binman

#backhanded compliment

Go redleggers

I can't believe it. Went to buy my ticket today. They were available. But I checked with friends if they were coming and was waiting for a reply. Wasn't stressed. Surely it wouldn't sell out. Just went to buy them. Sold out!

Blimey, that's almost as long as one of my shorter posts. More informative too. But seriously, that's what we should be getting. Basic level of professional information. I went to the mfc website this arvo to buy a ticket for tommorow. No doubt the info is there somewhere, but I couldn't find it and gave up after 5 mins. Not good enough. Struggled to find it on the afl site too but did.

Yeah, that's a fair point. As is Werridee's point that May, week in week actually has a direct opponent and usually that is their best forward. I mean how would Stewart go head to head with Curnow or Hawkins? I completely forgot about Andrews. Like Stewart. Moore and Lever he also zones off and intercepts, but i think is probably better one on one than those three players. But no may. And May can also zone off and intercept when required. So, i'm sold. May if not the best key defender in the AFL, none are better. And any top 50 that does not include May is an assessment of the author not May.

Sorry Dino, that's just wrong. And in my opinion is a narrative dees fans should actively push against, because it is one the AFL and the Pies are pushing - for obvious reasons. Compare the circumstances of Gus's retirement with Paddy McCartin. Gus hadn't had a concussion for 5 years and regularly had MRI and advanced imaging and neurological assessments to check on his brain health and there were no issues. He was out cold for at least 2 minutes after the Maynard hit. The damage from that hit was so severe there is chance any player receiving it would be advised to retire, regardless of any history of concussion (by the by i'm guessing almost every AFL player would have received multiple head knocks, if not concussion, in their junior footy career from say under 10s to TAC cup. That's to say every AFL player is likely vulnerable to the impact of concussion). Paddy McCartin had to take an extended break from the game and once back had at least 2 head hits. The really worrying thing, and the key reason he had to retire i suspect, is the last one was barely a glancing blow (he didn't play another game after that).

Haven't been in this thread for a couple of weeks and this is where I landed. Was a very good call old. Unfortunately since then we have lost Gus. But clarry looks in good nick and will be in the ones by round 3, perhaps earlier. BB had said he hopes to be back with main group in 2-3 week. Fullarton is apparety two weeks away, as is mcadam. Petts still sounds a couple of weeks away, but is on track for being back by round 2-3. Tmac is out of rehab and salo is up and running. Turner is a bummer, but will back before the mid season bye and melk seems in great shape and on track for aprox round 15.

He's certainly a gun, but not sure he's by far the best tall defender. Agree he has Moore and may covered, but I rate weitering very highly.

It's funny isn't it. It's now completely accepted that teams are nor going anywhere near a flag without an elite defence. Footy media bang on about all the time. And every year the brownlow gets, rightly in my view, for being a midfielder award And then all the media awards go to mids. Coaches award too I guess, but al least defenders get votes. And then a top 50 from the head footy writer at the hun doesn't include the best defender in the best defence in the AFL. And has Moore at 22 and weitering at 36. Curiously he has Tom Stewart at 19. A gun no doubt. Better than Moore, weitering and may? Big call.

Lots I agree with. The main one is that it will absolutely be a shame if we don't get another flag out of this group. I think we have another 3-4 seasons in the premiership window, in large because of how balanced our list age wise. Of course that depends on tracc, Max, clarry, viney, lever and May not dropping away too much. But barring injury the only player that worries me is maysie. Players are so fiit and well managed these days that most stars are still at the top of their game well into their 30s. And it depends on koz, Sparrow, Bowser, jvr, mcvee and a couple of others improving. But again that's not an unreasonable expectation. And we will have some serious coin to back fill with quality free agents at the end of this season. Agree, not making a prelim this year was a fail. And I'm sure that's how they assess it internally. And as I have noted in another thread, we tightened badly in the last 5 or 6 mins of the blues game. Even with our inaccuracy, we should have won that game. The pies game is a different matter - we deserve massive kudos for being in a position to win that game given we basically only played 3 quarters. Huge psychological effort to get up after quarter time given what happened to Gus.

With the BB article suggesting he is only 2-3 weeks away from being back training in the main group and Fullerton a couple of weeks away from returning, our injury situation is not quite as dire as some in the media have suggested - certainly not preseason from hell stuff. Including Gus, with Melk and turner out for that's only three players who wont be available for big blocks, and Turner will be back before the mid season bye (and got the clicks in before his injury).

If its choice between Riv and Salo in the middle i'd take Salo. One, on what i swa in the praccy match he looks a natural inside mid. And two, i think we lose more not having Riv playing back with his run and carry and long kicking. He has become a critical player for us down there, particularly in terms of how we transition the ball. And i think we can cover salo more easily too - Bowser for one. Not sure we have a natural cover for Riv - Howes perhaps in time.

Good points. And i'd add that it is elite level hypocrisy for the AFL media boys club to knock the culture of any club or organisation. A bigger bunch of misogynist, dipsomaniac, reprobates you couldn't find. Exhibit A: Morris being welcomed back into the boys club on SEN and now as head of channel nine's football team.

The Snake Baker model.

Good things Port weren't wearing their prison bar jumper or else Christiansen would have let it slide out of muscle memory.

I've read some things on DL over the years. This is one them.

What i meant about Pies, Blues and Tigers fans is that they push back against the media. But they don't accept failure? You're probably right, but ironically that reflexive desire for 'accountability' and not 'accepting failure' is the key reason all three clubs were in fact failures for so long. Fans of the Pies, tigers and Blues had plenty of practice at accepting failing. Feral fans not accepting 'failures' meant all three clubs repeatedly shot themselves in the foot in the form of upheaval at board level and sacking coaches. And ironically the path forward for all three clubs was not being led by the nose by their feral fans' desire for scapegoats and 'accountability'. Take the tigers. Their fans were going nuts at their repeated 'failure' to make the finals under Hardwick. There was talk of board coups and total upheaval. The board, learning from past mistakes, weathered the storm and stayed the course And won three flags to become the best team of the modern era. After a similar period of upheaval and chaos (and failure), the Pies stabilized under McGuire and Buckley. Yes, they ultimately replaced Buckley but he had a decade as senior coach, almost won them a flag and i'm guessing the first positive win loss record of any coach since perhaps Hafey. No way McCrae has his success without that foundation. And the blues? A basket case for decades. Burning through coaches and board members. A board coup always on the cards. Hell, halfway though last season the blues fans, who don't accept failure, were screaming for blood. A high profile board coup seemed inevitable. Voss was in the gun. But the board took the tiger's lead, stayed the course, ignored the baying fans who don't accept failure, and had their best season in 20 plus years. And the only thing that changed was the tune of the don't accept failure crew. The Cats have long been rightly lauded for their excellent administration and governance. I think that was one reason their fans never went full feral on the board to axe Scott. They were rewarded for not conflating not winning flags and 'failure' by winning another flag. Like the tigers, they stayed the course and were rewarded. What does accountability mean in the context of a team, coach, administration and board that won us our first flag in 57 years just two seasons ago, and followed it up with two top 4 finishes? Sure it was heartbreaking to go out in straight sets two years in a row. But only feral fans would really consider that a pretext for some accountability, which in footy speak is sacking the coach and/or board. Is that what we want? Even when we know that history is crystal clear that is the path to failure? On your final point doc, personally i don't agree that we have a stale game plan, or that we have cultural issues (or at least no more than other clubs - i think this is a classic media beat up), but that is another discussion. But i totally agree fans have every right to ask questions. What i find bit frustrating on Demomnland is how often discussion becomes binary and devolves into camps. There is a lack of nuance. It is equally frustrating to be pigeon holed as some pollyanna optimist who is unconditionally positive and refuses to acknowledge issues (to be clear, i'm not saying you are dong so here doc, or have form doing so). It is possible to both be critical of the club AND think we are heading in the right direction. Positing potential reasons for something occurring (eg our forward line injuries impacting our finals campaign) is not making excuses for this playing/coaching group. Being positive about our chances is not accepting failure. The same is true of criticism of the club. I have been very critical of the clubs kicking skills ever since i started posting on Demonland, and long argued that we should be targeting more players with elite kicking skills. And, for that reason was critical of the decision to take Salem not Josh Kelly, and equally critical of the decision to trade Watts. I think my criticism on the kicking skills front has borne out. In my opinion, injuries was the number one factor in us going out in straight sets last year, but clear number two was too few elite kicks. But i'm not banging on about being proved right or pointing out ad nauseum how much better we would be if we had Josh Kelly kicking inside 50. And i am long time critic of the clubs' external communications, which i think is a big factor in our poor relationship with the media and certainly in how various crisis events have been perceived externally. But again, i don't run the club down and bang on about it at every opportunity. Predicting failure is easy. Anyone doing so will be proven right way more often than those predicting success. But a back and forth between those two poles is exhausting. And to be clear, I'm as guilty of anyone as getting involved in those back and forth discussions that lead nowhere and clog up thread after thread. I'm down for nuanced discussion about strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats. But like reducing my consumption of footy media, i'm tapping out from binary, black and white discussions on Demonland this season.

Thanks DZ. In was indeed referring to that hysteria - though i was really just taking the opportunity (albeit in an unrelated thread!) to do some more misquoting of Paul Kelly, one of our great chroniclers and poets - and mad football fan (Adelaide unfortunately). But on the hysteria front, since our loss to the blues i have had an almost complete football media black out. And i like it. Reading the threads on here about various media predictions drives me batty enough, so i'm going to tap out of watching or listening to the footy media this season. No SEN (apart from some catch up of Phil Davis and the bloke from Champion data on Tuesday nights). Maybe the two ABC footy shows on Sunday. Actually just the first one. No Fox 360 or their inane half time 'analysis' (i might not be able to break my last crack addiction). Maybe some of the usually excellent ABC news.com analytical articles (the authors' names escape me, Dean Bilton is one i think) but no Age or Hun articles. I'll listen to the ESPN footy podcast, which is usually (bit not always) pretty good. And read whelloratings excellent site, and maybe some other similar data driven websites. That will do me i think for footy media in 2024. By the by, speaking of the footy media, one of the issues I have it with it is all so 'feels' based. So few analysts actually analyse, and the opinion heads just have vibe based feels. So for example, on the discussion about our fortunes in 2024, as far as i have seen no-one has noted that we finished the 2023 season as the number one rated team by Champion Data (combines the ratings for attack - +2.7 and defence - +12.5). Sure, that is based on data and and data doesn't equal flags. And people seem to hate data. But it is relevant information to include in any analysis i would have thought. Readers or listeners can choose to ignore or factor it in as they see fit. As a punter i certainly look at the data and factor it into my thinking. And, in term of how i assess the 2024 season, the table is not miles off how i think it might play out, including the Giants being a big chance and the Crows also being a contender. The Crows are interesting. The key factor in their rating is they were the number one rated attacking team in the AFL (we were 8th) but only #10 for defence (we were #1). If the Crows sort their defence this season they are definitely contenders and from a punting perspective the 1.81 you can get for them to finish in the top 8 is good value, if that bet was in a bubble (futures bets are never good value). This is the top 8 rated teams: Melbourne +15.2 Brisbane +14.9 Collingwood +14.3 Giants +14.3 Adelaide +13.7 Sydney +9.4 Port Adelaide +9.2 Carlton +5.4

Good thing for him the round zero game against us is in Sydney - he won't have to fly.

To misquote Paul Kelly once more: 'The hysteria on the back pages is still blooming' @3183 Dee

Agree. Only against VFL players, but i was surprised how natural he looked as a mid. Low centre of gravity, nuggety, and good hands are positives for a mid. Tough too. But there's one thing I really like. Of course we will benefit from him kicking it inside 50 more as a mid than defender. But his ability to hit 15-20 metre targets under pressure would be even more important for us as a mid than defender. Less turnovers, and crucially a mark allows us to control the ball, and hold it up and reset if required. Even some players with good technique struggle with that kick. Clarry, tracc and viney - our starting midfield players - don't have that skill, and almost always handball, or dump kick, under pressure. Which most of time is fine, but can lead to some chaotic ball movement and turnovers.

But that's the problem manny. I doubt Powell-Pepper meant to hit Keane in the head. It was no doubt a an accident. But an accident that would not have occurred if the bump was a reportable offence.

Yeah, they might well do that. They certainly wont ban the bump any time soon. Still creates a grey zone of an AFL sanctioned action (the bump) being a causal factor in accidental head knocks when a player chooses to bump. I mean the alternative is 100% of the duty of care fall on the player electing to bump. Which won't fly in court. Leaving aside the legal stuff, i really don't think on bumping (except for those scenarios where a player braces for contact to protect themselves) would change the game that much. What would actually change? I know fans love a good hip and shoulder 'down the centre' that rattles the cages of players but its not as if the game would look much different without them - there's already relatively few anyway. The game is more ballistic and dangerous than in my supporting lifetime, so its not as if it suddenly wont be a tough, physicals game that test the courage of participants.

Yes, of course. I'm talking about outlawing the bump all together. The bump will ultimately be banned, if for no other reason than the legally ramifications of not dong so. Take that hit. If the bump was illegal (particularly in that scenario where tackling is an option and self protection is not a factor), like for instance the chicken wing tackle became after Judd was suspended for it, then sure SPP might have still chosen to bump to take out keane. But really that is pretty unlikely becuase he would have known he coukd get reported. And if the bump was illegal and he did bump him in the head he would get 7-8 week not 3 weeks (he might get 3 for a bump thta didn't hit him in the head). From an OH&S perspective, of being PROACTIVE not REACTIVE in terms of protecting players from unnecessary head trauma, a case could be made the AFL is legally exposed. Of course head knocks will always be a part of the game, accidents will always happen. But every person and their dog has identified the risks when a player chooses to bump not tackle, yet the employer (the AFL) has failed to implement the obvious risk mitigation strategy - ban the bump in such scenarios (ie player has option to tackle, but chooses to bump - because the rules allow him to do so). Every time a player is hit bumped to the head this season when tickling is an option, and gets head trauma (concussion) the AFL is legally exposed civilly (ie being sued by said player) Adn i would have thought also exposed to action by Workcover for not doing all it can to maximise the safety of working environment.