Lucifers Hero

Haven't we done this topic to death? Different commentator, same stuff. Carey could easily have written the same lack of intimidation story about North, Ess or Eagles. All were physically bad. It must be 'feed on the Dees week'. I'm over it.

Looks like Lockhart will play. Which means at least two changes (May being the other). Who might Lockhart replace? Given he is 176cm and we have Viney, 175 cm and Spargo, 173 cm, I don't think we can play all three vs Geelong. Assuming Viney is fit to play it may be Spargo that misses out. A bit unlucky if he does because he worked hard vs Port; just not strong enough to get a grip on opp and make a tackle stick, or to bump anyone. I really hope Sparrow doesn't get dropped, he was one of our better players. Feel for Stretch if he is overlooked again for a debutante.

Will debut this week according to this article. https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-03-28/former-vfl-star-set-to-make-debut-15-days-after-signing-with-dees Early by some training accounts but well done, young man.

You were right. Thanks for that. Seeing the replay, Jones did well to get the ball to Sparrow. A very nice kick from our debutant and if the kick was a few centimeters higher Watts wouldn't have marked it on the line. A shame we didn't have someone back there to shepherd it thru.

Not sure how it looked on TV but I recall Tom Mc being well within the 50 and Jones was right in front of me about 25 mt out, on an angle. As I said Tom could open the face of the goal to better the 45 degr angle. Would be interesting to see what the tv cameras picked up but I don't have access to replays.

'chookrat' was joking.

I agree he did not squib it, just took his eyes off the ball. I don't agree tho that he was looking downfield for a quick pass: he was 25m from goal and had no intention of passing it. Really he should not have called for it in the first place: Tom Mc had marked and his position was not much different to Jones; possibly better for a right foot kicker to swing round and open the goal face. Selfish call by Jones.

Technically we did but we had difficulty getting the ball out of the square or forward. I haven't seen the replay - the positioning of our wingmen I noticed at the ground. I didn't mean to say it was a plan to be unaccountable, more that it made it difficult for us to defend when they got the ball out of the square. My post was hypothesizing on what Lewis meant by 'positioning' when asked why we were smashed in the middle. Would be interested in other people's theory of what he was referring to.

Hmm, he is laughing raucously while every one else look nonplussed...I wonder what Gus is saying to him...

Correct but we didn't and can't see how we expected to with Max out of sorts and being bashed all over the place. When we did win it our wingmen were sucked into the contest while their wingman stayed out and before long we had a turnover. It seemed the day for more defensive set-ups, especially as we are 'slow on the outside' at the best of times. More importantly, we didn't change tactics when it was obvious they weren't working. Not enough respect paid to Port by coaches or players.

An aspect of our 6-6-6 tactics backfired vs Port! For center bounces, our wingmen were positioned near the outside corners of the square leaving their opp around the middle on the outside. When their inside midfielder won the hitout, he would handball to an unattended wingman, who had a defender running down the wing to accept a pass for an easy i50. We were chasing all day and several meters behind opps. We played into Ports hands: 59 inside 50 for 27 scoring shots vs our 45 inside 50 for 16 scoring shots. On AFL 360 last night Lewis was asked why our midfield was smashed so badly. Lewis said it was a little bit positioning but also lack of effort. Unfortunately no-one asked him to elaborate on 'positioning'. I reckon it was what I've described above. Suspect our wingmen will stick to their opp this week. Last week was our worst game in a long time for our midfield and the team and we are much better than that. And we won't make the same mistakes as last week (I hope).

With Viney was off for much of the game, it was Jones' job to defend Max and rally teammates to help. In Lewis' and May's absence it was even more critical that Jones stepped in and set the example. He didn't and reflects poorly on him. When Roos took over he had to teach Jones 'team-first' ie not just focus on his possessions, his tackles, his goals, his stats. On Saturday Jones reverted to those old behaviours of self-first. I hope being in the last year of contract Jones does not go down the self-preservation/self interest path. He is still co-captain and needs to set the example on team-first behaviours. I'm glad May is back this week, he will add some much needed leadership.

Great for Christian to get the TOTW nomination. Well deserved for a stand out performance. Not easy to stand out in a team that was well beaten all over the ground. One of his very best games.

Suspect it was more an 'encouragement' from Hinkley. Jack played a good game but quite a few played better. Its hard to imagine that Goodwin valued Watts' game higher than Salem's to whom he gave 1 vote or zero votes.

1. He was, not to obliquely, referring to the rules that dictate the leave players must take which critically reduces the time fitness and football staff have to rehab and condition players. For us it was approx 3 months of preseason (incl JLT) in a 6 month off season. I think Goodwin used the words '...the amount of time we were given...'. Goodwin always chooses his words carefully; imv there was a clear message there for the AFL/AFLPA. 2. True - Hawks, Cats, Swans are battle hardened teams. But its often said that players need 4 to 5 solid preseasons to become an AFL hardened player. Of Saturday's team only Jones, Jetta, Gawn and maybe Melksham and Hibberd are in that category. The rest have had several interrupted preseasons or just not had enough of them. The shorter preseason, clearly impacted all 4 Prelim teams. Only Rich won but they were playing last years wooden spoon team. They also are largely a 'battle hardened' team. It also reduced our ability to practice tactics for the new rules. Three of our senior players didn't play with the rest of the team in practice/JLT games so their ability to show leadership and implement those tactics was limited on Saturday. Add surgeries and other injuries to the mix and our ability to get the team 'battle ready' was severely hampered. Port had 4 months of preseason with most players healthy and most 'battle hardened'. The difference was stark. Our players will get conditioning in the next month. I just hope that their injuries don't reoccur or have setbacks because they came in underdone. Not sure the selection committee had many options.

Now 43,829! This is approx 6,000 up on same time last year and a mere 400 short of our all time in July 2018. We will smash 50,000! Then how high?

A bit of scaremongering in that article! What it doesn't say is Sydney were 0-6 after round 6 in 2017 but made the 8 being 6th on the ladder at round 23 with a Home final! I'll take that any day of the week. A lot didn't work on Saturday and we were outgunned, outsmarted and outplayed. Coaches will make changes in tactics and players. Things will get a lot better for us. Keep the faith, folks.

That is about 2 1/2 quarters. Not sure I agree that he looked the same on Saturday as when he came back in past seasons. Last year he came back for the first final and he was mighty: ran, tackled, harassed, rag-dolled one of the Holy Trinity ? (can't remember which one) and was the Jack we know and love. The Jack at the MCG on Saturday was nothing like that. TV made have painted a different picture than seeing him live.

Just to clarify, Rookies can be upgraded without the need for a LTI so its simply lodging the paperwork with AFL House. Simples.

From my post earlier today in the Changes vs Geelong thread: "Hate to say it but I think Viney needs to be rested: he played only about 2 1/2 quarters, when he tried to run it was barely trotting pace and when on field he didn't really impact the game. He not only looked underdone, he looked injured...We effectively played one short vs Port and it took its toll on the rest of the team". Other players had to player longer minutes to compensate for Viney being on the bench. Co-captain or not, Viney cannot be allowed to call the shots.

At the ground I noticed our wingmen often played off their opponents and stayed toward an outside corner of the square leaving opp wingmen alone on the outside around the middle. This positioning only made sense if we got the clearance. But not a good position to defend from. When they won the clearance they would handball to their (unattended) wingman and in the meantime a defender ran onto the wing took a pass and put it straight into their forward line. These were set plays by Port and worked nearly every time. We were forever several metres behind their players so they had 2/3 uncontested possessions from centre bounce to their forwards. This made them look more fleet-of-foot than they were. Port will win a few games this way before someone works them out. Not sure if our problem was poor structure/positioning or players not playing to rules. But to me it didn't make sense to leave wingmen unattended - I had recurring visions of the game vs Hawth last year when we played without wingmen. Unattended wingmen is a high risk play and especially high risk when a number of our mid-fielders/wingmen were on limited game time or underdone. I hope we ditch the 'stand-off' the wingmen tactic asap.

It certainly looked that way. Captain or not it hurts the team to have someone who plays 2 1/2 quarters with little impact. And, we do have another captain and a few vice captains on the field... We effectively played one short vs Port and it took its toll on the rest of the team. It may not happen but we have paid the price in 2017 and 2018 of bringing Viney back early. Hopefully, we don't do it again this year. We showed for most of last year we can win without him and kept him to be cherry ripe for the finals which really worked for us and him.

Hate to say it but I think Viney needs to be rested: he played only about 2 1/2 quarters, when he tried to run it was barely trotting pace and when on field he didn't really impact the game. He not only looked underdone, he looked injured. We had 6-7 players whose on field time was managed down to about 3 quarters (surprisingly one of those was Jetta, hope he is ok) which puts enormous pressure on those that stay on longer than they should. imv there is a limit to how many players in need of managed game time we take in. Max needs help. If Preuss plays as Goodwin suggested, it seems unlikely he can play 4 quarters (based on JLT) so who does he displace? That depends if he goes forward or back when not in the ruck as we can't afford to have him on the bench for long stretches, especially if other players need managed game time. Based on club report Lewis' omission was precautionary rather than an injury so wouldn't be surprised to see him in. In: May, Lewis, Preuss (as Goodwin signalled) Out: Frost, Hore (sadly as I don't like to see players given only one game), Viney and, there would need to be some re-balancing in positions as Preuss/Vine aren't like-for-like The team needs time to settle and develop cohesion so any other changes will need to wait.

The rule change which was most difficult to train for is not having Runners during play. In the first 3 quarters there were large gaps between goals which limited Goodwin's opportunity to impact the play. And in the last qtr there were only 3 goals which again limited the coaches ability to make positional changes, get messages out etc. With Lewis out, Viney on for only 2 1/2 quarters, Max focused on staying on his feet and Jones with his perpetually limited on - field nouse, we had no-one looking at the 'big picture'; marshaling the troops to support each other etc. The result was 22 players playing largely as individuals; the antithesis of teamwork and the 'esprit de corps' we pride ourselves on. We can change team selections but I don't know where our on field leadership is going to come from. The no runner rule may be the one that hurts us the most and probably the hardest to counteract.

6. Salem Daylight 1. Sparrow for his endeavour and taking the heavy knocks. Sparrow took a knock to the head early on, had head over the ball, low to the ground, when Powell-Pepper rammed his knee into the side of his the head. It was obviously deliberate (P-P made no attempt to bend down or go for the ball). P-P won't get cited as they will argue it was accidental in the course of play. Sparrow took another heavy knock in the head area late in the game. Credit to Sparrow that each time he just bounced back. Like the roughing up that Oliver received, it was disappointing to not see teammates remonstrate for Sparrow's treatment. Senior guys need to stand up for the kids.