Lucifers Hero

According to the 'Rich List' thread Gus is ranked @ 86th in the AFL on $600,000 - $650,000. No indication of Harmes but I would be surprised if it wasn't $500k+ p.a. That is very good coin when the AFL average is about $370k.

I get all that but a new contract for 2 years would make more sense if we simply wanted to track Viney's and Petracca's improvement. I was delighted with the 4 and 5 year contracts. But 4 and 5 year contracts on very good coin are for key players not for players to be treated as 'journeymen' or 'spares'.

This is part of the mystery for me: We renewed Brayshaw's contract in July 2018 for four years to 2022, before our run home, before finals and before the Brownlow. So he earnt it before the hype. We renewed Harmes' contract late last year for 5 years to 2024. We also knew that Peracca was building his midfield time. Rhetorical question is why would we give them long term contracts then keep them as 'spares' when we had adequate 'spares' in Jordan and Sparrow on the list. Both Harmes and Brayshaw have been played all over the shop in 2019 and 2020. Hardly ideal for finding form or bedding down a role in the team. Neither looked at all happy on Sunday. Nothing against Jones but why would select/play him when either Brayshaw or Harmes are sitting on the bench?

What isn't very clear is what his new role is. Sometimes he is on the wing, sometimes in the middle. If only playing 65% game time and being moved around he has little chance to settle into any role. I agree about giving Petracca a chop out. He played 95%, a huge workload all credit to him for lifting the team in the last qtr. Game time for mids and wings: Jones (81%), Oliver (88%), Langdon (90%) and Viney (82%. Harmes could have done a shutdown job on any of the midfielders or wingmen. Both he and Brayshaw could have relieved any of those mids/wings. Interestingly, like Brayshaw, Harmes also played 65% (his game time has been trending down for 4-5 weeks). Given that we have a game in a few days one would think the coaches would have spread the work load a bit more. Something odd is happening with which players get game time and which don't. All a bit of a mystery.

Deleted. Repetitive Post

Do they explain how the voting works? Is it on stats? Given that Petracca has had several BOG and 2nd BOG from multiple coaches it is a surprise he isn't in the top 3. Worse, he is missing altogether ?

If it was Selwood or his cohorts he puts his hands in the air, prances around or deliberately falls over. Free kick. HTM paid this year: Source: plea-for-cripps-to-be-protected This in fact shows that Cripps is getting more protection than other players so Carlton shouldn't be bleating too much. Oliver and Pendlebury are getting the second most protection. Lots of big names who get mauled and not there so getting no protection at all. Its interesting to see that in nearly all the pics of the op post, the Lion mids are on the outside of ours - they corralled us in, making it nigh impossible to get the ball out or close their exits. And in those pics our wing men were usually several meters behind their op who was on their own goal side. imv the 'corralling' and positioning of their wingmen (more than the scragging) is what stopped us getting clearances. Simply put, they were smarter. Disappointingly, neither our captain nor our vice captain changed tactics. Don't get me wrong, they worked harder but that isn't the same as being smarter. I get why everyone is frustrated but it is the same for all teams, it won't go away and umpires won't enforce the rule as it stops a 'free flowing game' - the Holy Grail the AFL aspires to. There are many rules umpires are rarely enforcing eg running a few meters past the point of the mark; blocking a forward so team mate can take an intercept mark, not returning the ball immediately to a player etc etc. The rule non-enforcement that really gets me is 'throwing the ball' for which commentators have found new descriptions: ball came free in the tackle, flick passing, scooping and the comical 'fresh airy handball'. Hello, 'fresh airy handball' can only be a throw. Commentators are complicit in covering up for umpires. Anyway, we got the raw end of the deal on Sunday but it didn't cost us the game.

Mc Stay gets 2 weeks for bump on Jetta, rightly so.

True. Just goes to show stats impress fans but don't necessarily impress coaches. Oliver topped most of the stats for us but failed to get a coaches vote. I guess Petracca having 9 score involvements in 14 total scoring shots is very impressive. He would have to be odds on for the Bluey.

All teams do this including us. The better teams do it better than us. Usually if Viney and Oliver are being scragged one of the other mids isn't, can take Max's hitouts and attack. Max talked about this a few weeks ago. That week it was Petracca that was able to get free. It won't change unless someone makes the umpires aware of it. No reason that Max, as captain can't highlight it to the umpires at the end of a quarter.

Coaches votes: Looks like: 5/5 Neal 4/3 Bailey 4/3 Petracca 2/2 Viney 1 Lyons 1 McCluggage Very even assessment this week. tbh this week I thought Viney had a better game than Petracca. It would be interesting to know what they look at. Anyone notice Zac Bailey and why he polled so well. Petracca now 2nd on the leader Board (37) to Neal (50) having played one less game. Max still at 11th Tonights game Cats vs Freo still to be voted on.

Yeah, it is tricky as to when to attack from stoppages. My thinking is that since it is a tactic that is often employed against us, especially by the better teams, I would expect coaches to have a set play plan to counter. Also, given that our capt and vice are in the thick of the stoppages they should be aware of what is happening and take it upon themselves to change the dynamics of the stoppages. Sometimes they need defensive set up options.

I do to! As an aside, its really frustrating when an article heading promises something interesting only to find it is a podcast. It was ok when they listed the topics and when they start on the timeline. Now most don't show that to force us to listen. I choose to not listen. Too boring.

King may not have talked about the elbow directly but he was pretty clear on how dangerous it was and that the AFL has 'lost control' and need to fix. Listen to the video in the article and there was a bit of discussion on how many weeks he McStay should/will get.

I think that was part of the neutralise Max tactics: If they don't win Max's taps, their mids deliberately wait for ours to take possession from the taps and immediately tackle to force the ball free. Set play: they nominate the tackler and the others set up in a position to receive or move the ball forward to the outside. Our mids were poorly set up or slow to block the exits. I feel it is a deliberate strategy and not just the conditions making us fumbly. I think part of the problem is our mids set up in attacking positions and moving forward expecting us to win the ball from Max's taps. When we don't we are not in a position to defend. Ball gets out and they are off. Would have liked to have seen us man up the spare they had outside the stoppages or have our mids sit goal side of their mids at times and block the exits. Especially in the second quarter when they were walking it out of the middle.

King agrees with you Demon was millimetres from a wheelchair. The video there in clearly shows McStay didn't go for the ball and crunched Jetta's with his hip and his elbow. Jetta wasn't leading with his head as Healy said, he was trying to dodge the Lion players. It was a sad sight to see Jetta walking down the race a bit wobbly and had to lean against the wall to stay steady. McStay should get weeks.

Was that when he went to help Oliver chase down Cameron? He came across from the middle to the flank, made up a lot of ground but couldn't quite reach Cameron. It was a gut busting run so he didn't look unfit in that run.

A touch of humour there, MR. I would agree but Tigers, Pies and Hawks have successfully used the same tactic over recent years. They openly talk about it in tv interviews. And I think Freo did it very well in 2017 or 2018. Roving to Max and/or creating a loose ball from his taps has been happening for several years. It had sense of the Geelong game - not anticipating what tactics they might use and having a counter plan before the game. Not sure we had a counter plan last night except for Oliver and Viney to bullock their way out. Couldn't tell if we ever tried to match-up with their extra around the contest or to make him accountable. Hard to tell on tv.

As I said, getting into the rhythm of the game is very difficult if only playing 65% then going on/off the field as a relief player. Best way to get confidence is to be on the field and stay, for both Harmes and Brayshaw. Brayshaw has had 4-5 games with 65% game time. At some point this has to affect motivation. Again, not making excuses for yesterday's game. This comment is not related to your post but those posters who criticise the stats of some players need to be aware of how much game time they had. eg Harmes and Brayshaw 65%. Jones 81%. Who had the better game?

Adding to the Brayshaw's 65% game time. Harmes also played only 65%. Like my Brayshaw comment above being on/off the ground doesn't help playing consistently. All game he was uncharacteristically fumbly as if he wasn't concentrating. And he didn't look too happy at the end of the 3/4 time break. Yet players that might have needed a rest played a lot more: Jones 81%, Pickett 77%, Jackson 75%, Bennell 72%. There is a reason why two of or recently better players spent so much time on the bench but it isn't obvious to me. Could have we won the game if Brayshaw and or Harmes spent more time on the ground?.

Getting very worried about Brayshaw: Again played only 65% of the game. He doesn't have a role to make his own in the team. Don't know how many rotations he had but he seemed to be on/off the field a lot, almost as if he was a 'relief' player to give others a spell. He looked frustrated at one rotation when he almost pulled his helmet off. These first 3 things would make it exceptionally difficult to get into the rhythm of the game, to get some touch for the ball and that 6th sense for where teammates and opponents are. Not making excuses as he had a poor game. But not sure he is being given the best opportunity to play to his strengths.

A few days ago I posted this in the 'Teams' thread: Fagan is a smart coach and neurtralizing Max's dominance will be his #1 goal. They are a very smart mid-field and will rove to Max's taps. Also, Lions is one of the teams last year that used the strategy: "match them on the inside, beat them on the outside". So if roving to Max doesn't work they will try and stop us getting the ball out. So we win the clearances but forced to turn the ball over. If it gets into McCluggage's hands they are off to the races. And so it came to pass: Max, our #1 weapon was neutralised. That is not a new strategy. Other teams have used it many times: Pies, Tigers, (last generation) Hawks etc Goodwin said they were better than us at getting the '''loose ball' out at stoppages. Given that it was obvious what their midfield tactics would be why did we not have a counter strategy from the get go? They had an extra around the stoppages so even if we got the ball they ring-fenced us in so the ball fell into dispute. We didn't counter it. Viney and Oliver were mighty in trying to bulldoze there way out but were beaten by weight of numbers and smarts. Not our best coaching effort. To see Max's 'Hitout' work 'wasted' is heartbreaking ?.

Geelong don't pay anyone around or more than $1m so surprised to see Danger there. Surprised Patrick Cripps isn't there. AA, Club Captain, 2019 MVP, 4th in 2019 Brownlow etc. He, Pendlebury, Tom Mitchell and Josh Kelly are at or over $1m.

You are correct re the blowout of costs impacting on financial results. I recall at last year's fan forum Mahoney or Pert mentioned it as a reason for our loss. We had a lot of senior players out injured and paying their (fixed) contract amounts and paying the replacement's match fees. Not sure if it is only older players that have fixed contracts being paid regardless of games played. The better players and those enticed from other clubs would be on fixed base contracts with bonuses eg B&F, Brownlow, AA and other award results.

Not happy at all if O'Dea goes: 2 x AA and ex club captain. Cordner has lots of upside. Newman had a very poor last season so don't mind if she goes. Don't know the other players well enough to comment. Edit: this is the full article https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/carlton-move-on-the-cards-for-former-melbourne-aflw-skipper-o-dea-20200723-p55exd.html O'Dea's Manager: “She’s an in-contract athlete. But some conversations that have stemmed over the past few months in regards to where she will play her best football going forward. As a diehard Melbourne supporter they’re really tough conversations and tough things to address, but in the best interests of her love for the game and obsessions for the game it’s important to address these things to make sure she feels really valued and also making sure she feels like she’s playing a big role in a team as well.” Sounds like some unhappiness with proposed role in the team. Don't think this is the sort of player we should let go! Hope we can mend fences if there are issues.