binman

Indeed, which goes to my point the stat is of little use if it's not clear how it is defined and measured. Last season, according to Champion data, we were the second quickest in the AFL at playing on after a mark or free kick. I don't know if that's the same stat Hoyne referenced on the First Crack preview when he said we 205 from after a mark or free kick (but i'm guessing it probably is) because he didn't define it. But it's relevant because despite the myth that dees were a treacle slow down the line team that constantly held the ball up under Goody, whilst true for much of his tenure it decidedly wasn't in 2025. In the 2025 season we were in fact the second quickest at moving the ball on after a mark or free kick (something Hoyne highlighted all season in his 30 min Tuesday spot on SEN - my only not miss footy media). Does that misconception matter? I think so because already you can see the footy media, and many fans if DL is any guide, suggest King has introduced a radical new game plan, one that is chalk and cheese to what the players are used to - and are assessing his perfo4mance accordingly. Whilst King's game is different in lots of ways to the one Goody tried to implement in 2025 (and the first half of 2024 too for that matter) - for example, the concept of all team defence AND all team offence - the speed at which we move the ball on after a mark of free kick is not one of them (though its clearly even quicker this season). That's relevant because the team have had a full season of practising moving the ball on quickly after a mark or free kick, which can only be a positive in terms of making doing so instinctive, as seems to be the case this season (helped by the fact that we moved on players who clearly struggled to implement that method last season).

With King's game plan he selects a bunch of what are essentially utilities with no fixed positions as such (except at centre bounces when everyone starts in a fixed position). After a restart, players like Langford, Culley, Sharp, Chandler, Langdon, Latrelle, Kolt (if not tagging or playing at HB) and Cross (though he did play pretty deep) play roles similar to that of high half forwards acros sthe comp in the previous 2-3 seasons - ie pushing up the ground deep into defence when required, running ahead of the ball on turnover to provide an option and tonnes of box to box running. So, i think under King the idea of a like for like replacement, except for some very specific roles such as key defenders, key forwards and ruck is no longer relevant. Which means in practice, Cross wasn't a like for like replacement for Rivers, and as you suggest doesn't have to be replaced by a small forward (as you say he actually played quite tall in the sense that he obviously had the freedom for fly for marks). And CJ doesn't have to replaced by a half back flanker either. Kolt could go forward and play as a utility or play at half back. As you suggest Laurie would be a good fit because he can play the utility role, and whilst not particularly quick is not slow and has the tank required to cover the ground utilities need to cover under King. I can't see them picking Melksham because i thinks he's just too slow, unfortunately. My guess on who will come into the side (as opposed to replacing Cross and CJ) is Laurie and AMW. If they are 100% confident Disco is good to go, he'll come in (and i suspect they'll be keen to bring him to play on King). And sadly for Tmac, in that scenario, that probably means he comes out.

IMO, Mathhew's is no chance whatsoever of being selected this week, next week, or the foreseeable future. I would not be surprised if he doesn't play in the seniors this year full stop. But if he is, it won't be until the back end of the season. Likewise, Heath is also no chance of being selected this week, or for the foreseeable future (assuming no injury to Maxy). He'll get a go at some point this season, perhaps as a trial of using two rucks or in the unlikely even they rest Maxy at some point. And i can't see Xavier Taylor coming into the ones anytime soon either. He's got some work to do at VFL level, not to mention some serious time in the gym, before he'll be considered for senior selection.

In the sense that whilst King has suggested Riv is carrying some niggles, I suspect there's some aspect of his game King wants him to work on. And to do so likely requires some time at Casey. And if he does have some niggles, is one week not playing at senior level going to do much to help him get over them?

Total eclipse of the Suns. Sung to tune the of:

I saw that. It would of been handy to know how it was measured- I mean what's 100? What's 200?

That surprises me I have to say

Money spinner for the dees - and we need the money old

You'd be surprised at how many such jumpers they sell

Some, but really just notable numbers - and only one or two per quarter. For example this comment was made at the 20 mins mark of the last quarter: Melbourne continues to apply the pressure with the last two goals of the game, both from forward half chains. All three Melbourne goals this term have come from forward half chains. It has been pretty even in forward half scores, with Melbourne leading 7.5.47 to 7.4.46 for Carlton.

Speaking of Lloyd, I watched the access all areas he does with Damien barret on afl.com. He disccussed our game, but didn't talk AT ALL about how we played, or the game itself. Instead, he talked about koz and how amazing he was in the second half. The framing? He loves players who play well in 'poor teams', reiterating several times he thinks we are a poor team. Sure we are a ways off the top teams but we are not a bottom 4 team which is what i would think is the marker for 'poor teams'. The bombers are a poor team, which to be fair Lloyd acknowledges. We are not a poor team.

Indeed. Under goody, Sparrow was basically the chop out for viney for 5 seasons

His best, most impacful and influential game he has played for us.

The 'timeline' on the AFL app is pretty good as thru the match, and at the end of each quarter, it highlights some notable stats.

Well in addition to being rubbish at trolling you're obviously equally rubbish at sarcasm. Champ

This is seriously the worst troll attempt i have ever read on DL- bloke has his best game for the MFC and you reckon he was poor? Are you an AI trollbot?

Good call.

I'm not sure of Adam's contract status, but if he is out of contract at season's end i'd be very surprised if he gets another

Great post, and you make some great points. A couple of thoughts in response: i take your points about Latrelle, but King's game plan is based on running power and simply does not work without players on every line with genuine leg speed, particularly striding speed over distance - and every player needs to have a massive tank. For that reason, i can't see Latrelle being dropped anytime soon (meaning he'll almost certainly be dropped this week!). I also think Latrelle's the future and we need to get Latrelle to that critical 50 plus games of AFL footy ASAP - i could see them playing him for the first 5 or 6 games then give him chop out and send him back to Casey to work on his craft Based on what i saw against the dogs in the VFL game i'd be very surprised if we see him before, at a minimum, round 7 or 8 - he's not ready physically and i suspect not mentally either Heat aint coming into the ide anytime soon either - i can't see him playing in the same side as Maxy, in large part because of my first point, until perhaps the last few games of the season; and then only to get some AFL games into him If AMW is good to go i reckon he' straight swap for CJ this week

Yep, agree on both counts. That said, in the first half we copped some shocking frees against us, and perhaps more significantly, frees not paid - the amount of throws, HTBs and scragging of maxy let go was infuriating.

He rucked well too I reckon

Couldn't go - was away. Just finished watching the replay. Go redleggers!

I think that's exactly what will happen, and I suspect that might be a big factor in both th selection of cross and riv being dropped. It also mean Koz can have more CBAs

Yeah, I agree it's unlikely to be pace alone. Who knows, Riv might have been given a specific role or task he didn't satisfactorily complete, or break a non negotiable team rule. Or more likely, despite having reseonable disposal numbers, King, like all AFL coaches uses bespoke data and metrics to set KPIs for specific players and inform his assessment of their performance. One such KPI would almost certainly be pressure, as evidenced by tackles (and pressure acts, one percenters etc) In other words King perhaps king and/or the coaching panel wanted to get some more pace into the side, needed to drop somone to make that happen and decided riv was that person because he didn't perform to the level required.