binman

You're point that he is has been anything but conservative tacticaly is spot on.

They flood back into he backline as soon the ball is bounced. So teams have about 5 seconds, less maybe, to get an uninterrupted clearance into a on one forward line. And statistically very few such entries. Which is exactly why it has not achieved the AFL reason for introducing it - to increase scoring.

He stopped running players off the back of the square half way though last season. Goodwin noted this in an interview when asked if his use of players off the back of the square would make the 666 rule a challenge for us (his answer was that basically wouldn't impact us much). I maintain the 666 rule has made almost no difference to us or other clubs. The biggest non event since AFLX

Me thinks you might be new around these parts... In cop speak MB has form. And lots of of it. An like many with form any number of aliases. The fact that his very first line after yet another suspension (it weren't me guvna, i've been fitted up) was 'Possibly the most deluded post I've ever read' should give a bit of insight into a poster who is a serial baiter. A master baiter if you will. What's weird is i have him ignore and that first post bypassed it but thankfully is now back in place. Can i take this opportunity to remind people of a previous health warning i read here: Please do not quote MB, or if you must do so delete text. Research shows his posts can cause lasting cognitive damage.

You see things in such excruciatingly simple, black and white terms.

But of course we might have picked two completely different players to those who were picked at 10 and 19. Or traded those picks for another player, perhaps one with elite foot skills. But I hope you are right Moonie about lever proving to be a steal.

That's a fair point. I guess my concern about Lever is that when he joined us he wasn't coming of a knee reconstruction - he was coming off a good season and people were talking him up as a a future AA lock - and his form before his injury was underwhelming - and that's being kind. He was poor one on one and an average kick who turned it over a lot. We actually did a lot better defensively when he wasn't in the team His best attribute was his finger pointing and it is good to see he is still elite in that category. Sure he had to learn a new system but compare that block of games with May's handful of games for us. May has impacted straight away and i feel really confident we made the right call in trading him in. May is also an elite finger pointer, but at least he can back it up. With Lever right up to his injury i was hoping we had made the right call but not confident. I still feel the same way.

It takes a fair bit to surprise me but to be honest i'm amazed anyone in their right mind actually thinks Goodwin did not review the prelim last year.

Exactly right on all counts psd. So simplistic to pick three games out of a season and use them as evidence of a failed system. We have nor been anywhere near fit enough this year. If people can't see that with their eyes our disastrous last quarter record all year is sufficient evidence. And I find it hard to see how people can't see that we have adjusted our game plan, as we did last year (to brilliant effect, becoming the harfmdedt team to score against in the last third if the season). On the slow tempo style that many seem to think is the new key to premiership you are exactly right it places a huge emphasis on aerobic fitness as it relies on multiple players leasing into space to create multiple options (and discipline to keep offering those leads). Players are running huge distances. Lose players through injury and dealing with the grind of the season makes it a hard style to maintain It does means less physical clashes, and therfore less risk of contact injuries, which is why I suspect clubs have taken it to the next level this season. But it will be employed less in finals, not least because teams are not scoring enough. I flagged a few weeks back that the tiger's, with their opposite style, a team close to full strength and a dream run of games at the g would be close to premiership favorites soon enough. If they win it our style will be the flavour of the day again.

G'day Amdamdemon. You should pop over to the chat room and say hi from Ibiza as they may no read this thread now

Yes he did. But he also had a huge emphasis on contested ball and as result focused on getting contested ball winners to the club. I think Roos did a fantastic job for the dees and i have nothing but respect for what he did for us. But i reckon he has deflected responsibility for our current situation. I am rapt the club isn't falling into crisis mode and making crazy public statements. I'm over arguing the impact of a rubbish preseason (and therefore no fitness base) and injuries. To me it is obvious. As Webber noted the correlation between these two interconnected issues and ladder position is an irrefutable fact. Believe it or not believe it. But of course that's not to say we don't have issues that need to b addressed if we are to win flag in the next 5 years. And as i have pointed our for a long time, including during the Roos era, my belief is that the number one issue for the MFC is the lack of kicking skills in our team. This issue was evident last year but has been laid bare this year with so many of best 22 not available, exposing our second stringers, who of course have even less skill. Roos chose not to address this issue, focusing instead on meat and potato ball winners. And Roos bangs on every week on On the Couch about the low standard of foot skills across the AFL (they should train more!). Well why on earth didn't he recruit some elite ball users, like the best coach of the modern era, Clarkson, has been doing for a decade. Under Roos the one player who came to the club with elite foot skills, Salem, came at the cost of missing out on Josh Kelly, arguably the best kick in the game and some would say the added cost of getting Tyson who regularly butchered the ball for us. And after Roos, Goodwin, who shares the Roos love of contested ball winners, doubled down and went after more contested ball winners and then traded out our best kick in Watts (yes, yes i know why) and traded in a poor kick in Lever, which cost us access to first round draft picks which they could have used to target foot skills, not to mention valuable salary cap space they could of used to target an elite ball user. On Watts i'll bet London to a brick many of the posters bemoaning our terrible foot skills were all for getting rid of him and disagreed with my comments at the time about the folly of trading out one of only two elite kicks in our team when it was so evident that kicking skills (and composure) was a massive problem for us (and by the please don't bring up Fritter - we could have kept Watts and still trade in Fritter and so have both. And besides Fritter has shown that he is nowhere near as reliable a kck as Watts).

Can you explain how you think the 666 rule has impacted how AFL.is being played?

Compare the pair One is paid close to 800k a season. The other is paid half that. One cost us pick 53 in a draft. The other cost us two first round draft picks. Two.

Trac assumed it was a dees free and was putting his hand up to indicate he was not taking advantage. Woeful decision.

Yes and no. No. Poor skills are exacerbated by injury and interrupted preseasons. Fact. Same goes for any sport. And as much as i understand the emotion of another bad loss there is no such thing as 'putrid' AFL player, depending of course on your definition of putrid (a pretty base sledge in my book, but perhaps not others). Yes. As i have pointed out literally hundred of times over the 9 years i have posted on Demonland we are, across the board, woeful kicks and have a critical lack of above average kicks, let alone elite kicks. Forget game plan and/or coaching we are not winning a flag until we fix this issue. And speaking of free passes Roos chose not to address this glaring problem and instead focused recruitment on players who can win contested ball but couldn't hit the Montague Street bridge with a semi trailer. The one elite kick recruited under his watch, Salem, came at the expense of an even better kick and potentially a generational player. And Goodwin has continued that trend, doubled down even, by trading out the best kick we had by a country mile and one of the best kicks the dees have had for the last 4 decades (and yes, yes i understand why). And doubling down further by trading in Lever who is a rubbish kick. A good, potentially very good, player (and i am ok with the decision to get him) but we paid through the nose for him and i have little doubt he is our highest paid player. And as such he should be our best player - in all facets. And if not kicking then we should have made sure we surrounded him with the best kick we could find.

Omac is a better kick

Yes and no. Yes for game rust and taking time to pick up the speed of the game. No for missing targets less than 30 metres away under no pressure as result of a woeful kicking technique. Aan issue that by the by was evident in his first 10 or so underwhelming games for the dees before his injury (coming off his best season).

Sorry, did you make a typo. I assume you mean Twiggy Lever. His turn overs directly cost us 4 goals. Pathetic. What was the losing margin? Our highest paid player can't hit a target 25 metres away. Gets a free pass.

Yes, no doubt. But that is evidence in favor of Webber's completely valid argument, not refuting it. Thanks Webber. Good to see some people can see sense through the red and blue mist.

Yes it does. And has. If people can't accept that then that's their problem

Good question. My reposen would be to keep bot the kick in rule and 666. One because neither rule has changed much, and not impacted on the 'spirit' of the game as such ie don't really represent a major change to how the game has always been played. Two because i don't mind the main impact of the 66 rule - which is in those relatively rar occasion when scores are very close in the last couple of minutes, And i don't mind the kick in rule and think it could create some interesting tactical responses (although it hasn't yet). But please no more changes

Excellent post. Agree that if i'm right about their approach it was more than justified. If you have any shot at a flag you go for it. The only point i'm not sure about is the impact of the 666 rule. Personally i think its impact has been marginal at best, for us and for the AFL as a whole.

Totally agree on those needs. I'd add we need some small defenders too. I'm a bit concerned Jetts might not get back to his best, whilst i like Jones back it's a stretch to say he's a natural defender and neither Hibbo and Salem are attacking rather than shut down defenders. Small and medium forwards have killed us this year and i'm not convinced we have the player's to shut them down.

Of course it does rjay and of course it is not working as well this year. But it certainly was last year. Better in the last third of the season when our defence was the best in the season and we were applying manic all ground pressure and smashing opposition in contested ball. We were trapping it in our forward half, getting rpeat entries, applying forward 50 tackles, running in waves and playing forward half pressure game. Just likes the Tigers. And just like the tigers this year we were utilsing a key forward who was grabbing everything and kicking goals. The Hawks tried their spread style in the semi and we smashed them the same way the tigers smashed the pies last night. As i said their game plan is the closest in style to ours. Not the same but close, particularly in terms of philosophy, which is contested ball is king and the swarm will beat the spread. You watch, from tomorrow the footy talking heads will be all over the the tigers game and how effective it is - kryptonite to the pies and west coast style. But it is game style, just like the Pies game style, like any game style that relies on having your best players playing. Which the tigers are close to having and the pies don't. And nor do we. Our list is built for our style. When we had our best players playing we showed last year we can be brutally effective. And Goody obviously has faith in it. Contest out. Swarming, smashing in and hard at it. The Melbourne way. Tweak, and adjust sure but he's not going to throw it away now and try new one. So what choice is there but to get on board and trust he is right? If worried ask a Tigers fan about game style. They're pretty happy right about now i suspect. And the Cats, Pies and Eagles fans are suddenly worried their game plan doesn't score enough points to win big games.

Yep, and with a game plan that is closest in style to ours of any team. But hold on, i thought the pies, cats, west coast slow, chip it around, cross to the fat side and maintain possession model is unbeatable and where the game is heading and Goody has failed to keep up with premiership winning trend in footy. I'm confused. Perhaps that's the not the case after all.