binman

As i understand it, there us a huge body of research on the role helmets play in concussion because of their use in gridiron. Different sport, and obviously much greater risk of concussion because they are using helmets to literally ram in to opponents also wearing helmets. So of course the helmets give players a totally false sense of security because whilst as you note they protect from say fractures they do nothing for the real danger- the sloshing of the brain inside the skull. In fact because the helmets are hard shelled they likely do more damage because they don't absorb any of the impact of collisions, in fact the opposite is true. And the amplify the impact of the whiplash effect of hitting the ground (becausevthey have no give), which is where a huge amount of the concussion damage is dome in NFL (and AFL) I wonder if the sort of helmet worn in AFL footy is slightly better in that regard (though not in terms of providing false confidence) as they are padded and so perhaps absorb a little of the contact, minimising, albeit not much, the slosh effect. Which is the principle of where they are heading in the states with the design of gridiron iron helmets. Which is helmets that have a sort of absorbent egg carton style material padding on them (and also have smart tech that measure impact and provide real time data to support doctor's assessment of concussion). I watched a doc on netflix about Brett favre ladt night Total [censored] hole. But of course deified as one of the greatest NFL quarter backs. He has recently diagnosed with Parkinsons. He would have taken thousands of huge hits to the heads, and countless whiplash incident when being driven into the ground. But that's nothing compated to the number of such events offensive and defensive linesmen suffer. Unless they sort the Its hard to see how NFL continues in say 20 years. Not because of the morap aspect of the obvious link to cte etc. But because of the financial implications of being sued. There is already a huge number of retired NFL players with CTE. Imaginehow many more there will be in 20 years given, like all eliye sports, players now are exponentially faster stronger (and therefore are hitting each other at greater velocity) than 20 years ago.

Apologies DS, apologies I missed the original quote. Ironic given the massive score a KP tonight.

Sure. If it was 1977 and zones weren't a thing.

I think your missing drevs point ds - as I noted it's also 5 metres narrower. Which means there's less area. Which us why over the last 10 seasons the average score there is aprox 10 points less than at the g, which statistically is very significant. It's a [censored] ground that's too small for modern AFL footy. Ditto kardinia Park for exactly the same reason.

Its chicken and egg. Again, id argue that people who watch footy, or at least a significant bl8ck of us arec very interested in meaningful analysis. That's certainly the case in America, as reflected in the coverage of MBL, NBA and NFL. I really can't imagine American sports fans are any more sophisticated than Australian sports fans.

Yes he does - but he explains exactly what it means clearly and with the visual aid of drawing a line down the ground to illustrate what he means (ditto 'fat side')

It would be pretty basic stuff for anyone currently playing footy, or involved in coaching or talent spotting, at a reasonable level. But not basic for the rest of us, particularly people like me who last played footy in the under 14s. I'd like to think I've got a reasonable handle on tactics and structures, but whatever I do know is a function of: Having always been really interested in the tactical side of the game Being fascinated by the evolution of tactics in footy My own observations Like a bower bird, getting scraps of information from the media to add to my knowledge All of which means my knowledge about tactics, method, game plans, structures etc etc is really just a hodge podge of cobbled together info with heaps of knowledge gaps and guess work. Which is why i find the coverage of the game so frustrating. I want to learn about the tactical side of the game, the basics and the more complex aspects and i don't think it is unreasonable to expect i get some that in the wall to coverage of the game in the same way you do in other sports. But there seems to be no interest in helping people learn about what I'd argue, given the size if the field, the number of participants, being 360 degrees, opaqueness of the rules and the speed of evolution is the most complex elite sport in the world. Which is why I loved this vid so much - smart, easy to understand when combined with visuals, doesn't talk in the stupid code and jargon ex footballers seem to love so much (eg the infuriating habit of recently retired ex footballers saying stuff like 'the fat side' or 'kicking off line' assuming people know what they are talking about when they have never bother explaining it) and above all informative and interesting. I mean, really, fox and 7 is that bloody hard?

The key is not having someone fast enough to chase him. The key Is frontal pressure and closing down the apace he has to run into. By the by that is also the key for us generally.

Indeed And there no driver fir 7 or fox to introduce any meaningful innovations given their duopoly. Why spend any money on innovation above and beyond paying the bone headed ex footballers who clag up the coverage of the game.

Yes, but its not as wide - i think its something like 5 meters less. So 5 meters shorter and 5 meters narrower meaning the surface area of the SCG is smaller than the G which has an impact on the ability of teams to spread and is a big factor in how congested matches are at the SCG which in turn impacts scoring. I haven't had a chance to double check this data, so take this with a grain of AI salt, but according to Copilot: Summary ComparisonStadium Avg. Total Score (Last 10 Seasons) MCG 188.5 points SCG 177.0 points This difference reflects the slightly more expansive playing conditions at the MCG, which can lead to higher scoring games.

He's good too

Ditto: Just watched it - absolutely brilliant. Love it I haven't watched any of his videos before - I'll watch them all now. I learnt more in those 27 minutes than i have in every game or replay I've watched this season combined That's exactly the sort of analysis that should happen during games and at quarter breaks.

I posted this in another thread, but makes more sense here: It's so great. I said on the pod that I thought our defensive structure was really good, particularly in the last quarter. But that was really almost a feeling based on the limited vision you can see watching on TV and the evident fact that we made it difficult for them to chain up those short 30-40 metre kicks the lions love to use to transition the ball. It was awesome to see that defensive structure and sytem demonstrated so clearly (with pretty basic tools - just shows it doesn't have to be super high tech to be effective). It was also terrific to get an insight into how zone defences are evolving and the concept of depth perceptio. The vision of our players lining up on the diagonal to block the oppo kick from the pocket was fascinating, as was how much direction and talk we do to maintain structures. Also loved the fritter pump up and the vision of fritter and koz working super hard on transition in the play that ended up with koz spotting up Friitter for a shot from 45 metres. Oh, and also loved the set play vision at the end with White highlighting how pumped tracc and maxy were when it came off.

I totally disagree about the average punter not being interested in that level of analysis. It's totally standard in say the coverage of NFL, NBA and test match cricket. Mainstream shows don't show it because they are lazy and hopeless and treat fans like [censored]. Does my head in

Pre the bounce Claz would find Neale and close check till the ball hit the deck. Post that they just went their own way Bin. Other than if they happened to come together in their attempts to extract or get on the end of a clearance etc. There was no heavy lock down or run with (shut down) role from Clarry other than the initial checking as the ball was bounced or balled up. In general play Claz does not look for Neale and just plays his own contest to contest game as well as guarding grass in the rolling zones. Neale also payed no attention to Clarry in general play as they both just played and ran the patterns they'd normally do. Your definition of a shut down must be very different to mine. Last week yes. This week not from what i witnessed. Reckon Clazz was instructed to play his own way after the initial pre-bounce (and during the ruck contest) checking. Will agree to disagree on this one. We're either in furious agreement or taking at cross purposes. I agree with you that clarry went to neale at stoppages to limit his influence, to shut him down. Sure he may not have run shoulder to shoulder outside of stoppages the way a true tagger would. But why would he? Who cares if Neale gets easy around the ground kicks - that's not where he does his damage. He does his damage at stoppages. That's where he needs shutting down and that's the role clarry was given. Clarry wasn't tagging neale he was taking neales one wood away and limiting his influence- the key metric being minimising the number of clearances Neale won (he only had 6 as it turns out, a huge win for us). That said, the way you describe it gives an impression clarry and neale spent most of the game nowhere each other. That's a false impression. Neale and Oliver's TOG was both mid 80% and neither played any position other than mids. That means claz was directly on Neale for almost all stoppages in the match. There were 83 stoppages in total during the game. That's an awful lot of time for claz to be directly locking down Neale. That's my definition of a shut down role of a gun midfielder (as opposed to say an outside runner or half back flanker which might involve running shoulder when the ball is in transition). Similarly melk had a shut down role on Andrews, despite not wearing him like a glove the way a tagger might.

It's so great. I said on the pod that I thought our defensive structure was really good, particularly in the last quarter. But that was really almost a feeling based on the limited vision you can see watching on TV and the evident fact that we made it difficult for them to chain up those short 30-40 metre kicks the lions love to use to transition the ball. It was awesome to see that defensive structure and sytem demonstrated so clearly (with pretty basic tools - just shows it doesn't have to be super high tech to be effective). It was also terrific to get an insight into how zone defences are evolving and the concept of depth perceptio. The vision of our players lining up on the diagonal to block the oppo kick from the pocket was fascinating, as was how much direction and talk we do to maintain structures. Also loved the fritter pump up and the vision of fritter and koz working super hard on transition in the play that ended up with koz spotting up Friitter for a shot from 45 metres. Oh, and also loved the set play vision at the end with White highlighting how pumped tracc and maxy were when it came off.

That's not even the half of it. There were weird comments all night. In all seriousness i thought some were borderline concerning. Just one example. Melksham was lining up for his FOURTH goal and Healy said something like, 'Melksham lining up for, what his second goal?' I mean he is a professional caller and he thinks Melksham, who kicked the first goal of the match inside 60 seconds has only kicked one goal late in the game?

No its not, as Pates suggests, he definitely played a shut down role. I guess it's semantics, but whilst i agree he didn't tag neale (which i assume is how you're defining shut down) he was given a shut down role on him, with, as you note, the goal of blunting Neale's influence at stoppages. And he was super effective in that role. It's interesting because clarry's weakness at the moment is he is lacking his speed from a standing start. That has been a problem when he has been a purely offensive mid at stoppages this season because if we don't win first possession his lack of acceleration makes it hard for him to switch to defence, making it easier for opponents to win clean clearances. But having a job on an oppo gun mid means his starting position and mindset is defensive from the get go. That reduces opportunities for the oppo to get quality clearances but still keeps clarry close to the coal face where he does his real damage - close quarters and winning the hard ball.

Just watched it - absolutely brilliant. Love it I haven't watched any of his videos before - I'll watch them all now. I learnt more in those 27 minutes than i have in every game or replay I've watched this season combined That's exactly the sort of analysis that should happen during games and at quarter breaks.

Based on what- the decent crowds we've had this year? We get enough ill informed rubbish from the media about crowd size without fans feeding misinformation too.

All while struggling with personal issues off field. A case can be made that he us our greatest ever skipper.

I'd go with:

I'd prefer he went with this version of The Guns of Brisbane:

He actually mentioned that they don't get many easy kicks to pad their stats, to the contrary they are taking on high risk kicks under pressure.

I heard hoyne say on sen that 8 of the top 10 rated kicks are half back flankers. Shows how important it us to have elite kicks behind tge all in terms od both creating scoring chains, but perhaps even more importantly not turning it over taking on high risk kicks that create scoring g chains (eg yo the corridor). Windsor is a weak link atm re: kicking skills, but great to have Mcvee back and Bowey playing so well. And tmac is generally excellent by foot too.