bing181

The old Demonland furphy. Ridiculous. Just because you don't understand why the FD are making the choices they are, that doesn't mean that Goodwin is "stubborn". It just means that he/they have access to information that you don't and/or see things differently to you.

Injuries or equivalent. I know you get bonus points on Demonland for far-flung conjecture, but in the vast majority of cases the obvious reason is the reason. As they apparently tell medical students "when you hear the sound of hooves, think horses not zebras". This coupled with the fact that injuries/lack of preseason etc are random events over which we have no control. Trouble is, our species deals very badly with randomness, we need order and control. So we look for patterns where none exist, but at least it reassures us by giving us a sense of agency, of being able to "do something". Even the question here, "who's responsible?" underscores this as it presupposes that someone is indeed responsible, when that's far from necessarily being the case. And I'm not even going to start on how bad we are at distinguishing causations from correlation. It's injuries, loss of players, etc. Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

And watch our defence fall apart - and then come on here post-match complaining about Goody playing players out of position.

You're absolutely right. You're guessing.

Not what Petty himself has said, but heh, what would he know.

Seriously?

Or not. Plenty of obvious reasons as to why we're struggling at the moment.

Changing the way the forwards play will do nothing if the mids can't deliver to them.

He effectively missed the pre-season, and has been playing catch-up ever since. Regardless of what's going on with his hand, he's never going to be fully right until next year.

He hasn't nailed anything. All he's done is taken the dots and come up with a story that fits. See below, the one in purple.

Which is why we drafted Windsor, and traded up to get him.

Nicely done, but can't ignore the impact of Academy players (Sydney) and father-sons (Collingwood) amongst that list. Also, can't underestimate the arrival of even a single key player, e.g. Dangerfield at Geelong as a way of avoiding the dreaded rebuild and keeping clubs competitive.

It's an opinion piece from one of their editors and a Dee's fan - not something from their FD. And not any different from anything you're already reading here.

He's playing the best we have. If you think there are players running round at Casey - who have won 3 matches all year - that would make any appreciable difference, there's a bridge in Sydney that's up for sale.

No he won't, nor should he. Current situation has little or nothing to do with the coach, as the higher-ups understand even if it's frustrating for supporters. We can run around screaming "do something" all we want, but if the cupboard is bare ...

Short of pulling him out of games for 6 weeks and putting him through a mini pre-season, what you see with Clarry is what you get. You can't build fitness in season, it's all you can do to maintain fitness.

You can't keep losing your best talent and expect to compete at the same level. But you can still compete, so getting into the finals would be a good season, winning a final under current circumstances would be a very good season. The one positive is that this could help fast track a few of the younger players/lesser lights. And in terms of wishful thinking, my knight in shining armour coming over the hill to save us is the return of Melksham. if he can get back to his best (??), marshalling the forward line and nullifying key defenders, it could give us a whole new look up forward and go some way to covering the loss of Trac. And from there, who knows.

You also don't win flags without your best players playing to their best, and the lack of games + pre season in the cases of Oliver and Petty only add to the losses of Brayshaw and Petracca. People should also remember we've lost Smith, who in spite of everything was our best forward in last year's finals.

Under the AFL system that's what's supposed to happen. Equalisation. The only way round it is through father-sons (looking at you Collingwood), or Academy (come on down Sydney Swans).

"The empirical analysis shows that the shock effect of a turnover has a positive impact on team performance in the short term. Results reveal no impact of coach turnover in the long term. The favourable short-term impact on team performance of a coach turnover is followed by continued gradual worsening of results. The turnover effect is non-existent when the comparison between the new coach and the old coach is done over 10, 15 or 20 matches before and after termination." https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236043349_Coach_Mid-Season_Replacement_and_Team_Performance_in_Professional_Soccer

Viney struggling (age?), Oliver with no pre-season, Petracca having to play forward/now injured, Brayshaw out ... that's pretty well our entire mid-field. Just what were people expecting?

... then that will indicate that the list isn't good enough.

You're only speculating in any case, so go right ahead.

This, this and this. Whole team balance looks out of whack without him, both on and off the field. If you're looking for reasons as to why a team might lose its way, start with loss of leadership and experience. Having Melksham out for a year isn't helping either as he's in a similar category, same with Lever over a shorter period.

If ever there was a post to prove my point it's this.