Macca

Yes, there's also different levels of optimism, pessimism and having a realistic view In fact, this whole site revolves around the 3 types of thinking along with all the variables But I've always felt that a team is heavily reliant on the experienced players ... and they let themselves down in 2025 (need to bounce back)

An optimistic view would be pushing for finals or playing a final or 2 I'll be disappointed if we fall right away, as this list is still far superior to the lists we had from 2008 to 2015 Short on genuine stars but plenty of players who are AFL standard One thing that we didn't see in 2025 was a motivated list. We were going through the motions match after match So with a new coach (?) Given a good run with injuries I'd take 9 - 11 wins on an upward curve

Yes, very true, Betters We were just meandering along and then that loss hastened change 2 of the changes (losing Trac & Ollie) will take time to completely come to terms with, but time may well confirm that it was for the best. But hey, 3 first round picks in return might return 3 top players Goodwin had run his race but he'll forever be a premiership coach and for some of us, we thought that 13th flag may have never come

One bounce at the start of each match would have kept a small part of a rich history Did you ever try bouncing the footy? Damn hard thing to do and with the first 10 or so tries, the ball would often come back straight at your snozz (and ... would bring tears)

And it's flipped Blue Jays now lead 3-2 going into game 6 in Toronto (Sat 11.00m AEDT) One more win and they win their 3rd World Series

We should be expecting a decent improvement from our senior players/experienced players We saw the improvement with Bowey, Turner & Chandler along with Kozzie getting better by the year We should be expecting better seasons from Salem*, Fritsch, Petty, Lever, Rivers*, Langdon*, Viney, JVR, May(?) & Sparrow. T-Mac & Melk continuing to play well would be a bonus but then there's Mihocek, Steele & Max of course And the youngsters coming through such as Langdon, Lindsay & Windsor *Salem, Rivers & Langdon need to be more dynamic with their possessions Finals might be a bridge too far but at least 10 wins is a possibilty ... much will depend on injuries as our depth isn't great There's a whole host of middling clubs that are very beatable. And we might get a kind draw So next year's pick might be 5 all the way up to 10 (in my view) And what if King is a really good coach?

Yes, they could have at least left the bounce in there for the start of the match (any match) Out of the 4 umpires, one of them would be adept at the bounce

And they've now made the stand ruling even more complicated with protection zone criteria. It's like a dog chasing it's own tail The Stand rule is another band-aid approach. Although it kind of works, it's another example of how the fabric of the game has changed Apart from the changes that I've advocated, I'd ditch the stand rule because with a more open game with loads more space, it wouldn't be needed

No, Kane is wrong because he can't see the big picture ... 6 too many players on the field and what is needed is a drastic cut in rotations. Why should the players get a rest? It's bs What are Kane's answers? Has he ever had an original thought? As I said, he's clueless But 18 per side seems like it's an untouchable number Here's another tradition that's gone ... the playing positions are now obsolete and each team is full of mids It's an ok sport if you enjoy watching endless stoppages I only follow the sport because I want the Demons to win. There's no other reason

Yes, all the changes that they make to try and get less stoppages and more free-flowing football are a band-aid approach After a time, the coaches find a way to create stoppages again so it's rinse & repeat Try doing that with 15 a side and 20 rotations ... 2 games in and the players would be cactus Extreme examples of free-flowing & way less congestion are Rugby 7's & AFLX (which is not what I'm advocating) Just take 4-6 players off the field with limited rotations By the way, in Rugby League, they still only allow 8 rotations per team

Kornes is clueless but so is the AFL The coaches have re-designed the game and the game evolves into a different form on a year to year basis There's too many players on the field for the modern game. 15 or 16 a side would fix most of the issues with congestion and allow far more free-flowing football As a result, the game would be far easier to umpire But it might take the AFL another 10 years to realise that the crowded nature of the sport is the real issue. Maybe 20 years From the mid 2000's onwards the sport became too congested with endless stoppages Meanwhile, Rugby League (the AFL's biggest competitor) is now a fast, free-flowing sport with very few stoppages

Shrugging in the tackle will be impossible to adjudicate properly, especially in terms of being consistent Just another grey area that will be even more grey now Definition of a shrug? (open to interpretation) There are other ways to deal with the duckers ... including suspensions No prior at all has been suggested but that creates other obvious problems A solution for continuous play is to reduce the amount of players on the field ... the grounds are way too small for 36 super-fit players. It's a 19th century way of thinking Won't happen but 16 a side would fix most of the congestion issues ... but for whatever reason the league seems to be obsessed with 18 a side Imagine watching soccer if it was 13 a side? It would be a congested mess Rugby League went to 13 a side in 1908 for a reason. As did the VFA when it went to 16 a side in the early 1950's Tradition? That went out the window decades ago

It's like Sandpaper-gate in the cricket ... there's a good chance that they all knew including the keeper and the bowlers (especially) As it stood at the time, the coach (Lehmann) resigned during that series

His words may well have got back to the club anyway. A Broadcast on SEN is all there for the listening (and wouldn't be hard to find for anyone here that is interested) But it was just after the 2023 season had been completed (Dec 2024) so it's the height of the cricket season so probably got lost in the mix ... Not newsworthy unlike the height of the footy season Another comment (paraphrasing) "I saw some stuff going on that I didn't particularly like" Looking back to where we find ourselves as a club right now, the words back then were quite profound

Back around that Lorne camp we were in a bit of a mess anyway Ox said what he said and probably meant well. He didn't name names at least

What gives me hope is how our experienced players respond to King Putting aside the young talent coming through over the next 2 years, we need our established players to lift their game I'm confident that the senior players will respond. If they don't, we're in strife

And apart from the coaching, the players need to take responsibility in an autonomous way. You can't spoon feed forever The Hodge & Selwood types are naturals. By the age of 20-21 they've got what it takes

Who knows? Amateur hour I'd say And in the pre-match thread here, there were numerous posts on how we were going into that SF with an undermanned forward line It was an almighty stuff up at the selection table, all round And getting back to that position where we are a genuine contender again will be no easy task If we'd bounced back and contended again in 2024 or 2025 then that match might have been forgotten about ... but since then, things have gone pear-shaped So it was a defining moment and a sign of things to come

Sure, there's all that, but there was a game to be won against Carlton (SF) Whether Gawn is an excellent forward or not, is not the question. It was that Gawn was our only choice forward (T-Mac was our only other KPF and he was almost completely incapacitated ... should not have played at all) Let's not forget that all of Melksham, Petty, Brown & JVR were unavailable. And Fritsch was on one leg And we had a ready made replacement for the ruck duties (Grundy) Gawn should have been told to play forward in that SF, it's as simple as that. Or, he puts his hand up to play forward in a selfless act So it was fairly simple ... T-Mac out Grundy in. And we play another runner as the sub, instead of Schache How is all this related to this thread? We lack on field leadership. The move to get a player like Steele is the pointer I see one person after another here wanting to blame the team for choking in that 2003 SF but we lost the match at the selection table The other factor was the risk of only playing one ruckman who was going into that SF with a broken toe (Gawn)

That's right And my comments re Gawn are directly related to Goodwin If the coach was going to cop a lot of the blame (here) about the behaviour of a number of the players, then what about the captain? And the so-called leadership group?

The Ox's comments was during an interview with SEN and related to the camp down at Lorne He mentioned a few times that he had witnessed the players getting up to no good. He didn't elaborate but repeated himself a few times My reading off of it was that the listeners needed to fill in the gaps as he wasn't prepared to name names or describe what the activities were (that he witnessed)

We don't want (or need) a soft draw. Our new look list will still have loads of experienced types, so it's best that we get tested as much as possible If we're good enough, we'll get our fair share of wins. If not, there's always the 'learnings' However, because we finished 14th in season 2025, we should (by default) get double up games against 3 of the bottom 6 teams (and 2 double up games against the middle 6 teams) Having said all that, it would be nice if we got to play the Cats at the MCG (if both teams are in form, a decent crowd could be expected)

What a game today ... 18 innings!! (Blue Jays @ the Dodgers) Broke all sorts of records and finished up at 2.50am Eastern time (USA) 6hrs 39 minutes all-up Dodgers now lead 2 - 1 in the Fall Classic

Power Rankings? I'll have a go ... 1 - Chiefs (5 & 3) 2 - Eagles (6 & 2) 3 - Colts (7 & 1) 4 - Lions (5 & 2) 5 - Bills (5 & 2) 6 - Bucs (6 & 2) 7 - Packers (5-1-1) 8 - Patriots (6 & 2) 9 - Rams (5 & 2) 10 - Broncos (6 & 2) 11 - Seahawks (5 & 2) 12 - Chargers (5 & 3) 13 - 49ers (5 & 2) 14 - Jags (4 & 3) Remembering that 14 teams make the playoffs ... 7 from each conference I'm expecting the Ravens or Steelers to win the AFC East so 1 of those 2 will almost certainly make the playoffs