binman

Failed to ignite?

Why?

Apparently the covid vaccine also protects against getting sick from MFCSS. Can still get it. Just protects you from predicting losses to cellar dwellers.

They have who can run the slowest races at athletic carnivals? If so does that mean Jones finished behind seleood?

It's crazy. The AFL should be promoting the hell out of the VFL. A strong, popular VFL can only help footy

I fully acknowledge my confirmation bias with melksham. I might go watch his afl pro vision to see all his involvements. By the by, for some reason thus far this season you don't seem to need an afl live pass to watch relays or the afl pro vision on afl.com. I assume it is related to tbe kayo deal. Hopefully it will continue.

I see your point. But for the sake of argument lets count Melksham as a tall (as you have with Fritter). Our line up this week is then three talls - Jackson and Tmac being the other two. A player like Sparrow can replace Melksham as a medium. In the future i think Brown is a lock. I have no doubt Jackson is a lock (though they might 'manage' him at some stage). But Weed isn't. For me its Tmac or Weed. At the moment i'd go with Tmac. In that scenario the forward line would be Brown, Jackson, Tmac and Fritter. To that mix you have to add Kozzie, Spargo and ANB rotating though the forward half and bench. Hard then to see where Melksham fits, though many would say that it one tall too many. So lets say Tmac comes out. That frees up a spot. But i reckon those four talls can work as Jackson can play as a medium on the high half forward, such is his athleticism and mobility. Also in this context its worth keeping in mind Tmac trained a winger in the preseason. And has almost played as one this season, with many of possessions up the ground. So he could also play at high half forward.

You're preaching to the converted OD. But we aint Goody. And he clearly has him in his best 22. And really with his talent he should be.

Which is why the obvious move is Melksham playing Fritters role. Basically the same size (2cms shorter and 1kg heavier), but like Fritter he plays tall. And is a good mark - though not as good as fritter i don't think. He is as good a kick at goal as Fritter and has good goal sense too. As is the case for fritter, if he can snag 2-3 goals it doesn't matter so much that he is not getting big disposal numbers (not in Fritters job description in any case). And like fritter, Melksham is no defensive star, though to be fair he still has Melksham covered. And unlike Brown Melksham is in our best 22. Or so says goody, it would seem.

I said before the season started that the first four games would shape our season. Freo started the season with an outside hope of making finals, and the next three teams would have had making finals as a minimum expectation. So three, maybe four of those teams are direct rivals for a final spot. Winning those four games has set our season up. We only have to win 50% of our remaining games to be a lock for finals. And we have put a points, and crucially, a percentage gap between us and key rivals for the 5-8 spots. We can now make a serious push for a top 4 position. I don't see either the swans or the tiger's game as as important as those first four games. A win against the tigers would be a bonus. And history suggests the swans will run out of gas as the season progresses given how young they are. And personally I think their run and gun style, which has caught teams off guard, will become less effective as the season progresses and under finals pressure. I don't see them as direct competitors even though they are likely to still scrape into the finals with their start. Which is a long winded way of saying I don't see either matches as 8 point games. Funnily enough I do see the hawks game as an 8 point game. And I hope the players do to. We need to bank these points. Good teams win these games. Our serious rivals - the Dogs, Eagles, Lions and tigers (sounds like a zoo) will likely beat the hawks. A failure by us to so is an effectively an eight point swing to those teams. On a related note we play both the hawks and crows twice (though north only once) which i doubt all of dogs, Eagles, lions and tiger do. We need to win all four of those games (and of course the roos game). Doing so will go a long way to a top 4 spot and a serious tilt at a flag.

Yep, melksham is the logical replacement. Arguably melksham's best role is the one fritter is currently playing. Like fritter he has good hands ans is generally an.acuuraye kick Might be good for him too as the kpi is goals not disposals.

Any idea who was injured?

I thought it was Mia Farrow's maiden name

Viney doesn't forget. Or forgive.

Or the more depressing: May may miss much of May. Maybe.

I heard that interview with Thommo. He said the boys call him farm strong (at first I thought he meant they call him Farmstrong ie like a nick name)

Jordan, for sure. Nothing wrong with calling Swallow Sparrow!

That's interesting that he was an intercept defender in the lever mould as a junior. In the handful of games he has played with us that has not really been his go. I wonder if that's because, whilst all defenders need to be able to take intercept marks (either by zoning off or one on one) you can really only have the one pure intercept player in a defensive unit. And we have Lever. So maybe the club have developed him to be more a one on one defender? Do you (or anyone else) have bead on what role he has been playing in the VFL practice games ie intercept or lock down?

Yep, I reckon that is very likely. I have zero doubt petty comes in. And effectively rotating jordon and swallow is great management of two young players that are clearly seen as key members of our side this year. They can play similar roles, but also can both be used in a number of positions as needed - eg defensive forward, outside mid, inside mid, wing, hb. So both make good medical subs. Rotating them keeps them engaged in the team and focused. I guess chandler is also an option for the medical sub, for much the same reasons. Clever use of a new element of the game.

Our defensive system is rock solid. One change should be fine - even one as important as May. Petty will come in for May this week. Petty is not an intercept defender i don't reckon - at least not in the Lever/kelly mode. He is more the the classic man on man full back. So a like for like replacement for May - well not as good obviously, but you get my meaning. And i really rate Petty. A potential A grader. Before Jordon elevated i thought he was our best young player to come back into our side this season. Its actually pretty good timing in terms of the tigers' game. Petty will have a game to get up to AFL speed against a relatively weak forward line and set himself for the tigers. I reckon he'll go to Riewoldt as he has the mobility to cover him. Hard job but as i say he will set himself and being a night game the likely slippery conditions will help his cause. And Thomo will take that whiner, Lynch. If he can handle Hawkins - who must the be the strongest one one one player in the AFL - he can manage Lynch.

Fictional? Dang it. Another shattered illusion.

No biggie.

So many user problems. Another is that to find stats you have to go to the match reports. The button for that is on right side, but for some reason I often click on the match video button, on the left side. Which is my issue i guess. The problem is you can't navigate back by clicking the back arrow, as is the case on 90% of Windows. You have to close the video windows first, then click back. And the button is hidden in the top right corner of a black screen

Fair dinkum you can be obtuse jimmy. Melk not best 22 last year? Is that why he never got dropped? Clearly goody didn't share your assessment. Very few unforced changes are made to winning sides. It is a fact jimmy. Coaches love settled sides. Reward players that bring wins, as they should. Unchanged is an aim. Of course there are some exceptions to that rule (most notably bringint back best 22 players), but they simply prove the rule. And when they do make an unforced change it would be rare for it to be more than one. Which brings me back to my question. What doesn't add up? RalphiusMaximus noted that 'you don't change a winning side unless forced. . Of course it is not literally true on every occasion. Hence my examples. But it is an accurate statement about the prevailing selection philosophy of AFL coaches. You don't change a winning side unless forced is a maxim. One that holds true. For good reason, because in spite of your confusion it makes sense on a number of levels (you can work it out) not to change a winning side wherever possible. Which is why the only change this week is, RalphiusMaximus suggested, likely to be petty for may. Because you don't change a winning side unless forced. And why after our previous three wins we only made one unforced change. Melksham in this week If RalphiusMaximus is correct, which i suspect he will be, and we don't make any unforced changes this week we will had 4 wins for a grand total of one unforced change. So what doesn't add up? It was a genuine question. Are you disagreeing with RalphiusMaximus that the only change should be petty for may? Are you arguing the philosophy of not making changes to winning sides is not agood one? Or are you arguing that no such philosophy exists in the AFL?

What doesn't add up? Obviously it happens that unforced changes are sometimes made to winning sides. For example a clear best 22 player coming back from injury (like buddy or melk this week). Or perhaps a player breaking team rules, or some other misdemeanour. Or perhaps after a scrappy win against an easy beat. Or just coz. But as a general rule, coaches are loathe to make changes to winning sides. It has always been thus. A mantra if you will.