binman

From the fox article linked above: NSW Health has declared that anyone who visited the Azure Cafe during that time frame is a casual contact, meaning they must get tested and self-isolate until receiving a negative result.

#the footy media is crap as it is a big boy's club full of bonehead ex players and hopelessly conflicted peanuts like eddie, player managers, board members, club employees etc etc Does my head in. Example 97, 562: This morning on RSN old mate Brad Johnson was on. Of course he was asked about Tracc's seven year deal. In between joking with another ex football bonehead (and current AFLW coach) Daniel Hartford about how brilliant it would have been to be offered a 7 year deal and how quickly they would have accepted it, he opines that 7 years is too long and 4 years is the 'sweet spot' for top shelf stars like Tracc. Fine. But here's the kicker. That answer came after his response to the first question he was asked. The question (paraphrased) was: would he be happy for the dogs to offer Bontempelli (whose contract ends this year) a 7 year deal? The answer (paraphrased) was: chortle, chortle, [censored] yeah! Lock him in for as long as possible. Sign him up for life! So the dees (and other clubs) should offer a generational player a four year deal. But Johnson would be thrilled for the the dogs to offer their best player a seven year deal. And is this ridiculous contradiction pointed out to him? Of course not.

That's nothing. Viney trained with the hawks before he was drafted too. Also told to cool it because the players were super worried they would get hurt The difference is Jack was 11.

This is only the case for close contacts. Which longmire and his merry band of assistants are not

What a coincidence. I directed my on call work crew to strip the Cabots they just put on my deck at my chalet at Thredbo and replace with the Woodcare "Dexpress" Merbau. Then asked them to do the same for my little shack at Wye River.

Indeed. And the problem is that if there is very little spread or an outbreak does not occur it is easy to say 'see, what an over reaction' . This is similar to the challenge of getting traction for effective prevention policies across community the social wellbeing spectrum, particularly health policy. It is hard to sell an absence of something. Easier to treat the symptom than address the cause. Cheaper too. In the very short term. Which unfortunately is what government is often focused on short term success increases their chance of reelection. Much, much more expensive in the long term however.

I watched it after you posted. Tracc was in good spirits. Hard not to like him. But what he actually said was 'that usually happens often. Which didn't sound as funny as your edit. And was grammatically and linguistically headache inducing.

Disagree. Number 32 was, in my view, best on ground by a mile. Weed was good and worked hard. But he benefited from a woeful defence and the ball coming in under no pressure. Missed some gettable shots. And frustratingly applied little forward half pressure and I can't recall him laying a tackle.

No risk of that!

I'm in the camp that one week probably wasn't massively unfair. But i did think he also might of just copped a fine based on it being accidental not careless. Or some such. But I'm also in the camp that an appeal was a total no brainer. I mean the only downside I could possibly see is burning 10k. Which of course is easy for me to say. Even if we had lost the appeal, you could argue we still get some press coverage for our sponsors and some we're a top club, don't mess with us vibe for our fans. But the reward for winning the appeal is the clincher. We are a better chance of winning this game now. And for any number of reasons that is worth WAY more than 10k.

Big call, but agree. Trac is the sort of player you build a club around RDB is a great comparison, both in playing style but also star power. Dusty is an obvious companion too, but no less accurate for being so. The genius of dusty is how he performs in the big games. Three Norm Smiths is mind blowing. But he has also played a lot of top shelf, game changing games in other finals and big home and away. To get to Dusty's level that is what tracc has to do, which of course means having the opportunity to play in big games. But i have no doubt he will be desperate to prove himself in such games. Where he does differ from Dusty is he gets more of the ball. A lot more. He is averaging 30 odd possessions and is weapon all over the ground. Whereas Dusty is really a forward who has bursts as an on baller, particularly at center bounces, (from which he almost always goes forward). He doesn't really go into the backline at all. Welcome by the way.

Refreshing.

No. I was simply saying it was good that: We decided to appeal fritters suspension Trac signed for 6 years Fritter won the appeal. All good.

Good.

Good.

I guess. Though i think it would be more accurate to say we are willing to lose more clearances than we historically were under roos and goodwin in return for having better clearances(as defined by creating scoring opportunities) when we do win them. Of course winning clearances remains important for us. But is no longer a fundamental indicator of our success. I suspect a more important indicator is the percentage of stoppages that we win that result in a score. And conversely how effective we are stopping the opposition score from stoppages we lose. To be honest i don't know what those numbers are across the season (AOB might), but i suspect they both look good for us and in all likelihood are the best in the AFL atm.

My theory. In this post from March, i make the case why i think we have made the shift. In short we are adopting the tactics of the winners of almost all premierships in the last 10-15 years. We have had the dominant ruck for three years. And in that time we have regularly smashed temas in clearances and inside 50s. Yet often lost games where we have won those stats. With the clear tactical shift we have made we are currently scoring more, conceding less points and unbeaten after 7 rounds. The proof is in the pudding. In the third quarter in the north game the commentators noted how far from the center bounce Oliver started. They didn't really explain why he was set up that way. What they should have said it relates to a pretty big change in how we set up at stoppages(a point you made when you called into the podcast - an excellent point i might add). I contend this set up relates to the discussion about clearances. That space is a double edged sword - if they win it there is a good chance they will do so in space. But if we are on our game even, if they do win it we more often than not (in fact two thirds of the time) intercept mark and/or rebound off half back. In part becuase of pressure, in part becuase we are structured well and in part becuase often the opposition have to kick it from thee defensive side of the stoppage. But if we win it and it gets to Oliver (who can now hit that contest at speed as he is coming from 20 meters away not 5) our kick inside 50 is deep and dangerous. Think how many goals we have kicked this season, particularly in the second half, from these sort of clearances. And conversely how few we have conceded from the center square clearances. Sure some, those easy north goals stood out as they were outliers. Quality over quantity.

Respectfully, disagree with the first point. Agree with the second. What i mean is that we don't need to sort anything as such. The center clearance differential their way early was a function of the changes we have made to our clearance set up (as discussed earlier in this thread) and our sub par pressure. We are prepared to lose more clearances than we have in previous years - with the pay off being when we do win a clearance are more likely to create a scoring opportunity than was the case previously. Basically a tigers tactic. The challenge with this shift is that it relies on a rock solid defensive unit. Which in turn relies on super high all team pressure. When both elements are in place you get a stat like oppositions only scoring 30% of the time they enter 50 (our stat prior to the north game). And with opposition teams only scoring every third time they enter their 50 losing clearances is not such an issue. When one, or both element are not in place, as was the case in the fist half, losing clearances becomes a big issue. As we saw. I think this why the tigers will occasionally cop a 5 goal loss - their pressure drop off and so opposition clearances really hurt. In the tigers dogs a game, when the tigers upped the pressure the dogs clearances became useless - and in fact often costly because players like Bolta took multiple intercept marks and triggered scoring chains. Same story for us against the roos, albeit with much less pressure. So what i'd say is the the weekend's game (and the dogs v tigers and lions v port games for that matter) reinforced the need for us to always have our pressure ratings up high as our game plan is completely dependent on that being the case. The Swans will beat us if we don't bring the heat. But if we do bring the heat i'm predicting a big win as they are a young team, coming off an emotional win, with a game plan that like the dog's is susceptible to breaking down under pressure because it relies on skilled execution.

Good.

A great analogy. By his mid twenties he will be a top5 player in the AFL. Of that i have no doubt. A star. His versatility and athleticism means there is almost no position they can't play him in, bar small defender. Which will give his coaches so many tactical options - something we have seen already this year in the way they have been able to use Max. No better example than on the weekend. Gawn was having his worst game for the year. Which is understandable given how hard he works. And Goldie was winning that contest. Jackson taking the ruck duties changed that dynamic and created a tactical problem for Noble - do they run Goldy against Jackson in the ruck and risk Gawn getting off the chain. Or do they keep Goldy on max and risk Jackson dominating. They largely opted for the latter and Jackson was instrumental in changing the momentum of the game and setting up a win for us. taylor is going to leave an amazing legacy, for all his work. But in 2019 he was inspired - kossie, rivers and Jackson. Reminds me so much of the year that the hawks got Buddy, Roughhead and Hodge. I would have loved to be a fly on the wall in the no doubt multiple meetings where Taylor was making his case for all three players (there is some great video somewhere of him and some coaches looking at vison of Kossie, including that crazy tackle he laid in a SANFL reserves game)

But not 10kgs overweight and half fit. And not super over rated either for that matter.

I just watched melksham's involvements. He had a pretty serviceable game i have to say. His best this season. Two beautiful kicks - one to Brown on the lead and one to max on the lead

Here we go FD: https://www.afl.com.au/stats/stats-pro You have the option of watching highlights or extended (which is every single involvement). I recommend extended as tbey give a better sense of a player's game. For example melksham's highlights go for 2 mins and extended 11 mins!

That should have been a free kick. We got a lucky break. As you say it went straight up the other end for an easy goal and game over. Given we seemed to be in total control and they were out on their feet it is crazy to think we were only 6 points up with 9 odd minutes to go - and it could have well been level if the free had been paid!

I wish mine would....