binman

That was a really bad mistake by me. Even though he has a become a right wing nut job, I loved his work with the Smiths.

You seriously think he should not have taken that kick? What would you have had him do instead - kick into the stands, just drop the ball at his feet, bomb it up the ground? A professional footballer does not refuse to take a shot after the siren in any circumstances. What did it achieve? For one thing it was yet another example of our discipline and playing to the final siren. And an example of tom's professionalism and respect for the game. The same discipline underpinned why goody never fudged the rules to get Jordon on the ground, something he could easily have done (after all Steve may had a tear in his hammy). When asked why he didn't goody (paraphrasing) said no one was injured so he couldn't do it. Discipline.

Your MFCSS is so acute you are worried Bruce will kick a bag against us this weekend, coz he 'always does'.. And that is in spite of the fact you know he is currently out injured and he no longer plays for the saints.

Which is one reason why criticism of tmac for being 'selfish' when he chose to shoot for goal not pass to a teammate(s) is unwarranted. Bad decision? Maybe- though I'm not convinced it was in the circumstances. Selfish? Nup.

Last week kozzie completely burnt fritter AND by doing so almost certainly cost us an easy walk in goal. Not a hanging offence, but zero doubt that was a selfish act. Didn't cop much grief or accusations of being selfishon here as far as I can recall. Tmac marks on the line (didn't cost us a goal) and made a decision to shoot for goal instead of an almost equally difficult pass to teamate (who knows if that cost us a goal) and gets accused of selfishness. Pretty harsh if you ask me.- particularly for a fella with plenty of credit in the selflessness bank.

Totally agree. Particularly given the fact that he didn't cost us a goal.

We are 7 zip.

What on earth are you talking about? They kicked ONE goal in the first 3 minutes - at 2.07. They kicked their next goal at 3.39. WE kicked the next goal at 12.02. And they didn't get their third until nearly the 20 minute mark. Sheesh.

We got away with it? We won the bloody flag!

Right at the top? It must be in tbe mcc part of it. Def closed on this side of the great divide.

Fake news. Top of the Ponsford closed unfortunately.

That's a yes?

A question for anyone at the g, is the top of the Ponsford open?

The Corner Hotel if you are coming from the Richmond side

I'm convinced they will. Mitchell will want to test his game style against the best. And why not? I expect them to come out attacking, look to move the the ball fast, switch a lot and take on the corridor. Which I actually think is their best chance of winning - the reference point is the crows game we lost last year. I hope they do play their game as it will make for a much better game to watch than if they take the approach gws, the bombers and tigers took ie flooding, creating congestion and minimum 2 extras up to stoppages.

West Coast are a rabble who will want to finish bottom of the ladder to finally get a number one draft pick (have they ever had one?). And the tigers have been better than their win loss tally suggests, were really good against us in terms of intensity and pressure, and are still playing for a finals spot. Grimes in is huge as their defence has been super wobbly and they lack height down back. Lambert is also a great in and smart to bring Soldo in to exploit the fact that Nic Nat is out. The tigers will smash them in clearances and post clearance contested possessions. And after trying to suffocate us last week (which meant they couldn't transition the ball from their back half because all their numbers were flooded up around the ball, and therefore struggled to score), they will relish the space and time the Eagles will give them and look to get it forward and attack. All of which means that i think the tigers will win, and win well (i'm predicting a 5 goals plus margin) So to Richmond to make their line of 14.5 is rolled solid gold bet.

I've got no issue with the rubbish scheduling. You need to win lots of games to earn the Friday night slot. Wait a minute.......

I've heard Fauci created covid in a lab when on a secondment in China. Source: too many to mention, but they include Marjorie Taylor Greene Tucker Carlson, Elon Musk and the New York Post

@dazzledavey36 get ready for a Milkshake attack!

Me too. Deserves a shot.

Did he review the 2018 prelim?

By the proverbial county mile too. In fact he seemed to have improved his ball handling and an ability to gather off the ground. Some of his work in that regard against the tigers was super impressive. A key role for Weed is to block and screen for BB because opposition teams look to double and triple team him all the time. Which, by the by, is further evidence of how far ahead is of Weed and Tmac, as with all due respect to both, neither get doubled teamed.

Totally agree. The super high kick is a really noticeable strategy isn't it. Langdon is the master at it, perhaps because he gets so many of possession hard up up the boundary and ahead of the play (ie he is often on the end of the outlet kick and has to wait for teammates to get set ahead of him), meaning if we don't mark it, which is often the case, if not crumbed by us it smashed over the boundary line. Which means we don't turnover the ball often, if we do it is not in a dangerous spot and if it goes over the line we can reset. But other players do that kick too. A variation on the same theme is deliberately scrappy long mongrel kicks forward when we don't have a clear target that are all but impossible to mark - deliberately so. Some go t packs, others just not space. Tracc is the mater of these kicks I feel like this latter kick is more the tigers go to - we have added the high kick (though they do them too, just not as often)

That is a really good point. In addition to the benefits you note of looking to go forward, another benefit is we can control the tempo of the game AND take territory. Other teams try and control the tempo, for example when wanting to slow opposition momentum, by kicking it side to side in their back half. Under pressure, Geelong reverted to type and did exactly that in the last quarter in their loss to the hawks. And got marooned in their back half. You can't score when the ball is in your opponents 50 metre arc. And if you turn it over there you get scored against in quick time.

Agree. There has definitely been a change to the option we take when we get a mark or free - and even when a player is running with ball in hand. The rule appears to be go quick and take the first option, but only if tbat option is the best one. But if there is not a good option, then hold onto it and wait until either a good option appears (eg a player leads up for a short hit up) or until the players ahead of the ball, and behind, can get into their structure (eg tall marking targets an crumbers to a specific spot). It works well for a number of reasons. It supports our tactic of controlling the tempo of the game. It helps us keep our shape offensively, but more importantly defensively as players who have pushed forward or back can reset. It means we are not always going flat chat, so when we need to go we have the energy to do so. It supports the option of giving a handball to a player running from behind. It reduces the opportunity for opposition teams to bounce it off half back and slingshot because we are not kicking it to a one on one or outnumber. Which is important because some teams rely on doing so to generate scoring, for example the hawks and dogs. And it reduces turnovers. A lot of the turnovers we win are on the back of opposition teams going fast and taking the first option. Freo have implemented a lot of our key tactics and that includes not taking the first option all the time.