binman

Agree. I agree the Petracca-Oliver-Viney midfield is the optimal line up but it seems seems it is mid field or nothing for brayshaw and he is too good player not to be in the side. And one thing brayshaw as on Viney is that if does get centre clearance he gets more penetration and depth with his kicks inside 50. I like Viney up forward, bu like TRIGON like him deep. That goal he kicked on his right sharking a tap out against the crows shows his natural roving skills and nose for a goal. And i love the idea of him and Kozzie smashing players inside 50 with tackles. Also he is so fit that playing forward he could play big minutes and take his tune in the middle when brayshaw and oliver is off or swapping with Tracc. So maybe 70% forward and 30% on the ball. With that mix we always have super dangerous midfield.

Good work I don't mind Tomlinson in. Just not as a defender. I'm not that critical of his work as a defender as he isn't one. Barely played any footy there, apart from stints at CHB. And it shows. I'm not wishing him bad. Honestly. I'd like to see him establish himself in the team on the wing, where how height provides a down the line marking option other than maxy, can take some throw ins and his aerobic capacity can be best used. You're right lever should have killed that ball but when it hit the ground Tomlinson read it wrong and didn't go with daw. Instead went to the boundary. A rookie defenders mistake as you need to defend the goal side The free was there. He panicked one out. Sure the 50 gave him a sure goal (brain fade by vdb) but he still would have had a shot from 50. And totally agree larkey should not have had space to run into (we were way too flat in that first quarter). But it wasn't a mark on the lead as such (it was a contested mark), Tomlinson was slow to react and should have been able to spoil that. Again looked not someone who is not a natural defender. So even if the daw one is not solely on him the other two are absolutely on tomlinson. Immediately after that larkey mark they took Tomlinson off him, so before the end of the first quarter. This threw the structure out meaning may (mainly) and lever had to play deep, when both are more damaging up the ground. Tomlinson looked much better playing higher and that is because it is closer to the position we recruited him to play - the wing.

May could for sure. But I reckon it locks him up and I reckon he is more damaging higher. I'd play May on miocheck as he is a player who is good one on one but may will be too good. And he plays up around the hf line. Hibberd could take Stephenson, or perhaps even Lockhart? Who takes Reid rjay if not omac or Tomlinson?

Skuit, really interesting connection to Ajax. And timely. I'm on phone at the moment but tommorow I planned to look at the pies demon game through the lens of the article in link to a post by EO in my OP. If you haven't read the post or article (or the subsequent posts in that thread) I think you will find it interesting in terms of the connection between soccer tactics and those in the AFL from a philosophical perspective. On the questions im no expert on tactics etc, though obviously interested. But my thoughts are: (I'll have a shot at the first one and get to the others tommorow) My assumption is that man on man (assuming you mean every player goes to a direct opponent) would create too many variables for coaches to utilise as a tactical weapon (as opposed to end if games when scores are close and time is running out). In basketball when they go to man on man the players generally man up on like players (usually, but not always, players playin in the same position, e.g. guess on guard). Would this occur in the AFL? Probably as how else would they be able to organise it? But with players coming off the bench and so many fluid roles it would be confusing and very hard to get right As a result and because of 18 opponent on the field (and four on the bench) there would be mismatches all over the place. For example Brayshaw ends up on a much faster player. Or Hibberd on a tall. If you mean just in defence then they sometimes do go man on man on key forwards, for example against the eagles when they might try and shut the two bigs and and a crumbed down. But even then they would look to clag up space and leading lanes by pushing extra players back. I don't know soccer, do they go man on man in top level soccer?

I was against thecselection of tmac. He played ok actually and all credit to him worked hard. My knock on him is not his ability but his condition. And but his lack of mobility was evident. However I got it wrong, I'm happy to admit. Not wrong in terms of the tmac maximising our chances of winning that game. But we need tmac up and about. If for no other reason than to cover the loss of any of jackson, Weed or gawn. With no vfl how else do you get proper match conditiong into the big fella? They should have been confident about coming into that match. The roos looked depleted. Great chance to give tmac a really good run alternating between ruck and forward. I wonder if the same applies to Tomlinson? Give him a couple of games down back against average opposition and get some match practice into him.

May is quick enough for mihocek, but you're right Smith would be a good match up if told his job is to stick with all game. No zoning off. Could also take Stephenson and play a similar role.

Dazzler you can't be serious about Omac. Surely you read what i posted about that game. I don't want to play the old 'i expected more from you' card, but do. Omac got dropped for a reason, but it wasn't Georgiades, that is for sure and certain. Tomlinson was rubbish tonight. He has no idea how to defend and is terrible one one one. Which to be fair is not that surprising seeing he is not a defender. As i say, he gave them all 3 of their first quarter goals. They only kicked 5 for the match and over half were his fault! Basically schooled, in your parlance, by a 22 year old kid. Had to take him off him before the end of the first quarter. You would have gone nuts on Omac if that were him. And, by the by he is much slower than Omac. You are right about a match up for Omac next week. They play small up there so don' t need a third tall. Hibberd is in excellent form and can take either Stephenson and may will kill Miockeck, leaving Lever to be a damaging intercept player. So no Omac. And surely no Tomlinos down back. Maybe Goody might play him in the position we paid well overs for him to play. If not on the wing then he has to go out.

No chance if joeboy is voting

Omac has to come back in. If Tomlinson stays in, it cannot be as defender. He is clueless down there. The first three goals were all on him. Losing Daw and gifting him a goal, free kick to Larkey and then out marked by Larkey Had to be moved of Larkey, a 22 year old in his 21st game, 10 minutes into the first quarter and one of lever or may was then forced to play deep on him for the rest of the game. That's tow games in arow he has been embarrassed by a kid. Just imagine the vitriol that would have rained down on Omac if that had been him.

Has someone hacked you account A F? Gawn, if fit should come back? Should? if Viney is going to play again? if? I know Goodwin has made some bewildering selection decisions this year, but not selecting his AA captain and vice captain would be brilliantly surreal!

I reckon there is a typo in the name of this thread. I reckon harmes is having a little puff on the wacky tabacky before game this year. Harmes is wasted

Tomlinson - not a defender

Such a dees performance. So much work. So little reward. But if we maintain that level of pressure and take our chances we will open the roos up. Weed fantastic. Tmac has not miraculously got fit and mobile. Tomlinson not a defender. And slow. Makes Omac looks like a greyhound. Harmes goes out. A shadow of his best form. Not the brightest either. VDB less bright. Jones good. Lever terrific. Rivers good. Umpiring is simply atrocious.

They have had to move Tomlinson and now may had to play deep. Ridiculous selectuon

As I said Tomlinson is not a defender. All 3 roos goals are on 100% on him. Imagine the crap omac would be getting if he gave away three goals and was being thrashed by a kid. Where is Goodwin's head at?

Preaching to the choir rusty.

Agree on both points. 16 minute quarters represents a fundamental change to the game. Teams can keep their zones working till the end of quarters. Fitter teams so not get the comparative advantage they do wirh normal quarters, nor those that rely on high pressure, contested footy, like the tigers and us. That game style reaps its real benefit when opposition teams tire lat3 in quarters. Look at this block of compressed games. Scores are going up and I'm convinced that is related to fatigue.

I just don't think Preuss has had enough match practice. In fact he well have had none this year? And he was coming back from a fair break from injury so i wonder about his fitness.

I have been meaning to start a thread, not about the state of footy media and the coverage of the game (though this issue is related to my focus) but about the tactical evolution of the game. There was an excellent article discussed on Demonland a few weeks back arguing essentially that 'AFL football's problem is not the football itself, but the way it is filmed and broadcast' it argues there was a widening gap of 'understanding between those intimately involved in the game at club level — the coaches, assistants and analysts who have access to every available piece of footage filmed on game day — and the average fan and even journalists, who, if they're not sitting in the stands, are entirely reliant on what's shown by the Seven Network and Fox Sports.' The author, Russel Jackson 'asked AFL coaches and team analysts a simple question: would they be able to understand a game of modern AFL football from the television broadcast alone?', with the answer being a firm no, with hose asked painting 'a picture of AFL broadcasting as something closer to a coaching fraternity in-joke' The focus of this article is about television coverage but it touches on an issue that frustrates me no end - the almost complete lack of decent analysis of the game across all forms of media. For me, the way game is covered live but also discussed on radio and TV, feeds the narrative that the game needs to get back to the golden game of themid 90s football with it high scores and glorified one on one battles. It is no coincidence that it was this point in time where the completed the transition to a fully professional, elite sport. This narrative is the driver of all the ridiculous rule changes the AFL has made in the last 5 years as it seeks to legislate the game back in time. And of course those changes simply don't work and all have any number of unintended consequences. But he game is not going back. I reckon footy is fantastic now. Of course it is different now than it was in the 80s and 90s, but that is as it is. It is a game that it is constantly evolving and changing. The following factors all combine to create the perfect environment for constant evolution, even revolution: the AFL has only been fully professional end elite for 30 years, the size of they playing field, the number of players involved (ie 22 a side), the 360 degree nature of the game, the rules the athletic profile the game demands the combination of distance players cover and the fact the game is so physical For me the tactical evolution of the game is what i love most about the game. So in this thread i am hoping to create a space where Demonlanders can help fill the analytical void and post, discuss, argue all things games plans, tactics, strategies, zones, structures, where the game is heading and analysis. There have been some fantastic posts about tactics etc on different threads in the last few weeks., with some fantastic insights from posters such as A F, Engorged Onion, Pollyanna, Axis of Bob, George on the Outer, Big Red Fire Engine, Lucifer's Hero, Damo, Whispering jack and many others. A really good example was the recent discussion about an excellent article Engorged Onion posted about the tactical evolution in the EPL (i had planned to contribute to that discussion, but thought i'd kick this thread off with post about it as i totally agree with EOs suggestion it is very relevant for goodwin's game plan and in fact the game more broadly). Often those posts don't neatly fit into the threads they are posted in because they are bit tangential. I hope this thread can be a home or such posts. I would love to hear from people like Dazzler and others with recent experience of playing senior football, or who are involved in coaching, junior footy or club footy. For the thread to stay on the main board it has to stay current and topical so footy nerds out there in Demonland please post any relevant comment, thought, link to interesting article or vision etc etc and help create a space to reflect on the tactical evolution of the game and build the collective understanding of our great game.

Don't mmind spargo in. Hayley's lack of physicality was a problem and spargo will provide more pressure. Neat enough kick too. For the reasons stated dismayed, but not surprised at Tmac's selection. I hope he proves me wrong. I'd play him out of the square all game, and rotate jackson, Weed and Tomlinson.in the ruck (59-30-20), with tmac taking all stoppages inside 50. Really like rivers in. I hope they encourage him to be aggressive with his kicking. Kozzie should have benefited from a little break and I hope they encourage him to take his shots at goal. Have a sneaky feeling he might have a good game. Hannan is dead set lucky to get back in after his last game. He is the sort of fella to work hard to take the chance he's been given. Expect him to apply a lot of pressure. If all on hannan, kozzie and spargo will make it very hard for the roos to exit our 50. I look forward to all three bringing the heat, and if they do it will go a long way to helping us win. Bottom line we should win this. But every chance we won't if the whole team don't bring the heat. We had too many passengers against port, and up till half time against the crows. No passengers and we win.

Love to see a sprint race between Gus, Tomlinson, Tmac and Jones. Possibly the slowest team that has played for the MFC since Big Carl, Ray Biffen, Spud Dullard and Gary baker (sorry Gary) lined up together. And i reckon those four would beat the others home!

Tmac is not AFL ready. He is not up to playing ruck, his lack of mobility and pace would be even more a liability than it has been as a forward. Would be a big mistake for them to play him. Unfortunately i won't be surprised if Goody makes it.

My worry is other teams get a proper break wit their bye and we cop another short break

But does that mean it creates a short break between games either side of it?

As i have been banging on about a season of inexplicable decisions by Goody. To the list this week we can add playing max against the Crows (who surprise, surprise target him) and when we do not bringing Preuss to SA as option if required. Surely Omac comes back in. Tomlinson and Jackosn split ruck duties 970% - 30%), and possibly forward duties