binman

I'm a fan too, but i see your point about his weaknesses, in particular his positioning. I agree that he will keep his spot until Salem comes back and then it becomes a battle, in my view between Hunt and Smith and hiiberd for the final spot in the preferred defensive unit. If that proves to the case Smith has few weeks to improve on his weaknesses, and make a strong case he is the man.

Computer says, in all probability, yes.

Really good calls. I think that is exactly what will happen, with the possible exception of Tmac staying in and Weed going out. I was of the mind that Tmac would stay in but i think you make good point about giving Weed a crack at it now. BB being a late out gave Weed an unexpected shot at playing and his excellent performance, combined with the need for BB to come back in, has given Goody a good opportunity to be true to his stick with a winning team philosophy AND give Weed his shot and the Weed BB combo a trial. And as you rightly point out we can afford to give that set up a solid trial over 3 to 4 weeks. Funnily enough, it is a mirror of the last years back and forth about the forward line set up - with the difference being Tmac is the one at risk of being dropped, not BB or Weed (well that's not exactly true - it still could be Weed). And like last year, i don't think Goody minds that at all at this point in the season as it gives them something to work on and they can land on the final set up in the back third of the season.

Available is not specific enough for me.

Great stuff Watson1. It is a very revealing stat. No surprise to see Port at the foot of the table as they ate miles off with their intensity and gut running. Major alarm bells. By the by, on tactics the best thing ive heard on radio or TV, just about ever, is Sanderson on wheatley's show on Thursdays. Terrific insight and he explains things so clearly and so well. Highly recommended for anyone interested in tactics and strategy.

Goody look like he' been on the billies (Sam McClure - that was a joke)

Yes, unless they want to give weed another week to make his case and not have to make the tmac v weed call this week.

That theory is about to be tested.

I know. I put him on ignore instead.

You might be right Bing. Brown is one of the players that cones straight back in when fit (Lever and petty are the only others that are currently not in the team). So a tall has to come out - and weed made a very strong case it shouldn't be him. And tmac didn't have a good game, on the back of a couple of just ok games. But it really depends on how well he has been playing his role - in particular his gut running up and down the ground, providing a hit up target, blocking and bringing the ball to ground. On the final one, he failed to do so a few times whe out marked inside our 50. But the others are harder to assess. Does weed have the tank, and strength in one on one contests, to play tmac's role? I doubt it, so expect tmac to keep his spot. Tomo will definitely make way for Lever when he comes back.

That's probably a bit unfair on the statisticians. They no doubt do lots more than just provide data to the fitness and coaching teams. For example, they have to find a way to measure and record team specific kpis set by the coaches (eg role specific data) and build and maintain the data system Important role.

I'll think you'll find 'statisticians' only role is to to monitor time and distance of each player in order to keep the person in the Burgess role informed about loading. Burgess, and his equivalent, at every club design the schedule for TOG percentages, time on ball and rotations. And are in almost complete charge of it (save some negotiation with the head coach). In the gf burgo went away from HIS OWN plan to give more time to Jackson. The person on the laptop is not a decision maker. Their job is to provide the person in the burgo role with exact, real time information (and obviously the coaches all the key data they need).

So much time....

That combination of information would be perfect.. No detail required about the specifics of an injury or progress of rehab. But enough info to make your own assessment of time out and progrss.

Really glad I went. Smallish crowd, but great energy. And it was fantastic that the team were able to spend time on the ground after tge win, such it up and engage with the fans Appalling standard of umpiring

That's how I see it. Though I think if Lever comes in it will definitely be tomlinson out

Sic day break after playing a physical interstate game in a sauna. Players were felling it and the bombers made tge match a grind. So def not fully arouses, so to speak. No need to be really. Still kicked nigh on 100 points and won by 5 goals. Super professional win, which in of itself makes it an impressive win.

I was thinking the same thing. Part of it is the mental strength, and confidence in their ability to run it out, they develop along with the increased fitness.

Agree. He was immense.

That's all well and good Webber, and you have high level expertise in this area. But my gut tells me you are wrong and i will not be changing my opinion we are treated poorly as fans in terms of information about injuries. Jokes. Thanks for the very thoughtful post on the topic. It has certainly shifted my thinking. I think for me it comes down to the management of fan's expectations - well mine i guess, seeing the majority seem to be of the quite reasonable view that the club are not obliged to share specifics about players injuries or timelines. Personally, i'm not hugely interested in the specifics of the injury - I'm interested in the potential time out. I hear what you are saying about the impossibility of being accurate about that, but i think the 4-6 week standard reporting is unhelpful becuase it is narrow range that implies some sort of certainty where as you say it does not exist. And can feed into a sense of the club being disingenuous with information when the timeframe is not met or simply always stands as 4-6 (as is pretty much the case for Petty). This potentially ends up eroding confidence in the club's messaging to fans and even the club's medical team - at least for some people. I reckon the model like the one used by the tigers noted by whatwhat above would work well (at least for me), ie not listing weeks, but rather four types of timing listed: short term medium term long term indeterminate

No change. No surprise. Why? Because, Goody rarely makes changes (except injury related ones) to a team coming off a win. So, if we win this week and lets say Tmac or Spargo have quiet games statistically, can repeat offenders please consider resisting the urge to suggest they will be dropped.

No, could care less is a well established idiom and much used phrase. One I like actually. The Miriam Webster treats the two phrases as synonymous. However, I am aware that it frustrates pedants because they believe it to be illogical.

You don't think that is not a bit reductive DS? I mean, for people who do choose to listen to the game audio, which would be the overwhelming majority, the performance of the commentary teams has a direct impact on their perception and even enjoyment of the game. It certainly does for me. This is particularly true for interstate games that posters have to watch live on TV rather than watch the game at the ground. Given the commentary team is part of how the game is experienced for most posters why it is not fair game, particularly in a post game thread, to discus their performance - and complain about them should they wish. Saying people shouldn't complain about a subject when they know 'full well what to expect' would disqualify discussion about a range of relevant topics - umpiring standards for example. You may not be 'trying to tell people to mute the commentary if they would prefer to listen to it', but you are telling them not to post about it. But plenty of threads have tangential posts that can, and sometimes do, 'clog' them up. For example often jokes are made, that invite multiple replies, that are of limited interest to many posters or spell checking of players names, because for some such errors are frustrating where most posters could care less.

Not sure about so many, but agree there are others who are so much better. Almost all of whom are calling the women's games and/or the vfl and practice games. I watched the Sandy Casey game and thought the commentary was excellent. Jack everin and another bloke whose name escapes me. Two handed (which is all that is needed), play by play call, with only the odd 'special comment' - and those comments were often really helpful and insightful. Didn't talk over each other and helped me follow the game because I didn't know all the player's numbers. Above all, both had obviously both done their pre match preparation and research. No coincidence, neither were ex afl footballers

Sorry, missed this. We won center clearnces by 8 and they won rhe around the ground clearances by one, so net seven positive to us. So, pretty good on rge raw numbers. Bur agree we didn't get a huge advantag - though I don't think that was a function of mutiple players at the ball. Credit must go to the suns. Watts was excellent and I think their mids were excellent- as was their structure and set up. They clearly had a focus on being physical and hard at us, and were really trying to work over our mids - particularly clarry. Lots of niggling and grappling. I think one function of thst work by suns is there were lots of 50 50 midfield scraps and there were several occasion where mutiple players looked to tackle Rowell - who was into our guys all game. That might have contributed to the sense we were bees to rge honey pot.