Macca

First G1 of the new season at Randwick Saturday (Winx Stakes) Good field assembled but nearly all the runners are back from a spell ... Anamoe is the class runner in the race but noted frontrunners Profondo, Hinged & Forbidden Love should be leading for a lot of the race Might be one for the exotics only ... trifecta might pay well with the right combo

The strange bit about the pessimists is they often get even more upset about a loss than the optimists. Even though they were often expecting a loss I've always viewed footy fans as optimistic pessimists or pessimistic optimists. We delight in having 2 contrasting opinions Realists see both sides and end up arguing with both camps. Optimists often see realists as pessimists and pessimists often see realists as optimists

And that tap-type action only happens 1 in 4 or 1 in 5. Often when there are multiple defenders in the same contest. It's like he is treating the situation like a rucking contest And one arm up only can get to a higher elevation much like how ruckmen go about it So if he's summed up the situation and then chooses to use his right hand to bring the ball to the front & centre area, then that's smart play. Especially if he is acting under coaching instructions Worked to a treat in the last 30 seconds last night. He made a movement to the side/front of the contested marking situation, got his right hand to the ball ... front & centre to Kossie who kicked the winning goal

Whether we are pessimistic, optimistic or realistic doesn't matter a lot anyway We're not out there playing or coaching and how we react shouldn't effect a player or players anyway A great example were the years 2012 & 2013. All the pessimists were having their say here as were all the optimists (in a poll held towards the end of 2102 over 97% of people here wanted Neeld to continue on and see out his contract) But we were a terrible side and the poor results kept coming whilst we were just yapping away almost pointlessly The optimists can often see no wrong and they need to be optimistic to satisfy their needs whilst many others are only happy when they've got something to complain about (the pessimists) Sport is a departure from real life for many. We are tribal and our instincts connected to that tribalism has the same goal - winning. We just go about searching for that success in different ways Vive la difference

Our crumbers aren't first rate like say Cyril, Farmer or Betts. Kossie might end up being extra good but he's not there yet (needs more time) And we often kick long to the left flank or left pocket and that is where Brown is. And when we kick deep to the right pocket, it's usually towards Brown as well As previously discussed elsewhere on other threads, we need to mix things up more and seek out other forwards in the hot spot just outside the goal square or to CHF. The other forwards need to lead a lot more too The way I read it is we want to lock the ball in our forward line so using the forward line corridor risks turning the ball over to the opposition (who can then counter attack on a fast break) Switching play from the wing to the other HFF or other pocket could also be viewed as risky so we often continue down that same wing side attack on that same side of the ground So Brown starts his movements from the goal square (or thereabouts) either heading left or right which means that he is often targeted by default (based on how we enter the forward line) By the time the ball near Brown arrives, multiple defenders have arrived at the same time (thus, the triple-teaming) However, we did target Gawn a bit last might who was often a bit further out near CHF but Max wasn't holding his marks So I felt we did change things up a bit compared to the Collingwood game

That was the interesting consequence of how Brown is being used. Gone are the days where a key forward (one out like Brown was tonight) is expected to present, take 6 or 8 marks and then have as many shots at goal Crowded forward lines, triple-teamed and even if those circumstances are overcome, a mark and shot at goal might be taken from an acute angle So we play 2 mediums to complement and one shines through. As a percentage play, it can work but equally, the mood here would have been quite gloomy if that crumb to Kossie had bounced a metre to the left or right and we don't get the winning goal Such a fine line sometimes and we live to fight another day from 2nd place on the ladder (could have been 6th if we'd lost) But along the way you need a bit of good luck sometimes. Without that good luck, bad luck can step in Right now, the Blues would be rueing their bad luck. So close, but no cigar We can happily puff away (along with sipping on a decent cognac) Winners are grinners!

Ben Brown's 2nd half was quite good after a very average 1st half Triple-teamed for most of the match as the predominately lone forward target he kept at it and never gave up Don't judge him on his first half only. Right at the death he put his body on the line in the front of a pack and got a hand in to marking contest which led to Kossie getting the crumb ... apart from that, he had worked his way into the game and played his part. And right now, the only alternative to Brown is Weideman. Or someone like Smith or Tomlinson. That is not going to happen Brown in fact played a game tonight very similar to the game that T-Mac often plays (and T-Mac gets criticised for playing that sort of game until it's realised that value that is being underestimated) It's a big ask playing as the lone KPF in today's footy. Crowded forward lines, triple teamed, and battered about, often the best that can be expected is to compete and bring the ball to ground for the crumbers And that's how we are set up to play. We bomb to the left forward pocket or thereabouts (until the last few minutes tonight when we decided to take some risks in the corridor) Brown won't be playing anywhere apart from the seniors ... he's a vital cog and Goodwin is probably reasonably happy with his overall output

Well his new team then went and won 3 flags but you have to wonder about the levels of real passion. Something false about all that as those who switch teams as an adult could best be described as untrustworthy types! Fast forward to now and obviously we want to win more than one flag with the current list but for me anyway, there is still a strong sense of absolute relief that we at least broke the long, 57 year drought 3 flags over a 10 year stretch would satisfy (I fully expect the club to keep reloading with talent long past the 5 year window) Other teams such as the Cats, Swans, Eagles & Hawks have reloaded so why not us? To do that we have to keep recruiting aggressively with a real, workable plan 2020 might have been the first year of our window even though we didn't (but should have) played finals. The list had been put together and it was just a matter of clicking into gear Reckon we'll win tonight to make it 1 from 5 with 4 more to knock over to win big

Stewart Dew - Hughes Menswear Salesman Alistair Clarkson - Anger Management Consultant Jeff Kennett - Hair Replacement Spruiker Eddie McGuire - Storeman & Packer Gil McLachlan - Pan-man

As to whether any KPF wants to come to our club, it's not so much whether they see the club as a destination but more so if they're available and at what price? For the player himself and the club that currently has possession of that player As an example, would we entertain the thought of trading Ben Brown or T-Mac? (or both) I doubt it, even though both players are injury prone and are entering their 30's We're looking for add-ons, better versions or replacements you'd reckon. The draft means a fair wait ... sometimes at least 3 years. Or we trade and almost certainly pay overs That's the market and it's why Hogan just got recontracted (good on him) These players are in demand We've got our fingers crossed with JVR but we need at least 1 more KPF to fill the ranks. Same goes for ruckmen but we'll need at least 2 with the departure of Majak and with Jackson (?) being on the move

Agree on the way the ball is delivered into the forward line but we only have 2 players that can create seperation as well as being competitive forwards (Brown & Fritsch but not Weideman) And there is no one else apart from Gawn on occasions So given we've got 2 small forwards (usually) we need at least 1 more forward who can present ... so I've suggested Petracca or Brayshaw (but not both at the same time) Or another KPF which we haven't got right now ... Weideman isn't the answer and JVR needs more time in the 2nds by the looks of it The addition of just one more marking option up forward can make a difference but again, the coaching directive to bomb it in is telegraphing our intentions. And being defended against to good effect ... often it works though so the tactic is sound We just over do it sometimes We need more variation with hit-up passes for forwards on the lead (or being kicked to when they've created space) We need to keep the opposition guessing and we're not panicking the opposition defenders right now T-Mac can't come back into the side quickly enough but both Tommy & Brown have got injury concerns and both are entering their 30's Only playing 1 KPF means that that player is often double or triple teamed. Brown can sometimes overcome the odds but Weideman is more of a 3rd forward (and we've already got Fritsch for that role)

Oddly enough there was very little backlash towards the umpires back then on the game day threads (the team was performing so abysmally - that was the focus) Numerous people quit the site on those game-day threads (often returning at a later date) One bloke told us he was going to barrack for Richmond! Others were predicting 10-15 goal losses half way through the first quarter. Nightmare times The shared misery was another standout feature ... at one stage there were at least 30 threads all with different topics on what was wrong with the club To this day I've no idea how the moderators kept up with it all ... it was total mayhem and the venting was at extreme levels And most are still here ... we are a stoic bunch, Col

Sam Weideman - Gigolo Dustin Martin - Meth Cook Joel Selwood - Confidence Trickster Steele Sidebottom - Sideshow Attraction Christian Petracca - Mafia Don Tom Hawkins - Fruit Picker Toby Greene - Hitman

Maybe we could go medium sized with Petracca up forward for periods or maybe even Brayshaw or a combo of either/or (as well as Fritsch) 40% game time up forward for Petracca & Brayshaw would also mean that both play in the midfield for 60% of the time Talls being Brown & Gawn until T-Mac gets himself fit. And if we've earmarked Gawn to play predominantly forward then pursuing Grundy makes sense We need forwards who can create separation and good midfielders can often play forward quite well Remembering that Petracca was our best forward in 2019 averaging about 20 disposals as a high half forward Also reckon that Brayshaw could play a forward role well ... he can create space for himself, reads the play well, is a good mark for his size, has plenty of courage and is a good kick for goal In a general sense, our midfielders should all be kicking more goals anyway ... collectively they get a stack of the ball so why not drift forward and get amongst the goals? Get a bit hungry like Fritsch!

The big issue is that they (the AFL) don't practice what they preach "If you choose to bump and contact is made to your opponents head, you will be reported and sidelined" Except that doesn't happen but sometimes it does. It's pot luck on outcomes They've got all the time in the world to get these decisions right and also, to end up with consistent outcomes ... but it's still a crapshoot

Incidental contact to the head where a bump is involved is always going to be impossible to adjudicate properly anyway (with the ball being in the vicinity) So unless the tribunal or the appeals tribunal is instructed to find a guilty verdict for incidental contact to the head from a bump, they are likely to arrive at a not guilty verdict as absolute guilt is very difficult to prove. Again, with the ball being in the vicinity So the language from the AFL doesn't match the language of the bodies that they have in place to adjudicate on these matters If they are going to have rules, they need to make sure that everyone associated with those rules are all on the same page Highly doubt that that will happen though

Is that related to our dreams being the answers to tomorrow's questions?

Fantasy sports? Leave me out of that stuff, Gonzo! Did not even cross my mind but I can see how those thoughts might enter the minds of the fantasy types Bit I firmly believe in the concept of 2 proper ruckmen in the same team (in the 18) ... with the proviso that both ruckmen can do a lot more than just tap the ball to advantage (who doesn't want first use of the ball?) Play forward, play back, be a link player and be an extra midfielder. As well as a general out on the field Both Gawn & Grundy qualify so go for it I say Also, what can happen with 2 proper ruckmen is that one rucks in 60% of the ground whilst the other rucks in 40% of the ground. With roles reversed when applicable Called a couple of Collingwood 'acquaintances' yesterday and both said that Grundy can play forward reasonably well as long as he is not the sole focal point And splitting the field in terms of who rucks where keeps both players relatively fresh as they are saving the legs

Play the rules then ... and stretch it to the limit Our players should not be too concerned with contact to the head of an opposition player on Saturday night (apart from striking with a fist) Get reported for high contact via a bump, go to the tribunal then take it further to the appeals tribunal then go even further like we've seen in GF week. For fringe players as well. Put the league to the test Striking offences aside, all contact to the head via the bump could now be argued as incidental or 'In the contest' ... as long as the ball is in the vicinity

We now have to look at the parameters of what can be deemed legal looking ahead (re the bump) It's a case of have-to, we don't get a choice nor do we have a voice The head is now not sacracanct so if a player goes in to bump or braces for contact and then subsequently makes contact to the head, there's a very good chance that that player either won't be cited but even if cited, there's a better than even money chance that the player won't be suspended (especially if using the appeals system) It's quite clear in a lot of ways. Appeal any decision so that you only have to answer to the appeals tribunal (who have just let Cripps walk free) Our players can now use the bump with impunity. The players no longer have to walk on eggshells And right now the players have been granted a licence. Incidental contact to the head can be argued against easily but the ball now only has to be in the vicinity for a bump to the head to not even be cited

Contesting and bumping can happen at the same time ... Jeff Gleeson has got it wrong by saying that it's one and not the other (especially in this instance) And because it's both and whilst contesting (and bumping) Cripps also has eyes for the player only and then takes that player out, he's liable The ball being in the vicinity is just a convenient excuse Except he's not liable because for some obtuse reason, he walks free Cripps should have got 4-6 weeks if the AFL are serious about head trauma

True, but the Cripps incident is still going to brought up by those representing a player who has contacted an opponents head (in incidents where the ball is in the 'vicinity') Probably every time. They'll try their luck and why wouldn't they Outcomes? Who knows? Will depend on all sorts of reasons but you're right, we'll never get consistent rulings That's not how the AFL rolls I viewed the incident as a shirt-front. Cripps played the man and not the ball Ah Chee has to sit it out this weekend. He'd feel cheated. Illegally taken out of a game and the perpetrator walks A complete joke but again, that's the AFL for you. They are like a mini version of FIFA

Maybe tl_nl (too long _ not listening) Can you imagine one of the Tribunal members putting up his hand (like a stop sign) and saying that? 10 or 15 minutes you could understand but an hour would put some of our pollies to shame

If he gets off it's going to set a very big precedent The ball would only have to be in the vicinity and then it could be carte blanche

An hour! Bloomin' hell! That's longer than it takes to read one of my longer-type posts! Forget tl_dr, more like tl_dl