binman

It's funny you should mention the 'terrority game'. Like the pies, we are still playing it in so far there us a clear emphasis on winning the territory, inside 50 battle this season. The difference is the focus on, as you suggest, not always bombing it in (though we are still doing plenty of that) and bei g much less straight line. It's interesting because in 2024, on the back of the pies 2023 flag win, it was all about scores from the back half and spring boarding from half half. In 2025, whilst transition from the back half is still important, the pendulum has swung back a bit to territory, get it inside 50 and trap there, forward half turnover footy. It's a shift that suits us. The red and blue print.

A good example is trac handballing sharp in the seans game to set a running goal rather than bombing for goal himself.

No it's not.

Yep, back to back solid games with good intensity. Times his leads super well.

Neat

Noah yze kicks a beauty

Sound is nor synced properly with the vision, at least it is for me, meaning the whiistle is slightly ahead of the play, which very annoying.

It's not deliberate. Its insufficient intent to keep the ball I the field of play.

All true. But it should never noted that whilst we have 15 AFL listed players they have 11.

Demonstrating how he keeps reinventing himself?

Any truth in the rumours you are reporting from your studio in South Melbourne?

And people wonder why Spargo is a best 22 lock.

Yep, no rivalry at all. To the contrary, its terrific there's two good dees pods and i reckon they compliment each other really well as they are both a bit different in style. All power to the dee brief team (by the by it's a great name for a dees pod)

I forgot about that. That's another black mark on that podcast and in particular Birch's 'analysis'. They actually implied Saints hadn't played there (but i was dubious which is I added the i dont tkink caveat) and as a result didn't point out an obvious flaw in Birch's 4-6 rationale - ie, the dees might well have lost 6 of their games at Traeger Park, but one of their wins was against the Saints (who may have lost 100% of their games there?)

I won't be making that mistake again I can assure you.

Agree cranky, calling for violence is a red line for me. I understand the anger, though to be honest any residual anger I feel is directed at the AFL for the sham that was his non suspension and their role in the shameful thug washing of maynard"s reputation. I'm happy for the karma bus to hit Maynard. Then stop, reverse, and back over him.

Out of interest i just listened to some of the podcast. Firstly, leaving aside her feelings about the dees, after earlier saying in a different context that the saints only had 2 decent players, she picks the Saints to win. Nothing wrong with that on its face - as I've noted earlier in this thread it's definitely a danger game. Given it supposedly a podcast focused on tipping the winners in the upcoming round I had expected some analysis, and certainly the rationale for selections. Birch's rationale for setting the Saints? That the our record on the 10 games we gave played ar the Alice is four wins, six losses. I mean c'mon, that makes zero sense - for one thing those games cover a 10 year period. Perhaps, at a strech, you could say last year's flogging by freo is relevant (she didn't) but any further back has zero relevance to our chances this week. Actually, it probably does a little - but in a positive sense for the dee as we have 10 years experience of travelling there and all that entails. Surely that's an advantage over the saints who I dont think have ever played there. And that was it. That was her sole reason for selecting the saints - that our record at the Alice is 4-6. Though she tipped her hand as to the real reason a couple of minutes later. One of the other hosts said he thought Melbourne were 'starting to play really good football.....' before Birch completely cut him off to say contemptuously 'oh, they're still pretenders'. The co hosts were surprised, noting the dees are her former club, and after expressing their surprise, one asked for her 'analysis' as to why she thinks that given our current form Her response? Because, and this is a direct quote, 'the only reason they are playing well is they have nothing to lose'. I mean please, that's pub level rubbish.

It was posted in another thread. I won't/can't speak for Andy, but I'm pretty sure he doesn't mind other pods etc being promoted or shared. I certainly don't. The more the merrier when it comes to dees stuff. Is it a good interview (I plan to watch it)?

This game be like: How did we lose to the bombers? How did we beat the lions?

Ta Stu, that's interesting. You're spot on that will hinder the Saint's ability to claim up our forward line. And even if they flood back into our forward line (which they will) if we're on we are smashing teams when the ball hits the deck inside 50.

Though to be fair, it's an accurate headline. Maynard does perfectly embody the mindless thuggery and low IQ that is in the DNA of the Collingwood Football club.

I reckon there's a reasonable chance you're right - it would make sense on a few levels. One, as you suggest the timing works in terms of the breaks they have. Two, again as you say they can afford to risk losing a game or too (just as we could in 2022 and 2023) Three, and this one hurts a bit - they might have assessed us a game they could take that risk and still win. As i noted above it would be ironic if we are cherry ripe in that game and they are fatigued from loading.

Yep, i can see that logic, and of course i'm just guessing so there's every chance i'm way off base. I just wonder, given how poorly we have played in the Queens, Kings birthday game in the last few years (ironically, in large part because, IMO, we have been loading at this point in previous seasons) if the idea might be to be cherry ripe for the game.

Nup, was referring to us.

Wotcha ya talking about Willis? When i have i questioned that the big change since round 6 has been our pressure and contest? The answer to that question is never. As you note, i made that exact point after the Freo game and have banged on about it since, both on the pod and on DL. As i have said many times pressure is the most important stat in footy - doesn't matter what game plan a team uses it won't work optimally if the pressure is not high enough. Take the lions - everyone knows what their game plan looks like. In the last quarter against us they applied woeful pressure and as a result could not come close to implementing their method ad looked nothing like they do when they are up and about. The next week they applied relentless pressure again the Hawks for the whole game and hey presto were able to implement their game plan. You are correct to say our increased pressure has been a catalyst for increased time in forward half, forward half turnovers and in turn higher scores. Those improvements are not possible without getting our pressure right - they are symptoms no causes. But our shift to applying elite pressure is not an example of us changing our game plan or method, it is an example of playing in a manner that is nonnegotiable, a fundamental, if teams want to be competitive in the AFL, regardless of their method. It's a minimum standard - one we did not meet in round ones to five. Bottom line is you are wrong - there hasn't been a 'significant shift in our ball movement', or for that matter our method or game plan, which you have implied is the case in previous posts. Which was Joey Montagna's exact point as evidenced by the data he highlighted. Again, it doesn't matter what game plan a team uses it won't work optimally if the pressure is not high enough. Applying AFL standard pressure has simply enabled us to execute and implement a game plan they started developing in the 2024 preseason and for much of the 2024 season (before reverting to straight line footy later in the season, i suspect to minimise losses and try and eke out some win - something Goodys publicly said he regrets doing, ie he thinks he should have stuck fat with the new game plan).