binman

On all of the above port provided the perfect example of the risks of the traditional model of kicking to the hot zone. Their game plan is built around kicking it to Dixon 20 metres out straight in front. Which works great against average teams because Dixon marks it more often and if he doesn't they win the front and center ground ball and kick goals. But against us he barely can take a mark and WE win the ground ball, in the corridor and bounce it out of their back half. How many crumbing goals did they get? I can only think of two - amon and rozeee - and neither were from crumbing Dixon, who i don't think took a mark

It does make sense. It is really important each player sticks to the team rules from the first whistle to the last. Discipline. Or else at some important juncture a player goes of script and we lose an important contest. And in your scenario who makes the call to kick to the hot zone? Presumably the kicker. How do his teamates know he is not going to follow team rules? The only way for it to work is for some sort of signal , and then practising it, which would waste their time. And they clearly don't want unpredictability. A tenet of the game plan is predictable ball movement. Like kicking it to the pocket. Repetition builds predictability, not random off script plays. Another tenet is percentage play. Kicking to the hotspot is low percentage. Sure we might score more often (with that specific kick), might being the operative word. We want to trap the ball inside our forward half and get repeat entries But very few pack marks get taken these days and so the likelihood is that the ball hits the deck. If it does and is won by the opposition they win it in the corridor it makes it super hard for us to defend the next kick as the field is open. And so conversely much easier for them to transition out of their back half as it is impossible to cover the whole ground with a zone But a contest in the pocket that is not marked might go over the boundary line. So we then reset. Tick. And if they win the ground ball their only safe option is a pressured kicked down the line. Where we have pressed up, mark/intercept and go back inside 50. Because we know that's where it is likely to go and CAN cover that space. If they decide they are sick of kicking it back to us down the line their other options - eg cross or try to hit a target in the corridor- are super risky and if turned over highly likely to concede a score. A great example was kossies first goal where we had pressed up, book tried to hit a man 20 odd metres away rather than kick down the line, missed it and after the ball was in dispute fritter tapped to kossie who goaled from just inside 50. On percentages we we will score more often, and concede less coast to coast goals by sticking to the plan. Not sexy, a little boring perhaps, but smart. And sticking to tbe plan at all times will help us win finals. .

Nup. Was in my year. In many of my same classes actually. I knew him pretty well.

I met Gary a few times. Well, met is probably not accurate. He was the year above me at Melbourne High back in the day. Old mate gaz waltzed around the school like he owned the joint and was more much more likely to push me down the stairs than say g'day.

Nothing is stopping you from counting kicks at the footy. Each club collects their own stats on specific indicators i think, albeit a a small number. They obviously get the full data set from Champion data and then i guess the skill is mining that data to customize it for their own KPIs etc. And there are some examples of journos and others creating their own analytics based on publicly available data - for example the excellent articles by Cody Atkinson (and someone else?) for ABC news. But even if you collected your own stats I'm not sure you would be able to publish them as there are licensing issues no doubt. However, even if you could publish them, there is no way you - or more pertinently a start up who set out to collect and publish (or sell) their own AFL data - could get comprehensive useful data in the first place. So therefore no way you could monetize it. I'm totally guessing here (someone will know specifics i'm sure), but i assume Champion data have access to the GPS numbers, are provided a box, or similar, with all the necessary infrastructure (power, internet access, monitors etc etc) and access to the grounds is facilitated (eg right passes to get into the grounds, parking spots, moving equipment about etc etc). Only Champion data gets all this from the AFL, effectively making it impossible for another organization to compete. There is another data tool which the AFL own and control - AFL Stats pro. I assume they use this to generate the data they provide on their website (and the club's websites too). It appears to be fully automated ie the data is pulled form the vision of the game directly. No doubt Champions data have access to this too.

I don't mean this in a patronising, or facetious way, but Robbie was ahead of his time in many ways. I grew up a passionate dees fan. The only fan of the dees, and the only fan of footy actually, in my family. Robbie was my hero. The only one I have ever had. And in the 70s and 80s, his grace and compassion and - what a perfect word for Robbie joeboy - his gentleness was decidedly uncommon for men. Particularly those playing football. Add in his fierce desire to play to his limits whatever the score and his leadership, a finer role model you could not find. I went to his memorial at the g and the love for the man was so incredibly palpable. When we win a flag, I'm sure my thoughts will turn to Robbie.

The afl allow them to monopolise the market. It is outrageous Open up the market and allow competition

The crows tried to apply the same rule to their preseason camp

For the love of God Nash, never, and I repeat never, go on the game day threads!

Played well. Got 3 goals, with one being a Joe the goose. Gave off a couple of goals. Competed well in the air I quite like him in the ruck. Worked hard. Good, positive attitude all game.

They HAVE to score the next goal to have any chance (said with 15 minutes to go)

Just KICK IT!!!!!

Maybe. But I'm pretty sure they always wanted the two talls. After all that's why they recruited Brown. The issue was one couldn't elevate his game (yet) and the other wasn't physically ready for the role they wanted him to play.

With him being pushed under the ball I reckon there are a couple of factors. One, we have A LOT of poor kicks. One of the most underrated skill is weighting the ball to a forwards advantage. Where he was pushed under the ball it was kicked to the defenders advantage. Two, he has clearly trimmed right down. So will have lost a bit of his ability to push back on the defender. Tmac struggles with the same issue. No doubt they are working on his core strength, and he will probably have to get used to playing a bit lighter, but having less weight to use in those situations will always have an impact. Looking at tmac and Brown, apart from the height differential, they now look like remarkably similar physique wise. Now tmac can kick it to tmac.

Would not surprise me at all. For mine it was always about them needing him to sort his fitness, core strength and perhaps most of all his agility. All looked much improved on Thursday night, particularly his agility. A number of times he recovered really well and was able to impact the next contest. His 3 tackles were evidence of this. And they would have loved his recovery after dropping a mark on the boundary, collect and turning his opponent inside and our then beaut pass. Sure we could have done with him against the giants but perhaps he wasn't quite where they needed him to be. So stuck to their guns. As good coaches do.

Oh, please. I resisted responding to your previous post on Salem because it was twaddle. At his best he can be damaging? In our top 5 most important players. Absolutely critical to our game plan. Two out of bounds on the full from kick outs, passes that did not hit the mark? Salem Is our best kick by a mile. And his ability to hit target under pressure is phenomenonal. And again a huge part of our game plan, in particular our ability to not lose the ball in our back half and transition to our front half. Lazy? Absolute bollocks. His numbers are of the charts. He gets huge disposal numbers for a half back and covers huge territory. In fact one of the most impressive (and important) parts of his game is his ability to continue to hit targets when he is red lining and fatigued. When the lions played us, pagan tagged two players - Lever and Salem. Because both are so important for us.

Sounds like a TISM gig

Wayne carey to daisy: Daise, keays has a glove on. Has he had it on before Daisy Yes Carey: Is it injury related? Daisy Get me the [censored] out of here (she thought)

Any award for worst commentators would surely be called the BTs

I think you answered your own question

It wasn't that one, though you're right thst was a good example of his smarts. The one I was thinking of was around the wing. I'm.about to watch the replay and will make a note of when it happened

Imagine one of those peanuts calling a horse race. Jockeys have the same build, all wear silks (that often look similar eg the Godolfin blue) and all are riding horses that with the odd exception look much the same. And jockeys don't have big bloody numbers on their back!

For mine, i'd have Sparrow in ahead of Harmes. And once jones is fit, i'd have him in ahead of both based on his game the weekend before last. Harmes was average last night. To be fair he had an improved second half but he made some potentially costly errors in the first half. And that makes three average games in a row I take your point about his defensive work, but he often undoes that work with poor decision making. And a big knock i have on him in terms of his decision making is that he takes too many low percentage options, eg taking on the tackler on when the percentage play is to give it off or attempting marginal handballs or kicks outside his skill range. And it is poor decisions that can really hurt in finals. He is at his best when he is given a specific job on a gun opposition mid, who can take him to the ball. His role should be a negator, not a creator. And when he does that job well, his possessions become more valuable. Viney was the perfect player to go to Wines, but it left Harmes without an obvious tagging role. All that said goody has placed a huge value on consistency of selection and rewarding players, so Harmes is unlikely to be dropped. Which is fine by me. I have a lot of respect for that approach. Give Harmes a job on O'Meara and free up Viney a bit. Sparrow will remain as a sub, unless they want him to get some game time, as goody no doubt wants to reinforce he is an important part of the team. By the by, can Sparrow play for casey this weekend?

Jordon was essentially playing as a winger/half back in the first 6 weeks or so. He took Viney's defensive mid role when he went out of the side. And now jack is back JJ has slotted back in to his winger/half back. Which is perfect for him - and us. He gets a lot more outside ball, which is great for us as he hits targets and makes excellent decisions (there was one last night where he delayed the release and chose a really good option, where so many players would have given to a teammate under pressure. I can't remember exactly when though). But he balances that outside role with fantastic tackling and pressure Good role for JJ too, in terms of being less physically taxing than a pure inside defensive mid. I reckon the biggest impact of Viney being out was robbing us of JJ n that role as there is not an obvious replacement, except for perhaps Bowey, who i assume they want to have more VFL time. JJ has become a super important cog in the machine. And reliable one at that. Such a pure footballer.

What? How on earth could you come to that conclusion??? Kossie marked it. Jonas assumed, incorrectly, that it would not be awarded. He then threw him to the ground preventing him from immediately playing on or giving it off. Which is exactly what the 50 was brought in to penalize. Sure Jonas was unlucky, but it doesn't matter a jot that he thought it was play on. Didn't for Friiter - and nor should it have.