nutbean

Agree. If you are pressuring hard enough to execute quite a few smothers it not only impacts that play but has the opposition rushing their next disposals because "the opposition are on, they are throwing themselves across our boots - better dispose a bit quicker"

With no real preseason I still don't think that Riley is match hardened. I would not sub him - he needs more time playing time not less - so either play him ( not sub) or drop him.

Its not a coincidence. Now Essendon did miss some gimme's but I mentioned this a couple of weeks ago and it still holds true. Taking the Eagles game out of the equation, there hasn't been too many easy hit up leads into our defensive 50. Roos has concentrated on two defensive aspects - firstly - our mids are pressuring the opposition ball carriers going into their forward line so there is not a great deal of unpressured entries. Secondly - we are now leaving very little space inside the corridor. I know that modern football does hug the boundary but so many opposition shots are coming in from 45 degrees or worse. Roos has mentioned that our team is making opposition take shots from difficult positions.

not quite - but I'm loving the win

Isn't it fascinating to see a Roos plan come to fruition so quickly. Step one - do nothing more than shut down your opponent - check Step two - because you can jump, If you think you need to go up and spoil a contest - then do it - check Step three - now your confidence is up - if we get the ball, provide an option and become offensive - check

If you want to see ugly vision ( which I won't post) - see the vision of him breaking his leg last year. Happy just to see him get through this year - a good preseason under his belt and watch him fly next year,

I looked at the stats this morning and wasn't surprised that we were beaten in every key indicator (except marks). I can see the possession count per quarter and there is no surprise that we won the second half. It is also no surprise that we lost all indicators for the entire match as we were very ordinary in first half - I would be very interested to see all the stats ( tackles, contested possessions, inside 50's) from the 10 minute mark of the 3rd quarter to the end of the game. I suspect we would have been ahead in all of them. My point is that leading possessions ( especially contested), tackles, marks etc means little unless you take advantage of the supremacy by putting it on the scoreboard. What we did successfully is take advantage of leading the stats in that last part of the game - we took advantage by kicking goals. For the first 2 and half quarters - Essendon didn't.

The crunching tackle in the last wasnt too bad either.

Dunn's transformation is unbelievable. Cudo's to Daniel Cross. In the dying minutes , Blitzed for pace by zaharakis that cost two goals. Like the professional he is , a minute later calmy waltzed into the forward line and put the ball on salems chest.

As an aside. Goddard and Chapman must be hoping for infractions and suspensions - Essendon still has to pay 95% of the cap - to two players only !!!!!! Now that's a salary !

Without knowing what the players were told - how much they knew - I do feel for the players. I find it too convenient that the club stood up in front of the players and said you are going to take a new drug called "yadda yadda" and all the players had to do is punch it into a smartphone and get the all clear or dont take - and 95% of them didnt do this. I think the players were told that this drug is approved and I think that will come out when the players sue the life out of the club for abusing their duty of care.

There are supplements and programs to bulk you up that are not illegal. If a small amount of research could have easily given the information then why are Essendon still claiming what was given to the players was not illegal ???? The Club certainly may have known what was going on - I am not so sure that the players were not duped.

I have a few questions to you as you seem to be well in advance of what is known - you know the players weren't tricked ? - you know that the players were told that they taking something illegal - because if the club said this is all above board - no problem - then yes - they were tricked - you know that the players were told exactly what they were taking ? there seems to be some confusion as the club is still suggesting that they took nothing illegal I understand if one player is asked to take something - one on one with a doctor - you would check - but this was a list wide program - it is not unreasonable if the club is asking the whole list to go on the program that they would have done their due diligence.

And yet even the most scathing articles ( look at Caro's) - suggests that "the club has failed the players."

If the coach pressured - " don't ask questions - just take it " then I have zero sympathy for the players. I know it may be herd mentality ( wow - what a horrific pun) but as i said above, logically - with the entire list get the jabs, as an individual player knowing the penalties, my first thought would be that my club knows what it is doing.

Just to reply. Not sure about your analogies at all. Beating your wife - the individual has the knowledge that they are doing something that is blatantly wrong ? As to speeding - the individual has the knowledge that they are doing something that is blatantly wrong ? And I empathise with you situation but in your defense would you say were a liar or a cheat or just plain foolish that you didn't question. Quoting McDevitt - "If an athlete can demonstrate, for example, that they didn't know what they were receiving was in fact a performance-enhancing substance which was prohibited, then they may be able to claim no significant fault - which could lead to a reduction of up to 50 per cent in the penalty that could be imposed," he said. I am suggesting that they players were naive and foolish not to question. Lets take this argument to its logical end - When the players saw the other 40 odd players on the list all being signed up in the same program would the thought not go through the individual players mind - "Surely my club can't be that stupid, with all the penalties that can be handed down, to give prohibited substances to the entire list ??" Now the answer in hindsight is yes - the club could be that stupid.

Not if the hater destroys the hated first.

And yet to our knowledge - that didn't happen. Can I ask you M, do you believe that the players knew they were doing wrong and turned a blind eye thinking they would never get caught or do you believe they were naive, negligent and just plain foolish to not ask questions.

Very flawed logic I'll ask you a question - you are suggesting the back flankers run off Gawn at every opportunity. The question is not why back flankers are running off him but where the hell are our forward flankers !! He is 18 foot tall for gods sake - of course a back flanker is going to run off him. If his direct opponent who should be in the 195cm range and 100 kilo runs off him and he cant apply any pressure to him then we should start to worry . The players that ran away from him last week were smaller opposition collecting the spillage from his marking contests not his direct opponents. I think we lacked for a crumber last week to pick up the ball from spillages. My concern ( and temporary concern because i think it will improve) is he is not holding enough marks that he clearly gets his hands to first. He has fairly ordinary posture in that he doesn't stand tall and take advantage of his massive height like Sandilands does. He is 22 which in ruckman terms is still very young.

I get all that but you have an expectation that your own club is not going to screw you over. I might be wrong but I don't believe the players knew that they were taking prohibited substances - I believe, according to the code, that they were negligent in not being vigilant in finding out exactly what they were taking. I get that it is the players responsibility to know exactly what is being administered and that is why they will be punished. But as stated above,when the entire playing list is going through the program I'm sure that the players ( incorrectly) assumed that the club was not administering anything wrong. Because this is the first of it's kind ( mass doping) in the AFL I will not have any sympathy for the next caught as there is a valuable lesson for the players - do not trust anyone including your own club and club doctors.

I don't hate Sylvia. But my disappointment is that his talent overpromised and his performances underdelivered (I only have irrational dislike of footballers who did the dirty - Scully for one. I dislike him, not because he took the money but he was so blatantly dishonest.)

There is no doubt in anyones mind that this is going to be an ugly protracted legal battle. The advice to him would be simple - say and do nothing.

A Jamar aside. Last week was the first week since he has been back that I noticed outside his ruckwork he made a big effort to be involved which has been my knock on him since his AA days. Yes ..we need a good tap ruckman.. but we need him to be more than that. We need him to take a few contested marks but also some hit up leads and provide another option. He started to do more of this last week. Pleasing to see.

The most disappointing footballer I have seen during my time supporting. Many disagree but I believe he had the talent to be anything...alas he had an attitude that made him amount to nothing.

Yet McKenzie is named for North Ballarat so maybe Jordie is trying to keep his options open for the weekend.