binman

Top shelf detective work right there.

That makes sense. The lions are definitely in the premiership window, so tbst fits. And with the way they play, they need their tall forwards firing and bringing it down to their gun medium forwards. In terms of talls, they've got some good ones. But for various reasons, they all have some questions marks about them. At his best, Daniher is a star. But he is a game to game proposition, let alone season to season, in terms of consistency and staying fit and injury free. Hipwood is a star too. But might take a while to get back after his acl, and is a little one dimensional, in that if he is not kicking goals he doesn't add much (though is a terrific field kick). I rate Mcstay, he has good dukes and competes hard. But he is no star, and i thought I read he is maybe looking to leave. Walker would slot into their forward line perfectly, and would love the quick way the lions move the ball into their 50 (creating lots of one on ones) and how direct they are.

Ours. Because in the ladt couple of seasons the swans have moved away from a contest and territory game plan, to a move it quickly by hands and running from the back half plan. Which is a style similar to the dogs. And similarly at risk of breaking down under pressure - or in wet slippery conditions. Plus they simply don't have enough strong, seasoned bulls in their midfield. I suspect they will bring at least one, probably two extras to stoppages and look to win tge clearance battle. We won't match them so lets hope tracc is fit and firing. Look for maxy to take more ruck tonight

Footy changes. So much accepted wisdom is no longer relevant. For example I assumed that the dees would be at a disadvantage compared to every other team other than the dogs becuase of the shorter preseason. Why? Because in the 45 odd years i have actively followed footy, that trope was repeated every year (not the demons part - the premiership bit). But in the interview we did with yze on the Demonland podcast, I asked about that and he said the shorter break actually helped, gave us an advantage because the players were with the club longer (ie not having to train alone for so long - tbey now have to train at high intensity 12 months a year, break or no break). Conventional wisdom is that even the best players come back through the twos after a long injury break. But more and more it seems that accross the comp, best 22 players are coming straight back in, as is the case for salo. No doubt it depends on tbe injury eg comng back from a knee injury might play some twos to get some confidence in the knee (though hipwood didn't). The other common rationale seemed to be that players need to regain their touch and get some match fitness, whatever that is. But if a best 22 player is fit and in our case has been training at match like intensity (which is how goody approaches training), then I guess why not bring him straight back in.

From the beginning of the season he has been saying, up till this week, on all his spots on fox and sen that freo aren't the real deal. He maintained that line even as the evidence suggested he was wrong. On his spot on sen (the means test) after the loss to the pies, the second loss in a row, he doubled down. Basically said they weren't up to it. Even joked about flagmantle and the anger he copes from dockers fan. Meanwhile he gives the lions a complete pass for their pathetic loss to the hawks in tassie, despite the fact they gave up 117 points and maybe put a home game in the first week of finals at risk. Freo come out the next week, are super impressive and a clear contender, and roll the unbeaten premiers. The lions get opened up by the giants, a team with a stand in coach in his second game, and are lucky to get a (unconvincing) win. Not a single negative comment about freo or any follow up on the bagging he has been giving them on the first crack. Nothing on the watch list spot on 360 (haven't listened to the means test this week or watched 360 tonight) Shameless.

I agree it is an appealing ban. Glad buddy is not playing.

Hunt's role is the small opposition forward. That's not Hibberd's go - last season he took the dusty type ie strong, medium size. Hunt will likely go to papley.

Fair dinkum Deeerm is a peanut - there was zero chance he was gong to get off. Such incredible irony Derm accusing anyone of insulting our intelligence. The AFL will somehow find a way to let him walk conspiracy palaver is ridiculous.

Agree on all points

No chance he gets off

Sure. So to be clear, i define Sam as 'making it' as being a best 22 selection who holds down a key forward position in the seniors week in, week out. That is not going to happen this year, and that is ok - he can still be on the path to being a first choice selection. I am talking his career, not this year. But if it doesn't happen next season, or at the latest the 2024 season, then by MY definition of making it he hasn't. And it is worth noting that next season, and certainly by the 2024 season, there is a real chance he will behind JVR in the pecking order (though of course BB and Tmac may drop off). If Sam (and others) define making it as being depth and playing VFL football with the occasional run in the ones as making it then he is on track. But i suspect Sam's definition of making it aligns with mine.

I didn't say he was a bust. I said if he can't make it as a key forward he is a bust. A big difference. The club has resigned him so one assumes they think he can make it. And are obviously ok with him being depth, as Weed must be as well (or at least prepared to be at Cassy for significant periods) - at least for this season. But surely part of their thinking is he will replace Tmac as the second key forward as Tmac nears retirement. Let's not forget we used a top ten draft pick on Sam, and as such clearly our hope was that we get a top ten forward. Weed bouncing between Casey and the occasional game in the ones, and being little more than depth, whilst perhaps not a bust as such, is hardly a great return on our investment My own opinion is he won't make it as a key forward. And to be honest that is not a particularly outlandish opinion.

I can't see Weed behind any good as a defender becuase with his size it would have to be in a key post, and he is simply not good enough in the sort of one on one wrestle situations against big forward he would find himself in regularly down back. And i can't see him being a natural intercept type like Liam Jones - the pin up boy for a forward to a defender shift. So, if he can't make it as a key forward the sad reality is he is a bust - at least for us. Which means we have problem in that second tall forward role. Even the biggest Tmac critics and/or Weed fans would surely acknowledge the Tmac v Weed debate is over and the second tall forward role is Tmacs. If Tmac is injured again i think they have to look past Weed as a fill in. JVR is not ready yet, and i don't think will be until next year. So, if not Weed, who comes in? What do people think about Tomlinson playing the second tall forward role? Tomlinson is only slightly shorter and lighter than Weed, is much stronger and much, much better one on one. And crucially he plays with much more intensity than Sam and would halve more contests. If memory serves, whilst predominately a winger and defender with the Giants, Tomlinson played some games at CHF for the them. Having a look at his record he kicked 12 goals in 2018, so perhaps he played forward a bit that year. And having Tomlinson in the team would provide the positional flexibility Tmac provides as he could go back if required (and even, like Tom, to the wing) Thoughts?

It was strange anb didn’t get some time on the wing as he is the only player close to langers in terms of aerobic capacity, as evidenced by the fact he us second behind langers in average ks covered. And anb has the defensive mindset to do that job too. I also thought Bedford could have been a good option.

I agree, and said as much last night on the podcast. I was really surprised goody didn't seem to try and respond to their midfield dominance in the second half of the third q or in the last, for example by as you say at least one extra to stoppages. It felt really similar to the round 17 game against the dogs. They also had two extras at stoppages and smashed us. And goody never brought am extra up, which he had done earlier in tbe season against I think the swans. I'm sure he didn't because he was keeping his tactical powder dry that day, confident that when whips started cracking come finals trac, viney and Oliver would cover the extra. It felt thst a way a bit on Saturday. That feeling was reinforced by how much ruck tome Jackson, who was struggling (training loads? He struggled at exactly the same point last year) was given in the last quarter. Not saying goody played possum, but my gut feel is once they got their lead he was happy to leave the players to their own devices and try and dig themselves out of tbe hole they were in. (Weed back was as much about how ineffectual he was up forward as it was to try and stop their aeriel dominance I reckon).

I totally agree on freo. In my opinion they are the biggest threat, with the saints, who have really improved their all team defence, not too far behind. Leaving aside the issues we had in the second half (may out, trac struggling, langers role not adequately covered etc) we got a good look at how difficult freo are to score against when on. We got a real taste of our own medicine. Once we fell behind we couldn't find a way to generate scoring opportunities and resorted to high risk kicks to the corridor. That might work against the lions, as it did in round 12 last year after half time (after being nearly four goals down), but we can't afford to get 3 plus goals down against freo. The lions and the blues are not strong enough defensively to be a real contender in my opinion. As I posted in another thread, I'm amazed the lions did not retool their defensive system over the preseason and move to a model similar to ours and freos. Their old school defensive system won't cut it in 2022.

Is Neocleous a Greek philosopher?

What is the evidence we have struggled to score against bad sides?

Exactly. In tbe second half we got caught in the same trap we catch opposition teams in- we were down and took risks to try and bridge the gap - in particular tried risky corridor kicks. I donthink ink one resulted in a score, yet at least two cost us goals on turnover.

And that's how he looked. Played deep forward for most of the last quarter.

I wondered the same thing. We were running up and down on the spot in the last. And this was the point of the season last year that we started to look a bit cooked for a few weeks.

IMO the Lions have the second best list talent wise, and on that alone are an obvious challenger and arguably out biggest threat. But like the Blues they also struggle to stop opposition teams scoring. In the last 5 games they have given up 27 scoring shots against the Hawks, 21 against the lowly crows, 10 against the Eagles, 24 against the Swans and 25 against the Suns. And in the game they are playin now they have conceded 5 goals in the fir 15 minutes. I amazed they haven't retooled their defensive system because that sort of defensive weakness is simply not going to get it done against us - and as their finals record under Fagan demonstrates their model is not going to get it done in finals. They have bugger all chances of containing us to under 75 points and so therefore bugger all chance of beating us.

The forecast dry weather and the fact it is day game (so little risk of too much dew), albeit a late arvo one, will help Weid's cause.

Its funny you should say that. I watched the replay of the roos game and when they got within 6 points or so in third, i wondered to myself if there has ever been a team that can regularly have a lead whittled down from say 4-5 goals to one latish in the game, yet there still be no sense of being in trouble in terms of losing the momentum and the match. In 2018 i would have been having kittens if a team kicked multiple goals to pull back a decent lead.

Yep, good call. he can cover Harmes minutes in the mid field and is natural forward so can cover Harmes' half forward role. I have been as big a critic of Melksham as anyone over his time at the dees. My main criticism has been his lack of intensity, particularly in 2020. But i have seen some really positive signs in that regard at in the Casey games i have watched. He is perhaps fortunate to keep his spot on the back of a pretty quiet game last week, but the fact he has tells me he applied sufficient pressure and played his role to a level acceptable to Goody. So, that's good enough for me. It wouldn't shock me if getting him to 200 games is a factor in his selection. And if so, as someone noted, that would be in keeping with the culture of respect we have built. I think it was factor in the decision to pick Tmac for his 200th game ahead of Weed. That said there is no way Goody would gift anyone a game. If Goody figured he was not up to he job he wouldn't select him. Again, that's good enough for me. I hope he has a ripping game and shows off some his undeniable A grade kicking skills.