Having watched the replay this morning, even the commentators were astounded by how much the Handbagger Dad's Army get away with, even Dunstall who normally thinks us getting a raw deal is good was inspired to something, before trying to explain it way with an excuse of being kind to the Handbaggers.
Dunstall only gives us a raw deal when we don't try. He used to barrack for the blues and very much has a soft spot for us now. If he is critical, you can guarantee we are on here as well. He actually loves the club.
Nothing in the rule changes can stop the asymmetry, the problem is not a rule the problem is that some teams basically badger and batter officials until things fall their way.
A great example is happening today, rather than the AFL media focussing on Handbaggers continually infringing off the ball, the Handbagger mafia is at play beating up a storm about Williams staging for a free? The AFL media has largely ignored the act of holding 20m off the footy, it's a smokescreen by the Handbaggers, who are desperate to escape a focus on their off the ball activities.
Fans forget, when the Handbaggers do the fast break, it leaves opponents loose all over the ground, if the opposition force a turnover they are left vulnerable, so they get away with it by nefarious off the ball tactics that stop opponents finding or closing space.
We have more AFL umpires out on the ground than every before, how can it be they don't see the illegal holds and shepherds that allow the Handbagger Dad's Army to remain competitive?
You consistently seem to miss the point of removing the rule. It doesn't fix every decision in the game. It doesn't solve world hunger. It doesn't cure cancer.
It fixes players/teams using it as a tactic to cause stoppages instead of trying to continue the play. Thats it. Remove it, and that tactic goes with it.
The knock on from there is a much more free flowing game with more of a one-on-one focus because the ball will be pinging around so quickly (due to less stoppages) that teams will be found out if they don't man up. Leaving your man behind will be high risk, low reward. In turn, that will help defensively with turnovers if you start with a more defensive mindset to begin with.
Currently, its attack at all costs and if it doesn't go your way, hatch the ball, cause a stoppage and reset.
The problem that's now been created is that he hasn't been playing football on a regular basis for a while now at any level...so will essentially come in cold.
Gotta bite the bullet sometime.
Couldn't have been any worse than Binns was......which is to be expected as a debutant....but it fills a need.
Why can the likes of Tuohy or Guthrie take the footy run 2 or 3 steps, be tackled and then just hold onto to it unpenalised, but Hewett or Acres does that and it's holding the ball?
The constant just holding onto the ball without trying is furiating to watch.......but thats what happens with the 'no prior' rule.
I keep banging on about it, but remove that rule and that doesn't happen.
Players can't simply cause a stoppage because they want to by not attempting to move the ball on. THAT needs to be penalised, but current rules don't allow it.
Remove 'prior' and that immediately disappears. Players are handballing/kicking/slapping/punching/tapping the ball on rather than simply hatching it. AFL won't do it, because they are too slow to see/fix trends and justify their own existence, but i'm telling you, the game would be much better for it.
I don't know what Cincotta has done or said but his card appears to be marked. I think i had him in my best 22 at the start of the year or at least next in line. He has been an emergency just about every game, and it doesn't how many injuries we get, he still remains an emergency.
Honestly, i would've preferred him in the side over Young yesterday, and that is saying something with the twin towers they had there. Young loses his opponent too many times, and that costs us goals. Kemp and Weitering don't lose their opponents half as much, and even if they did we'd still be better off with the extra run we'd get by not having Young as a hinderence in that area. McGovern provides exactly that, and Cincotta is a poor mans McGovern.
Explain to me how the whole Southern Stand saw Williams get coat hangered but not one of the 4 umpires saw it? That turned the game back in their favour.
Not sure if you saw the replay or not, but i wouldn't have paid it from the replay, and if i was Vossy, i would be tearing strips of Williams for diving and giving them a goal as a result.
Pressure acts are weighted; physical pressure acts (bumping, pushing, tackling) are worth 3.75 points, closing acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing acts are 1.5 points and corralling are 1.2. Chasing and corralling (Zac Fisher's forte) are worth less because they don't have much impact on the ball carrier's ability to dispose of the ball. Fantasia isn't tackling as much as Durdin and Owies so he must be doing a hell of a lot more corralling, chasing and closing to be 17 to 8 and 5.
The same applies to Charlie. Apparently he doesn't chase and his tackle numbers are relatively low so, to be so far ahead of Harry, Durdin and Owies in pressure acts, he must be dynamite on closing acts and corralling.
Harry has incredible acceleration for a big man and his ability to put pressure on defenders by closing and tackling is a bonus for our forwards. Charlie has greater endurance but not the same acceleration. He puts his endurance to good use by applying pressure, closing and corralling, but his main priority is to create separation with his defenders. That's not quite so critical for Harry as he usually enjoys a size and strength advantage.
As MBB said, you are describing something different.
If you compare a players pressure acts with Tackles, you generally see a player higher in one or the other. So Charlie is high in pressure acts, but low in tackles. Harry is higher in tackles, but lower in pressure acts. They almost need to be read together to get a true understanding of how well a player is doing.
What you are talking about is the pressure rating that they show during games, which is a combination of everything you say.
Its very difficult getting consistent stats on all of this stuff. AFL app, shows different to AFL website, which is different to footywire which is different to AFL tables etc etc
That's a stretch too far for some of these blokes. I included Marchbank in my 22, given the criteria... But 'Fit' and 'uninjured' are mutually exclusive terms when combined with 'Marchbank'
I think i had him in at some stage this year, and definitely parts of last year, but i don't see a huge upside to him over McGovern or Kemp playing similar roles, so i think his days might be limited unless he can work out that 'fit/uninjured' part.
Apart from destroying the “Charlie doesn’t defend” nonsense, it illustrates one aspect of Fantasia’s game that goes largely unnoticed.
As Thry has pointed out, Fantasia’s leadership is another reason why he is in the team. We have more than our share of relatively inexperienced players and Fantasia’s guidance and encouragement is invaluable.
Is Fantasia in our best 23? Probably not, but he will continue to be selected until Martin and Motlop are back in the mix.
Playing devils advocate, when i posted similar stats, people didn't like them because a pressure act was deemed to be the ability of created pressure without actually doing anything. Like chasing rather than catching.
I did a comparison of tackles, and Fantasia is well behind the other small forwards.
To me the issue has always been a case of thinking in the present rather than thinking about what might be achieved. That could never be done without them at least playing some time together, and developing that combination. It won't always work, or even be the best option every game. But if you don't try you never know, and that's not going to happen with one of them stuck in the VFL.
Yeah, but you could say that about a million different permutations.
Why dont we try 6 small forwards in the side. Why don't we try 3 rucks in the side. Its not through lack of trying that we have got to this point, its been through lack of output. The output we have got from them last game was very good. The week before, less so. Next week, who knows. The most promising thing to come out of last week was the ability of TDK to be a genuine forward. Never kicked 3 goals before. Never crumbed a goal (AFAIK). He has always had the potential to do it.....just never put it all together. Hopefully that was his turning point. Hopefully next week we do not see the 'old TDK' come back.
I mentioned previously that against injury riddled defensive unit from GWS, inside with ideal conditions at Marvel was the perfect breeding ground for his success. Outside, in the swirly wind in slippery conditions (which might be this week) may not be so rewarding for him, and the team.
