Carlton V Port Melbourne Backs: [61] Tyson Sruk, [25] Jaxon Binns, [63] Kristian Ferronato Half Backs: [31] Harry Lemmey, [45] Alex Mirkov, [34] Rob Monahan Centres: [39] Alex Cincotta, [40] Hudson O'Keeffe, [67] Aiden Mills Half Forward: [43] Ashton Moir, [50] Zavier Maher, [51] Heath Ramshaw Forwards: [52] Liam McMahon, [54] Ned Cahill, [55] Lachlan Young Rucks: [57] Luke Nelson, [58] Michael Lewis, [59] Tom Phillips Int: [60] Blake Kuipers, [64] Archie Stevens, [77] Will White, [79] Jack Lefroy, [80] Bailey Lambert, [74] Logan Prout, [71] Callum Verrell Emergencies: [70] Darcy Hogg, [56] Flynn Riley, [76] Lachlan Swaney, [68] Jess Gedi
Very good to see Mirkov named. He is probably a way short of a gallop, but having him on the field is a bit plus. The other thing is that he gives our mids a decent look at the ball. O'Keefe did pretty well last week, but he doesn't give our mids the sort of service that Mirkov can when he's up and about. Nice to see Tyson Sruk named for us. He was like Ferranato, considered stiff not to be drafted. He gets a lot of the ball from half back. Ferranato was OK last week, but clearly needed a run.
Interesting to see Darcy Hogg and Flynn Riley named as emergencies, Hogg because I want to see him play, Riley because he is a 206 cm tall ruckman. Does that mean our seniors are going to have ruck issues? I have no idea, but it bodes poorly.
Nice to see Lachie Swaney named as well. He is one of our VFL leaders, when he can get on the park. He is an assistant coach for the girls and appears to be highly regarded. But, like Maher, he has been cruelled by injury.
Like seeing Monahan named on the half back... he'll learn more there.
I suspect there is still a bit of a difference between Pittonet and O'Keefe
Unless there is an issue with one of the rucks, O'Keefe is just there for show. In the unlikely event that he does play it just reinforces the fact that the coaching group are committed to two rucks.
So that then begs the question.... If a coaching group that contains a Brownlow medallist and triple premiership mid-fielder with over 150 games of senior coaching, and years as an assistant at a moderately successful Port...and our best ruckman this century think that there are times when the two ruck option should be used. and knowing the strengths and weaknesses, and fitness levels of both our ruckman far better than any of us.
Why are they on a different page to those questioning the two ruck set-up?
They're either as stubborn as mules, or they have a 'cunning' plan that depends on time for Pittonet and TDK to work together and develop a combination. In all the games both have played probably less half have been together.
In the end they'll either work it out or abandon it.
I really like your perspective, Principal LODS. Could very well be the case. And HOK definitely has something/the goods as a ruckman. Raw as heck but his 2nd and 3rd efforts are there for all to see. Agree his is probably named as an emergency as encouragement.
Just watched the final qtr of the Croweaters game... coulda, shoulda won by about 4-5 goals but there was an element of cockiness/lairising which let the Croweaters in. Arrogantly, perhaps, I suspect this was a game we lost more than the opposition won.
Our ability to respond after a loss is pretty good. It'll need to be. I'd expect a far more intense and competitive effort tomorrow arvo with an upset (us winning) on the cards.
Time to regain the 'hunter' focus/spirit. What's the best way to satisfy a 'hunger' for winning - Hunt.
Not only that Young offers less run than Gov. Cowan offers less run than Saad.
So we were lacking with run last week, so they've 'fixed it' by 'adding' less run this week.
Also no chance of putting a tall as an emergency because that will come from.... [37] Jordan Boyd, [16] Jack Carroll, [14] Orazio Fantasia, [19] Corey Durdin, [7] Matthew Kennedy *facepalm*
Eventually we'll win one of these, but it will be from good luck rather than good management.
I have developed a bit of a sniffle and, as Ms DJC is scheduled to have an operation on Friday, I thought I should do a RAT; positive!
All the very best to you and Mrs DJC, David. I hope the op goes well and Mrs DJC is doing 100 metre sprints in no time
Mrs Baggers tested positive to Covid recently and developed a nasty cough, temperature, runny nose and fatigue. Now she's lost her sense of smell and taste but is feeling better. Yours truly, naturally, also got it but like you, only experienced mild cold symptoms for a day or so.
I think you have misunderstood my position. I don't believe ms Higgins was anywhere near as inebriated as people are insinuating. I think she and he ended up doing something that they were dismissed for, and have been in reputation fix mode ever since. Her way to get around that, was to sling mud somewhere else, it has stuck, because he is a potato and was already covered in dirt.
If you read the trial notes and the judges notes it is recorded approximately how much alcohol Higgins consumed... be enough to eventually put me under the table. They're the facts. Consensual sex was virtually impossible... but I hark back to one of my original points, what kind of bloke seeks to take advantage of a drunk woman?
Did Justice Lee come to this conclusion based on his vast experience on the current nightclub/ bar hopping scene?
I think old folk who say things like "One does not pash" are completely out of touch with the current climate.
Well I've followed this thread pretty closely and can't find anyone saying, 'One does not pash...' Even in this old bloke's day, we did plenty of 'pashing' at the disco, some times with a few different gals, but that did not signal, 'She wants a r**t.'
But from what you're saying MBB (& 3 Leos), if a person is three sheets to the wind, they're fair game, regardless of what they might say if sober. To moi this is not so much a legal issue but in fact goes far deeper than that... beyond the 'law.'
I must be quaintly old fashioned, but I think not. Simply put, and perhaps it was my upbringing, if a woman is drunk you look after her and protect her from sexual predators. And I have done this, as a young fella (and just as horny as the next) through to present day. In fact I find men who prey on drunk people to be cowardly and predatory. And this attitude is not righteousness (though to a predator it would seem so), it's just common bloody decency and a basic male responsibility. That drunk woman could be your mother, sister or daughter... how would you like the men around her to behave?
As K pointed out, VFL good form does not automatically transfer to good AFL form. And this applies, especially, to the perplexing selection of Pitto... to replace a mid... WTF! I don't care how well Pitto played in the Magoos, his selection unsettled our side. Another sentimental selection?
Personally, I think Binnsy is close but his light body still concerns me... needs more strength in the contest. When the going got really hard and tough in the VFL Rottingwood game, especially in the second half, Binnsy went missing.
Ollie hasn't been down on form, he's been ordinary. Reality. Tries his heart out, but tackle failures and fumbles worry me. I'd definitely give him a spell in the Magoos to regain touch and work on hurting the opposition with possessions... not to mention much needed confidence.
Acres and Cotters are our best wingmen... both can run all day, defend well and then hit the scoreboard.
We literally won game(s?) last year without a recognised ruck.
You, among others, have pointed out how pointless some ruck stats are.
You, amonth others, have pointed out that the around the ground work is more important than what happens in the ruck.
So why are you, among others, so fixated on the need for a second ruck in the side?
For the record, Harry did not attend a single ruck contest.
As many of us have mentioned previously, bringing in a ruckman (Pitto) for a mid (Cerra) was baffling... to be kind. Dumb, to be blunt. This spanks of 'Old Carlton'... sentimental selections (which could also apply to small Durds & Fantasia).
It's not that it's the end of the world, but (as a I banged on about previously) with so many of our recent 'precarious' victories we cannot afford to ignore the signs; the reality, and flirting with form with silly errors at the selection table almost spanks of arrogance.
We are still very much a work in progress with a fair way to go yet.
In fairness, we did have 5 rushed behinds (they had 0) So it was essentially 14.9 to 16.4, and we had at least 1 hit the post, and 1 go down as touched when it was a goal. So its not so bad when you dive down into it.
It was more of a case of them not being able to miss more than it was our bad kicking.
And they couldn't miss because so many of their shots on goal were 'easy.' When a side has 20 shots on goal and nails 80% of them, you look at your defence... it wasn't 'luck', it was simply that their shots on goal were 'a walk in the park.' Poor pressure. We gave the 'suckers' an even break and made them look much better than they were.
