La Dee-vina Comedia

To me, the most interesting thing about this story is that Jake Niall has referred to the numbers allegedly in Misson's report. Assuming Niall's story is accurate, how did he get the figures? Has there been a leak? If so, for what reason? My gut feel is that the data has been deliberately leaked to take some pressure off someone. Is that someone the coach? Misson? And, if that is correct, why is there a need now to take pressure off someone? Is there some internal pressure on Goodwin? I find the questions the story raises far more interesting than the information itself, which probably doesn't tell us significantly much more than we already knew, or, at least, assumed.

I think I may have been misunderstood. I'm not saying our players don't know what Frosty is doing, that he isn't following team rules or that he's not playing well. All I was saying was that in a hypothetical situation IF our players didn't know what he was doing it would be a problem.

What if it's all a grand plan to ensure a soft draw in 2020?

A bigger concern is whether our players have a clue as to what Frosty is doing. It would be hard to know where to position yourself if you don't know what the player with ball is going to do with it.

I don't know how these stats are collected, but one significant difference in disposal stats between this year and every previous year is that Champion Data is now recording the kick in (or a hand pass) from a behind as a disposal which wan't the case previously. This will inflate the number of disposals for those who do the kick-ins, which would appear to be primarily Lewis and Salem. That's not to denigrate them - I'd rather the ball was in their hands when kicking in, but it might cause people to misunderstand the data.

Spelling is the easy bit. It's the pronunciation that's hard!

Surely running under the ball is the fault of the person kicking to him, isn't it?

Did he play wing against Richmond? He certainly played large periods of the game in the backline and spent some time as the starting 4 at centre bounces, but I don't recall him being used on the wing. Thankfully. My preferred spot for him right now is as a small forward with occasional runs on the ball.

I note that Goodwin's "buzzword" over the last few weeks has been "connection". He seems to be saying that he's happy with the effort but with so many new players and perhaps a new game plan forced by the 6-6-6 rule change, the players haven't yet worked out how to play together. If it's "connection" that Goodwin is looking for, then keeping the group as stable as possible would seem to make sense, making changes only when the injured best-22 become available. I can never work out whether Weideman is in the wrong spot or whether we deliver the ball poorly to him. Either way, I'd like to see him continue in the firsts where the problem - that lack of connection - can be resolved.

The rest of the year should be used to make decisions on fringe players and respectfully farewell two veterans. Now that the year is effectively over, we can actually afford to play Jones and Lewis. We should also start playing Petty, Keilty, Sparrow and the Wagners, etc so some get seniors experience and others get fully tested so we know who to persist with. We also need to decide where some players belong. Is Hunt a forward? Where should Lockhart play? Should Petracca spend more time in the middle...or none at all? Where is Fritsch's best position? etc

6. Brayshaw 5. Gawn 4. Salem 3. Melksham 2. Oliver 1. Hore Thought about Hibberd for the last vote but decided on Hore because of Hibberd's poorer disposal. (Which makes me wonder whether Hibberd is playing with a sore foot which is being injected before each game.)

I assume the extra game time wouldn't tire ANB as he's used to clocking up big miles and, instead, the club believed he needed more opportunity to get his touch back.

You just need some Vitamin AnB and to do your stretch exercises. Not sure what you should do with Marty Hore, though.

How many years do you think a coach has to serve before he's no longer a "rookie"? It can't just be that a coach is a "rookie coach" when he's at his first senior job. By that definition Alistair Clarkson and John Longmire would still be "rookies". I can accept Goodwin was a "rookie coach" in his first year as our Senior Coach and maybe even his second. But not now that he's into his third.

I will wonder on the train home what execrable pun the Herald Sun will use in its headline to describe the game.

Old Dee, you were responding to WJ's Gallipoli remembrance. Any chance the "similar result" you are expecting was meant from the perspective of the Axis powers? It's one of the advantages of being a Dees supporter for over 50 years. I don't get anywhere near as stressed about football matches as every non-Melbourne supporter I know (other than St Kilda supporters who are equally sanguine).

So, all we need is Weideman to kick 18 and the game will be ours. Under normal circumstances I would agree. But I wonder whether the short-turnaround time between the last game and this has changed things. While it wouldn't be my strategy, I wonder whether Stretch was always going to play one, miss one and then play again tonight? I could see some logic in it.

I've never heard this metaphor before. While I think I understand what you intend it to mean, for the life of me, I can't understand how this expression ever came to be in the first place. In fact, the more I think about it, the more it seems to express an anti-logical position. Nevertheless, as an expression, I love it.

I'm not sure Goodwin still qualifies as a "rookie coach". Not only is he onto his third season as senior coach, but he's also had many years as an assistant including a couple at Melbourne as part of a proper succession plan.

That's a fair comment. When he does get the ball he seems to use it well, except when he needs to kick long. But he doesn't get the ball enough and he doesn't seem to know how to defend. It's that last part of his game that needs serious improvement.

I'd suggest that we're getting better, not worse. The number of minutes per goal has lengthened in the last three streaks. The second of the 6 goals against Geelong took 17 minutes, or 1 goal per 2.8 minutes; the R3 8 goals were spread over at least 23 minutes or 1 goal per 2.9 minutes and the R5 8 goals were over an estimated 32 minutes, or 1 goal per 4 minutes. Just in case it's necessary, I point out that the above text is written in "tongue-in-cheek" font.

I'm not disagreeing with the general theme of your post, but didn't St Kilda only play one tall forward in Bruce? Membrey is 188 cm, although plays like a tall in that he's a marking forward. Have I missed someone?

I have a question. Is it possible to restrict Demonland to paid up members? I'm not a fan of freeloaders.

I wonder if it will be 6 or 7 using the "excuse" that the short break necessitated some of the changes. In some respects, I'd be disappointed if that was the reason given.

I'd suggest Salem. Not that his best play is any better, but his consistency is significantly improved. But that's only one player. I can't find another.