binman

Agree with all of the above.

Then i assume you would agree that the expectations of the coaching staff of Tmac's younger brother would be that he defends to a satisfactory standard. And that his key assigned role is defending. And by extension if he did not meet these expectations or play his assigned role the match committee are not very likely to give him many votes. So if your assessment of tmac's younger brother's ability to defend is correct it follows that it is very unlikely he will vote well in the bluey. And therefore unlikely to be top 10. Of course the opposite is also true. Which i'm willing to bet is the case. By the by my from wiki the bluey voting system works as follows: 'The voting system as of the 2016 AFL season, consists of four members of the match committee giving each player a ranking out of ten after each game. Players can receive a maximum of 40 votes for a game.' The match committee members are under no obligation to give any score should they believe a player does not deserve one. The process gives a pretty good indication of how a player is assessed by people who know what they are talking about.

Could he not agree in principle to terms for season 2020? Win a flag at GWS come home to Melbourne and help us win our second in a row? Such a good player and he has what we need. Outside speed and an ability to hit a target. Well to be honest he has what every team needs. Pure class. but i can't see us even trying to get him for next year. too much money and would create issue with the brotherhood.

Matt Jones and Terlich finished top 10 when we were putrid. We are playing finals and have a much, much better list. Sylvia had ability, no doubt. All the talent in the world. And played some fantastic individual games. But a good player? Good players players consistently play well and he didn't. Which is why he polled poorly in the bluey. The bluey is not based on an assessment of how far above expectations a player performs. That would be manifestly silly. As i understand it votes are cast on performance and how well a player performed their assigned role in a given match. Of course games played is a factor. Players not performing their role don't get picked. Those that do get the opportunity to accrue votes. As they should. Salem isn't accruing many atm. But lets say you are right. The fact remains that defenders who can't defend are not likely to get too many best and fairest votes..

So that's a yes or no to the bet?

Yes good point. my bad. A brain fade. Do we have a bet? Should be in your favor really. Defenders who can't defend are not likely to get too many best and fairest votes. How about you steve. Are you in?

Agree on all but the bolded bit. From the bullies game to the port game our midfield pressure fell off a cliff, exposing our defence who actually held up pretty well all things considered. Conversely our scoring suffered witb last week being the first time we scored more than a 100 points since the dogs game. A large factor in how well the crows and the tigers defend is their awesome midfield pressure. Not coincdentally that also is a big factor in how damaging lever and rance are - hurried kicks under pressure into the forward 50 are manna from heaven for intercet players that can read the ball as well as those two. That midfield pressure is exactly why the lions had so many marks in our defensive 50. If that midfield pressure drops off a side is in trouble just as richmond were against the cats in the periods where their pressure dropped off. The bolded bit. If rhe midfield pressure drops off i4 mak2s it much easier to borh orchestrate mismatches (think brown v jetta x 3) or kick to a forwards advantage (think taylor v rance. Taylor monstered the best defender in rhe league and his 4 resulting goals were the diffetence between winning and losing). One of the dees players said post match that they use a pressure gauge during matches to montor where they are at in terms of applying pressure. All teams probably do. Because if it drops off - as it did at certain points in the lions game - it is easier for the opposition to score. And when high it us harder foe the opposition to score and easier for your team. With any analysis of statistics is important to take all the variables and possible causal factors into consideration. Not just one. Unless of course you want to use those stats to prove a point you are trying to make.

All reasonable points. I agree it is likely lever will continue to improve but it none the less as i say it is not inconceivable he might plateau

Very good point.

Sure. If you need to. Not sure why you would need or want to though. Lever wont replace no 28. But if we want to compare them - and avoid a silly who will better argument - lets factor in that all players, but particulaly talls develop at different rates. Lever is a gun. But blind freddy can see that. But it is not inconceivable he might level out given he is alreafy playing at a high level. Though it should be noted in this context he is playing in a better side. And it is not inconceivable no 28 has scope for considerable improvement. And pwrhaps more upside than lever. And it should also be noted that whilst there are similarities - age, height, weight, both defenders - lever is much more a rance style intercepr player. No 28 will likely end up 10kgs heavier and play different role, ine more akin to tbat played by tmac. If lever comes to the dees - which i reallt hopes he does - he will be a perfect combination with no 28.

Really you are losing all credibility steve. Funny you should rail at being misquoted on no 28 being a dud given you say that i am 'confident Oscar will develop into a great key defender'. i have never said such a thing. All i ever done is rebut your incorrect assertions about his ability. Among other things you have claimed Tmac's younger brother is not AFL standard, can't spoil (though it went from not at all, to spoils into the corridor to doesn't 'kill' spoils), is slow (of mind and foot), hopeless one on one, no vision, only in the side because of circumstance etc etc and more recently you could not even concede he is a good player. You can't mention Lever without mentioning no 26's supposed weaknesses. I vowed not to enter into any more argument about no 28 as quite frankly the argument is done and dusted. And i won it. No 28 has done all the talking for me. So i won't bother rehashing it. But I'll tell you what, i'll give you (and jnrmac if he wants to play) an opportunity. An opportunity to put your money where your key board is. So to speak. Let's make a wager. I bet that Tmac's younger brother will make top 10 in the best and fairest. You bet he doesn't. The winner of the bet can choose the avatar of the loser from the day after the best and fairest until after the second round. Please don't give me any nonsense about a top 10 in the bluey not proving anything. The best and fairest and is judged by the match committee. Paid football professionals. It is not an encouragement award. We are going to make the finals. No player with the many weaknesses you think no 28 has finishes top 10 in an AFL side that makes the finals. Perhaps in years gone past at the dees but not this year. A top 10 finish in the bluey would be irrefutable evidence he is considered by the match committee to be a good player. And with all due respect i value their assessment more than yours. So do we have a bet? (and Jnr mac happy to have a side bet)

Call me old fashion but i always though supporters defend their own players and bag opposition players not vice versa.

I am. Steve is obsessed with trying to prove himself right about Tmac's younger brother. To be frank it is getting ridiculous.

Of course you do. But you don't overspend. He's a value add.

Both x 10

Careful steve you might scare Lever off with your feverish passion for him. I don't think i can ever recall a DL poster express so much love for a MFC player, let alone one who plays for an opposition team. Have you seen the film swimfan?

Yep, the Astbury and Rance set up is the pro type zone set up. You can't really have gorilla keepers anymore (think Frawley and dunn) as if they are not mobile enough you are one runner down. The skyscrapers are hard to stop no doubt and if you went man on man you would need a taller player rather then Frawley style man on man player to guard them. But with the zones all teams are playing (some zones are more aggressive) you can't really have a defender running with them all day or else your whole ground zone suffers and you are almost a man down (which is why taggers, with some obvious exceptions, have by in large gone out of style). The answer - at least at the moment - to stop the power forward like Dixon and the skyscrapers like Danhier that most teams employ is the zone. And it is hard to do and when it goes wrong the skyscrapers and gorillas have a field day. Look at some of the goals Pedo and Hogan kicked on Sunday. At least four were from marks where the lions zone failed and both players were allowed a free run at the ball. But on other occasions their defensive zone worked really well and they got easy marks down back. They are a young team and it takes time to get zones right. Moving Tmac back and dropping Salem and Frost was risky as it is impacted on the synergy down back, which is critical for zones in football (and soccer and basketball) to work well. I think some of the Saints second half goals and the lions goals were as a result of the zone breaking down. Geelong used Taylor to force Rance to go one on one on him and cut down the damage he usually does with his intercepts. Interestingly Rance, who some consider to be the best defender of the modern era, really struggled one on one and was well beaten by Taylor in the air and the scoreboard. The tigers often send martin really deep knowing generally someone will mark him, which makes it harder for the opposition to set their zone. Lever would fit perfectly into our zone set up and very much play the Rance role.

It was into the wind but i agree that hw has struggled getting distance since his hamstring. His struggles since that hammy and goodies srong praise of hogan's effort to rehab his shoulder makes me think watts perhaps did not apply himself in the way goody expects

Agree. Hannan works super hard. Hw has a terrific way if creating space and fights like a tiger. No way he goes out of this side

Imagine what some would say if he had pulled out of the contest? But actually he was a bit a victim of his own instinct. His instinct not to fly aggressively for contested marks that is. I reckon he slightly hesitated before going to the contest. Someone like the weed would have not hesitated and in tat split second perhaps given himself enough time to get to the contest and go for the mark. Still at least Watts went. There is no way he will copy a suspension for that contest. No way. As evidence it wasn't late was that the willy player didn't mark it, hence why there was no 50. It was actually not a bad spoil. Made him earn it and in some ways unlucky to even have the free kick paid.

According to whom? Here is how an objective observer saw it (from the official VFL match centre and by the by those lists are normally in order): CASEY DEMONS Goal Kickers: L. Hulett 2, Y. Zijai, J. Kennedy-Harris, J. Watts, A. Ferreira, B. Fritsch, S. Weideman, E. Morris, A. Scott, C. Maynard Best Players: J. Munro, E. Morris, J. Watts, T. Bugg, S. Frost, J. Kennedy-Harris

Based on his interview at the end? I think people makw too many assumptions about jw. I would be shocked if he is not in the side next week.

Love your work KC

Good lord, DL's dark web has leaked onto the main board. Predicatably given rhe topic. Can't wait for the inevitable pc police comments. After all it is tough being a white middle aged, middle class australian and being told their views are out of step with what is acceptable in 2017.

Perhaps he could also school him on taking a man on in his back half, getting done for dropping the ball 40 meters out and then compounding his error (after his man missed the goal) giving away a silly 50 and giving up a gimme goal. How much did they lose by? Oh that's right 3 points. Just imagine the response from some if the whipping boy had made those errors and cost us a game?