binman

He's good kick in terms of hitting short and medium targets, which is critical because when those kicks are turned over it often gift the oppo a scoring opportunity - and of course our potential scoring chain is broken. The shocking turnover by may on the HB against the swans in the semi is the perfect example - we went from controlling the ball (and the game for that matter) and looking to transition and create a scoring chain, to gifting them a goal (and arguablly the game). I agree being a left footer helps. Good left footers so often get gifted space to release the ball.

Agree. I don't care about his leg speed - he is an excellent kick, which is what we really need. And is a reliable set shot, so can play the rotating half forward mid chop out role. If Salem can get back to his best, Bowey comes back in and we snare Hunter, then suddenly our kicking skills looks a lot better.

We like dog hunts

And then in a couple of months, will put the icing on the contrivance cake when they release their FIXture

Bruce is a gateway player

That remands me of the old drug related joke. Are you Jason?

I agree he is not particularly athletic, but i reckon his rick craft is actually pretty good. He's done quite bit of ruck at Casey, and not just this season. In 2019 he did a quite bit of back up ruck work, and IIRC was the number one ruck in a few games (i think because of injury to the main ruck). I remember writing on demonland a few times during that season that i thought Weed's ruck work was quite impressive. One of things i find interesting about Weed in the ruck is he uses his body and strength better than he does as a forward, and is pushed off the ball less. My feeling is he often gets pushed off the ball in marking contests because he slightly misreads the flight of the ball and ends up in the wrong spot, or is nudged off line by a defender who has read the flight better. Reading the flight of the ball is obviously not quite the same issue in the ruck. And at around the ground ball ups and throw in he can plant his feet and wrestle.

Fair points. The point i was trying to make is that as you say leg speed was not an issue.

I'm saying speed across the ground is not an issue for us. We are plenty 'fast' enough. My comment about the 'narratives' is the commentators regularly noted we were a 'fast team' - when in fact that what they should have focused on is our ability to move the ball quickly. We looked like world beaters in that 10 zip run because we were fit and running in waves - and when we pressed the button regularly transitioned the ball super quickly, just as we did in the first half and last third of 2021. And as a result i I wouldn't prioritize an ability to run fast in anyone we draft or trade in. I would prioritize foot skills because that is what will increase our ability to transition the ball quickly. In footy these days, how fast a player can run is barely a factor in how fast a teams can move the ball given how infrequently players actually get the chance to run and carry and how little space they have Which is not to say speed is not helpful. I think Freo has the most genuinely quick players - and if they can get the ball on the outside and into space use that leg speed to good effect. The Swans are probably second to Freo in terms of leg speed. But we have very few plodders and have plenty of players who can cover ground quickly - including our bigs who are all pretty quick for their size. You imply the Cats, Swans and Pies are fast teams. What's is you evidence that is the case? Their performances in the last part of the season? Their ability to transition the ball quickly?. Or do you actually think they have more quick players than us? I don't, with the possible exception of the Swans. The Cats quicker than us? Please. Go back and look at two in season lions game. We torched them them for speed. Yes, but lions are slow i hear you say. Then go to the first Giants game - again we absolutely torched them for speed. Still not convinced? Go back and watch the first half of the second Pies game - the pies were chasing our tail, and as a result looked slow and we looked fast. Hunt is arguably our fastest player. He was in our best 22, so no fringe player. Clearly pace isn't a priority for the club if they are trading him out. The Swans and the Pies got us on the outside because they were less banged up and were fitter than us. They could run faster for longer. The Cats didn't get us on the outside when we played them at Kardina Park - but come finals they too were fitter and less banged up than us. And crucially all three teams have better kicks than us, which in the Pies and Swans case meant they could go through the corridor more often. And in doing so move the ball quickly - and look fast as a result. We lost our ability late in games to cover the corridor kick and spread, the Cats didn't and consequently smashed the Swans. Who by the by, looked incredibly slow in the GF - in part because they couldn't hit targets under the pressure of a GF and in part because they had, like us, clearly hit the wall physically.

During our 10 zip run i heard several commentators note how quick we were

I would prefer above average kicking skills. Teams look quick when they hit targets regularly by foot. And look slow when they don't as they can be exposed on turnover because players have pushed ahead of the ball on the expectation/hope the disposal chain won't break. When the disposal chain breaks often multiple players are out of position and have double back and chase tail

More the point, if nibbler was a mid he wouldn't be redlining at every contest.

What are his kicking skills like? From the little i have seen of him he seems to be a good kick, but i haven't watched him enough to really assess him.

I think you are being very unfair on Jeff. Jeff understands how serious this is - he is not minimising it. He said it was a bump on the highway. Much bigger than a road.

How long is this 'short break'?

The other thing about Georgiades is you'd be paying for his potential more than the level he's at now. He's got great hands, presents well, but often goes completely missing and can get the yips kicking at goal.

Agree. The other factor is that MG is a similar size, and possibly role, as JVR. That said, if he was gettable they'd have to seriously think about it. I'd rather too many marking forwards than what we had in the back end of this year. And really good talls of the type you mention are bloody thin on the ground. Which is why a player like Lobb can command serious coin despite being so inconsistent - though I guess the fact he can ruck adds to his value.

Now she's singing Naughton, Naughton say that you love me to the tune of love me love me

Just started watching the B&F livestream and they are on break. A woman is singing the old standard - Georgia, but instead of Georgia she's singing: Georgiades, Georgiades, you are on my mind

Just started watching the B&F livestream and they are on break. A woman is singing the old standard - Georgia, but instead of Georgia she's singing: Georgiades, Georgiades, you are on my mind

Yep. And on top of that both Jackson and maxy looked hampered post bye. If all our talls can get cherry ripe and Grundy comes in JVR will be the icing.

Assuming he is fit, the other thing that Grundy would bring is his athleticism and the kms he can cover in a game. Tmac was a massive out in terms of being a genuine second tall. But as big a factor was losing his up and down the ground running. With our method, most players have to run upwards of 10 kms a game. Get tmac fit and bring in Grundy, that's two big players covering 25kms a game. Throw in BB and Max (if fit) and that's another two genuine bigs getting to contests.

I was of the view that they are on the upward trajectory and would push for top 4 next year. But you make a good points about the players they will lose. Lobb is flakey, but he is important structurally and was their best tall forward. And mundy, even at his age, was super important because, one he gets the pill and two they lack big bodied mids. The other thing is I wonder if beinging Jackson in on mega coin might create problems in the playing group. I'm tipping the pies to miss the 8.

This is the heart of the issue. You, like many, appear to be conflating the accusations against Fagan and Clarkson with those against the club, which are much broader than headline grabbing accusations (eg forced termination of pregnancies) You say 'these very allegations have been denied'. What allegations have been denied? As far as i'm aware Clarkson and Fagan have only denied telling a player their partner should terminate their pregnancy. And Fagan made a general comment in his media release denying HE was culturally unsafe with Aboriginal players. To be clear, Hawthorn, or Fagan and Clarkson for that matter, have not denied the central issue - that the evidence from the players indicates the club was seemingly culturally unsafe in the period the report covered (noting his is not a proven fact). The noise around Fagan and Clarkson just distracts from the central issue - cultural safety. As a proponent of free speech, i presume you agree that the players had every right to say what they said. They didn't put the comments into the public arena - the ABC did. Of course, when speaking to a reporter they would assume it would be reported, but one also assumes the ABC did their due diligence in terms of things such as checking sources, corroborating any accusations and assessing legal exposure. If they didn't they are rightly exposed to legal action People are free to make their own assessment of the comments from the player's and their families. Fagan and Clarkson will have their opportunity to tell their side of the story, both as part of the AFL investigation and in the media, who will be gagging to give them both air time. And people will be equally free to make their own assessment of those comments. If that doesn't satisfy Fagan and Clarkson, they can take the ABC (not the players) to court for defamation It was stupid, and so on point, by the AFL to not get ahead of the story and respond immediately they received the report, for example by coming out and doing what they now have been forced to (ie setting up a panel and investigating). Instead they chose to sit on the report, presumably till after the GF, and left the door wide open for a news outlet to gazump them. And the ABC obliged. The players don't owe anyone anything and are under no obligation, legally or morally, to participate in any way with an AFL investigation. The players participated in a process commissioned and initiated by Hawthorn. What more do they need to do? They certainly have no obligation to justify or substantiate their claims. And why would they have any interest in being interviewed again? What benefit would they derive from participating in the AFL investigation? If they do decide to go down the legal path then they will have to substantiate their claims. Perhaps you think they do have a moral obligation to participate in the AFL investigation given the impact on Clarkson and Fagan's reputation? I disagree, but for the sake of argument lets say i don't. Its neither here nor there if they have a moral obligation to participate. The bottom line is they can't be legally compelled to participate in an AFL investigation, which leaves only the courts as an option to have their 'stories tested'. If WorkCover get involved they might be interviewed as part of that process and any resulting legal action. If the players sue Hawthorn their claims will be tested in court (assuming no settlement) If Fagan and Clarkson sue the ABC for defamation their claims will be tested in court. But the players can leave the AFL to their own devices with their investigation.

Someone hack your account Andy? You're not with optus are you?