Mega Thread 2024 Media & Miscellaneous Thread

[gungho]

My crazy idea: Give Fyfe a go on the wing. He won't get as beaten up and can give us a marking option down the line.
He also - won't get in the way of Andy, Brodie and Serong in the midfield, and won't get in the way of Sturt, Jackson and Amiss in the forward line. (We need space in the forward line).
Longmuir's conservative nature, (Sturt taking an eternity to be selected and the Erasmus no show) makes me thing this will never happen.

 

[freo1997]

My crazy idea: Give Fyfe a go on the wing. He won't get as beaten up and can give us a marking option down the line.
He also - won't get in the way of Andy, Brodie and Serong in the midfield, and won't get in the way of Sturt, Jackson and Amiss in the forward line. (We need space in the forward line).
Longmuir's conservative nature, (Sturt taking an eternity to be selected and the Erasmus no show) makes me thing this will never happen.

Banfield staying in the team is another one.

 

[Ragtooth]

While we all might blame the PurpleReign guys for cursing us to doom since they started their podcast, give the latest episode a listen.


It's just Oz and Ryan Daniels. Quite insightful and maybe we wear our purple shaded glasses too much when reading into the medias Freo "hate". Made me relatively optimistic for the future.

 

[Joao]

While we all might blame the PurpleReign guys for cursing us to doom since they started their podcast, give the latest episode a listen.


It's just Oz and Ryan Daniels. Quite insightful and maybe we wear our purple shaded glasses too much when reading into the medias Freo "hate". Made me relatively optimistic for the future.

The dude literally works for the organisation "responsible" for the bias. So whether true or not, he isn't remotely impartial.

 

[sumavich]

I don't agree with the premise that we won't be impacted by Tassie. We haven't been good at retaining talent, obvs.
That will affect us as much as anyone if we lose Cox, anyone else of our higher picked players

 

[Dale147]

WA footy

 

[Dockeroo]

While we all might blame the PurpleReign guys for cursing us to doom since they started their podcast, give the latest episode a listen.


It's just Oz and Ryan Daniels. Quite insightful and maybe we wear our purple shaded glasses too much when reading into the medias Freo "hate". Made me relatively optimistic for the future.

Thanks I enjoyed this.
Purple reign are my fav freo podcast. Great listening each week.
Rhino comes across as a decent fella to be fair.

 

[ignoramus]

Sonny up for the goal of the round.

 

[Nothing]

Sonny up for the goal of the round.

Unfortunately not even goal of the game.

 

[s_wd6]

Unfortunately not even goal of the game.

Georgiades didn't even have the best mark of the game and still came away with MOTY

 

[BigRang]

My crazy idea: Give Fyfe a go on the wing. He won't get as beaten up and can give us a marking option down the line.
He also - won't get in the way of Andy, Brodie and Serong in the midfield, and won't get in the way of Sturt, Jackson and Amiss in the forward line. (We need space in the forward line).
Longmuir's conservative nature, (Sturt taking an eternity to be selected and the Erasmus no show) makes me thing this will never happen.

Fyfe on one wing and Jackson on the other would be my choices. Leave the actual forwards in Treacy/Ammiss/Sturt in the forward line

 

[ignoramus]

Unfortunately not even goal of the game.

Depends on what you criteria you're using to judge them. Call it purple tinted glasses if you want (many would), but for mine Sonny's goal showed a more even balance of desperation, luck, nous and class than Ashcroft's. Though, obviously Ashcroft's was a killer too.

 

[Dockeroo]

Goal of the year - meh I couldnt care less. But let’s me honest - that Ashcroft goal was a bit of a fluke. Throw it on the boot and see what happens.

 

[s_wd6]

Goal of the year - meh I couldnt care less. But let’s me honest - that Ashcroft goal was a bit of a fluke. Throw it on the boot and see what happens.

That's the thing. I thought Ashcroft's goal was insane, and Charlie's too, but both of them were complete flukes. Whereas sonny was absolutely intentional and pure skill. That being said I have zero issue if either of those two win over him, and a fluke mid air kick from the tighest of angles is rly entertaining.

 

[Lach72]

Sonny was clearly the best of all three

 

[PurpleReign]

Sonny’s goal was calculated and deliberate, an amazing act of skill, Ashcroft’s, although more spectacular, was a kick in hope.

 

[gaskin]

Doesn't make Sonny's better. Ashcroft's goal, whether he meant it or not, is better and will rightly win goal of the year.

 

[ignoramus]

I find it odd that people regularly express disbelief that BB keeps getting selected despite not laying tackles, etc., like a pressure forward should be.

Not trying to negate criticism of BB or anything, but if he continues to be picked despite routinely demonstrating few pressure acts, then it seems reasonable to me that his performance is not being assessed in terms of how much pressure he applies. Ergo, BB is not a "pressure forward" — in terms of performance, certainly, but also in terms of designated role. He's being asked to do something else, such that he is not often in the right positions to lay tackles (nor expected to).

Those like me who use that description are only doing so because our coach has said that's why he's picked, for his defensive pressure. I agree that he isn't, hence my disgust at him being picked.

It's certainly not as a goal kicking threat, marking target or nullifying dangerous HB's because he's doing none of that either.

I'm still waiting for the reasoning those who support his selection can provide other than the ongoing comedy it provides for some. I'd honestly love to hear/read a cogent reason why he's playing because there isn't a statistical one, there isn't a performance one and as far as I can see or have heard there isn't a strategic or structural one that holds any water. The relief in understanding it would be great for me but every time it comes Longmuir gives a reason that isn't backed up by any measure or the eye test.

Brought over from the BB appreciation thread, so as not to derail it.

I'm not defending BB. I don't often argue what should or shouldn't be done, because I admittedly don't know much about football. But I have to believe that match committee is not populated by a bunch of total simpletons who know less about footy than me. I have to believe, in other words, that BB is being selected for a reason (something other than pearls/money).

Like you, I'd also love to hear what BB does that gets him selected, but more because I'd like to get a better sense of thinking/strategy more generally. E.g. Snuffaluphagus asked Lachie Schultz in the BF question session a few months ago how many roles he prepares for, and Lachie said there are 6 different forward roles and he usually prepares for all of them. I'm assuming that "roles" here are separable from the conventional positions, and perhaps even not quite the same as the roles that often get thrown about in the weekly changes and the best 22 threads ("crumbing forward", "high half forward", etc).

BB, in my view, must be performing better in one or more of those specific roles than the next best option, regardless of how well that option performs as a goal kicker, pressure forward or whatever. I'd love to get some insight into the specifics of these roles, but I'm not really expecting the coach to front the media and go into those specifics for the sake of satisfying members. There will no doubt be a bit about these roles that is standard across the competition, but part of it will be specific to game plan, set plays, etc., that are not for public dissemination.

Of course, I could be entirely wrong, and football is really just a case of a bunch of disorganised players chasing a pigskin around the oval. Either way, I would love it if we could somehow convince a (recently) former AFL player to join our board and provide some insight.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Brought over from the BB appreciation thread, so as not to derail it.

I'm not defending BB. I don't often argue what should or shouldn't be done, because I admittedly don't know much about football. But I have to believe that match committee is not populated by a bunch of total simpletons who know less about footy than me. I have to believe, in other words, that BB is being selected for a reason (something other than pearls/money).

Like you, I'd also love to hear what BB does that gets him selected, but more because I'd like to get a better sense of thinking/strategy more generally. E.g. Snuffaluphagus asked Lachie Schultz in the BF question session a few months ago how many roles he prepares for, and Lachie said there are 6 different forward roles and he usually prepares for all of them. I'm assuming that "roles" here are separable from the conventional positions, and perhaps even not quite the same as the roles that often get thrown about in the weekly changes and the best 22 threads ("crumbing forward", "high half forward", etc).

BB, in my view, must be performing better in one or more of those specific roles than the next best option, regardless of how well that option performs as a goal kicker, pressure forward or whatever. I'd love to get some insight into the specifics of these roles, but I'm not really expecting the coach to front the media and go into those specifics for the sake of satisfying members. There will no doubt be a bit about these roles that is standard across the competition, but part of it will be specific to game plan, set plays, etc., that are not for public dissemination.

Of course, I could be entirely wrong, and football is really just a case of a bunch of disorganised players chasing a pigskin around the oval. Either way, I would love it if we could somehow convince a (recently) former AFL player to join our board and provide some insight.

Think that was a Taylor question but I'm happy to take credit =)

On Banfield, I think there are definitely roles and nuances we dont understand but at the same time, we have all watched enough footy to know when something doesnt make sense and coaches definitely develop favourites. Like you said, I'd love to have a recent AFL player try to explain how on Earth he keeps getting a game. If he's playing a role in our forwardline we somehow dont understand, our forwardline sucks so either the role he's playing is bogus or he's not playing the role

 

[ignoramus]

apologies to Taylor

 

[Taylor]

I can't remember the setting, so I apologise if it's a casual chat over coffee that I remember, but JL has said Bailey has learned almost every role in JL's game plan and can perform them.

That's a lot of versatility to have in an objectively large runner.

Whether he is in the places the coach wants when he wants them is a different story.

 

[apuchar]

Sounds like good back-up, not necessarily best 23

 

[Wobbly Punt]

Brought over from the BB appreciation thread, so as not to derail it.

I'm not defending BB. I don't often argue what should or shouldn't be done, because I admittedly don't know much about football. But I have to believe that match committee is not populated by a bunch of total simpletons who know less about footy than me. I have to believe, in other words, that BB is being selected for a reason (something other than pearls/money).

Like you, I'd also love to hear what BB does that gets him selected, but more because I'd like to get a better sense of thinking/strategy more generally. E.g. Snuffaluphagus asked Lachie Schultz in the BF question session a few months ago how many roles he prepares for, and Lachie said there are 6 different forward roles and he usually prepares for all of them. I'm assuming that "roles" here are separable from the conventional positions, and perhaps even not quite the same as the roles that often get thrown about in the weekly changes and the best 22 threads ("crumbing forward", "high half forward", etc).

BB, in my view, must be performing better in one or more of those specific roles than the next best option, regardless of how well that option performs as a goal kicker, pressure forward or whatever. I'd love to get some insight into the specifics of these roles, but I'm not really expecting the coach to front the media and go into those specifics for the sake of satisfying members. There will no doubt be a bit about these roles that is standard across the competition, but part of it will be specific to game plan, set plays, etc., that are not for public dissemination.

Of course, I could be entirely wrong, and football is really just a case of a bunch of disorganised players chasing a pigskin around the oval. Either way, I would love it if we could somehow convince a (recently) former AFL player to join our board and provide some insight.

Thanks for relocating so it can be discussed. Like Snuffaluphagus I've tried to stay out of the BB stuff to avoid rancour etc but haven't done a good job of staying away from it more recently.

Whilst I don't think the match committee is a bunch of simpletons who know less about footy than me, or you, I think it is entirely possible they are humans who can suffer from confirmation bias, over analysis, skewed analysis or simply getting things wrong. It happens in all fields all the time at all expert levels.

I have no doubt they have their views on why they play him and some of them may even be invisible to me and the wider crew who watch in bemusement. What can also be true is that he is hitting whatever role they see for him and they over value it or, via confirmation bias, ignore his deficiencies. The vast weight of information available suggests he is a bad pick, as does team performance so to question it is valid.

The biggest reason I can see for the ongoing selection of him was the main thrust of my initial response to you. When queried about it JL2 said the pressure he brings as a forward was his point of difference. So to me, and others, the coach is picking him for things he doesn’t do and doesn’t pick people who do it better PLUS offer more as scoring options.

If there is a secret sauce the coaches see and we don’t, it’s not working and needs to change.

 

[Wilksyy]

While we all might blame the PurpleReign guys for cursing us to doom since they started their podcast, give the latest episode a listen.


It's just Oz and Ryan Daniels. Quite insightful and maybe we wear our purple shaded glasses too much when reading into the medias Freo "hate". Made me relatively optimistic for the future.

You want to be optimistic for the future get off Freo bigfooty!

 

[Purpletown]

Has anyone seen a write-up on round 1 of the PSA football ? If there was anything in the media I must have missed it.