chookrat

We need to sort out our front half for Friday night without sacrificing our clearance and territory game. To do this: Petracca has to play 50% forward which means we need midfield cover for him. JJ is the natural choice here but we could alternatively bring in Spargo as HF and have Sparrow play more minutes in the middle. I prefer JJ as he provides flexibility to play both in the middle and behind the ball. With JVR out, we need to bring in a key position forward / relief ruck. I'd give TMac the job as our key forward with responsibility to nullify Weitering and bring in Schache as our second forward. I think Schache will work better with Tmac, Smith, and Fritsch than Grundy. I also think that Gawn is more valuable in the middle of the ball or a kick behind play than up forward, and bringing in Grundy takes away from Gawns strength. It will be interesting to see if Gawn backs himself to play predominantly forward and Grundy is brought in. As for the sub, I'd imagine we'd give Laurie another go. While statistically he didn't set the world on fire he is part if a side that had 30 more inside 50's last week, plays the right way, and should get another go. Scratch Laurie, Turner would offer flexibility if we lose a back or key forward or even if we need to roll the dice and swing May forward late or run Riv through the middle.

BDA I think the decision that is likely to get Maynard into trouble is jumping at Brayshaw when he is about to kick the ball. I'm not sure the rules will support a suspension in this case and what argument the AFL will make, e.g. will they say it is a bump and sanction under rough conduct or use another provision. One thing the JVR case earlier this year demonstrated is that if the AFL sanction a player outside of the rules then it will fail on appeal.

I think this is a sensible approach and pretty straightforward to adjudicate when one player has the ball. It is obviously more complex when the ball is in dispute. I've been in the camp where Maynard doesn't deserve to be suspension but would be comfortable if the AFL ruled that any high contact to the ball carrier where the defender has left the ground is deemed rough conduct, e.g treated the same as a bump. Gary Lyon's summed it up pretty well. “When you jump off the ground you take away any control. “You can run and jump to spoil, and take someone out and knock ‘em out.” Whether the Tribunal and Independent Judge (On Appeal) can uphold a charge would really depend on whether the panel can be satisfied that Maynard acted unreasonably. In any case I suspect the rules to change for next year so that actions such as Maynard's would be deemed rough conduct and treated the same as a high bump.

I think this is where it's important for the Tribunal to establish whether Maynard was jumping directly into the path of Brayshaw or not. If directly into Brayshaw's path then it has to be deemed rough conduct and with high contact and severe impact its 3 - 4 weeks. I'm of the view that concussions can and do occur through pure accidents, e.g. Bedford's sheppard a couple of weeks ago, and the Tribunal needs to consider this in determining whether Maynard gets at least three weeks or is free to play.

Agree re the Tribunal looking at the careless grading. My view is that if the Tribunal is satisfied that Maynard jumped across rather than directly into Brayshaw's path to spoil then they may deem his action reasonable but if they determine that he jumped directly into Brayshaw's path making front on contact inevitable then it will be a 3 - 4 week suspension. I think the path he jumped will be most relevant to the tribunal as it will establish whether the collision is rough conduct or not. On an aside I hope Gus recovers fully and also is able to keep playing footy. He's one of my favourite players and the heart and soul of our team.

El Diablo, it might not be graded as careless if not deemed rough contact. People on here seem to forget about the Van Rooyen spoil which if judged by the same standard on here would have been a 2 - 3 week suspension.

I might be alone here but I don't think Maynard should be suspended. If you watch the footage from the behind the goals angle, Maynard jumps forward and towards the left to smother the kick while Brayshaw is stepping directly forward and while Maynard is in mid air Brayshaw completes his kick and changes direction into the path of Maynard who at this point braces for impact. We were up in arms re the Van Rooyen spoil earlier this year and I think the Maynard case is similar in that he wasn't trying to make forceful contact it is simply a collision between two players who were focussing on the ball. While the ball carrier needs to be protected I think Maynard did this by jumping at an angle during the attempted smother.

Interestingly I reckon the Maynard incident has similarities to Van Rooyen's spoil earlier this season in the sense that the attempted spoil and attempted smother were both footy acts. The difference for mine is that Brayshaw had the ball and was running directly forward and while Maynard jumped and put his arms up to smother he cannoned his body into Brayshaw. I think Maynard must be suspended not for trying to smother but making the decision to jump directly into Brayshaw when executing the attempted smother.

We could use him like Mumford at GWS where he doesn't beed to play much VFL and might play up to half a dozen games in the AFL side.

I'm in favour of bringing in a ready made first or early second round draft pick each year. Such players usually crack into our best 22, don't cost much in terms of salary cap space for the first 2 years, and play regular AFL footy for 5+ years. They also allow us to trade out a mature player who on 300-400k a year who can perform a role but probably wont improve much.

We would have taken Patrick Cripps in 2013 instead of Christian Salem and BT would famously say "Nic Nac Paddy Whack" during a centre clearance goal.

Gawndy, while we might gain some new supporters the year after we win the flag I think it's more about people wanting to sign up for a team who is viewed as a contender each year and consistently challenges. We are a very attractive club for new supporters having won a flag in 2021, finished top 4 for 3 years running, but most importantly we have consistently been in the discussion re premiership contenders during this time, and with our list profile we are capable of challenging for the next 5 years.

Work smarter, not harder 🤔

For $30 a year I'd implore all of our supporters who can afford it to consider taking out an AFLW membership. Supporting and investing in our womens competition now will contribute in a significant way to our on field success and pay massive dividends in building our womens competition and making us a big destination club.

Didn't think there was too much in it and while I'd normally defend Toby here, he did the same action two weeks in a row and was suspended after the second. The fine seems sensible.

Does anyone know what the Family ticket provides? E.g. is it 2 x adult + 2 x children or some other mix.

Yep, pretty disrespectful of the journalist. Luke Dunstan has a name.

Oops, that makes sense. What if he runs around on Conca's shoulders? Inspirational.

If ACL is confirmed and Jake can't play finals is there anything to stop him from being a runner. Imagine him running out and delivering messages to the players, he wiuld be inspirational.

Nick Reiwaldt had a knee injury that looked really bad but ended up being bone bruising and I think he only missed one week.

Love the kudos that ANB is getting, he is in ripping form and finishing his work beautifully.

While I see your point, if these matters were addressed then what would the AFL media talk about during the Monday to Thursday media cycle and for the 5 months there is no footy?

Would love to have Preuss back, this was one of my favourite plays from when he played for us - what a character 😂 https://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/431167/inside-melbourne-wrong-way

I thought the same but have a look at earlier post for 2022 home games and we are top 4 for average home game attendance which includes our game in Alice. Last year both the QB and Anzac eve were away games. We are top 4 in the league for home game attendance.

Wouldn't we have to travel if we come up against Brisbane or Port in the prelim? E.g. they finished higher on the ladder and so play a home game, or does us winning our Qualifying place us ahead of them from a home v away prelim perspective?