DeeSpencer

Impact is hard to judge. But Brayshaw's tackling, hardness and direct style of footy was instrumental is us scoring against better teams I think. His impact was greater than his stats or talent. He lit us up at Geel, QB'day, North game, Tigers game. Even round 1 he made a big difference. Clarry has shown me some special abilities but Gus set the bar pretty high. I'd drop a footy in front of Clarry in a pack situation and he'd do some great things. Playing on him I wouldn't lay a finger on him. I'd roll a footy out in front of Brayshaw in space and I expect similar. He's such a natural tackler I wouldn't want to pick up the ball, and if he gets the ball he's so determined to get it on to a team mate in a good spot.

That's true. But then again he was back off the mark by a step or two and handball sideways, yet it was smothered. Would like to know how that happens. Then he picked up and drilled a pass what I thought was a good 15m easily. But the ump didn't like that one either. So multiple efforts it was!

I've said the same thing the whole time and if Vanders and Brayshaw are good to go then it might come down to Harmes, Matt Jones or Oliver. Oliver is the obvious choice but Matt Jones has impressed and Harmes does a lot of good as well. Less rotations means it's harder to even out the spread of game time but 70% is reasonable, the question might be for how long can he run out his stints on the ground. 70% is fine as long as he's not tiring whilst he's on. I get the feeling he's still much more suited to being on the ball than forward, yet he'll have to rest forward a fair bit.

I loved Viney when he started in 2013. Then I loved Tyson in 2014. Couldn't help but enjoy Brayshaw last year. Now already moved on to Oliver. Yet after all that I'm still really keen to see what Petracca can do, but I'm loving the idea of him getting to start as a forward and support Hogan. We need a bit more outside run and skill, but surely young players would be excited getting to play with those names above.

I mean only in terms of his readiness for AFL. Long term it was great to see a kid push himself to exhaustion. He's got the fitness to run out 70% of a shortened practice match against mainly a 2nds side. How is that not of some concern to whether he's ready to take on a super fit GWS midfield.

Was fantastic around the contest again. He needs to learn to stay down more as a forward and crumb, he won't be taking pack marks from out of position too often (he might from a nice sit!). Plus cramping (and spewing up) after 71% TOG is a worry as well. His spot in round 1 will be determined mainly by whether the coaches think he has the fitness. Form wise he's done enough already

I want both, the arms pinned and a player taken to ground. But I want the player taken to ground on their side and with their weight going through their hips. The grounds won't be so hard as to have many broken hips! It's the dangerous motions of getting a player to ground that causes the head injuries. So if the arms are pinned don't drive the player through the ground. Don't lift them and put them over horizontal and don't sling. Particularly don't do all 3 which Gibbs did to Robbie Gray last year! I still don't think the AFL have gone in to enough explanation about what tackling techniques they are banning. The definition on slinging and driving players in to the ground seems very much based on how it looks and not on technical points. If they explained it more everyone would get a reference point for what is a good hard tackle that can still result in injury but is legal and what is deemed dangerous.

You can't have tackling without bringing players to ground. The only way to stop someone like Ablett or Fyfe is to hit them hard enough with initial force to get them to ground, otherwise they'll get their arms free and get the ball out eventually. Not brining the player to the ground is cuddling not tackling. The AFL should focus on dangerous lifting tackles and dangerous pile driving tackles when a player has their arms locked up. Slinging is dangerous as well, but they'd want to be very careful when pinging someone like Oliver for a sling where the player with the ball really initiated the slinging motion, had his arms free and wasn't lifted. Having watched it yet again I can concede it wasn't the perfect tackle, but there were enough contributing factors that even if Young was injured I'd be angry if it came with a suspension. The focus shouldn't only be on the tackler, the player getting tackler has to know how to look after themselves as well and that goes for AFL players and kids. I'd tell Clarry to try and cut down the rotational slinging motion in his tackle, but to keep using his weight and the players own body weight to bring guys to ground.

Just watched the replay. Yeah there's a bit of a slinging motion but Young attempts to stop and spin around Oliver who doesn't pin the arms, doesn't lift him and doesn't pile drive him. We're in trouble if that's a dangerous tackle because you're mostly penalising a bloke for being harder and stronger not for dangerous technique.

Need to see a replay but at this stage I can't believe his tackle would be anything more than a free kick. He didn't pin the arms and there wasn't a double movement. Any slinging aspect should be blamed on the player with the ball as much as the tackler. If you can't keep your balance, evade or dispose of the ball without getting hurt then don't get the ball!

Height - similar Body shape - similar Hair colour - similar Skin complexion - similar Jumper number - similar Come on...

Fantastic debut. Knows where the footy is going and uses it creatively. Probably needs some work on his transition running but I'm super excited by what he showed today.

Bit of a country kid who doesn't want to overstate where he's at. That's fine by me. He's living with the Brayshaw's, so surely he's aware that it is possible to step in from day one. C: Stretch Jones Vanders HF: Kent ##### Brayshaw Foll: Gawn Vince Viney Int: Tyson Plus: Kennedy, Harmes, ANB, JKH, Michie, Matt Jones I'm very keen to see where he fits in the pecking order. It took Brayshaw a couple of dominant VFL practice matches to leap ahead of a few and get picked last year.

Meh, who cares, why does this have to be a thing. Class is shaking your opponents hand and saying well done. The media haven't done him any favours for most of his career, why does he have to give an expansive press conference.

Could do without the 'world', they haven't played the best teams from Victoria yet, but love the horses. I'd wear that

It's a mess. They need to cut back on the ground credentials, get rid of Hutchy and the 6000 photographers. Certainly the AFL model is better.

I tipped Denver 27, Carolina 24. I expected Denver's defense to be amazing, but surprised Carolina have the 2 turnovers and are so reliant on Newton. Why aren't they running it more with Steward? Draw the Denver defense up? I also expected Manning to throw at least 2 picks and be bad, with Denver's D and Special teams to bail them out. Which is happening. Probably thought they'd do a little better on offense though. The strip sack TD and the punt return have been the difference so far. Whoever can make the big plays in the 2nd half probably wins.

I see it the same way. The only thing it achieves is starting 4 different players on the bench each quarter will allow a more even distribution of time on ground. Similarly you could be tactical and leave a burst player on the bench for a longer stint and then put them in the game for impact. A bit of a mini sub each quarter. The reality is I'd say maybe 30-50% of the time if not more of the time you'll be down to 3 on the bench by 3/4 time as well given how often injuries occur. I can think of several instances - Kent v GC (later back on), Kent v Rich, Brayshaw v WC, Frost v Adel, Salem v Haw just off the top of my head where we made the sub before 1/2 time last year.

Removing the sub rule is an interesting change. Thought I'd consider it for Clayton. The obvious change is you can't debut as either the sub or with plans to sub off. Short term that's not good. But medium term that's a good thing to not have players stuck as the sub multiple times. It also means they'll have to go back to the VFL to regather form instead of being sub for a week. Which means they have to be used to getting dropped and to working on their games. The other change is in having the 4th bench spot. 22/4 instead of 21/4 means slightly less - 82% game plan per player. Now if your 4 deepest defenders can do 90, even 95+% TOG that means one player might be able to get away with 60-70% game time. However with 90 rotations that probably means only 1 rest per player per quarter and so longer spells on the ground when the player and more on the ground rotations. Given Hogan, Garlett, a ruckman and possibly another tall or goal kicker will likely play forward most of the game it means even a first year player like Oliver probably has to do midfield minutes. From the training reports that probably won't be a problem, he seems to thrive in the contested stuff. But it might mean 2 or 3 minutes in the midfield spelling an experienced mid before going forward for another 5 or so minutes in each rotation on the ground. Will he have the fitness to do that and keep a high work rate? The Nab challenge will be very interesting for how we plan to manage rotations and how our younger players can handle that.

Not that I've seen, but they'll plate it, put a cast over it, jab it and he'll play, but whether he can be effective I guess we will find out. He'll be ok in pass coverage and if he can 'hit' as they say, where they just spear in and make a tackle that way, not sure he'll be able to tackle if he has to use his arm/hands to hold a tackle.

My thoughts are summarised as: Carolina offense 8.5/10 v Denver Defense 10/10 - Carolina score approx 20 points Denver offense 6/10 v Carolina defense 8.5/10 - Denver score approx 15 points But there's always the wildcards of: 1. special teams 2. Unexpected turnovers 3. missed FG's and missed PAT 4. Injuries - and on that point Davis is already under a big injury cloud

Newton was amazing, but I feel like some of the other members of Carolina's offense need to get some credit as well. Their O line is really good. Olsen is making a case for the 2nd best TE in the league. Stewart always runs hard and the WR keep making big plays. I don't care if they have drops and bad moments, they keep getting open when they need to be. I feel like the success of the panthers is that their good players are really good and the role players around them just keep stepping up when the time is right.

Wow. That Denver defense is something. I need to watch the replay as only saw the last quarter but to make the stand and stop Brady on the 2pt conversion was something. Brady is amazing and Gronk is even better, just a freak of nature. Peyton looked bad in the 4th quarter, might have to watch more to see if the Broncos will get something going in the superbowl. As for Carolina, they are fantastic. They know who they are on both sides of the ball, aggressive and capable of big plays. Most will tip Carolina for the superbowl and I might too, but I'll be keen to see what Denver come up with on offense because their D will at least give them a chance I think.

Pats 24 - Denver 13 Arizona 27 - Carolina 30

Think you nailed it. Brady gets the ball out so quick a pass rush is irrelevant. I think you have to put 2 on Gronk and maybe even 2 on Edelman at times, then disrupt Brady's throwing lanes and not be afraid to give up a big play every now and then. The issue for Denver is without a great passing game they don't want to sell out and take some risks to force Brady in to a mistake or to get a punt and instead I imagine Denver will die a slow death in this game as NE gradually pull away by sustaining drives.