binman

BUT, if there is any sort of chance of landing Jackson i hope they do what it takes to get him - and whatever it takes might include putting JVR on the table. It really is impossible to replace Gawn - but getting Jackson in would be huge in terms of creating an opportunity for a succession plan Jackson is still young (24 in September) - barring serious injury he'll play another eight to ten seasons. I could see Max playing three more seasons after this year. That takes Jackson to 27 years old, hitting his peak, with still another six or seven seasons left in his career as the number one ruck. Perfect I reckon Maxy struggled to find synergy with Grundy in large part because he wants to be the man. Super competitive, he'd be happy to take every ruck contest. But it seemed to work better Jackson. And if they can make it work it might help to extend Maxy's career. Keeping Koz and getting Jackson in would be a game changer. All that said, how good would it be to get Jackson AND keep JVR.

I'm a huge jvr fan - I'm absolutely convinced he'll be a gun. That's hardly a big call - even with his middling form this season, his career numbers stack up well against his current peers (eg Amiss, Treacy, JUH, Darcy, McDonald, Philthorp) and the gun key forwards in the 2000s (eg Netiz, Lyon, Cunrnow, Kennedy, Darling, McKay, Naughton, not a mile from Brown) at the same age. I really rate Treacy, and he is in ripping form this season.JVR's career numbers are comparable to Treacy, who is a season ahead (and almost a year older) than Roo:

With his kicking skills and high footy iq a super fit TJ would be the prototype modern player.

I actually wasn't going to do a rant at all - planned to be all measured and solution focus. Clearly i haven't processed my emotions about umpiring yet.

36 on my back here we come (subject to availability)!!!!

They don't have numbers 0 thru 9 in stock at all times? Take up too much space? Too complex? They only sell 43 sets? 'Sorry binman I know you want kozzie's number but we're all out of 3s sorry. Can I interest you in a Windsor - half the the price! Or I think we can do you a Laurie - wait hold on, sorry we're all out of 1s too. How about a Jed or a Jai. Alternatively, how about we put a 6 in place and you come back at a later date and we you can add the 3 - good valuw as you can have a salo flr a while and its insurance in case koz doesn't resign'

I've heard that Cotton On is working on a new XXL range of Harley Reid undies and Ts.

Hopefully i'll be fine too - koz is an exception to my rule of not getting too upset about a gun dees player leaving. I don't' have a number on my jumper (was going to get 10, but didn't get around to it - where do you get a number added these days?) but if Koz resigns i'm gonna but the Indigenous jumper his dad designed (which is my second fav) and proudly put 36 on it.

I like Would be easy enough to mitigate - just don't allow ex players to umpire their own team.

A brilliant idea - ex players would have the required fitness and hopefully also the 'feel' for the game. It would create a career pathway for players, of who i think there are many, who as you suggest just dont know what to do in their post footy caeere, man of whom struggle wit their mental health because it's so hard to replace the adrenalin, routine and singular focus footy gives players (i mean its not the same as playing but jeez there be a bit of adrenaline and pressure involved in umpiring game in front of 80, 000 baying fans). And ex-players would have instant cred when going out to local footy clubs and leagues to, for example work with young umpires, umpire match sims etc etc. They could be given other skills and training, like coaching and instruction, skills that are very transferable.

Sure, every club would love koz but that's why there is a salary cap. As Jaded notes i forgot Bolton, who must be on huge coin and Young, who has just re-signed. To match what the dees seem to be offering koz, Freo would likely have to cut at least top 10 players, who unless coming out of contract would have to agree to any move, not to mention there being a in willing and able to pick them up and match their salary. And then there's the issue of list balance one from has already had issues with by spending so much capital (salary and contract length) on Jackson when they already had a highly paid number one ruck in Darcy. Bolton plays almost exactly the same role koz would - damaging small forward who can run thru the middle. As noted, they are paying him a motza. Adding koz on a contract that matches our offer would mean having aprox 2.5 million dollars a year or their salary cap tied up in small forwards. And then there's team culture considerations. If Freo were to match our offer koz would likely instantly become their highest paid players. Which might, or might not cause ructions, but it certainly would likely result in up and coming players like Treacey looking elsewhere in the knowledge they won't be able to command anywhere near same coin at Freo as they would on the open market.

Can't see them affording Jackson, Darcy, Serong, Brayshaw AND Koz (even if they traded Darcy). Treacey would be wanting some of the action too

Yep - Koz is box office. That goal he kicked of the ground from 45 was lucky, but genius makes its own luck. It was yet another jaw drop moment he's given us. He's just so great to watch - and surely that's should be a massive factor in his salary. That and the fact he's arguably our best kick, certainly most reliably accurate goal kicker, best mid and best forward.

I haven't been able to bring myself to watch the replay yet, or watch any video, so it didn't click a 50 should have been paid. That could have been a a game changer - literally. A 50 would have stopped the clock, taken Max to inside the centre square , meaning a 50 metre kick would put it inside 50 (or a handball give and go even deeper) - with time enough for a mark or crumbing goal.

The thing that was so incredibly frustrating with the Sparrow free (which was right in front of me) was that the rule he supposedly broke was insufficient intent to keep the ball in play- yet he literally (and I mean that literally) was desperately trying to keep the [censored] BALL IN PLAY!!!!!! The rule was brought in (replacing deliberate) to reduce the number of OOBs and keep the ball in play more. Which was precisely what Sparrow was trying to do. In fact more than that he was clearly trying to get it to a teammate. If he wanted to take it out he would have picked up the ball, taken the tackle and allowed himself to be taken over the boundary, which he was hard up against. The irony is that happens 20 plus times a game, never gets pinged despite the sole intention being to take it OOB.

So @WheeloRatings , i could be right, sort of: The pies chip it around their half back line, we DON'T close up hard and try and force a turnover (which if we did do so would accrues lots of pressure points, partic if it involves physical contact) - we don't accrue many pressure points The Pies don't play on very often from the marks that we are giving them therefore we don't accrue any pressure points for standing on the mark

Yes, great point. I suspect you're right.

You can borrow one my sledges for such fans from the bad old days (ie 1977 to 2017, with some gaps) - a half decent team would have beaten us by 8 goals.

Thanks @WheeloRatings That would suggest we didn't push up on them hard (which accrues pressure points) after taking a mark. Normally that would mean our pressure game was off but as you note we smashed them in contested possessions, which is an unusual combination- ie low pressure rating, high cp numbers. I wonder if not pressing up was by design? The pies are one of the best transition teams in the AFL - when they press go. Daniel Hoyne has pointed out they are the slowest side in the AFL by some margin in Moving the ball from a mark or free (conversely we are one of the quickest). Perhaps the strategy was to let them have those marks and use the time they give teams to set up our defensive grid and make it difficult to transition. If so it was wildly successful- they only scored 28 points from their defensive half. For context on average we have conceded nearly 41 points from the back half this season (67 last week). Keeping the pies, as noted a gun transition team, to only 28 points from their back half on what was essentially a dry day, is seriously impressive.

I'm amazed our pressure was so low. 146 in the last quarter? That doesn't seem right,

This is one of the arguments the media often make when poo pooiing the idea of umpires going professional. Not having a shot at you Nasher, but it's one if the arguments that does my head in because it's got a false assumption baked into it. The assumption is a professional umpiring model would build on the current model - which is that most (all?) umpires are well paid professionals in other fields (usually white collar it would seem, and often lauded as smart, high achievers in that field) and part time umpires. But they don't have to be. And perhaps that model is actually part of the problem. An alternative professional model is having a base starting salary of say 130k for AFL umpires. And then bonuses on top - eg finals, marquee games, performance, accuracy, etc. And perhaps have some levels, eg based on games officiated, performance etc so the base for the best is say 200k plus bonuses. They train together as a group (aerobic, decision making, team work etc etc) officiate AFL games, AFLW games and go out to local footy clubs leagues and help train young umpires. I suspect plenty of young men and women who love footy, want to be involved in AFL footy would but know they won't make it as a player, would see that as a legitimate career pathway. One that they could be involved in until their 40s. We don't need high achieveing accountants and lawyers who are part time umpires. We need high achieving umpires.

Fritter just had to go back, use up his full 30 seconds, and kick the goal.

It's beyond a [censored] joke. Another bloody game where instead of just enjoying the contest I'm livid at the standard of the umpiring. What's the bloody deal with umpires 50 metres away from a contest overruling an umpire who is 15 meters from the contest with an unimpeded view (eg the Howes marking contest free) - happens every week. Made worse when they DON'T overuse blatant howlers or missed decisions, which i thought was the only time a non-controlling umpire was supposed to pay a free (the bizarre decision to pay a block against Melk in one on two contest when he was clearly shoved in the back) What's the deal with the ridiculous inconsistency (eg sparrow insufficient attempt and then no free against daicos, tracc holding the ball with zero time to dispose of it then pies players with more time and no free)? What's the deal with ruck lotto decisions? What's the deal with non-decisions for blatant free kicks One of the things that infuriates me is all the AFL accredited journalists give the idea of making them full time professionals is ALWAYS rejected out of hand by almost every single one of them. I mean it's the only logical thing to do. And the media's halfhearted criticism of the standard of umpiring as if fans are just making it up how poor the standard of umpiring is, how much it is ruining the game for fans. Can't bite the hand that feeds. And to be clear i don't blame the umpires. I blame the [censored] AFL. And i truly believe they don't make meaningful efforts to improve the standards of umpiring because all of the angst and controversy is such great content.

It's beyond a [censored] joke. Another bloody game where instead of just enjoying the contest I'm livid at the standard of the umpiring. What's the bloody deal with umpires 50 metreS away from a contest overrulimg an umpire who is 15 metres from the cintest with an unimpeded virew (eg the Howes marking contest free) - happens every week. Made worse when they DON'T overuse blatant howlers or missed decisions, which i thought was the only time a non controlling umpire was supposed to pay a free (the bizarre decision to pay a block against melk in one on two contest when he was clearly shoved in the back) What's the deal with the ridiculous inconsistency (eg sparrow insufficient attempt and then no free against daicos, tracc holding the ball with zero time to dispose od it then pies players with more time and no free)? What's the deal with ruck lotto decisions? Whats the deal with non decisions of blatant free kicks One of the things that infuriates me us all the AFL accredited journalists give the idea of making them full time professionals is ALWAYS rejected out of hand by almost every single one if them. I mean it's the only logical thing to do. And the media's half hearted criticism of the standard of umpiring as if fans are just making it up how poor the standard of umpiring is, how much it is ruining the game for fans. Can't bite the hand that feeds. And to be clear i don't blame the umpires. I blame the [censored] AFL. And i truly believe they don't make meaningful efforts to improve the standards of umpiring because all of the angst and controversy is such great content.

Bloke kicked 30 goals in the 2024 season, two more than he kicked in 2023. Thirty goals in a season for a 21 year key forward, in a year we didn't make finals, playing as second ruck, is outstanding and compares favourably with the very best key forwards in the last 20-30 years. But sure, still living on the promise of 2023.