Prediction Round 23 Changes vs. GWS Giants

[CaseySibosadoHOF]

It was unnecessary and out of character but those thinking that had any significant damage were just hoping he got suspended

Hopefully we re-sign him this week, coz I can see him being made sub with Walters coming back, though on past occasions he's returned from injury as sub. As you've noted, Banners generally plays better up the ground, and that position has other takers it'd seem.

Side note: can he pls get a usable right foot? He might be more of a one-footed leftie than Arjen Robben, and this year in open play I feel like it gets exposed more. Once I saw it, it's become impossible to unsee how much he avoids using the right.

 

[ilikepotatoes]

Only a fine for Banfield.

Consistent with the season.

The MRO is so out of touch with reality.

 

[anchor man]

Crows have done us a massive favour.

 

[kp junior]

Hopefully we re-sign him this week, coz I can see him being made sub with Walters coming back, though on past occasions he's returned from injury as sub. As you've noted, Banners generally plays better up the ground, and that position has other takers it'd seem.

Side note: can he pls get a usable right foot? He might be more of a one-footed leftie than Arjen Robben, and this year in open play I feel like it gets exposed more. Once I saw it, it's become impossible to unsee how much he avoids using the right.

Yep it is super obvious


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ilikepotatoes]

So in an ideal world we get Sonny, Darcy and Treacy back.

And hopefully we have an attacking option as sub.

Win one of the next 2 and we should be in finals thanks to other results.

Rather win this and be able to manage players for round 24 in the hope a second win isn't necessary.

 

[Footskill]

Hopefully we re-sign him this week, coz I can see him being made sub with Walters coming back, though on past occasions he's returned from injury as sub. As you've noted, Banners generally plays better up the ground, and that position has other takers it'd seem.

Side note: can he pls get a usable right foot? He might be more of a one-footed leftie than Arjen Robben, and this year in open play I feel like it gets exposed more. Once I saw it, it's become impossible to unsee how much he avoids using the right.

Don't think he necessarily deserves to be demoted to sub again, although his game on the weekend wasn't great. But none of the fwds were

However, sub is better than omitted. What I've seen is banners best quarters are 3rd and 4th .seems to ease into the game and able to run games out.

 

[Cobbler]

So in an ideal world we get Sonny, Darcy and Treacy back.

And hopefully we have an attacking option as sub.

Win one of the next 2 and we should be in finals thanks to other results.

Rather win this and be able to manage players for round 24 in the hope a second win isn't necessary.

There is also a highly unlikely but not impossible chance at top 4.

Obviously we beat GWS and Port

Port could lose to Adelaide
GWS could lose to Dogs away

If that played out we’d be in the 4.

Not impossible.

 

[Sherriff Incorporated]

Do we need to go through and analyse the game of every single player who played?? Will that make you happy?

I'm not really sure what criticising most of the team actually achieves. For what its worth there were some players who dont deserve criticism that have received criticism here in my opinion. Sam Sturt for example was actually free a fair bit but was missed by the player kicking the ball to him particularly in the last quarter. His game didn't deserve criticism in my opinion unlike Banfield who's kicks missed free players multiple times.

 

[Taylor]

And no Brayshaw sanction

 

[freocuz]

There is also a highly unlikely but not impossible chance at top 4.

Obviously we beat GWS and Port

Port could lose to Adelaide
GWS could lose to Dogs away

If that played out we’d be in the 4.

Not impossible.

It’s also possible we finish 11th, with both Essendon and Collingwood jumping us. Not likely, but possible.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[CaseySibosadoHOF]

Only a fine for Banfield.

Consistent with the season.

The MRO is so out of touch with reality.

They're applying the rules pretty consistently. Like for any given incident, I think if you watch it with an objective eye and look at the corresponding rule, most times the MRO ruling would be "correct". There was an outcry for Banfield to be suspended and for Fyfe to get off, but based on the rules the opposite outcomes occur.

I think most fans want a harsher distinction btwn footballing acts and non-footballing acts (ie: a footballing act that happens to cause damage shouldn't be punished harsher than a non-footballing act that doesn't). The AFL, on the other hand, seems to be really leaning into "avoid concussion lawsuits at all costs" mentality. And if that involves Tom Emmett being dealt with harsher for a tackle that 5 years ago we would've applauded than Jesse Hogan did for intentionally punching someone in the face, so be it.

 

[Docker82]

They'll suspend him because he's in purple. We've never gotten off easy with them. I don't care anyway. He needs the week off.

But it'll be a nice three suspensions in a row after having none for the entire first 20 rounds of the season.

They don’t like West Coast anymore than us - they’re just a more powerful club when they need to be. As they’re sh** atm they won’t throw their weight around and waste everyone’s energy.

 

[hoss]

Do we need to go through and analyse the game of every single player who played?? Will that make you happy?

I agree to a point but it makes for way more interesting internet than being the 112th poster to blame the same one or two players.

 

[Docker82]

They're applying the rules pretty consistently. Like for any given incident, I think if you watch it with an objective eye and look at the corresponding rule, most times the MRO ruling would be "correct". There was an outcry for Banfield to be suspended and for Fyfe to get off, but based on the rules the opposite outcomes occur.

I think most fans want a harsher distinction btwn footballing acts and non-footballing acts (ie: a footballing act that happens to cause damage shouldn't be punished harsher than a non-footballing act that doesn't). The AFL, on the other hand, seems to be really leaning into "avoid concussion lawsuits at all costs" mentality. And if that involves Tom Emmett being dealt with harsher for a tackle that 5 years ago we would've applauded than Jesse Hogan did for intentionally punching someone in the face, so be it.

Sums it up around right for me.

It’s frustrating than an unnecessary non-football act isn’t worth more or at least the same than a careless but dangerous borderline football act.

Punching someone off the ball should be a week. To the head three weeks. If that punch causes significant damage then the player then the punishment should be severe. ATM we’re seeing fines for any punch that doesn’t cause damage and penalties not harsh enough for one that cause damage. Eight weeks for Gaff wasn’t nearly enough but was consistent with the tribunal at the time so was fair in a way - an accident like should be worth 20+ weeks.

 

[Cobbler]

It’s also possible we finish 11th, with both Essendon and Collingwood jumping us. Not likely, but possible.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yeah, but Pies and Bombers have very difficult draws.

At least with the top 4 it’s dependent on us winning both against teams literally that we’d be displacing.

The reality is we beat Port (no given) and someone in the current 7,8 and 9 spot lose one of their collective 6 games remaining.

 

[kingswood71]

Strange season....If we can win both (unlikely) and theres a bunch of upsets, we could finish as high as 2nd ha ha
It is what it is. Just need to focus on beating GWS!!!

 

[doppo]

You have to give it to Bailey. Between the dirty straight outta the 80’s elbow, and the vintage Banners performance - he certainly wins the “took retro round most literally” award.

 

[Joao]

Jezz and here i was thinking we were trying to get into the finals. Upside is future not today.

Let me be more clear, Johnson isn't far off Brodie as an inside mid already and you can't play Brodie instead because Johnson spends time on the wing.

And then you add the upside and it's no contest.

I know age and inexperience aren’t factors. They’re not factors when you’re up at 3 quarter time.

Pearce coming back was plain dumb.

We’ve blown a great chance at top 4 or better.

Holy **** dude, how are you not getting this? That's exactly what "young" teams do. More talented teams that lack the polish/composure/whatever required beyond pure ability to consistently win games against more experienced teams.

It is literally what people mean when they say it's hard to win when you're young. Its not because they don't have the raw ability, its all the other stuff that 99.9% players only get from experience.

Johnson needs to put on more size, needs to look like Cripps. It's a shame they removed weight from player profiles, I want to track his progress!

Don't want him to overdo it, he's noticeably quicker than Cripps.

He's already pretty hard to tackle, could be an absolute beast with another preseason.

 

[ilikepotatoes]

They're applying the rules pretty consistently. Like for any given incident, I think if you watch it with an objective eye and look at the corresponding rule, most times the MRO ruling would be "correct". There was an outcry for Banfield to be suspended and for Fyfe to get off, but based on the rules the opposite outcomes occur.

I think most fans want a harsher distinction btwn footballing acts and non-footballing acts (ie: a footballing act that happens to cause damage shouldn't be punished harsher than a non-footballing act that doesn't). The AFL, on the other hand, seems to be really leaning into "avoid concussion lawsuits at all costs" mentality. And if that involves Tom Emmett being dealt with harsher for a tackle that 5 years ago we would've applauded than Jesse Hogan did for intentionally punching someone in the face, so be it.

Oh I get it.

I think that the discrepancy between football and non football acts in terms of suspensions is the biggest mismatch between supporter/fan expectation and what the AFL delivers other than umpiring.

It's just such a simple fix.

 

[sumavich]

banfield was free on a number of occasions and didn’t get hit up as well. Had his arms outstretched a number of times and was ignored.

The worst part was the Geelong defenders strolling it out with minimal resistance. No pressure, and that’s on the ones that should be doing it! Not naming anyone, but you know who they are. Our forward line has a problem with tackling

 

[doppo]

Yeah the upsetting part is it should be our senior players who are lifting in these fourth quarters - Ryan, Cox, Darcy*, Fyfe, JOM to raise us to the level when the intensity rises, as Geelong senior players did yesterday. But they’re often the most frustrating. Serong was the only one who looked like he was absolutely not going down without a fight. It shouldn’t be on the shoulders of our under 25’s to dig and and do the hard work

*yesterday obviously excluded

 

[Footskill]

Watching the 3 qrter huddle JL seemed to be more animated than usual and getting them fired up. But then they they just get snuffed out without much of a whimper

I really think our mids need to own these last three losses. For all the praise the mids get for being such a great clearance team, we can't seem to clear it when the games on the line.

 

[Cobbler]

Let me be more clear, Johnson isn't far off Brodie as an inside mid already and you can't play Brodie instead because Johnson spends time on the wing.

And then you add the upside and it's no contest.


Holy **** dude, how are you not getting this? That's exactly what "young" teams do. More talented teams that lack the polish/composure/whatever required beyond pure ability to consistently win games against more experienced teams.

It is literally what people mean when they say it's hard to win when you're young. Its not because they don't have the raw ability, its all the other stuff that 99.9% players only get from experience.




Don't want him to overdo it, he's noticeably quicker than Cripps.

He's already pretty hard to tackle, could be an absolute beast with another preseason.

You ok?

Young teams don’t win 12.5 games either. So which one is it?

We can be young and good. We’re not young across the board.

But maybe you’re right. If thats the case then well done on winning the opinion piece.

Either way, no need to go about it like an arseh*le.

In my opinion, we blew a massive shot this year. Next year there’s no guarantee.

We blew it by attempting to hold leads and not extend on them. My watching came to my conclusion. Age goes out the window IN MY OPINION when you’re up with 10 mins left and lose 5 out of 6 times.

We seem to run the Pies game out well. Were we young in that last 10 mins or did we try to win it?

 

[wakojako]

Don't want him to overdo it, he's noticeably quicker than Cripps.

He's already pretty hard to tackle, could be an absolute beast with another preseason.

While that is true, I also think size does matter when it comes to clearances and contested possession. The stronger and bigger they are, the more they can impact the contest. Just look how Danger destroyed Fyfe on the weekend. If they (other midfield bulls) can do that to Fyfe, they will have no trouvlr destroying Young and Co. which is why I think we need Johnson to pack on the size and take the hits for us. Johnson is a very exciting prospect so let's hope he lives up to his potential!

 

[Taylor]

banfield was free on a number of occasions and didn’t get hit up as well. Had his arms outstretched a number of times and was ignored.

The worst part was the Geelong defenders strolling it out with minimal resistance. No pressure, and that’s on the ones that should be doing it! Not naming anyone, but you know who they are. Our forward line has a problem with tackling

Quite a lot of times we had a loose forward, a good 40 to 50m ahead of the ball after a mark I about 25m of clear space all around. One that stands out is Freddy taking a mark near half back and Young roaming ahead with his hands in the air forward of the corner of the centre square.

If we took that option, we would have turned it over more, but we probably would have scored more too.