How are the previews handed out at Roar HQ Ryan? Am very much hoping that we’ll get your insights into the WCE v Melb prelim but not sure if the powers that be might see you as a bit conflicted? Maybe you’ll just have to take your blue and yellow scarf off while you write it??

Once again an interesting take on things, I’m sure my response (albeit a bit late on the scene) will elicit calls for me to take my “grumpy old man” hat off momentarily (as unlikely as that is).

While I am not against the idea of diversity of thought, particularly in regards to something as subjective as the recruitment process, I think that there is a danger of this being somewhat of a thin end of a potentially thick wedge. The “moneyball” philosophy is definitely valid in sports where the activities are, for the most part, closed (e.g. baseball) and most practical when assessing the performance of players who are already in the system. The recruitment of kids out of TAC/WAFL Colts/SANFL Colts when looked at with a predominantly statistical based lense (I recognise that this may not be the predominant view at present, but the tone of your article suggests that there is support for a move towards this thinking) is that it undervalues the inherent nuances of the game such as game awareness and decision making.

To give a practical example. A baseball batter goes to the plate, if he hasn’t already been given instruction from the dug out as to how to attempt to hit he will get it from the 3rd base coach, there is limited (if any) scope for independent thought and/or action (unless he chooses to defy the orders, which is a separate matter). His ability to execute those orders can be fairly represented by the statistics that support his performance (e.g. on base percentage etc.). A footballer is required to use a much larger degree of free thought in the execution of his skills on the field. Granted he will be attempting to execute the coach’s/team’s plan but this is never a binary action.

There is a risk that the move towards a more statistical based assessment of potential recruits will have a similar impact to the “revolutionary” move years ago to focus on recruiting athletes and then working on their football IQ. Yes there were and are examples where this works but give me a good football brain over an athletic build every day of the week.

For the record, I’m not saying this is specifically what Emma has been hired to do (I don’t know her from a bar of soap and have never been a mock-draft devotee so I can’t comment on whether this is statistically based assessment or not). It seems to me that the role of statistics in modern football is increasingly to give “expert” commentators something to talk about. I for one wouldn’t put supplying David King with his ammunition high on my list of achievements, the man makes me want to deafen myself. But that is an unrelated rant.

Great read Cam! I was planning on an article myself after I attended the Perth leg last weekend. This is the 3rd year that the PDC have come to Australia so it appears we are getting behind it enough to ensure that it is a recurring event.

If Simon Whitlock and Paul Nicholson can rediscover their best form it will do the world of good from a local interest perspective. Also good to see Kyle Anderson continuing to improve. The atmosphere when he played in front of his home crowd was electric!

Like the 3 criteria that I used swagger is one of those intangibles that doesn’t find its way into the statistics. These are qualitative, not quantitative attributes, which make them far more open to interpretation.

The beauty of opinions is that we all have them. Are the 3 players you mentioned the best players in the competition right now? Quite possibly.

Would I chose any of them over Pendlebury as my first choice when picking a side for grand final day? No, for the reasons I outlined in the article.

Nothing against the guys you mentioned and I rate them all highly in the areas I have discussed, just not as highly as others.

Your most influential player doesn’t necessarily have to be your best one!

I really hope the scuttlebutt that I am hearing around Perth is either wrong or at the very least ineffectual… Have heard from a couple of different places that Hogan will be Fremantle’s number 1 target once he gets to the end of the current contract. Given he is a Perth boy this makes me very, very nervous!!

There aren’t too many times that I would advocate going to someone with an open chequebook, but as long as he is playing the way he is at present there is absolutely no way Melbourne can afford to let him leave.

How many 17 year olds win best and fairests in state leagues?

Being a Melbourne supporter I think I’m pretty qualified to add my two cents worth here (granted possibly a little biased in some respects). While Garlett has been a handy addition, given that we have craved a quality crumbing forward for quite some time now, I cannot come up with a single example that explains how he has contributed more to our improvement that having a confident and talented key forward.

Surely of the players that we have traded in recently, Vince and Cross are far better examples of players who have had a significant impact on the performance of the side?

Pretty average to use an example of a player decimated by injury as an example of why we shouldn’t get our hopes up about a youngsters potential. Given we have Jack Watts in our side you should have been able to come up with a much more relevant reference (not that I agree with your assertion anyway).

No one thinks that Hulk is the panacea to all of our problems, but I sure as hell prefer him in our side than out of it.

As a Tottenham fan I am waiting for the day when the sloppy passing will be tightened up… It has been one of our major deficiencies for several seasons now and no amount of new talent seems to be able to address the issue. I don’t know whether it is a directive or not but there seems a determination to over complicate things with passing that requires laser like precision, particularly our back 4.

There are times when the KISS theory should be adhered to… It won’t be pretty but sometimes the right thing to do deep in defence is just belt the thing out for a throw in and start again.

Cannot for the life of me figure out what Pat Howard’s role actually adds to the national set up? Surely it is the job of the administration to ensure that the right coaching set up is in place such that all areas of the game are addressed (technical, health and rehabilitation, etc.).

When Mickey Arthur was dismissed it seemed, rightly or wrongly, that Pat Howard played a big part in the decision. How can the High Performance Manager not be ultimately responsible for the performance of the international side? For someone that is meant to add value in improving the team’s performance (I presume??) he seems to escape scrutiny when the team is under performing. Granted we have just won the world cup but there have been signs of a decline in the test side for quite a while now.

Interested in your rationale regarding the Victorian teams who would be “relegated” to the VFL. While I am clearly biased as a Melbourne supporter I’m struggling with the basis for these four being on top of the list? I suspect 12 months ago Footscray would have been in that list too as it appears current form forms a large part of your criteria.

How would the AFL deal with the reduction in TV revenue, particularly if that is coupled with a revamp of the fixture which, while seemingly fairer, could result in less advertising revenue for broadcasters?

Certainly not trying to knock you for having a crack, there is some good stuff in here, but I think it is difficult to look at all of these in isolation and consideration needs to be given to how they would all work together.

I don’t think anyone is advocating for the abolition of T20 (though personally I can take or leave it, but I am a traditionalist). The thing that frustrates people is the fact that there doesn’t appear to be any balance between these competing priorities. Shield cricket is becoming CA’s whipping boy. How does a player out of form after the test in Brisbane or Perth get back into form over the T20 break?

If that’s how CA want to approach things then come out and own it, but they can’t pretend that they are doing everything they can to ensure that test cricket remains the pinnacle and the administration’s number 1 priority when that clearly isn’t the case.

Personally I don’t buy into the theory that getting a broader range of youngsters into the game will ultimately help in the long form of the game (for the reasons set out in the article). When all that they are really exposed to is short form cricket (where the benefit of less time invested is sold as one of the main advantages) what possible improvement can we expect in the long form of the game? What will improve it is a move away from the game having to be more “appealing” at all costs through higher run rates, batsman friendly wickets etc.

It will probably come as no surprise that Chris Rogers is my favourite current player…

I think that is a big part of the issue here and should be front of mind when considering amending the rules. Is a change to the status quo absolutely necessary? If a more cautious approach was taken we could avoid some of these issues. A perfect example is the change in interpretation of high contact.

The rules committee in their infinite wisdom decreed “the head is sacrosanct no matter what”. Instead of protecting the players it encouraged them to take reckless risks and put themselves in MORE danger than they previously were. 18 months go by and we have yet another change to try and rectify the situation.

Some of the changes in interpretation have also meant that players don’t take any responsibility for protecting themselves. Once upon a time you were taught how to approach a contest and protect yourself so that you didn’t get hit in the head. Thanks to the changes in the rule players started to do the exact opposite to try and win a free kick. Absolute madness!!

I don’t think that the club would necessarily have handled it any differently if it were more high profile players. There is less room for discretion with drug use than with other misdemeanors where players may be treated differently based on their “value” to the club (for example when Mick Malthouse openly admitted that Heath Shaw and Alan Didak got off more lightly than a rookie may have).

The interesting thing here is that this episode shows the strange situation we find ourselves in with the league’s drug policy. We have a situation where players are using the fact that they took illicit substances as an explanation of why they shouldn’t be considered drug cheats. It’s pretty perverse (to me anyway) that this should change in any way, shape or form, the light in which these 2 are viewed.

If the best explanation that you can come up with is that someone sold you some dodgy gear then you’ll get no sympathy from me.

Out of curiosity, would this have counted as a “strike” under the illicit drug policy if the players had not been sanctioned for taking performance enhancing substances?

My biggest concern with a review of the “second tier” competitions (I use the inverted commas there deliberately as I am sure there are still some – particularly in WA & SA – who believe their local leagues where forced into this status through no fault of their own) is that any involvement by the AFL to me represents a conflict of interest. We are talking about leagues that, at least indirectly, competed with the VFL now having to essentially serve their master.

The current VFL is a perfect example of the AFL imposing it’s will on another competition. Of the 15 current teams, 5 are AFL reserve sides and that doesn’t include the aligned sides. Rather than take responsibility for the management of team lists themselves, the AFL has pushed this responsibility down to the state leagues, who essentially had no recourse to object. A league which once operated independently alongside the “old” VFL now is irrevocably wed to it.

WA is now grappling with the same issue. East Perth and Peel are pretty much West Coast and Fremantle’s seconds (I know this is somewhat of an exaggeration, but you get my point). The league was able to keep some legitimacy by denying the AFL sides the right to field stand alone sides (unlike in Vic and SA) and some would argue that the ends justifies the means (helped by the fact that neither side is dominating the competition) but there is irreversible damage that has been done to these leagues, driven by AFL policy.

Just how much freedom/ability will the second tier leagues have to dictate their own destiny? Would any move to reduce AFL involvement (either directly through participation of reserves sides or otherwise) have an impact on the funding structure? If the answer to this is anything but a definitive no then it is hard to see that this is anymore than a waste of time and effort.

Once upon a time there was a national football council that oversaw the health of the game nation wide. While a return to an independent voice may be a pipe dream the thought is still a nice one.

FWIW I have no allegiance to any state league side, though Melbourne’s alignment with Casey means that I have to keep abreast of their results so I can find out what the hell is happening with my own team!