Macca

Well in 3 or 4 years time we might have an absolute gun midfield which could allow us to play Oliver on a half back flank. Imagine a Brisbane Lions type midfield circa early 2000's. Great lists win big and in my decades of support we've never had a 'great' list. So Oliver playing as a distributor/sweeper across half back is dependant on the team being a great one.

I'm commenting on what my eyes see and what has often happened. Historically and what is likely to happen with regards to where our players play. I haven't actually looked at the line up of the team that closely. The ins & outs are noted though and how we've used our principle on-ballers up until now is plain to see. What is unknown is how we will share the ruck duties ... they'd have a plan but what was that Mike Tyson quote?

See post above Wyl

Jones can play as a half forward but he is nearing the end. Replacements aren't all that flash either so I'd still play him. But he needs to lift. T-Mac probably had to come in once Gawn was ruled out but Tom is horribly out of form. It's not over for him though but again, he needs to find his best form. The ruck duties look like being shared instead of the Pruess option. That's fair enough. I'rm reasonably happy with the selected team (all things considered) but we've got 5 blokes who are ideally suited for the clearances and centre bounce downs. That's 1 too many for my eyes thus my push for Viney to the forward line. Way down the track Oliver could be a star at half back ... but he's a ball magnet on the ball right now. Brayshaw feeds off him but for whatever reason, we've gone away from that.

Excellent point Wyl ... you have to wonder why we'd ever set players for roles away from what they're best suited for. I can understand such moves if they were entirely necessary but those types of moves are often unnecessary. To be fair, a few moves have benefitted the team such as T-Mac to the forward line but lets face it, his role as a defender was questionable anyway. Petracca on a forward flank? Harmes on a back flank? Brayshaw on a wing? Would have better to rotate the 4 onballers whilst using Viney up forward. So off to the bench for 1 of the aforementioned 4 and/or occasional stints for 1 of the 4 as a high half forward. And you don't want your best players on the bench for extended periods of time such as what we've done with Brayshaw and (sometimes) Harmes. For the record, for team balance, I would have played Viney as a forward pocket from 2018 onwards. As valuable as he's often been when playing on the ball that decision ends up effecting team balance.

Draft revisionists are everywhere though MC. Endeavouring to put high school age junior footballers in a numbered order of how good they are going to be 5 years down the track is crystal ball gazing at best. But we're told otherwise. Of course we've been a disappointment from an overall perspective but we were just dreadfully unlucky with our draft choices. And if Petracca, Brayshaw, Oliver and the like had have been abject failures we'd be banging on about the draft (again) Petracca & Brayshaw were standout juniors much like Scully & Trengove were. And Oliver won the Morrish medal which has often been seen as a millstone. Last year's failures were put down to 'off season surgeries' (by many) and now it's the coach who is in the gun. I see our failures as an overall problem ... from the Board all the way down to the last player on the list. And our list is not all that talented either especially when it comes to disposal skills and decision making skills. A new coach isn't going to fix that in a hurry. We need an injection of 6 top players if we're going to be a true contender. A team generally needs at least 5 or 6 years as a true contender in order to be able to win 1 or maybe 2 flags. We could jump up and fluke one but I don't like the odds on that happening. I'd rather see the club build a great list of players and go from there.

We need to win at least 1 of the next 2 but both teams that we're playing are undermanned so we really should win both. And if we want to play finals we can't drop too many more games. Of course all those involved at the club need to take it one match at a time. And it's entirely possible for us to lose today and then beat Collingwood. But we have to be at least 5 & 6 before the last 6 games are played. And then we'd need to win 5 of those last 6 games to have a realistic chance to play finals. The 17 game season reminds me of the NFL where a team generally needs to win 10 of 16 to be 'virtually' assured of a playoff spot.

Didn't get a chance to watch the Tiges/Port game but listened to a fair bit of it. Sounded like it was a cracker of a match. But how would have our team have measured up against either team?

In 2013 the club asked for and received a grant of $1.4Million from the AFL ... not long after Mark Neeld was sacked. It was rumoured at the time that we did have a cash-flow issue in 2013 and we did post a loss of $1.7Million that season (the only loss between the years 2008 - 2018. But I believe that Goodwin doesn't need the team to make the finals to keep hold of his position. 7 - 9 wins will see him survive especially if we see W/L tallies of 5 & 6, 7 & 8 etc as the season progresses. Every time we get a win the call for Goodwin's head dies down dramatically. Anyway, we have far bigger issues than just the coach. We have deep-seated cultural problems which runs right through the club from the Board down. And the players can't be let off the hook again either. They play on their own terms and have done for years.

I read somewhere that the NBA have instigated 'virtual' spectators DZ but I haven't seen any vision yet. Worked well apparently. Maybe Ice Hockey can go the same way! No tips but in other news a TAB account (for those who have one) are showing all(?) NBA & MLB games live on their app (free) ... not sure about the NHL & NFL. I'm more of a neutral with the Ice Hockey but I do like the match-ups between the long established teams (Montreal, Toronto, Boston, Rangers, Chicago, Detroit & Pittsburgh.

I couldn't really find a best bet DZ but I've got Brimarvi Vehero in a multi or 2 ... Morphettville Race 3 No.4 $2.60 James Jordan has it as one of his best bets as well. Good luck to anyone having a punt tomorrow. The racing has been a godsend during this time. A terrific distraction.

Joe might have got word that the AFL knew about our salary cap breaches and got in first.

It only seems a short time ago when I was talking up the chances of 'Sunlight' in the Magic Millions 2yo classic (it won) ... but today the mare was sold for $4.2Million at the Magic Millions sales for broodmares. That went quick! So how many foals can a mare produce? 6 or 7? 8? ... that's at least $500k per foal without the stud fees. Big money. The connections have done extra well after paying $300k for the horse (with winnings of over $6.5Million) Sunlight will always remain a favourite of mine.

And our argument that numerous others tanked during the tanking era served us no favours The investigation was about the MFC and we were on our own (save for many other clubs clamming up so as not to draw attention to themselves) For instance, we heard nothing from the widespread tanking Carlton when we were investigated. So there is no fairness and if Hawthorn do happen to be investigated (not likely) they will be on their own. But again, what are the chances?

So what if he is a bit accentric. Doesn't make him wrong. The accusation of eccentricity could be thrown about everywhere. And that includes you and I alongside numerous others on this very site We post and read away here for 30+ hours every week ... isn't that a bit strange? Or nornal? Who are we to cast aspersions. The truth is that many of us are 'unconventional' Gut feel LDcV .. is Scott telling the truth? I lean towards yes but what do you think? Do you believe him or more importantly, do you want to believe him?

Not at all surprised but the story will probably go away because the AFL will make it go away. And they won't have to lift a finger to make it go away either. With the backing of the media & general footy public. One big happy family and it gets kept that way. Look at the systemic cheating that went on at Essendon ... 80% of the footy public didn't want to know about it and simultaeously clammed up and went into denial. And it was the much despised Essendon. And that included 80% of the prominent posters right here on this site. No comment at all from any of them. The silence was deafening Footy rules and footy must win out. The same people often complain bitterly when it suits but they protect footy like it's their children. There is no absolute honesty and never will be. Tony Liberatore was told to shut up or else over the widespread tanking that went on at Carlton. So he shut up. Don Scott will be portrayed as an eccentric old fool. It's already hapoening on this very thread. But what he is saying could well be true and if so, a proper investigation should follow. But what are the chances?

Brisbane's intensity and 2nd & 3rd efforts outmatched us ... until the last quarter We left our run too late and our kicking for goal was an issue today as well. A game we should have won.

The MC effectively made it very difficult for T-Mac by playing him as the only tall in rounds 2 & 3. Double-teamed etc and then he got an injured eye. And a lot of key forwards have struggled to impact this season. But they are still needed for structure. 2 KPF's but 3 is a stretch Jackson got his chance and deserves another crack at it. However, Tom could come in against Port as Jackson needs to be managed properly. Rotate them around will win out (out of necessity) Not every player will be able to back-up with the condensed fixture. Our 'immediate' depth will be tested as it will be for all the teams. The other thing to consider is that Gawn also needs to be managed properly. And Jackson goes alright in the ruck.

Been a good game tonight. High intensity, finals like. And I reckon we can play at this type of intensity. But can we do it all the time?

The circumstances are obviously different but selection has taken a bit of a different course this season, all the same Jones out and can't get back in. Tomlinson out where previously that may not have happened. Jetta dropped but returns soon after. Rivers & Jackson given a taste and now Jackson gets another chance. And Brown is pure back-up. Which is not a bad recruiting move. Same deal with Preuss. And it now looks like the coaching panel recognises that we need structure up forward after trying out a medium sized forward line that didn't work. Same deal down back where Oscar is now preferred over others. Jackson plays because of the eye injury to T-Mac but the MC now gets another chance to see what Luke offers (albeit a very raw recruit) But he can ruck alright and has a huge leap so he may surprise.

He's not that bad and lets face it, most of our forwards aren't all that flash in front of goal. We need marking strength and a tall presence up forward. Gawn fits the bill but I'm advocating maybe only 20% - 30% forward. Gawn can occupy the hotspot whenever possible, which can bring our small forwards and other forwards into play. Did you read my post as having Gawn up forward permanently or as a mainstay AF? Because I certainly didn't mean it that way. Jackson will almost certainly spend a bit of time on the ball (IMO) ... how much time, who knows? Key forwards these days are often there to provide structure. So much so that Sydney were so worried about Reiwoldt & Lynch that they overdid the flood. A mix of Weideman, Gawn & Jackson can provide that structure. And with a large bank of games to come in the next 6 weeks, Max will need to be managed properly.

Gawn might play more forward whilst Jackson does some rucking. What the split is in percentage terms remains to be seen. The MC might not know exactly either. However, it could be assumed that Weideman will be a stay-at-home forward so there's that. Double-teaming a player like Gawn up forward is easier said than done esp if they need to keep an eye on Weideman as well. So a lot may depend on how LJ goes in the ruck and on the ball. And Jackson is a very different type of draftee. He will have rucked and played as a very tall midfielder for a lot of his junior footy. His ability as a forward is the question. But Luke may not have been picked primarily to replace T-Mac's position. Could be a bit of all sorts. He is the very definition of a project player.

I thought Sam presented and played quite well on Saturday. All things considered. Kudos. It's a tough gig playing as a KPF these days. Crowded forward lines & zones makes it near impossible for a KPF to stand out. So the expectations need to be tempered. A lot of grunt work for not a lot of reward. But without that structure, our forward line is up against it. And he's still learning. You'd like to imagine that Sam would be getting some specialised coaching because again, it's a tough role to excel at. Body positioning, knowing where to be and where to lead to as well as the other basics often need to be taught. Unless said player is a bit of a natural. And if T-Mac is out next game we need to place another tall in the forward line otherwise Weideman can be double-teamed out of the contest (esp against a team like the Hawks) Brown is the back-up so he looks the logical replacement. Petracca & Gawn can drift forward to help out. Not sure Weideman or Brown are suited as forwards who can roam far and wide as T-Mac can do (when he's on song) so we might have to improvise in that area. Melk & Fritsch can both play as high half forwards so there's that option.

Roughie for the weekend Sha Tin Sunday Race 8 No.9 Pakistan Friend (33-1) Ace tipster Tom Biddington has marked it on top after 2 strong trials from the horse. Certainly has a chequered history but if it turns up it's a show. One for the exotics

Cadel Evans features tonight ... stage 9 2011 (when he was the winner of le tour)