nutbean

I asked this question a few weeks ago - do coaches coach drawing high tackles - and it appears my question has been answered. My problem is that there has been such a push to protect the head at all costs and coaches are now coaching a technique that makes head more vulnerable to contact ???

and living with Elvis ?

He is our best defender for the simple reason that he doesn't really have a weakness in his game. He has safe hands marking, his disposal is neat, he makes good decisions, he know when to stick to his man and knows when to peel off or go third up and he now has some nice attacking qualities to his game ( which was missing in the early days as a defender) The likes of TMac, Dunn, Garland, Hunt, Wagner, Salem all have aspects of their game that are superior to Jetta. The difference is that all the named have weaknesses or inconsistencies to their games that Jetta doesn't have. I would loved him to have just a tad more straight line leg speed - that would have put into the absolute top bracket in the AFL IMO.

I just checked the forecast for the game - 23 degrees and 33% humidity

Im impressed that at 194cm he doesnt get smashed in ruck contests - but he doesn't - now he doesn't win too many and his taps to advantage are negligable but his job is to give Gawn a rest and not have us pulverised in the ruck when Gawn isn't rucking - he plays that role well. What he needs to do is more when he is not rucking - he has games when he does and...... he has games when he doesn't

They really don't give a rats these days about position placements when naming a team - it means nothing . I get that but at least make some sort of effort - Lions have named Lewis Taylor as their Centre Half Forward. He stands a whooping 173 cm tall. I always saw Lewie as the logical replacement for Jonno Brown at centre half forward.

He was ok. I think the days of accepting ok are over. Salem has been ok this year too.

You should be a moderator then.....

My point is you are overstating the extent of his howlers - i rewatched last night - 3 kicks he wish he could take again - that's 88% efficiency and the running himself into trouble was absent this week. His decision making this week was good and you are right - it can be heart in the mouth when he gets and that is because it does look horrible but you look at the times he has the ball and he runs into to trouble or he turns it over - it is overstated. It just looks horrible when he does it. I think part of his problem is that he looks so cumbersome it exacerbates the problem. I love Jack Viney but gee wizz can he can turn the ball over - but absolutely no mention is made of it ( except rjay pointed it out this week). Our skipper this year has been turning it over a lot more than his last two years - no mention has been made of it. Your blanket statement that he can't kick at AFL is not supported by the facts. No good one on one is not supported by the facts. He turns it over too much - yes but if you want to label that he can't kick/dispose at AFL standard then either can Jones, Tyson or Viney ( and I am talking about their disposal under little pressure - not in the heat of the contest). He gets beaten one on one on occasions yes - he is not as good body on body as others but is a better intercept mark than most. But to suggest that he is no good would imply he gets beaten most times one on one and that is not the case. I agree with you on his weaknesses you have rightly pointed out - I disagree with how you overstate it - if his kicking was below AFL standard and no good one on one - he wouldn't get a game. He is the first picked because what he brings to the table vastly outweighs his deficiencies - however his deficiencies, unless corrected will stop him reaching the elite level. (not sure we are going to agree on this so i will leave - we both agree on the problems - we just differ on the extent of it)

The game at Etihad was the single most putrid game of football I have ever seen. I was going for the "Damien Hardwick" clause at half time and trying to get the game called off.

The weakness in your argument is that Tmac is not the weakest link. He absolutely can turn it over - he absolutely can make the wrong decisions and that is what is stopping him going to the next level. But he intercept marks and attacks. You absolutely suggest that they don't cover him but i don't see that. When he goes to the back pocket no one covers him or Vince or Jetta or whoever else goes to the pocket as that is how defensive zones are set - teams regularly give up the back pocket as suggested by another poster. However his biggest strength is he is willing to run and attack. Yes - he turns it over on occasions and most of the time he doesn't. Watching the replay again - two of Redpaths marks Tmac actually stayed down and let Gawn spoil which he did not do successfully - another of his marks was against Jetta. Don't misunderstand me, Tmac frustrates the hell out of me because he when he turns the ball over it can be under little pressure and miss the target by a mile. But when he keeps it simple he is valuable as attested to by Demonlanders having Tmac in the top 5 in 4 games so far this season. (some stats that do matter - second most marks behind Hogan, relatively low clanger count and highest 1% count in the team by a lot - his "horrible" is overstated because when he does do something "horrible" it looks truly horrible)

You will create a game with players not willing to pick up the ball and teams full of lurkers - players who will just wait for the opposition to pick up the ball so they can tackle.

PB may have actually gone out on a whim.

I has stated elsewhere that D/E is a fluff stat. Tmac's D/E is always going to look better as he does drop right back and is involved in those easy cheap switch kicks back across the field deep in defense whilst the opposition is zoning off. Vince and to a lesser extent Salem get way more possession with heat on so their D/E will be down. Where you are 100% right (IMO) is "how bad his poor disposals are which makes it seem much worse, ie straight to an opposition player". But I would suggest that even on his really bad days it may happen 3-4 times maximum. Yes - it looks terrible and can even be a momentum killer but the suggestion that " he is more than likely to turn it over or make the wrong decision" is absolute nonsense. Having said that - it is frustrating to watch and you want it out of his game.

Max had his worst game of the year on Sunday. He was ineffectual - although we did win the taps 50/42. We were just down down in clearances 39/35 but won centre clearances 12/11 and lost stoppages 28/23 - hardly a belting. Our midfield was not one dimensional on Sunday - what is was ( compared to the Bullies) is sloppy. The bulldogs were much cleaner than us - we fumbled way more than they did putting pressure on ourselves. Also throws or no throws, the bulldogs mids just disposed better than we did. Our midfield went up against the number one clearance team in the comp and was not pulverised although Maxy was very ordinary. If Maxy goes down in screaming heap we replace him with someone who is nowhere as good as he is and that will probably mean that our midfield output will diminish - that is nothing to do with not having a plan B - that is recognition that we don't have a ruckman kicking around doing nothing that is anywhere near as good as Gawn. (for the record - West Coasts mids would lose supply if NicNat went down Lycett had to ruck full time and the Swans weren't as potent as the year before when they lost buddy )

This is such a nonsense. I am big critic of some of Tom's decision making and very iffy disposal but let's get it into context. Firstly, I find him very frustrating as the brain fades are horrible and he does make poor decisions and dispose poorly at times. Some perspective please - he turned it over a few times on Sunday - he kicked out from fullback straight to opposition ( why on earth he took a kick out is beyond me). He also had 25 disposals of which you could count 5 that were horrible and that is way too many but to suggest that "he is more than likely to turn it over or make the wrong decision" is absolute nonsense. Now if you asked if i preferred that Tom give the easy dish off to Salem,Vince or Jetta who rarely if ever dispose poorly then the answer is a resounding yes but lets get his disposal into some sort of context.

I thought it was a perfectly weighted pass straight into the hands of Trengove who was positioning himself at the top of the goal square.

My suggestion is to do what I do - I read the more bizarre posts to my lovely lady who knows nothing about football - she loves now Demonland. She thinks Demonland is like your crazy old uncle - farts at the dinner table, fly always undone and refers to anyone not born in this country as #$#%$$ or $$##%$$^ or worse still @!#@@#$%. ( when I say i read her the more bizarre posts - that is about 1 in every 3).

The same umpire usually interprets it the same way - it usually the 3 different umpires have different interpretations It makes sense - we talk about how about it is for a team to gel together and the more they play together the more cohesive they get - the same must surely apply to umpires - An umpire who constantly sees his cohort giving leniency or no leniency, giving an extra second to dispose or being quick on the whistle can then adjust to umpire the same way. The more time they spend umpiring together, you would think, the better the consistency.

I think that Spencer is miles behind Dawes and Pedersen - but you are right in that it might make other teams play another very tall to combat him. I think we can both agree that none of the suggestions are ideal.

So ManDee what did you glean from the stats ? My take is that Spencer has one string to his bow - he is tap ruckman. Doesn't take nearly enough marks or kick goals or get disposals Vickery hits the scoreboard more than any of the players listed and that is why if you need a second string behind Gawn you want someone who can have some value when Gawn is rucking. To me if Gawn is rucking then Spencer sits on the pine. He doesn't mark and he doesn't kick goals. Dawes is hard to gauge as his body fails him but if he got to his 2010 form, he could pinch hit in the ruck. If Pedo hit the scoreboard as frequently as Vickery he would be the answer IMO.

I'm of a different mind. Spencer has not shown enough for mine. He has had one good game against Geelong and a couple of other serviceable games. I compare Spencer's best and Pedo's best. Pedo never wins the ruck but to mind we have not been killed when he is rucking. That is more than compensated for when he has his serviceable games and he takes a few marks and kicks a few goals. Spencer has not dominated when he is the ruck and besides the Geelong game hasn't offered anything other than the centre bounce. (I won't discuss Frost as he has been a fail as a forward/ruck and Dawes just cannot get himself fit) Please note that I have no love for Tyrone Vickery but we need someone that has had his productivity. Vickery - 14 goals 11 pts = 25 scores. 30 marks and 25 hit outs - 70 disposals Pedersen - 5 goals 5 pts = 10 scores. 30 marks and 30 hit outs - 103 disposals So Vickery hits the scoreboard way more from way less disposals and has about the same amount of hitouts. It tells me that neither Spencer or Pedo are the answer. ( i would use Spencer as first ruck if Gawn goes down)

I think it can be switched on and switched off. If Gawn is dominating then I think it is an excellent strategy. When Gawn is resting and Pedo is rucking - you would go back to a more traditional structure - I will watch carefully to see what they do on the weekend when Gawn isn't in the centre square for a bounce. (further to this - a lot of strategies are not locked in for an entire game - for example Watts and Hogan both rotate playing further up the ground however when Hogan is on fire, as he was against the Saints they played him deep and left him deep)

I think they are fairly forthcoming on longer term injuries or injuries that are known to all - but I am sure they will keep opposition clubs (us) guessing on an unannounced injury that may keep someone out on the weekend to upset the oppositions planning. For example - If Gawn was 50/50 not to play on the weekend and I would expect Spencil to be emergency and a certain amount of subterfuge. However, the likes of Trengove, AVDB, H, Brayshaw - I expect they are telling us what they know.

I'll give it one more go - you intimated that Roos was extra dirty on Petracca due to him being a key component to this "diamond defense"and his absence hurting this structure The diamond defense relies on Gawn winning the tap to the inside mids and the HBF's pushing hard into the square to give us more numbers around the clearance. Petracca this year was always going to be a half forward with a run or two into the centre square - this is exactly what has transpired. Every player is important to a game plan but as to key components to the diamond strategy. Let's not overstate players importance who are not crucial to this strategy. Number one is Gawn - it is essential he gets the tap to advantage or at worst halves the contest. Number two - the inside mids - that would be Viney, Jones and Tyson (Oliver now being the addition to this trio with his great early form) must feed off Gawns tapwork or at worst not let the opposition mids clear the ball. Number three - the hbf's - Hunt, Wagner, Salem, Jetta, "H", ( and Vince when he plays there) - push up hard to outnumber opposition at the contest. Number four - the four defenders left - positioning is important for when the ball comes back in to minimise the damage. So your original assertion ( read carefully what you wrote) No wonder Roosy tore strips off Petracca over Summer. A fit and firing Trac would have helped get this Zone cement itself. Fcuking Slam Dunks. What an absolute Clown to be doing that. He must have been told he was a ley ingredient He would not have been told he is key ingredient to the diamond defense because plainly he is not. ( he would have had strips torn off him as a player of his potential quality is needed in the team ) ( actually there is only one key ingredient to the diamond defense and that is Gawn - if we did not have the best centre clearance ruckman in the league the aggressive nature of this strategy would probably not be considered - interestingly both Jones and Tyson have now both confirmed that this diamond defense is only "a few weeks old" - that would be because it has been borne out of Gawn's amazing centre clearance work - whilst it was hoped that Gawn would go to the next level his rise has been outstanding - another reason why Petracca would not have been told he is "key ingredient" )