Cheesy D. Pun

Yep. Agreed, @binman. Great thread, by the way.

I'm not in love with the rule but players that encroach on the mark do need to be dealt with as they are impact the field of vision of the player and potentially stop the 45 degree kick. I'd like to see a bit of wiggle room in the rule, so that umpires can decide whether the infringing player is impacting the game. For example, if a player is about to kick 45 degrees right and a player encroaches from the left, let it go.

I reckon it's pretty hard to assess this, given the way teams setup in the modern game. If I was forced to make a call, I'd lean towards it being less about a drop off in skill level and more about rise in the difficulty level of kicks due to numbers around the ball. I do think there might be a tendency to over rate the specific skill of kicking for players of a bygone era. I'd love to be able to compare the amount of pressure placed on a midfielder today, compared with the 80s or 90s. That would probably answer the question, either way.

Really interesting thread. I may be in the minority but nothing irks me more than the seemingly recent phenomenon of wanting the game to be higher scoring. I feel footy is at it's best when it is heavily contested (not congested, there's a difference). Free-flowing, end-to-end, high-scoring encounters don't do much for me as the value and excitement of a goal diminishes. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to see a skill-less scrap but I want to see goals earned. Personally, I like today's game more than the 90s game.

Pickett needs help down there. I hope Spargo can contribute but he's an odd player. He is very good as a link player from half forward but don't know about his pressure. I think we need more than two though. Three good pressure forwards at a minimum. Ultimately, I 'd like to see a mix that has two talls (B.Brown + one of Weideman, Jackson or TMc), one medium (likely Fritsch) and three quality small forwards (Pickett + two of Spargo, Bedford, Chandler, Laurie, Bowey or Farmer). Some tough decisions ahead. I really hope our match committee is willing to make them. Three talls forward of the ball is too many, so at least one good player has to miss out. If we try appease everyone, it will be to our detriment.

Works in a practice match with the larger interchange, but that forward line is probably too tall. We're still missing the small forwards we need to consistently win games. I know we drafted that way but until they're up and running, I reckon we could be looking at more of the same. At least one of TMc, Jackson, Weideman or BBrown had to miss out on a weekly basis.

Even if he doesn't improve, he's still a very good, mature-bodied player. If all of our fringe players were of his quality, we'd be in a pretty good spot.

Really surprised at this observation. From the limited highlights reel, I thought his kicking looked a lot like Anthony Ingerson. Is his ball drop ok?

Is this all because someone mistook a 46 for a 48 or am I missing something?

Calm your farm, cool your jets etc. etc.

Being a footy supporter isn't a tipping contest. Being the first to criticise a first year player is not something to hang your hat on. The thing I look for when considering the views of others is how they sum up their view based on evidence. For the most part, having a strong view (either way) about our club is the first sign that the poster is unlikely to be considering the available evidence as there's usually not a lot of it. Here's an example of a poor post(in my view): Goodwin has lost the players. ...and here's a good one (regardless of whether I like the actual viewpoint): Goodwin may have lost the players. Our contested ball numbers and 1 percenters are down from the start of the year and the players' body language has been poor. It's not about being negative or positive but providing a balanced view based on evidence. Being hyper-critical or overly glowing in praise - without evidence - is to make the same mistake.

Designed by Mark Williams - I use one to teach my daughter. The smaller ones also have a flat spot on the end where your foot should make contact with the ball.

Not at all. Goody is under pressure but that one game isn't the be all and end all. Freo are a well-drilled side and we'll have to be good to beat them.

Quite possibly. I can't think of an alternative, unless we have a fairly bold omission from that back line.

I haven't seen anything, Turner. My info comes from the wonderful Demonland podcast and their recent interview with Jason Taylor. I don't recall him mentioning any intel on those guys but others may be able to chime in.

Back as well. Going to be very interesting to see how it all plays out.

Bowey is training with the backs which is interesting. I don't mind it but I think our main weaknesses lie forward of centre. I hope Laurie progresses quickly as I'd love to see one of our mid-sized forwards left out for another small.

Interesting that JT mentioned Bowey will play back.

I think even the most ardent Goodwin supporter would have to agree with the reality of your first paragraph. I would argue that defining how close a team is to a premiership is a mug's game. Geelong finished 10th in 2006, Richmond finished 13th in 2016. Small yet significant adjustments in personel, mindset and game plan can change a clubs fortunes very quickly. Firing a coach that is loved by the players comes with at least as much risk as potential reward. You have to be prepared to say we are rebuilding or at the very least, we are going to have to move some good players.

I agree with a fair portion of this but would just add that kicking doesn't happen in a vacuum. I don't subscribe to the notion that we are a side full of poor kicks. We have some very good kicks in our team. Decision-making, agility and confidence all play a part but the structure ahead of the ball is also a huge factor. If you have a fair idea of how things are going to look ahead of you, the likelihood of you making the kick is that much greater. We need a forward line. We've targeted players to help fix this issue and hopefully we see some improvement in 2021. You often hear commentary around the need for players to lower their eyes but that's only useful if the forward setup is working. Unless its a very clear hit up kick, those short kicks inside 50 are a gift to the opposition, feeding their ability to launch from the back.

So, after four seasons, you would have removed Hardwick? What factors other than results can we look to, so that we make sure we're not jumping at shadows? It's true that the head coach has a high level of responsibility but he's not the only influence on results. At risk of overdoing the Richmond comparison, where does the credit for their success lie? If I had to give a percentage, I'd say that less than 50% belongs to the coach. I'm not really here to defend Goodwin, but I do question the idea that he is an 'awful' coach (or a great one for that matter) based on the information presented. Those that want Yze as senior coach equally seem to be making a blind assertion about his ability. On CV alone, you'd take Neeld over Yze at the same point in their careers which is evidence that being sure about a coaches ability without any inside knowledge, is ludicrous. There are some pretty compelling precedence (Geelong and Richmond come to mind) for holding our nerve. Our constant and well demonstrated impatience as a football club could be our greatest weakness.

Fair enough. Outside of results, I'm really not sure how people here judge the coaches without seeing what happens on a day to day basis. If results are the main component then Hardwick spent seven years as one of the worst coaches in the game. The only thing I see with Goodwin is a coach that the players love and play for. That's enough to build around from my perspective.

Can't wait for everything to come together next year so that everyone here can say it was all the work of Williams and Yze. Goody is on a hiding to nothing.

Two small forwards! Yes! I pretty much won't need to post anything on this forum again.

I reckon this is a self perpetuated myth. He acts like he whipped up Dusty out of a couple of planks of wood in the back shed. My read on this is that Williams played a welfare role in keeping Dusty on the rails. Inferring that he somehow orchestrated three Richmond premierships from a player development role is frankly ludicrous and completely ignores the work of so many people across the organisation.