected. Luff cutting and running from the list management gig screams fall out with the coach, head of footy or CEO. Rawlings hired him I think. If it’s CEO or coach that’s a worry. Remember one of Roosy’s core lessons - you don’t get anywhere unless you’re united and stable.

The thing about the Jackson - Gawn combo is unless teams track and match our rotations (which would be very tricky) opponents won’t go against one of them individually. And by going against a combination they don’t get to settle. Ryder has to adapt his plan at centre bounces, and then even more so has to adapt his plan around the ground. Up against Gawn he has to constant position in better spots or play as a defender to avoid getting out marked. Up against Jackson he has to chase him around the ground. I can see why you’d rate Jackson very highly because every time Gawn comes out rather than getting relief you get a whole new challenge. The Saints know this as much as anyone because they do the same thing with Marshall!

For a long time being short has been seen as a disadvantage for afl footballers, and in many ways it is. But Spargo uses his status as being low to the ground to change direction quickly with quick steps and baulks and then to deliver short sharp kicks. Add in the free kicks he draws (at times cheekily) and he takes advantage of his lack of stature. He played a little on the wing on the weekend I think. I’d still love to see him get the occasional centre bounce, he might get pushed around but I think he’d be really creative in there.

I can’t recall seeing a player genuinely hemmed in on the boundary kicking it straight up the line towards team mates and get pinged. It’s usually a player running free at half back with plenty of room to go up the line of the square. Or a player towards the middle of the ground using the fact that the boundary narrows at half forward. The cost is a free kick, on the boundary, generally way away from goal. Worst case scenario isn’t usually that bad: We saw that with Brayshaw last year and the Cats coughing it right back! The way I see it is umps can pay it, get 80% or so of them right, and punish negative play. OR we can go to last touch. One or the other though. Really pessimistic defensive footy deserves punishment.

The umps will say ‘back 5’ if a player is 5m behind the mark, where they’re allowed to move sideways and not stand. A lot of teams are good at dropping more like 3m away from the mark and getting the same advantage of moving sideways.

If a players intent is to kick it to no one and gain ground then there’s insufficient intent to keep the ball in play. I loved those decisions in the eagles game. Dumping the ball down the line knowing the boundary will save a potential turnover absolutely should be punished. Id even expand it and punish any kids from outside 50 that trickle over the goal line and fail to score. Whether it’s a skill error or a kick for touch I don’t care, you don’t deserve a throw in for being that bad. And you absolutely don’t deserve one for kicking for touch.

Standing over the mark: a problem, I hate it. If a guy is over he still needs to be pulled back immediately. Players going off their line: umps have generally done a great job calling this play on once players wander sideways (hello C Petracca). Back 5: way too liberally allowed and officiated. If there’s nah doubt they should be made to stand. Dogs and cats kings of the back 3.

I think Harmes would've moved to full time wing and Melk would've been a really good chance to take Harmes' role. If both Harmes and Langdon were out pre-game....hmmm, tricky. I'm still not sure who'd they choose out of Melksham, Baker or moving Gus and bringing in a defender. Melk hasn't played a lot on the wing but Goodwin's track record is picking him and not picking Baker.

When Brayshaw and Jordon both started on the wing they had some low possession games too. I wasn’t at the game to see if Melk was positioning correctly but it didn’t appear like North were suddenly galavanting up his wing. But that defensive work is more important than disposals. If Langdon’s out he probably did well enough to keep the spot if they don’t want to move Gus now. If there’s other options for the wing and the competition for a half forward/on ball rotation is Melk v Dunstan v Bedford then I really can’t have a strong opinion either way on that.

I wish they'd actually explain these incidents. A big dumping tackle is a reportable offence. They can state why they think it wasn't or why the level of force makes it less than a fine or suspension, but instead they don't. There's not actually any explanation in their explanation!

It's the second time Thomas has injured one of our players in 2 games this year. He likes to dish it out, not sure if he puts himself on the line to the same extent. But I'd certainly love that tackle it was Viney or Kossie.

We won a premiership on the basis of our key defenders and Max marking or clean spoiling the ball. Every AFL coach talks up the importance of forwards bring the ball down. And Weid has plenty of games where he doesn’t get to the right spots or gets bodied off it. Brown’s isn’t perfect, he can be moved off the line too easily too, but in terms of positioning and competing in the air I think he’s far better

Brown just about never but I’m fairly sure Tom did it in the last few weeks. McDonald’s 11 pressure acts is very solid for a key forward. Miles ahead of Weid’s 5.6. (And Brown’s 6). Maybe JVR could be at 8-10 pressure acts and lay a few tackles, but his VFL form just hasn’t suggested he’s a reliable goal kicker or mark at that level yet. 1 good game isn’t enough for a debut. Watch this video from a week and a half ago. Choco isn’t pushing JVR as ready to go at all Brown had a couple of goal assists, took a nice clunk mark and missed a sitter. Bought it to the ground at times fairly well. Walker and Corr played him well, the delivery was awful and McDonald, Fritsch and Gawn got the shots at goal this week. Weid’s had a good chance this year, he hasn’t delivered.

A teenage tall who probably blows up by half time and Weideman, who hasn’t chased down anyone since 2018 isn’t going to fix our lack of speed in the forward line. Tom might need a rest if he’s injured but otherwise he’s doing his job since he came back in to the side. Brown and Weid are pretty much the same player defensively but in attack Brown’s worst days are less frequent and less bad. Brown is the one player from our list that I think should be managed through the season like he was last year. There was a good argument not to take him to Perth and/or to avoid 6 day breaks. But he also needs continuity and unless he plays a true shocker I’d lock him in for the next 3 weeks before the bye.

Harmes out and doubts over Viney, Langdon. Hopefully they’re back. None of Melk, Bedford or Dunstan impressed in any way. Doubt Salem will be ready. Left field options would be Turner, Deak Smith, Rosman at half back with Gus to the wing. Baker on the wing. Or Andy Moniz-Wakefield. Personally I’d really consider a look at Deakyn Smith down back and move Gus back to the wing.

Some classic Melk marking contests that resulted in easy marks to North too.

Whilst day to day life might become easier they’d be a lot of scrutiny on his move. It might just be easier to play out his last two years at Richmond then see where he’s at after that. I’m also not convinced the Swans would sign right up for his salary. That might require a bit of give and take from all 3 parties to make it work.

The only complicating factor is the Harmes role. We saw exactly what Goody did with the 5 covid absences being covered as like for like as possible. Harmes is the 3rd wingman, an on baller, a pressure forward and a marking forward. No one can cover all of those roles Harmes plays. I think it will be Bedford primarily forward and we’ll see Sparrow or even Fritsch play some wing, and ANB and even Bedford on ball for stints. But there is a case for Dunstan in to fill the midfield minutes and to fill the wing and forward minutes with the resting mids

Tom’s not great but better than horrific defensively. Mitch did nothing for 3/4’s then kicked a couple as the Hawks ran out of legs, it wasn’t anything worth getting excited about.

Mitch Brown doesn’t get games because he’s inconsistent at the contest and poor defensively. He’s a backup in case of emergency or if needed for a specific role. Even though Weid isn’t quite consistent at VFL level his contested work is stronger, hence why he’s preferred. Young players will be considered and picked when they demonstrate consistent AFL like efforts not just 1 flashy game. Bedford is now a consistent performer. As is Chandler. They chase, tackle and win the ball. Hence they are next in line. JVR played close to a complete game vs North, if he starts to do that regularly against decent opponents he’ll put his name up. Laurie was barely a factor in the game until the last quarter, it wasn’t the kind of performance coaches would be impressed by.

I’m not saying he won’t be a good player but he doesn’t rack up the ball at VFL level yet and his defensive work for a small forward is miles off the pace. That’s not a combination that is anywhere near an AFL debut if there’s ready to go alternatives like Bedford and Dunstan

Bowey was best on ground in his first VFL practice match and performed well for most of the VFL season. They gave him things to work on and he ticked them off. The current crop of youngsters have played 1 good game against absolutely hopeless opposition. It’s unlikely they’ve suddenly ticked off all the things they need to do to play well at VFL week in week out, yet alone prepared for AFL. They all need to show consistently good VFL form, otherwise a debut is a waste of time.

The issue with the tackle is Chandler being a lefty he wants to take him down on his natural left side, he jumps and puts a lot forward momentum in to the tackle. It takes a long time for Chandler to come down and that makes it really driving. Chase down tackles really need to pull a player back and down rather than drive them forward. Combine that with the rotation back towards front on as Foley attempts to brace himself and it’s a bad result. The big contributing factors are the rock hard turf that they slide along and the fresh player coming on full of running due to the sub rule.

It’s slippery largely in part because it’s so hard, there’s no traction when players change direction. It looks like wearing footy boots on green painted floorboards

When we lost Frawley we were bad and needed draft picks. The only reason not to be absolutely delighted with pick 3 was our history of draft bungles and even that was a stretch. When we lost Hogan we immediately put pick 6 on the table and got May in because we were in our window and needed a ready made replacement. There’s an argument to letting Brayshaw go and using the pick and money to trade or draft a competent wing/flanker and coming out ahead in youth and dollars. That’s easy to see. I don’t think it’s easy to replace Jackson and with his age it’s hard to sell it as a win for the future and it certainly costs the present. We’d owe it to the current team to find a ready made ruck/forward replacement and that isn’t always easy or cheap either. At the end of the day though I don’t think we’ll be aggressively choosing to keep them or move them based on what we’ll get back. They’re good team mates and people as well as good players, you don’t push guys like that based on theoretical returns in 5-10 years time. We’ll offer the right contracts based on their value to us, if the players go then we’ll decide how to maximise the returns.