Macca

Sorry, haven't got the time I use the DE as a guide, as that is the best way to view it I agree that the efficiency gradings are questionable but it's like wiki, it doesn't have to be entirely accurate We live in a close enough it's good enough world so I allow players, umpires and even you to make errors I'd rather stick up for my own players So let's agree to disagree but I won't be changing my view on Brayshaw in a hurry. He's a valuable asset on a long term deal For you to put him in the same category with Harmes & Jordon is laughable. Neither of those 2 can get a regular game

He's got a fundamental role in the team as he is easily our best utility. Can play a number of roles even at half forward if required He's Mr Versatlity who once again had 20 efficient disposals yesterday He'd be a coach's dream

I disagree on Brayshaw I see him as one of the first picked and I don't play favourites (nor do I ever have anyone in the gun) After a couple of errors early Brayshaw's disposal levels (in traffic) was impeccable He got it 24 times too so at 83% DE that means he was only inneficient 4 times That's elite cinsidering he was in traffic a lot of the time Petracca went at 50% out of traffic So who used the ball better overall out of those 2? And where's the critical analysis of Petracca? To the eye Tomlinson used the ball well with his 15 possesions ... DE rating of 93% so there's the confirmation To be fair, you have to be fair so no cherry picking AF Highlighting mistakes is one thing but not acknowledging good play is disingenuous

By who? Discredited by those who think that a 70% DE is a fail? 70% is actually decent especially for those in traffic Used properly it's a good stat After a couple of early errors Brayshaw was impeccable with his ball use Those who can't see that are not watching the game closely enough And Brayshaw's excellent ball use is never highlighted, only his errors

Brayshaw is miles ahead of Harmes & Jordon. There's a huge gap lf we were point out all the errors made by all our players, the argument would make more sense Not running hard to create a contest is one such error that happens countless times during a game by many of our players But Brayshaw's biggest asset is he continually gets to contests ... and he does that better than many of our players His actual disposal numbers are quite high considering his role as a trouble shooter/utility And his DE% sitting above 80 all season is fantastic He is going to surprise many here with his B & F finish. He's played well season but his errors are the only thing talked about Petracca went at 50% DE yesterday ... so half of his possessions were inefficient (half) ... but to me that's not an issue either The consistent & fair argument would be to point out all the errors made by all our players And that includes not getting to enough contests, 2nd to the ball, not playing in front, not spoiling well, not running to position etc etc. In 4 games this season we failed in most of those areas But Brayshaw does all of the above well with the odd errant kick thrown in

ANB had a fine game. Made a couple of errors but so did every player on the field

I'm wondering why they don't single out every single player? Because all our players make errors as does every player in the league I reckon it's just pure scapegoating and those needing something to moan about Some can only be happy when they're whinging. Those types would clear a room in 5 minutes

If we were to lambast all of our players who make errors and as a consequence want them replaced, just about the whole team would need to be replaced Backmen are going to get outmarked, forwards are going to drop marks, players give away free kicks, we're going to get beaten to the ball at times etc etc That's the sport. So from an overall perspective, if the team makes less errors than the opposition, we'll probably win That was yesterday's game ... in the end, Collingwood made more errors than what we did due the same players who made errors for us applying great pressure And sometimes applying great pressure might mean that 4/5ths of your disposals hit a target (as it did with Brayshaw 83% DE, Salem 83%, Rivers 78%, Tomlinson 93%, May 78% etc etc) In my view 65% - 70% DE is quite reasonable. Anything above that is very good to excellent

Brayshaw will not be going anywhere As you said, as a pure utility he is extremely valuable. Can play in a variety of positions His knockers are clueless and they focus on a couple of errors way too much. Theirs is unintelligent analysis He'd be close to top 5 in our B & F ... even in the Demonland award he's sitting 5th and that's with many of the easily influenced not game enough to award him votes The smart thinkers know his value

Hunter was another who excelled after turning the ball over early. He is often required to kick long down the line (or slightly inboard) so if that kick is to a contest, it's up to the recipient to fight hard for possession. Hunter's done his bit Never gave up and had 28 disposals in the end. One of our best (along with Brayshaw) So it's the sum of all the parts Kicking for goal was poor today but we've been excellent in that area for most of the season So a bit of simulated goal kicking practice to get back on track and away we go

Brayshaw doesn't get enough credit for all the terrific work that he does. Often handballing off to a player in a better position. Deft touches on a constant basis. Competes hard and always puts his body on the line. Excellent spoiler as well His number of errors are often greatly exaggerated and his good work is played down and often ignored 24 touches at 83% Petracca went at 50% but there's no thought of throwing him down to the 2nds Viney went at 68% ... that means that a 3rd of his disposals were not effective Yet he was B.O.G So he (Brayshaw) had a great deal more than a couple of important clearances. That evaluation is utter nonsense He was fantastic after a dodgy first 15 minutes But all our players can turn the ball over such is the nature of the sport. It lends itself to forced errors and unforced errors At ground level (as opposed to up in the stands) it's very difficult to hit targets at distance. So players have to take risks delivering into crowded areas when kicking over 30 metres We need to allow players to make a few mistakes. You want perfection, you're watching the wrong sport The game is full of errors. And excellent disposals. You get both, that's the sport Collingwood made a stack of errors today and that was uncharacteristic ... but they all just didn't lose their skill levels overnight! We pressured them into errors. Again, that's the sport Take the good with the bad I say It would be different if we were talking about a player with low possession numbers making errors half the time That's a whole other argument

I see your point and the win today was the most satisfying since the '21 GF I just reckon they'll be better next time ... and we can be better too, more so in front of goal and with the inclusion of at least Oliver Petty will get back in but Smithy played quite well today and big Tomlinson was good too (especially in the last quarter) Bowey yes but someone has to make way ... Brayshaw, Rivers & McVee all gave us good drive from the half-back line Competition for spots heats up from here on in. Players will be well rested with 2 x 10 days breaks coming up Next assignment the Cats. Nothing can be done now but at least 60k - 70k would fill the MCG for that encounter Such a waste on a Thursday night at a construction site. Ridiculous in fact And here we are thinking that the AFL wants to maximise crowds???

We can't bank on any opposition being accurate or innacurate Take care of our own. Today our kicking in front of goal and our sets shots was below par You cannot do that in a final, not that that is likely but today was not the first time we've had the yips in front of goal I compare it to the batting collapse in cricket ... one follows the other, rinse & repeat. Many of the shots were to an open goal (not much of an angle) Don't get me wrong, we were by far the better team in nearly all aspects but our kicking for goal very nearly cost us the win Still, not nearly as bad as the Bombers in the '48 GF ... 7.27 to 10.9 (us) We won the replay haha!

Sidebottom was playing very well until injured. I rate him very high And we covered for Oliver in some ways with Viney Elliott might have a few injuries but not always. An extremely dangerous forward De Goey is a star Going into the game we had a bit of an advantage in terms of available high-end talent But against all that we had the yips something chronic in front of goal so kick straight and we win easily Don't be underestimating the Pies. We got the win but there will be a next time They've been up for a long time and this loss for them will probably do them the world of good Put it this way, if we underperform in front of goal like we did today (in a final) ... we'll lose But enjoy the win, we played very well and beat a worthy opponent

Their outs hurt them more than our outs ... by a fair margin. But if we'd kicked straight we win by 6 or 7 goals So even if their outs played (and Oliver plays) I reckon we still win Petty and Bowey are not in the same league in terms of pure talent and we covered for both quite well with Smith playing well up forward along with our running backmen collectively covering for Bowey Sidebottom & De Goey are stars of the sport and Elliott is a gun forward in big games We'll need to prepare well for a full strength Pies team (down the track)

All things considered a great win and very satisfying. Removed a few doubts We pressured them all over the ground (all game) and we hunted the ball extremely well and had many numbers at the contest (all game) Played very well as a team That's our best win in an age They had Sideottom, De Goey & Elliott out and they really missed those 3 players. We had Oliver out of course but Viney took up his role in magnificent fashion So what happens the next time we play them? They'll be better so we need to be better ... especially with our disposal skills (mainly early in the game) and our kicking for goal But we are one-up on them with a lot on the line today in terms of if we'd lost, we'd be back in the pack. In other words, if we're going to win big again we have to finish at least top 4 Another big test at Catland next. Bring the attitude, endeavour & effort that we displayed today to that game and we can win again. 10 days rest should see us cherry-ripe for that encounter In the meantime, we get the bragging rights over the Pies Enjoy!!!

We've beaten them in all aspects apart from our kicking for goal 26 shots to 17 normally indicates a decent margin of victory A most pleasing win and we are well and truly back in the hunt

Travis Head is now a Superstar! (official) Who would have thought he'd get this good? Aussies in a commanding position in the sense that it would be hard to lose this WTC match from here

It's a slow burn to become a big club but in the meantime we can still be in contention year after year. In the recent past the Cats, Swans, Pies and Hawks have all been in contention for a lot longer than the traditional 5 year window So why can't we be that same sort of club? The salary cap and being on top of recruiting can ensure success ongoing (if success is being perennial finalists along with the ultimate success when everything goes right) I've often felt that it's easier to remain in contention than it is to start all over again after bottoming out. Make the wrong moves when down near the cellar and you stay there. Support drops off and infighting surfaces Where as if you've got a strong list, never get complacent and keep improving the list. At the end of this season we'll have at least 4 draft picks in the first 2 rounds plus ... we can improve that position if we have a need to offload surplus to needs Adding a couple more midfield stars along with a gun key forward and maybe a top key back will keep us up there So the list is never complete. It evolves and must be improved upon year after year We need new young supporters and lots of them ... 10's of thousands in fact Do that and we'll be loud & proud (and big)

And the numbers ... my mate reckons he's dealt with in excess of 500 clients over a long period of time and only 2 or 3 demons amongst 500+ How many doctors & lawyers, Gonzo) Up around 500? Footnote; Same mate reckons we are the most marketable team if we have a long period of success The name, colours, the Demon, MCG etc etc

The game's a week away and we're in full-on competitive mode already That's the spirit!! My wish ... a one point win (after the siren) after Spargs receives a dodgy high contact free kick (with Ginnivan watching on)

Footy is full of lies But I'd rather be labelled as a snow-goer than simply known as the filth, scum or ferels. So there's an upside!

Yes! Looks a goer! But can he deal with Daniel Levy? @Dee Zephyr & @Grapeviney will be well pleased I'd imagine

I don't believe so in a general sense but I heard somewhere that the Pies get the 'pouring' rights in the Western Stand (Ponsford Stand) ... for all their 17 or 18 games at the MCG Having a bit of money & clout goes a long way hey! Others may know better but we get some sort of cheque from the MCC for each of our home games at the MCG. However, break even might be 22k minimum And the Pies make a stack of money out of our home games against them. They sell more than 20k x $1000 premium memberships that allows them to attend away games (with reserved seating payments as well) So it's a myth that the home teams at the MCG (against the Pies) get all the cash

Ha ha! Collingwood often have 60k screaming fans like your goodself ... but they've probably got a million supporters Australia-wide But they are nearly always in some sort of contention finals-wise (despite only winning 2 flags in 65 years) Living proof that playing finals consistently delivers the numbers Bottoming out and staying down the bottom like we often did kills off support