binman

That's all well and good Webber, and you have high level expertise in this area. But my gut tells me you are wrong and i will not be changing my opinion we are treated poorly as fans in terms of information about injuries. Jokes. Thanks for the very thoughtful post on the topic. It has certainly shifted my thinking. I think for me it comes down to the management of fan's expectations - well mine i guess, seeing the majority seem to be of the quite reasonable view that the club are not obliged to share specifics about players injuries or timelines. Personally, i'm not hugely interested in the specifics of the injury - I'm interested in the potential time out. I hear what you are saying about the impossibility of being accurate about that, but i think the 4-6 week standard reporting is unhelpful becuase it is narrow range that implies some sort of certainty where as you say it does not exist. And can feed into a sense of the club being disingenuous with information when the timeframe is not met or simply always stands as 4-6 (as is pretty much the case for Petty). This potentially ends up eroding confidence in the club's messaging to fans and even the club's medical team - at least for some people. I reckon the model like the one used by the tigers noted by whatwhat above would work well (at least for me), ie not listing weeks, but rather four types of timing listed: short term medium term long term indeterminate

No change. No surprise. Why? Because, Goody rarely makes changes (except injury related ones) to a team coming off a win. So, if we win this week and lets say Tmac or Spargo have quiet games statistically, can repeat offenders please consider resisting the urge to suggest they will be dropped.

No, could care less is a well established idiom and much used phrase. One I like actually. The Miriam Webster treats the two phrases as synonymous. However, I am aware that it frustrates pedants because they believe it to be illogical.

You don't think that is not a bit reductive DS? I mean, for people who do choose to listen to the game audio, which would be the overwhelming majority, the performance of the commentary teams has a direct impact on their perception and even enjoyment of the game. It certainly does for me. This is particularly true for interstate games that posters have to watch live on TV rather than watch the game at the ground. Given the commentary team is part of how the game is experienced for most posters why it is not fair game, particularly in a post game thread, to discus their performance - and complain about them should they wish. Saying people shouldn't complain about a subject when they know 'full well what to expect' would disqualify discussion about a range of relevant topics - umpiring standards for example. You may not be 'trying to tell people to mute the commentary if they would prefer to listen to it', but you are telling them not to post about it. But plenty of threads have tangential posts that can, and sometimes do, 'clog' them up. For example often jokes are made, that invite multiple replies, that are of limited interest to many posters or spell checking of players names, because for some such errors are frustrating where most posters could care less.

Not sure about so many, but agree there are others who are so much better. Almost all of whom are calling the women's games and/or the vfl and practice games. I watched the Sandy Casey game and thought the commentary was excellent. Jack everin and another bloke whose name escapes me. Two handed (which is all that is needed), play by play call, with only the odd 'special comment' - and those comments were often really helpful and insightful. Didn't talk over each other and helped me follow the game because I didn't know all the player's numbers. Above all, both had obviously both done their pre match preparation and research. No coincidence, neither were ex afl footballers

Sorry, missed this. We won center clearnces by 8 and they won rhe around the ground clearances by one, so net seven positive to us. So, pretty good on rge raw numbers. Bur agree we didn't get a huge advantag - though I don't think that was a function of mutiple players at the ball. Credit must go to the suns. Watts was excellent and I think their mids were excellent- as was their structure and set up. They clearly had a focus on being physical and hard at us, and were really trying to work over our mids - particularly clarry. Lots of niggling and grappling. I think one function of thst work by suns is there were lots of 50 50 midfield scraps and there were several occasion where mutiple players looked to tackle Rowell - who was into our guys all game. That might have contributed to the sense we were bees to rge honey pot.

That's a really good point. He gets enough chances to mark it doesn't he. And so often nearly does. I cringe when I hear commentators say something like 'weed contests, but can't quite drag it in' In some ways it makes it worse for him. Why not try a glove - good idea. Maybe we can send him a demonland one.

Agree on his marking. What's that about? I remember watching him clunk marks at will in a practice match against the pies in his first year. Happened to be standing next to his dad and had a good chat - summary, the kid can play. Someone made a good point about his marking that his strength is on rhe lead, but struggles in the one on one wrestle. In hindsight all his marks that day were leading out from full forward, Dunstall style. Maybe rucking more will help. On JVR, that's the the first time I have watched him play. Definitely has something about him. Unlike weed, he doesn't seem to mind the one on one battle.

All good points Sydee. That said, brown was terrific - clunked some good marks and took his chances. He is such a smart footballer. Weed must have had mixed emotions watching brown go to work. To be fair to weed Brown played deep as a true full forward, which is really weed's natural position. Weed played higher up the ground and spent plenty of time in the ruck. The Casey set up is largely a mirror of the senior's set up in terms of players playing specific roles. Which is super smart in terms of players ready to slot into the system, in the event of injury, and play a designated role in that system. For example, daw is gawn and rosman is langdon. Using that idea, Brown played the bb role, JVR the tmac role (contesting, bringing the ball to ground, blocking and screening for Brown etc) - and weed the Jackson role ie high forward, relief ruck, up and down the ground. I think it is a good role for weed, in part because I reckon he is a pretty good ruck, but it also means when he is in the ruck he is in the game. The downside is, like has often been the case for Jackson, the role doesn't lend itself to getting high possession numbers or bags of goals. So, a tough gig for weed. Hopefully he embraces it and it helps him address some of weaknesses, for example inconsistent intensity levels.

Let's start with this thread

To be honest, I'm just going with the suggestion of inside mail on Howes. I watched the game against Sandy and thought he played pretty well, but not banging the door down well. I was a bit surprised to see Laurie play as a mid, in so far as I thought he was a Salem style hb as a junior and trained in thst role last year. Does anyone know which group he has been training with this year?

Yeah fair point. I'd like to see Hunt get another shot at it, particularly on the wide open spaces of the g. He seems to be playing a more one on one role in the two games thus far. Not really his strength, but was OK against the dogs I thought. Had one of those nights against the gc where nothing seemed to work.

That's a funny coincidence. I was just about to post the same comment about you

I doubt Lever will play. Or Hibberd. Based on the comments about Howes on this thread, my guess is one change - howes in, Hunt out. Bedford to be medi sub again.

Goody picks players who do the role they are assigned to do. If they remain in the team you can safely assume they are doing thst role to his satisfaction

Which has been fine. Which is why he keeps being picked. And will be this week.

Me too x a million. And I'd pay for it too. It would be dead easy to do as I assume all sound come in in channels. All they would need to do is not put the commentator channel through one external feed.

You are probably right, but I thought it was at the end of 2020 hw was asked to look at order options?

I can't speak for others, but I can't watch the footy without sound. I've tried muting, and it simply doesn't work for me. It feels as if I'm watching it in an air lock. It's not just the crowd noise, it's all the other ambient noise, not least the ball being kicked. I've also tried turning the volume down and listening to a radio feed. That is better than no sound, but only just. It always falls out of sync and the sound is variable. But good to know muting works for you.

On the topic of the margin, and not scoring much in the last quarter or so, a mate made these really good points: Just after the beginning of the third qtr, we had 10.1, then we reverted to type and finished with 12.10. And at least 3 of those 5 points in the last were easy shots We actually had more scoring shots in the 2nd half (12-10). It's funny, good conversion often is interpreted as playing well, bad conversion - playing badly. And yet a lot of the times the only difference is just that - conversion. Which can be quite random at AFL level - you might miss by a half a metre or hit the post - the next time you might squeak one in.

Not sure that's true. At the risk of being accused of blowing my own trumpet, I have been a big fan for a long time. I thought he was one of our most important players in 2020, in large because of the running he did and how important that sort of running is to our game plan. Was really surprised we suggested he explore his options. That said, he has gone up a couple of levels and really improved, particularly his decision making and kicking. He is now one of most reliable kicks and forwards must love leading to him. Such improvement at his stage in his career is rare.

Sold the candy, sold the whole shop!

I reckon part of it is our predicable game style is a bit boring for non dees supporters. And the predictability males it hard to come up with anything new and/or interesting to opine. I mean how often can you say the dees set up so well ahead/behind the ball or we are hard to ay against.

Agree. And to boot he keeps crappimg on when the ball is in play. They missed calling Jackson's goal as it happened coz dermot was blathering away about something. That said, healy wasn't far behind in the waffle AND incomprehensible stakes - which is weird because he was never that bad i thought. That was the worst commentary I have ever heard in a footy game - and for me, that is seriously saying something. I found myself getting angry at all 3 clallers, particularly healy and breteton. It really affected my enjoyment of the game. Not only did they not actually call the game, they were frequently dead wrong with their comments and analysis. It was embarrassing

Fair enough, well have to agree to disagree. One thing though, playing tempo, slow, controlled football is as you say less taxing than attacking.and trying to score. For one thing, when going into tempo/control they frequently hold onto the ball and stop after a mark or free, sometimes up to 30 seconds. Everyone gets chance to get their heart rate down Slowing down rhe heard rate is tge key reason players taking a shot at goal take their full time before taking their shot. And we did go into tempo, control mode. On the players being gassed, perhaps you're right and they like goody says they weren't tired. But jeez when you look at the post match interviews the players all looked completely spent And tracc and may both mentioned the heat right at the top.