DeeSpencer

Did a good job on Dixon. Although looking at Dixon's stats for the year I wonder how that actually is. Unfortunately let his guard down against Westhoff a couple of times. Didn't adjust to the more mobile opponent. He also has to watch the ball and not let it go over his head like the Thomas ( I think) goal. The first 50 was a joke. The player marks after Oscar has left the ground to spoil and it was a reasonable spoil. The 2nd 50 was there. Oscar too fascinated by the ball and his ungainly attempt to spoil and was there way too late. Of course the number of missed 50's our way and the face it was a 70m penalty are for another discussion.

I thought his clean hands around the packs early made a big difference, but he lost confidence after the run down tackle and he was chasing Motlop or Polec (poorly) for a fair bit of the game. He's not the answer to make us better but I thought he wasn't the problem either. Did enough good and bad.

I don't see them as a pairing. Vince does anywhere between 3 to 30 ridiculous things a game but otherwise he's just Bernie but a little slower with less penetration on the kicking. The guy will still go most of the time when it's his turn to go and he often takes a taller opponent given we aren't playing a designated 3rd tall (or even a designated 2nd to be more correct). With Lever and Hunt injured the replacement for Bernie is either Wagner - who doesn't inspire confidence or a first year kid in Petty. I understand why the coaches are reluctant to chuck a kid in, even if I think it's time. Lewis is completely different to me. He's playing as the loosest defender - a prime position to get a lot of the ball and impact games. And yeah he's solid enough with the ball in the uncontested kicking game, and that's important, but I'd love to see Salem or Fritsch in that role, both guys with more kicking penetration and the speed to take it on. When it gets close in tight Lewis won't turn left. He can't even handball on his right hand, so he's always looking to go in one direction. Can't break a tackle so we throw it away before it comes to that. His kicks often end up wild up an unders. And the defending. The awful awful defending. If he's not in the perfect position he just can't offer anything.

FB: Hibberd Oscar Jetta HB: Salem Petty Fritsch C; Tyson Oliver Jones HF: Spargo Hogan Melksham FF: Petracca Tommy Mc Hannan Foll: Gawn Brayshaw Viney Int: J. Smith, Harmes, T. Smith, ANB Bye bye: Vince, Lewis In: Petty, Spargo Very open to dropping Harmes and Petracca but the forward/mid stocks are light on as it is and we have to redeploy Fritsch to half back to replace Lewis and bring in Spargo as is.

Another awful performance from Plugga Lewis. To all the people who said mean things about me in this thread, don't worry, I'm not angry. Will gladly accept any and all apologies.

I'd have: Petty for Vince - get a genuine CHB in to build the structure around, Vince the defender with the worst form Garlett for Hannan - Hannan hasn't nailed the spot so back to flaky Jeff in the hope he can produce Tim Smith for Pedersen - the 3 big talls plus Melksham/Petracca makes a top heavy forward line that doesn't tackle enough, the extra mobility/pressure of Smith helps Tyson for Spargo - I didn't want to drop Spargs but the extra mid lets us keep Tommy forward and we get versatility with who goes inside/outside/forward. Probably should be Harmes or Petracca dropped but they have greater upside/flexibility. Strengthen our strength which has to be around the ball FB: Hibberd Oscar Jetta HB: J. Smith Petty Salem C; Tyson Oliver Fritsch HF: ANB Hogan Petracca FF: Melksham T Mc Garlett Foll: Gawn Jones Viney Int: Lewis, Brayshaw, Harmes, T. Smith

I can't imagine a max exodus from the MCC bars to pack in to a modern version of a social clubs, those days are long gone, but I can see the club offering post game drink invites to certain select members, most of whom have reserved seats in Northern Stand or are MCC members and it's the perfect location for that. I've often thought extending over the Richmond rail corridor near the tennis centre when the Southern Stand was redeveloped was our best chance to build an MCG adjacent facility. Jolimont is just as good and surely a simple proposition building over 2 rail lines instead of the 12 or so that run to Richmond!

Bit silly to have Fritsch ahead of Cerra, Rayner, Naughton and Brayshaw. They should be 4-7 on this list. Fritsch a good candidate to be number 8 though.

16 VFL and 1 AFL game last year isn't a bad return for his first season, I think he only had some assorted niggles last year. Then a hip injury this year. As long as they get it right I don't think it will impact his career long term. The main downside is he needs games to develop ASAP, but the trade off here is he can probably do a heap of lighter skill work as he rehabs. I still like his potential as a tagger/stoppage specialist, he has the size and athleticism to go with the big name mids.

With a minimal amount of landscaping those pathways should all be protected, certainly the long stretch from Richmond Station to the G won't be even close to impacted and the walk down from Jolimont should also be untouched. The area is already used as the AFL Live site/ Grand Final parade finishing spot. It's not nearly as steep as people thing.

The Pullman and other buildings opposite the station are 10+ stories, and the RACGP building directly opposite the proposed site is 6 stories. If the Government gives the approval to build above the train tracks I don't see a reasonable argument against a 6 story building. Covering over the train lines should mean increased pedestrian access. I don't think this piece of land slopes nearly as much as some of Yarra Park but it would be a challenge. It's a matter of selling the oval as a part of the park and as a community facility. I know East Melbourne residents are a certain type but there's Fitzroy Gardens, Treasury Gardens and the rest of Yarra Park to be enjoyed as purely park spaces. With apartments going up all over the city of Yarra and population booming the strong argument should be made that they need ovals. Council's can create parks from acquiring properties or re purposing car parks. Unless they have a huge vacant area they can't do that for an oval.

A professional quality oval for community use would be a huge win for the council. Especially with the rise of Women's footy. They'd have no problems finding clubs to allocate it to. The development over the train tracks comes down to whether it will be approved for apartments next to our site. You put a few apartment buildings and you've got a council rates bonanza. That's the income councils love. Shutting down the trains for a select period of time to build over the eye saw that is exposed tracks and create useful community space and housing. That's a win win. Then Melbourne build next door with a community oval, medical facilities, maybe even make the gym public use outside of certain hours, some form of Indigenous cultural centre - pretty much you are doing the council a favour!

You can run it across that corner of land and pretty much fit it in without losing many trees. The trees that would be lost could be replaced with native varieties. It would stop an area being used as a car park (a dying trend anyway) and replace it with an oval that can be used for a functional purpose whilst still maintaining a park feel. Pretty much all you are doing is levelling an area of grass, fencing it and painting a few lines. With the right approach it should be allowed to happen. Getting the funding, planning and design of the building over the train line should be the harder part of the project!

Given the game can afford it I have no issue with 4 umpires, heck make it 5, but a trial for a few weeks isn't going to lead to useful data based upon the free kicks paid. The umpires will be used to how they worked in a 3 umpire system and probably a normal flow for how many free kicks per quarter/per contest they like to pay. This trial is really more interested in working out where each umpire stands, what kind of view of each contest they are getting and the impact 4 umpires make on their running and work load. Also, whilst there would be a rise in the number of free kicks paid that's not necessarily a bad thing, even if it does mean more mistakes as well. Sometimes you have to clamp down and get the players away from repeatedly infringing. More umpires could mean they start seeing all the off ball holding and throwing that we often see in the stands on on tv that should be cut right down. This trial also falls in the middle of a clamp down in illegal contact in a marking contest which is a shame because I think half of those free kicks are either guesses or wrong so that's going to skew the figures quite a bit.

I agree, although the unfortunate thing is Roos couldn't find reliable outside mids so we're using Tommy to give the younger guys a chop out on the wing, whilst also making sure the forward line isn't top heavy. I'm not against the idea, I'd just do it with Hogan instead. And up against Port it's a nice way to counter the damage that Westhoff can do as a mobile tall on the wing.

Restricted free agent, I can't see how we wouldn't have to trade for him. Eagles would match the deal, or do what Adelaide did with Danger and threaten to match whilst they worked on a trade. The only exception to the Eagles matching - It's the perfect situation to rort the system. They take the first round pick compo. We trade them a bunch of stuff at cents on the dollar to make up the rest of what's needed - ie. a couple of 2nd round picks they can package up to move up the draft and a nice depth player (Tyson, Kent, both?) for a guy they are about to delist and a 4th rounder. We just have to sing the praises of how much we love unwanted Eagle (ie. back up ruck Fraser McInness) and get the AFL Integrity department to tick it off.

The speed, smarts and discipline of those Tiger forwards create their great pressure, but it's back up by a midfield that spread hard and cover the outlets. I think at some stage we'd be wise to give Petracca that midfield spreading lesson. Also watching Richmond today I couldn't help but think Spargo is outperforming Jack Higgins and would be excellent in that role for Richmond, yet they also have Castagna, Rioli and Butler. We have ANB (who's more up the ground anyway), Petracca and Hannan. And the Cats had Parfitt, Gregson, McCarthy and Parson's all in the team to chase and pressure. We need a heap more defensively from our smalls so we can lock it in forward against the good teams.

I don't care about 1-3 and 5-6 Saty but on point 4 Gaff has been an ultra consistent and very solid wingman for years. His increase in form this year I'd put down to: 1. The return of Nic Nat meaning he can play inside mid and get spoon fed the ball from clearances. Nic's hit outs and ground level pressure makes the job of his midfielders so much easier. Gawn would provide the hit outs, if not the follow up. 2. Confidence - the increase in West Coast's form in general - confidence is infectious 3. Maturity - he's just turned 26, we expect too much from AFL players too early, a player should keep improving on weaknesses through their mid 20's. 4. West Coast's general skill level improving meaning Gaff's unrewarded running becomes rewarded running I've really liked Gaff since his draft year but his Grand Final in 2015 stood out to me, not because of the result or how well he played, but the style in which he played. I was superbly impressed that under the weight of massive Hawthorn pressure he kept going contest to contest and willing his side on. If he came to us his work rate - either on the wing, on ball or maybe one day even at half back as he ages - would make the team better and make the other mids better. He'd run hard to provide an option which makes ball movement so much easier and he'd work back hard to block off options or help the backline. At this stage I actually think the contract and trade will both be too much for us to get Gaff, but I certainly hope we are trying.

Watching Wallis this year I don't think he would. Struggling big time to get contest to contest as a half forward, and for all his faults ANB is constantly moving. Obviously the Dogs aren't moving the ball at all well but I'm not impressed. Remember how nasty his leg injury was. If we were to get Wallis I'd play him as a tagger and make the other mids rotate more forward or outside. I think that's his best role. Given other teams like Essendon are interested I'm not sure how much money I'd commit towards a tagger. Might not be too may other Tim Kelly's out there but there's surely some state league or delisted players who could do a tagging role.

You'd think Murphy would play very well in a good side and he could be managed more conservatively to peak at the right time. My concern is what role does he play? High half forward? I fancy Jones to move in to that role (not back) and compete with ANB and Spargo. Wouldn't be sold on him playing wing, not sure his body is up to running the kms. So maybe midfield with stints forward? He'd give us more skill and good burst speed in the middle but I'm still keen on getting more a more games for Oliver, Viney, Braysh, Petracca through the guts. I don't mind the idea of a veteran but I'd prefer a pure winger, a key defender or half back or legit small forward.

Interesting idea with Frost. I don't completely hate it, but I also think it's not a long term option compared to settling a backline group with quality talent. Which to me is getting Petty in there and given Joel Smith more games to settle and really establishing a consistent group. Oscar will go to Dixon and I'm not sure there's a great match up for Frost. I can't see why Tommy Mc has to play wing to shrink the forward line if they go back to Tim Smith who provides the forward pressure. I also think Hogan should have a go on the wing not on the ball. When Westhoff is on the wing Hogan would be a good match up. I can't see Lewis playing midfield again. His pace on the wing was shredded far worse than at was at half back when the right match up is there for him. And he doesn't have the explosiveness or desire to go in the guts any more. Half back is his best spot against the oppositions worst forward. Garlett was something like AA form based on a number of good matches in the first half of last year. Hasn't played more than 1 or 2 good games since and hasn't done anything of note at Casey. I'd be giving Spargo a chance to bounce back after the bye. If there was a player to drop for Garlett it would be Hannan.

Does his strings on cold nights. Which reminds me of Cyril Rioli, who does his strings in Tasmania so they stopped playing him there! Kent's not to the same level, but the reality is we don't have anyone really who's closer.

Who would you trust to build a training base at Gosch's? Josh Mahoney - jointly in charge (with list management committee) of allocating a salary cap amongst the 44 players and doing some trade deals, as well as resourcing the coaches and players Or: Gary Pert - overseen a club that turns over maybe 77 mil in revenue and has built the Holden Centre with all the same stakeholders to deal with. If we are smart and rate Mahoney so highly then the succession will actually be from Pert to Mahoney after Pert has built us a training base.

Apologies to Perty. Pub deal was before his team. https://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/afl/how-pies-lost-8-million/news-story/54631eb7122cea71af64e81327cdecb1?nk=c5c3f57ae8e15e99b04955486daba99f-1528976623

Pros: - Knows how to get a facility built, especially in the Olympic Park precicnt - Experienced in football - Experienced in media relations Cons: - The Balme/Gubby Allen/Buckley etc fiasco. Collingwood's footy department has been a mess the last few years - Very prominent in the media on a range of issues including on drugs where I thought his attitude and understanding was limited - Losing money on the pub deals