binman

By the by, moderation is a bit of a misnomer in terms of dl. Moderation for sensitive topics such as this usually involves posts being checked and then approved (or not) - and somtimes edited. Labor intensive requiring someone always on shift, so to speak. The moderaters on dl respond to reports or obvious issues and deltet3 as required. But because this is a volunteer run site there can often be a lag before sketchy posts can be be actioned.

Can I flag again kev my concerns about the challenges and difficulty of moderating a thread such as this. One person's robust debate is another's trauma. And this thread would be better I think in the general discussion forum, nor the footy one. Fir reasons I've noted. I won't be posting in the thread, but If the thread continues, can I respectively ask people to re read the post though a safety lens (oe could this make someone feel unsafe) before hitting submit. It's great kev that you are passionate about making a difference. Don't forget the education piece.

Pies to win.

I think what Andy has noted above is really important, with the second para of critical importance and raises an issue that i was just thinking of highlighting - the safety of victim survivors, women and children who read DL. On the topic of family violence, i wholeheartedly agree there needs to be discussion in society, particularly amongst men. But i don't believe a football focused thread is the appropriate space for such discussions (and even in the general forum i would have my concerns because of the risks of misinformation and traumatizing victim survivors if not expertly moderated - which is an incredibly difficult thing to do if the topic is family violence). I 1000% support the decision to not have a discussion about family violence on a football thread. I think discussion is important. But i believe that the most important discussions are those by men with their family, particularly their sons, and friends, particularly their male friends. Critical is understanding what family violence is, how many different types of family violence there are (eg financial control, psychological, electronic surveillance, control, emotional abuse, use of technology etc) and what drives it. A great place to start is the -Victoria's Royal Commission into Family Violence. For more general information Victoria's peak body for family and gender-based violence Safe Steps is great. For information about men's use of violence, Victoria's peak for ending male violence, No to Violence is a terrific resource. And if you are man who is concerned about your use of violence, the Men's Referral Service is the national counselling, information and referral service for men who use violence and abuse who want to change their behaviour. It is a confidential, anonymous service available 24/7 that you can call on 1300 766 491.

I agree with the first point, but disagree with the latter. Though line bsll. And I can see the argument for me being wrong.Which goes to my point about it being subjective how people rate individual players. And to my central point that fans tend to over rate oppo lists and that we have an excellent list. Whichever way someone lands on the relative strength of the players outside the best 12, which was the initial discussion, it's hard to argue the giants bottom 12 is clearly better than ours. We could probably all agree that max is the best ruck in the afl. He's certainly the highest rated. Similarly few would argue tracc is not in say the top 3 mids But once you are talking about the 12-24 players subjective assessment of players becomes much more variable. Which is why i chose the giants as a comparison as the consensus seems to be they have the best list. Better than the blues (who leave it to deaver suggested had a better list than us), swans, pies and any other contender. If they'll giants are the benchmark, we meet it. I think we have the best list, but as noted agree it's line ball with the giants. Ipso facto, we have a better list than all other contenders. I'd add that no other contender has a better group of best 25 players (as defined by selection in the ones) 24 years or under, which should be factored into any analysis of the strength of a team's list. What ever way you slice it, objectively we have an excellent list.

In season, runnnig hard to a elite level for seven months. I like journo Andrew Stafford's analogy of the demands on players in season as running a half marathon every game for seven months. That's aprox 20km, which is more than they run in a game (the most would be aprox 16km and the average 10-11?). So perhaps a better analogy would be a 10,000 metre race every game for seven months. Imagine running a 10k race once a week for 7 months with the aim of achieving a significant PB in the last week. Add getting tackled, bumped etc every week and dealing with niggles and injuries. Then add variable breaks between your weekly 10k and different conditions (eg humid, cold, wet, different surfaces etc). Add interstate flights and having to stay in random hotels (ie not in your home and bed) and constantly needing to adjust your routines. Hard gig for an individual. Multiply that by 44 and you get a sense of the complexities of AFL clubs' high performance programs. And for all the incredible planning the high performance programs involve how difficult it would be to get it right. It's fascinating the different approaches clubs use. The cats regularly managed players in the 2022, 2023 and again this year. Burgess never did, nor Selwyn in 2022. They flagged they would do more of it in 2023, but never really did. And we haven't done so this year, with the possible exception of how they are managing bbb - which I suspect is more about managing his chronic knee issue than management of fatigue. Given how critical the high performance programs' of clubs are, it's high time the media included it their analysis. How many people could name more than say 2 or 3 high performance managers?

And that wasn't even the stupidest thing. Rozee slightly hyper extended his leg, in much the same way as he did to hurt it the previous week (a weird action I've not seen before in terms of a hammy injury - is that a common way to hurt a hammy @Webber?) Was clearly limping. Went to the bench for 9 minutes or some such. AND CAME BACK ON, before getting subbed off a short time after. Hinkley said he erred selecting him, but was adamant there was no risk of further damage by putting him back out on the field. He may well be right, but if you think it was a unnecessary risk picking him, why double down and risk putting him back on?

#classic Demonland. Defence works 999,999 times. It's doesn't work on the millionth occasion and it's all doom and gloom .

No problems @Blistering. A son of Blistering has to be super quick, so he's got one key attribute nailed down. The other thing I'd add is I reckon a key metric for the HHF role is score involvements because they are so often links in scoring chains.

Agree. Ditto dees.

JVR is number 25 with 6.74. Hore then Howes, who is on 6.6. Jacob Weher is their 25th rated player on 6.5, riccarrdi and Adam Kennedy.

Compare the pair:

And their next 12:

It's subjective isn't it. Everybody seems to love the giants. Me too. Consensus seems to be they have a good list. This is their top 12 rated players in the last 20 matches:

Our way. We bet into a shared bank.

This was my mates reply: I like them, but not quite as confident, $ Crows +5.5.

Go crowbots. At the risk of going the early crow, this was the message I sent my mate I punt with beforethe game: 'I am really bullish about the crows to make their line. In fact, I think they'll win. Showdowns are like finals. Which always evens things up and means a hard contested game. Which I think suits the crows. But the main reason is port's injuries. Key players out in alir and Powell Pepper. And rozee is surely ginger.'

I largely disagree, but really like this post and think you make a strong case. Im not suggesting you are soing so tu, but i think there is a tendency for fans to over rate other teams lists. All lists drop away after the top 10-12, which is one reason why I a worried about the impact of the tassie team. The talent pool is too thin already, particularly given AFL footballers noe need to be bloody good at footy AND elite athletes. I take your point about forwards lined but few teams have actually scored that much more than us under Goody. And there's also an argument that the need for mutiple gun forwards is overated. The cats are a bit of an outlier in that regard arguably going all the way back to the dogs in 2016.

The first time I've got selection right since about mid last year!

@Blistering can't quite tell if this is a wind up. But I'll assume not and play with a straight bat. The high half forward (HHF) role has become one of the most important in AFL football. Daniel Hoyne from champion data said many times last season that the key reason for the blues' turnaround was sorting the HFF role. Cotteral for example has become super important to them. That's because the HFF role is key to the transition game and turning turnovers into scores and defending turnovers. To excel in the HHF role a player needs to be an elite athlete with a huge tank who can cover ground quickly. Similar to the role langers plays as a winger, it Involves gut running from box to box, in soccer parlance. In footy it's forward pocket to back pocket all game providing defensive cover in defence as part of an all team zone defensive system. The defensive cover includes direct defensive actions in rhe opponents forward half (ie helping our defence) like spoiling, smothers and tackles. And indirect defensive actions like blocking switch options or sprinting to a mark to stop a player immediately playing on. The HFF does those same defensive actions when the ball is in our forward half - with the indirect actions being critical in terms of making it harder to transition the ball from their back half. When we transition the ball from our back half the HFF gut runs to get ahead of the ball to either spread the opposition (ie an opponent has to run and cover him) or be an option to kick to. The latter includes being a target inside 50. And of course in addition to all of that, snag the occasional crumbing or stoppage goal. Some HHFs might be more forward orientated and play a bit closer to goal. Chandler is a good example. Others might have assists as a kpi and be one of the players teams want kicking inside 50 (though all will be expected to hit up leading targets). Miers is a good example. The best HFF in the AFL? Nibbla hands down. Don't believe me? Have a listen to Andy's brilliant interview with Kade Chandler. From 13.17 in the player at the top of this page Kade discusses the small forward role (but is referring to the HHF role). He defines it much more succinctly than I just have and pumps up nibbla as the HHF exemplar.

I'm going to assume if he picks the dees he is certain to be a gun who will play 200 plus games fir the MFC. And if he picks the suns he is over rated, and whilst a good average player who carves out a decent AFL career we use the draft pick to instead unearth another Taylor diamond in the rough who becomes an all time great of the club. It's a win win.

If he had the right attitude at Gold Coast? May was famously competitive and an obvious leader. Which is why Gold Coast made him co captain at 25 , and why he was an absolute gun player in.huge demand before coming to the dees. Rance and Scarlett are unarguably both legends. 5 and 6 x AA respectively. Premiership player x 1 and x 3 respectively. But May is 100% on track to be considered in the same league as both. If he plays two more seasons after this year he'll get close to 300 games. He's a two time AA, and a real chance of adding a third this year. And of course he is also a premiership player, who famously played with a hammy tear that normally would be a minimum 3 week injury.

Hunter in was my thought too, for the same reason ie strong, seasoned player. I was thinking Windsor might he sub. But I think you make an excellent point about our need for speed - generally, but particularly against the cats who are both quick and also play a back half, transition game. And Windsor out, Hunter in is a bad combo in terms of leg speed. So, I'm changing my prediction to no change.