binman

Except he sounded more grumpy than laconic. Reads laconic, didn't sound it.

I'm glad we didn't. What help is that sort of game for development and/or plsyers pushing their case for senior selection

Sharing forward duties with brodie for 2 or 3 games wont do much harm to the airplane's progress.

You'd have to think that of the players on the extended bench melk rivers and jj are locks. And surely chandler comes in for spargs. Smith as sub Hibbo and brodie cool their jets at cold Coburg.

That's not true. He played the dees at least twice when he played for the roos.

It's funny you should say that. I was just thinking today I might have to rethink that. Like Grumpy goody.

PETTY'S BACK

That could be an animation of goody in today's presser. He said brodie would be playing VFL. I might go watch him as Coburg is not as far as old Casey town

Go redlegs

Petty (injured) and spargo (ommited) out .

That's the right perspective. It really shouldn't bother me the lack of respect we received. After all I should be inured to it having posted on dl for so long. But if i was honest, it really does bother. I spent my entire adolescence, and much of my adult life passionately supporting a team that, forget respected, has been openly ridiculed. And i'm jack of it. I have a theory. Footy media is dominated by ex footballers who played in the 80s and 90s. Lyon, Russell, Dunstall, Brereton, ling, Taylor, King, Montagna etc etc. A common thread is the teams they played for did not respect the dees (with the obvious exception of Lyon- who I maintain has spent way more time running us down than he ever has pumping us up). I watched a clip of the last two mins of the game ad called by the mmm team. I'll find it and put here. It is shot of inside their box. The next box over is the sen box. Derwayne Russell is in the box, I assume calling the game. He looks like he is at a funeral foe the whole 2 mins. And doesn't appear to register an emotion hen jakey body marked and then goaled. No doubt I'm reading too much into it, but for me it summed up the antipathy the footy media has towards us.

All you need to know about the state of football journalism #2 So i decided to listen to the SEN Sanderson strategy slot on catch up. First topic for discussion - Brodie Grundy. Whateley played goodies answer to the the first question of the presser, which is about Grundy. Goody notes the hysteria (his word) in the media and that Brodie will be back. Chief hysteric, Whateley, doesn't bother defending the completely reasonable charge of hysteria. And Sanderson basically disregards what he has just heard from the lips of Goody and says Grundy unlikely to return to the ones this season. I mean the senior coach had just said he will be back for pete's sake. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say at least something like, well Goody was adamant he would be back, but i have my doubts? 5 more mins wasted on rubbish - remembering this is a segment supposedly about strategy. They eventually get to the game and it is all about the Lions. Sanderson's take is they got on top becuase they beat us in the contest and clearances. That's it. That's where the analysis largely ends. And then goes on to say how good he thinks the Lions are and that they a real 'smokey' to win the flag (some smokey - they are third fav) No respect for the dees effort to come back from 5 goals to win - the lions went too defensive apparently. No talk about what we did to wrest momentum back - other than we won contested ball. Fair dinkum, this is supposed to pass as analysis?

Not sure. I do know the revolution won't be. (Note: jokes aside, all vfl games streamed on afl.com)

That presser says all you need to know about the state of football journalism A nine minute presser. Five minutes of which involved questions about Grundy. That despite Goody being crytal clear about the situation in answering the very first question. And despite Goody addressing some of the stupid media talking points, they continued to ask stupid question (the very first question, which was about Grundy, was a good question - the rest were a joke as Goody had already answered them). Goody was finally asked a football question - about the lions second and third quarters. A vague question got a vague response. What i would have loved to hear being asked was what what actually happened - what did the Lions do differently, what did the dees do not so well.

That's a good question and really interesting observation - one i hadn't considered. Well not in terms of us having more of the ball decreasing our chances of accruing pressure points. I don't know for certain, but ,my assumption is pressure points can only be accrued by the team without the ball in hand and/or when the ball is in dispute ie neither team has the ball in hand. So logic suggests you are onto something ie if one team dominates possession the other team has more opportunities to accrue pressure points. Somewhat surprisingly, in the final quarter possession % differential was only 5% (42 - 37, with i presume the ball in dispute 21% of the time) - the diff in pressure was aprox 10% in the last (174-192). By the by the numbers for the last 10 minutes of the game are fascinating - 24% for the dees and only 13% for the lioins. Show our domination in that period. But i assume it also means the ball was in dispute for 63% of the time. That is a lot of contests and contested footy - which is exactly what we love; the dees DNA. As goody loves to say we got the game looking like a Melbourne game - get it forward and back the players in to win the next contest. But it also shows the Lions kept scrapping and running hard, otherwise the numbers would have looked more like the tola game time in possession stats.

A very good point. Their passing in that period was surgical. And i'd add that some of their kicking for goal in that period was also brilliant. They go 50 50 for accuracy in that period and they don't look nearly as dominant. The same is true for the first 20 minutes of the game with our crazy good accuracy, and to a lesser extent in the last with Melk's two beautiful shots at goal - particularly the one from the boundary which is easily forgotten given his match winner. On the boundary, on his non preferred leg and around the body from 40 metres. That was pure skill. The game was such a good example of the difference accuracy makes and how important it is to take chances. There was some brilliant kicking for goal from both teams: Tracc's bomb from outside 50 Bailey's set shot from an angle from the 50 metre arc BB's set shot from outside 50 Woey and Ashcroft's goals from almost the same spot in the pocket at the Punt road end Fletcher's beautiful goal on the run after outpointing Hunter in the air Daniher's set shot goal from near the boundary at the end of the first q Kozzie's set shot from a similar spot at the opposite end of the ground in the first Gawn' clutch set shot from 40 Tracc's clutch bannana (after a brilliant handball from kickett) soon after Viney's clutch snap under immense pressure on his non dominant foot And of course Melk's two match winners. Firsts class football. It's worth noting in that context that we had one more scoring in the Pies game than we did Friday night - and scored 34 points less because of our inaccuracy.

Damn - we only needed 747 more steps to make it a nice round 20, 000 step podcast. I blame myself - i forgot to highlight Whatley's ridiculous call as the siren went when he said with great fervor - "Melbourne rescue their season'. Sheesh. And what about the 'how did the Lions lose that game" narrative the media are pushing. Coz the dees didn't have anything to do with it did they! If it was the Pies reeling in 5 goal deficit it would have all been Daicos this, Pies that, never count them out this, have my baby Nick that blah blah blah.

Calm down? A bit of poetic licence from me. Chill bro Mono. For what it's worth I expect him to be picked this week and to play.

As a tall defender?

Haven't watched the presser - but it sounds more like grumpy goody than laconic goody. I like grumpy goody.

The other complicating factor for tomo next year is disco Turner, who may well be ahead of tomo too.

I have a different take. Our effort was first class the whole game. I don't think our work rate dropped much, if at all. Def a four quarter effort. They are very good side, who also worked hard all game, and there is no chance we would have won that game if we only showed up for only half a game. And really the game started turning our way half way thru the third. I don't think we are quite there yet with our collective running ability cover the ground quickly. Which impacts ability to get back and also cover off those short leads. But we are def much closer to overall optimal fitness and I think have a fitness edge over tge lions. And used that edge to grind them into the ground And as their energy fell away they had to abandon the short kicks because it takes a huge amount of energy for mutiple leads, most unrewarded that method requires. We were doing something similar in the first few games.

That is fascinating observation about the correlation between oppo mark differential and score. One of the questions for the podcast is what happened in the second and third quarter in terms of the lions getting on top. I watched the replay with that question in mind, and part of my answer was that the Lions really stretched the G and used the switch more than in any game since i could recall since the first half of 2022 when teams were desperately looking for ways to get past our defence the first Port game being the best example. Teams gave up on that model because it became very clear that going fast was the only way to consistently trouble our defence because it makes it hard for it to get set. Credit to McRae because he obviously gerried to this before the rest of the comp and made fast ball movement the foundation of their method. But Brisbane used a variation of the slow ball movement and keepings off method teams use in the 2022. They switched and chipped it around - which of course involves lots of uncontested marks. But they didn't go overboard on that and combined it with incisive 20 -30 metre kicks going forward to lead up players. Again lots of uncontested marks. And we seemed to allow many of these kicks - partic the switch kicks (which we always do). Our defence was set deeper than against the Pies, in part becuase Danhiher dragged May back to goal. And unlike against the Blues and Pies we didn't seem to look create density and congestion, and didn't apply much frontal pressure, or close down space. So there was a lot of space - which the Lions took advantage of with lots of sharp passes. My feeling is part of the strategy was to separate our key defenders to isolate May and Lever one out (because they are both vulnerable one on one i reckon, partic lever) and limit the ability of lever, may and Petty to intercept mark - which is key driver of our scoring. The strategy worked really well, as not only did it blunt May, Lever and petty and give their tall forwards good one on one looks, they were able to tic tac over our zone wit kicks and create overlap that way. The goal Ashcroft kick was the perfect example of what i mean. I';; check the stats for our previous three games against the Lions, but my gut feel is their uncontested marks numbers would have bene high in those games too - and its worth noting they are one of the few teams who have been able to regularly open us up. Another interesting part of all that using uncontested marks is clearly as they they have used specifically for the dees. It is it likely the Pies would try and follow suit? I din think so becuase every person and their dog have them on a pedestal so their conceit would be they don't need to try such a strategy to beat us.

Yep. So beautifully symmetrical

Yes, you can can just scan in. But you can only sit in in general admission area. But there is heaps of them, and there wont be more than 30k there so finding a decent GA seat won't be hard