I think we can expect about 8 (total) goals from the following players:
Levi Jones (if he plays) Kreuzer Wright Everitt Walker
We've had no one who can reliably kick multiple goals per week since Fev. Walker is the closest and even he kicked 1 goals or less in a third of his games.
It's a big call then for 2 of them to kick multiple goals each week and the rest also getting on the scoreboard.
Quote
None of them are world beaters, but they can all kick a goal in the right situations. If we get first use, they will get more opportunities which should lead to goals.
From there, its just a matter of whether or not we can get others to chime in with a couple as well. If we can get one or more from the following players (not every week, but a mix of them):
Cripps Gibbs Tuohy Murphy Simpson Docherty Byrne Kerridge Murphy Thomas
Then we can score enough to win games. Its all about how well we use the footy. If we are in last seasons form we wont win many, but last season we were clearly underdone and ill prepared for a full season. We seem to be in better overall condition but the real stuff is just about to start and things might change... Who knows. A bit of luck will be needed too obviously. Richmond are the most overated team in the AFL bar North Melbourne, and are missing 2 players who are barometers for whether or not they win games. Combine that with the fragility they frequently remind everyone of having, and the fact that they have a soft backend to the season, they will come good later but are ripe for the picking this week.
Blues by 10 points. We wont win easy, but Im confident we can and will win.
Early on, we're going to need a number of big individual efforts to drag the team along IMO. Which may be enough to snag a win but the focus needs to be on getting the players playing a game now that will win us flags, even if it means losses now.
You don't seriously think the club doctor runs the joint do you?
So then, who else in our club senior administration has enough of the equivalent training in technical aspects of health and injury to make recommendations to the board based on assessment of the specialist reports.
You don't seriously think the board read those reports do you?
It would be very poor governance for the board not to require some form of involvement and feedback from McKay regarding any player welfare issues. Short of actually having a medical doctor on the board, he is the next best option.
Not sure what you're arguing. That McKay actively took ownership of the risk that Thomas would never recover and now that it looks like he won't, he shouldn't be held accountable for taking the risk? And all that is fine because he's a vet and vets are better than doctors at assessing medical reports in humans?
I haven't been following this sport with any sort of regularity since the engine use rules came in (don't think I missed a race for 10 years).... Boy, it's a wacky sport now! Couldn't even hear the things...
So again no comments about the skills and training that make McKay's a suitable choice to deal with the technicalities, jargon, pharmacology and therapies relating to injuries, health and fitness as an AFL player. Just an attack on me.
Your bias is transparent, perhaps you'd prefer we replace him with an accountant or librarian!
Until there is some evidence to support your assertions, I'm happy stand by the knowledge that McKay has hard qualifications that cannot be questioned and makes him the ideal person to assess the reports of medical specialists.
So the guy whose job isn't to assess medical reports and who isn't qualified to do so is the ideal person to make the call? One of the more out there ideas but would nicely explain this mess.
I'd like to see Murphy spend most of his time as a forward. Besides being very good there, we need to start moving into the next generation midfield. Murphy for spurts and when they new guys start to lose their way (which will likely be often to begin with)
You are the one who made the assertion that we didn't take advice in your statement below!
So I appreciate you are ignoring the advice reported at the time that Buttifant had told Malthouse that Daisy was capable of making a full recovery, you write it off as smuck advice, fair enough. But you are making an even greater assumption that independent medical advice about Daisy would have been negative.
You don't know, you are just guessing and throwing darts!
So you think Buttifant, who is not a medical doctor or a physiotherapist and has a pretty clear conflict in this scenario, should be the authority on injuries?
You assume we didn't and you assume it was only McKay's responsibility.
Which is likely to be as accurate as the assumption that the club sacked Fev.
Do you think we run a lemonade stand or something?
All high value contracts go to the board and they only get to the board with McKay's endorsement. Potentially, Swan took it straight there, circumventing that check (a possibility given his sacking but probably unlikely) which is about McKay's only get out clause.
Most likely is he was "convinced" that the contract should go through by Mick and Swan and for that, he would need to go.
Easy to claim due diligence in hindsight, hard to see how people establishing player values after the fact would translate the knowledge they gained into a prediction. Any such statements are really rubbish unless they can travel time.
We should have taken medical advice ahead of some schmuck's belief that he has the heart to work through the injury.
There's no point defending it, the only question is how McKay has survived it.
Well I don't want Gibbs 'floating' around like a pansy so he can go have the spotlight shining o him and match up against a Cotchin or the like. He needs to be challenged in a MAJOR way!
x2
BTW, We're currently at $4.50 (think the line is under 4 goals).
I dint think we're a good show but Richmond with some injuries in round 1, us with a new coach, is probably our best shot at an upset all year.
Would be a nice change to start the season with a win.
problem I see is that none of the other candidates are offering any solutions to the issues Trump is raising....building a wall is a crazy idea as is banning all Muslims etc etc but there are no solutions being offered to rebuke this madness just personal attacks on Trump which he seems a master at dealing with....
Closer to Pauline Hanson IMO people felt what she was saying was so ludicrous that they dismissed her and the public sides with the person being attacked as it looks like a bunch of pompous asses not giving someone a go. As soon as they began focussing on policy she basically imploded (though still hangs around)
Unfortunate that we are not as skilled as the hawks and that gameplan might not work as well for us.
It took the players at Hawthorn the best part of 10 years to get the skills you see today - that's with selecting players who tended to be more skillful to begin with. It didn't take 10 years to start seeing the benefits but it was ugly, ugly stuff for the first 3 years. We need to invest this time as well rather than just saying it won't work right away.
