binman
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by binman
-
-
Would have preferred a letter from our 'new' CEO along the lines off:
I understand the anger of fans and also challenge faced by our hard working and passionate President in addressing that anger.
I don't want to leave Brad to deal with the angst of fans alone and I understand the importance of strong governance at this time.
Accordingly, i have brought my start date forward and rather than commencing in September, which in hindsight was an error on my part, will now start my tenure tommorow.
-
10
-
3
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, The heart beats true said: I’ll be there! What’s the point of not going? I’ve already paid for my Trident membership, and I’m interested to watch from level 2 at Marvel.
I was disappointed today, hugely, but is it more disappointing than the second semi in ‘23, or the Prelim in ‘87? If I can survive those I can survive anything.
I'll be there.
I'll leave my bells at home but.
-
2
-
2
-
-
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
-
-
-
1
-
1
-
-
This season has proved a disaster for the AFL - and even more so for the broadcasters.
Five rounds still to go and there's only one team outside the 8 who realistically can make finals, the dogs (by the by has a team ever not made the finals with a percentage north of 125%?)
Meaning we have five weeks with any number of rubbish games, including tonight.
And tonight's game highlights another related worry for the AFL and broadcasters - the gap in performance levels of the top 9 teams and the bottom 9 teams.
The dogs are 9th on 40 points, and the bombers are 14th on 20 points.
In most seasons, at this stage of the season 9th would of course be favourites in the betting against the 14th team.
I know the bombers have been decimated by injury but even so the fact they are 11.50 to win this match is absolutely nuts.
The dogs are 1.04 to win. I'm pretty sure winx never even started that short.
-
3
-
-
On 21/07/2025 at 20:50, Dr. Gonzo said: At first I rolled my eyes - I was never a huge fan of Joe, way too goofy for my liking.
But if he didn't cost much (picks wise), despite being a year retired and one of the more unreliable players even at his best he would still be better than what we have now. If it meant JVR could stay forward while Daniher pinch hits in the ruck and he takes the oppositions best defender while playing forward leaving JVR, Fritsch, Melksham (?) space to work it would be worth a stab.
We don't need a superstar KPF, we need a solid, big body that can take a mark and play backup to Gawn. If Daniher could be got for basically nothing then it's worth a shot, not like our list is bursting at the seams. There's about a quarter of the list we could cut tomorrow to free up a spot and no-one would notice.
Where I've landed pretty much.
The key is daniher would take the oppos best, and likely biggest, defender, giving JVR a bit of a chop out.
-
4
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Brownie said: I saw that one yesterday. Disgraceful.
The ump said to Jackson, you took a step. The kick was reversed and the pies had a shot on goal.
I then watched players taking multiple steps off their line for the rest of the game before play on would be called.
Players aren't standing the mark always anymore and players with the ball move a number of metres off their line before play on is called.
There's no consistency in how the rules are applied.
Insane.
As was this 50m and gifted goal to the pies after a Freo player gestured towards the screen.
No abuse no arguing, just a gesture, 50m. Yet players are back to arguing with umps all the time.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/724315990200691?mibextid=9drbnH&s=yWDuG2&fs=e
And it was another dodgy free kick paid in front of the goals for the pies to start with.
Compare and contrast with Xerri furiously pointing at the scoreboard and mouthing off when he dropped maxy off the ball and a completely reasonable free was paid.
-
4
-
1
-
-
Last night was the classic case of the scenario where two things can both be right.
We were woeful for much of the night.
And the umpiring was appalling and had a material impact on the game.
-
4
-
3
-
-
Didn't know the result and just read this thread end to end. Very enjoyable reading - thanks to all.
I needed something after last night.
-
5
-
2
-
-
Edited by binman
4 hours ago, No. 31 said: I have largely tuned out of footy for 2025 and am on holidays abroad. Against my better judgement think I will update my Watch AFL account and try to catch this with patchy wi-fi (I'm a sucker for punishment 😁).
Both clubs have badly botched their seasons. The Dees are trying to reinvent themselves on the run, the Blues are in freefall and probably haven't bottomed out yet.
Dees by 3 goals.
Interesting to see what the crowd turnout will be. How many Melbourne supporters are at the snow and how many Carlton fans sre sunning on the Mediterranean? 😁
I'm humidifying in Siem Reap.
Will have a delicious bowl of Pho and meander over to the God awful Pub Road to watch it in a God awful pub looking every inch the Aussie bogan tourist in my dees jumper and red and blue multi purpose Cambodian scarf.
Go Asuras
-
1
-
7
-
-
7 hours ago, Jjrogan said: We are 13th on scores against from turnover. 10th on scores from turnover.
Netted, we are 10th overall on differential.
The top 8 in both stats is pretty much the top 8, but really that shouldnt be too much of a surprise. Most scores come from turnovers and if youre in the top 8 logic says youll have the better percentage and therefore be most likely in the better half for turnover stats.
As for game plan, i agree with you there is a clear shift in our game plan, you may not like what you are seeing or agree with it, but if you cant see we are trying to switch more especially in the back half what games are you watching? Salem is 3rd in the league for marks! That's not nature thats nuture.
I also agree with the consensus we need some better penetrating kicks. Pies have 4 of the top 30. Adelaide have Dawson and elite kicks forward of centre. Brisbane have Zorko and the Luggage. We have.... Melksham, who is quietly the best in the AFL (with both feet) and Bowey, just. I reckon Lindsay and Langford are above average for now but may nudge elite. However, Windsor and Pickett are below average and ill bet my bottom dollar they will remain so. You can count on one hand players that significantly improve their kicking after they are drafted. Pickett however can create scoring opportunities from nothing so ill take the bad with the good every day of the week if he's in the middle.
I know I harp on it elsewhere but our biggest issue by far and part of the reason our game plan has looked so ordinary this year is because we have generational low output from our key forwards. The worst this century. Its not just the delivery as others find a way to get marks inside 50. If we had the output of even bang average kpf forward in our team, say Peter Wright and Mabior Chol we would be contending for the 8. But end of the day thats not enough, to win a flag we need a few more elite kicks. Sad thing is I think both Oliver and Petracca are having decent seasons apart from their kicking, which in Petraccas case will mean revert, so i dont really know how we're going to solve this puzzle.
Top post.
Agree on the forwards, though of course it would help if our inside 50 kicks were higher quality.
JVR has picked a bad year to plateau and petts has been average.
-
1
-
-
50 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said: We've made massive changes.
Now instead of kicking out long to Gawn we do a short kick to the pocket and then kick long to Gawn on the boundary.
Seriously the only difference I've noticed is that we are trying to kick lower into the forward line.
Cannot remember us being in the corridor once
None if the top teans use the corridor much anymore- nor even Collingwood who used it often in 2022 and 2023. It's too easily defenfended and the risk reward ratio is out of wack in terms of the impact of turning it over in the middle of the ground.
-
1
-
-
Edited by binman
1 hour ago, Pennant St Dee said: Lions were always a kicking side, they used to spread the footy back and forth looking for an opening in the corridor and hit the kick. Then move the ball very quickly once they opened the ground up.
They did this against us a lot from 21-24, making sure they didn’t go long down the line or kick to contests.
They are now more aggressive with their ball movement, speed on the ball and more backing the run and handball from behind.Less repeated switching
It’s not a massive change in game plan it’s taking away the lateral kick and repeated lateral kick to open up the 45 or corridor kick to change lanes. But let’s also factor in they’re a very different make up of a side/list I reckon they have better foot skills overall
We’re moving from a in the contest and go long and direct, generally to the pockets, where we can create repeat stoppages or crest pressure on the opposition on their defensive exits to cause a turnover and give us repeat entries, but that creates issues entering congested F50s
Our previous game plan wasn’t built around turnovers from our defensive half and getting speed on the ball with aggressive kicking or run in waves and forward handball.
I’d argue our style is a big shift and we don’t have all the pieces for us to be able to have that plan running smoothly. That’s not to say we don’t have them on our list with some magnet moving. I’m still not convinced we can get there without significant tough decisions, but we shall see.
I’ve coached for a fair while and it’s difficult changing payers from what they know and there are some players on our list who are very good at their style of game but very average at the hitting up of 45s and/or holding to give off the handball to the runner. We’ve done it on occasion yet still when the opposition brings the heat players go back to what they know
Spot on.
And I'd add going from the 2nd slowest in getting the ball forward in the first 12 weeks of 2025 to 4th in the last six weeks is not indicative of a 'complete change' of style.
For one thing, a six week period is a relatively small sample size to use as evidence of a 'complete change' of game style (they may well end up near the bottom of that table this season too - and from memory they also started to get it forward quicker near the end of last home season and in the finals, so perhaps they are deliberately following a similar pattern).
Secondly that is one stat, and ball movement is just one element of a team's game plan (eg how a team defends is arguably a more significant element of a teams game plan) - in isolation a change to that stat is not evidence of a complete change in style. A tweak perhaps but certainly not a radical change.
The pies have made a similarly dramatic change in reagard to their method of transitioning the ball as also evidenced by an isolated stat (albeit one that doesn't aggregate several data points Luke speed of ball movement) one hoyne has also discussed.
The pies have gone from one of the quickest to play on from a mark or free to the slowest.
Big change, but it's just one element of their method - and no one is suggesting they have changed their game plan. Tweaked it yes, changed it no.
From memory they were also the fastest ball movement team and are now in the bottom third (I might be wrong on that). Again noone is arguing tha5 is evidence they have completelychanged their game plan.
And as you note Pennant, tweaks are way easier to implement than wholesale changes to a team's game plan and method the dees have undertaken.
In any case, it's worth noting that goody deserves kudos for the fact that the dees have in fact implemented a new game over the last two seasons, in particular this season (we started the process in the first half of last year and as goody has said, unfortunately reverted in the second half of the 2024 season to try and eke out some wins to make finals).
There are any number of metrics that evidence our radical change in game plan - eg scores from defensive half, speed of ball movement (equal first in the AFL), how quickly we are playing on after a mark or free (top 3 in the AFL) etc.
The fact that we haven't been winning this year doesn’t negate the fact we have implemented a new method.
I would argue the key reason we have not won more games is not that we have failed to implement the new method but that we don't have enough players with the requisite skill set to implement it optimally. The most obvious indicator of that is our crazy scores from turnovers numbers (I'm guessing bottom three).
But our high turnover numbers can also be seen as evidence of working to implement a new transition based game plan - ie we are trying to take the game on just turning it over too often (ie we could reduce turnovers by reverting to our old, down the line, forward half game plan and/or playing g slow and/or not taking on the sort of high risk kicks the transition method demands).
A lot is made of mcrae being able to implement a similarly radical change in game plan in terms of movimg away from Buckley's defence first method but he had a major advantage over Goody.
Mcrae's game plan requires players suited to that style, namely a solid core of players who can consistently hit high risk kicks and not too many turnover merchants.
In terms of the former, unlike goody, he had a lot of senior players with above average to elite foot skills (eg Pendulbury, Sidebottom, Mcreee, Quaynor, Josh Daicos, Elliot, Hoskin Elliot) and had the good fortune of his tenure coinciding with the debut of the most consistently damaging kick in the AFL in Nick Daicos.
-
5
-
-
49 minutes ago, demoncat said: He’s the perfect cherry on top player for a contending club
It might be an obvious thing to say but it’s no surprise his best goal kicking returns game when we were contending across 2021-23 (minus his injury effected back half of 23)
Yep.
Bottom line is we need to trade in at least one highly skilled half back flanker/mid who can reliably hit targets by foot.
And we need to draft in such a player too
To do both we need capital.
And to get that we need to be prepared to bite the bullet and trade out at least one player who we can get a decent return from.
Makes little sense to trade out any of our young guns like mcvee, jvr, Windsor etc.
So we need to trade out at least one high value best 22 senior player.
Realistically Tracc, Fritter and Rivers are arguably our only such players (I'm not including anyone we've recently resigned or maxy as there's no world in which we'd trade him)
With his contract Tracc would be tricky to trade, and unless he wants out there's not really a scenario where we come out winners by trading him (that's to say even if we brought in another gun he's unlikely, on net, to have more impact than tracc).
That leaves Rivers and Fritter.
And for mine as much as there is a contradiction in trading out an elite kick to bring in another Fritter is the obvious one to trade.
As you note DC he would fit perfectly into a club like the hawks, lions or even pies that have plenty of elite kicks in their midfield and back half. And he's still producing high quality footy.
Taken together, he has good trade value.
-
2
-
-
Xerri cops his rightful punishment.
Can't believe North Melbourne challenged it.
And credit whete it's due - the tribunal slapped them down quick smart.
-
3
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Ghostwriter said: A couple of days out from the match we were at $1.23, second shortest odds of the round with Brisbane at $1.22 vs Carlton.
Actually, I think that's what we started, or thereabouts (ie 1.25 not 1.45).
-
1
-
-
-
On 14/07/2025 at 09:25, Pennant St Dee said: Why not just bring Petty or May in to replace Lever. Disco is settling in well down back and IMO needs to be left there.
JVR, Jeffo, Melk and Fritsch playing HHF like yesterday should be how we structure up with a rotating mid Kossie/Trac/Viney and Wing rotation Langford/Chandler/Langdon is how we should look to go IMO with someone having to come in for Sparrow
Yep, total no brainer.
And petts Is surely ultimately going back to replace Lever and May when they retire.
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, Howard_Grimes said: It shows diddly squat.
The reasons behind why we seem to 'get up' against better opposition is of far more interest and intrigue to me. And on many occasions those performances have come off the back of extremely poor games the week prior.
Of course some still claim those bumps in performance were 'loading' related, but again that's just one of those blanket excuses that seems to be oh so convenient in many cases.
We are a long way off the top. Why?
Because the top clubs at this level do not drop off like we do so consistently.
Hi Steve/Jimmy. Back on DL I see.
You must love how we're travelling this year.
Don't love the latest name, but each to their own.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Edited by binman
26 minutes ago, Chook said: I'm not comparing us to other sides. I'm comparing us to ourselves c.2021
We're miles off.
Yeah, agree.
Nowhere near as good as our 1964 team either.
Sheesh.
-
9
-
1
-
1
-
6
-
5
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, dees189227 said: Would you bring spargo back in for sparrow?
Yep.
And I suspect that's exactly what will happen assuming spargs is ready to go.
-
8
-
-
3 hours ago, Jaded No More said: He could take Judd’s role as a shut down small defender, freeing Judd to play a more attacking role further up the ground.
That's exactly what we need I reckon.
-
6
-
-
-
5
-
PODCAST: Rd 20 vs St. Kilda
in Melbourne Demons
Or alternatively be OK for three quarters of the show before falling in a complete heap for the last quarter....
('tell me Andy, do you think we should take the opportunity to change our allegiance to the Tassie Devils - I mean Demons to Devils is not such a big idealogical or conceptual leap, and there's a certain synergy in swapping support from the oldest football club in the world to the newest')