binman

I have previously commented on this topic, at some length. Short version: Oscar was not on Georgeadis when he kicked his first goal (or his second, or his third or when he took his one contested mark for the game, or when he got 6 of his 11 possessions for the game). Personally i don't get why Goodwin would drop Omac. But he must have his reasons. Georgeadis won't be one of them. If it was a result of the Port game it may well have been the two howling errors made that Omac made where he didn't collect the ball near goal (the one that he left for fritter when he should have grabbed it and attacked, and another where he didn't get it over the point line). Neither cost a goal, but only because of good fortune (Hibberd diving to touch with the first one). It is also possible he is a bit gassed and they want to give him a spell and bring him back for the Roos. Goodwin did concede at his last presser, when asked about his comments (which now look stupid) that we would not rotate players in this block of games, that some players might in fact need a break. If they are giving him a freshen up (which we will know pretty soon, as the side for the roos game should come out Thursday night) then the logical move would be to play Tomlinson on Walker. Tomlinson is slower than Omac, but stronger. Walker is both slow and strong and will play deep. If they put Tomlinson him with an instruction to play man on man all match (as opposed to a ZONE defence) that wont throw the structure out (ie Tomo/Omac deep - Lever, May high). The only alternative is to play May on Tex but that is complete waste of May as tex aint no Charlie Dixon. If May goes with him one on one he is will barely get a possession (as was the case in the Port game) and we lose the value of him as an attacking player. In that scenario Tomlinson shuts down tex, leaving may and Lever to do their thing and be aggressive, intercept and launch attacks. We then drop Braywhaw or Jones, move Tomlinosn to the wing and Omac back to full back. But really, who knows with Goodwin. His selections have been mind melting this year.

Agree. Which is one reason why I'm not convinced Bartlett's comments were smart as they amplified this factor. Of course we would have still been under pressure, but Bartlett introduced the spectre of goody getting sacked. Which adds another volatile element to the mix. The bombers were arguably worse than us. And it is worth remembering that they are way less successful than us in the last 10 years. But copped little heat because the footy media love nothing more than coachs being under the pump and Bartlett served up goody. As you say any result the pressure needle remains the same whatever the result. And that pressure flows to the roos game.

Omac did not have a great game. But please can people stop with the rrubbish about Georgiades giving him a touch up. It is completely untrue. Not one of his goals were omacs fault. He wasn't even on him when they were they kicked As I have forensicalliy established. Two, maybe three were levers fault. Don't believe me? Go to AFL.com stats pro and look at the vision of georgiades involvement. It will take 2 minutes. Sheesh

By far the most likely scenario is he will torch us, be super quiet the following two games. Get dropped and play his next AFL game against us next year. And torch us.

....I will remind myself we all have our cross to bare and mine is the MFC

Lets say there is a good reason why they chose to drop Oscar (to be fair he was poor last week). The problem is you change backline at your peril. And of course we should win. Lets say we do. Is that proof the new system works against a side who has not won a game and just made 8 changes? And so do they keep their new back line for the game against the roos? And risk it being exposed by a half decent AFL team? Let's say it is. What do they then do against the pies? And goody predicted speed would dominate after the covid break. So picked a quick team. He was wrong. But incredibly football is getting quicker in the last couple of rounds and scores are creeping up. So he may be proved correct. And he then selects a deadly slow team, keeping his two slowest players, who are both completely out of form, and forced to play out of position - on the wing where there lack of pace is exposed. And picks Tomlinson who is also slow. Just bizarre.

The Oscar wars have recommenced! Just with the coach. Jones, Brayshaw and Tomlinson. Speed to burn

Listening to goody's presser I get the vibe he is taking the swing the axe approach. Im tipping a couple more outs and I reckon it will be Jones and......drum roll.....brayshaw

I wasn't being critical of roos (though to be honest i am not in the roos as savior camp - i'm not convinced he was all in). Agree on your second para, but still wonder if decision making on selection might sub consciously influenced by a close relationship with player. On the third para, not for the first time you are ahead of the pack and spot on the money. Let's get Balme (sorry Josh - you want to be CEO anyway)

Fact or opinion?

That may be true of Goody, ie more coaching per se than others. But if you listen to him he puts a huge emphasis on building relationships with 'his' players. Which is all well and good, but it takes a hell of a lot of time to first build, and then maintain relationships with more than 40 men. I remember a fascinating exchange of posts years ago involving Drunkn reflecting on his brother's experience at the dees. IIRC correctly he said Roos almost never spoke to Dec or any of other fringe players for that matter, and this was matter of some consternation to those players (and again my memory is a bit hazy but i think there was suggestion it was the cause of some division between the A team players, so to speak and those like Dec who struggled to break into the team) There was a fair bit of discussion about it, a theme of which being that if true it seemed a bit of a contradiction given Roos had a very strong emphasis on relationships with players. But perhaps he didn't have enough time to build relationship with the whole lists (particularly give all his other commitments)? Hearing goody speak he is 24/7 coach and i wonder if he tries to make sure he gets to every player regularly. I don't meant to sound flippant but maybe he'd be better spending some of that time on selection and game day tactics. You hear players from the cats and tigers talk super positively of Neil Balme, almost like a father figure. Maybe it would be better for someone in his role and with his high EQ and management skills to be the key relationship builder. Of course relationships are always gong to be important for a coach, but i do wonder if in some ways it might negatively impact their judgement - pretty hard for instance to drop a player, who should be dropped, if for example you know they are struggling with personal issues and don't won't to make things worse for them.

Don't google that at work. I'm sure there is some fetish group out there involving WD40

You might have thought that perhaps because a poster was stating that as fact earlier this season (the name escapes me but i don;t recall them posting for a bit) ie they got him to stack on the weight as they wanted him big to play the gorilla role and would be played deep forward out of the square. Which never happened (playing out of the square) - though given his lack of mobility that is the only spot i would have played him. Instead they played him up the ground, to the teams detriment. Crazy. In any case there is no way an AFL club would ask any player Tmac's size to get bigger and heavier given how important athleticism in footy these days. All the key forwards (eg hawkins) have gone the opposite direction

Makes an awful lot of sense. Top call. As you say the coaches role has become ridiculously broad (in the last 15 years or so i reckon). Spread too thin and too much responsibility for man management, so to speak. On game day a NBA coach has one, two max assistants. Too much going on for multiple voices. I reckon AFL is the same. Too many voices. Get a coach whose expertise is tactics, strategy and game day expertise. Get a gun GM who do all the man management required a list of 40 odd young men demands. I reckon it is no coincidence Geelong and Richmond's recent success coincides with Neil Balme being at those clubs and heading their football department.

Insert not sure if serious giph. For one thing he is not fit or mobile enough to play down back. And for another thing the last time his spot in the team was under an threat was when he was a defender. His kicking out of defence made Frost look like Jordon Lewis. Moving him forward was n act of desperation, which if it didn't work Tmac was gonski And even if fit and suddenly could hit target why on god's good earth would they have four bigs down back.

This. Something must be wrong with him i reckon. Must be carrying an injury still. In terms of condition he has never got close to his best since his foot issues. Funnily enough i thought he looked in better shape in the Suns game than he did after a three week block of uninterrupted training and not having to recover from games.

Better than what?

Tmac out, AVB in. Both confirmed.

A key player when right nd gives me zero pleasure to say it, but they simply had to drop Tmac. But i said it after the port debacle i am completely bewildered by the decision to pick him for that game. He was nowhere near ready physically and they simply had to know that. One of the strangest selection decisions i can recall from a MFC coach. Ever. Made stranger still when you consider this comment:from Goodwin: “[Three talls] just didn’t look like it was going to function in the right manner,” Goodwin said. “Clearly, it was a slightly dewy night, but those are the sort of games we’re playing in at the moment.” Perhaps Goody read his fixture wrong and though we were playing mid afternoon and didn't want to fess up.

Did you stop reading half way through my post OD. That's exactly what i meant by: 'Make no mistake the doggies should have won. Which is where the no comes in. Port were mentally tough enough to hang in the match in the first half and last quarter. And were able to raise an effort in in the third. More mentally than physically. It won them the game I couldn't help but be impressed. I thought they were a bit flakey.'

Yes and no. Yes because their fatigue was evident throughout the game particularly in the first half. Dogs do a Melbourne and wasted so much of their dominance in the first half and last quarter. Bruce was tmac like and they kept going to him. Only a dees supporter could understand how they were only 3 points up at half time. It barely went inside the port 50 in the second quarter. Make no mistake the doggies should have won. Which is where the no comes in. Port were mentally tough enough to hang in the match in the first half and last quarter. And were able to raise an effort in in the third. More mentally than physically. It won them the game I couldn't help but be impressed. I thought they were a bit flakey. By the by had a good win on the doggies at the line. The difference in gaps between games will play a big role in the next two weeks.

Agree we need players who impact games. And agree Watts never impacted games nearly enough. And he was certainly not a competitive beast. But even the best teams will have no more than handful of players who can really impact a game, in terms of being the difference between winning and losing. The key is you have mix of players, with a mix of attributes and a mix of positions they can play. Competitive ball winners, outside runners, marking targets, crumbing forwards etc etc. Watts influence was underrated i reckon as he regularly led our goal assists and by far our best inside 50 kick. That influence has been evident more in his absence. The key thing is he was our only elite kick (lewis had dropped off by then). And we so desperately need one now. Many said fritter was a like for like but as we have seen heis kicking is fr from elite. The ridiculous focus on competitive ball winners who love a contest (nd presumably a fierce will to win) has lead to alist that has way too many similar players and saw us take Sparrow at 29 and Jordon at 33 in the same draft. And for that matter saw Brayshaw get less time in his best position when sparrow got big minutes in the guts, forcing brayshaw play more mintes where his lack of pace was exposed. Compare the mix of players port have drafted - roze, georgiades, butters, marshall, dursmaa. All different, with a range of attributes, and all playing in different positions (having done so in juniors)

True. And i have to think that this was in part a driver of Bartletts comments - our sponsors would have been livid.

Has a link to the RSN article with the audio from him this morning on their inner sanctum thing they do. About 15 minutes of max. First media i reckon since last weeks game

Except when he did.