bt50

We would have lost at least 3k on the attendance purely as a result of the rain we had yesterday imo. Its an excuse absolutely, but its also the reality.

We're back.

Are people sure it's 'free' or that being a member just gives you access to the $75 rate, rather than the normal $9 a month

I can only conclude that the people that don't like Daylight Savings are miserable psychopaths tbh.

I usually would say you're being negative, but i do think you're spot on with this one. This is an area the club ahs definitely dropped the ball in imo.

Don't think this one is much of a rumour. This is a done deal amigos, far too much smoke from reputable sources. Exceptional signing on paper.

IMO we have terrific depth and quality in probably every position except GK, but as the last two seasons have shown, we can be successful despite that. FWIW its not that i dont like Kisnorbo's Plan A, it was a joy to watch in 2020/2021 when we were at full flight and its largely a good system. But he needs to be able to adjust to the very clear approach teams have discovered to blunt it, and he effectively refuses to. Its mindnumbing. Probably pride more than anything else imo.

We've got a terrific squad. We have a donkey coach that insists on square pegs, irrespective of what hole hes trying to bash it into.

Totally agree, ultimately the best strategy is to have a winger thats capable of doing the job. Someone like Matt Simon, memes aside, is pretty rare. Simon was a different type of 9 that was semi competent and totally change the way you attack, but also was never going to command massive wages and understood his role.

Dont forget Nabbout was first choice to lead the line for the Roos at the last world cup...

Looks a very good signing on paper.

Yes, and i'd essentially view it as the club trying to free up salary and reallocate it to another part of the pitch where it can be better utilised. Obviously whether they can make good use of that remains to be seen, but I'm still fairly confident we'll sign a few more players, and at least one of them will be very good.

Magnificent for those coming with young families too. My kids absolutely loved the semi final last year and have talked about it ever since, but any kick off after 5pm is just too late for us when the commute is all the way back to Ballarat. Plus beers in the sun is an absolutely ace way to watch football

I thought Colazo was excellent when deployed as a full back, servicable but underwhelming for a marquee when played on the wing.

I totally get where you're coming from with regards to a second striking option, but we'd be mental to allocate too much cap space to a player that is likely going to see very limited minutes as a second striker. Totally different ball game when theres no cap and clubs are awash with money, but theres a reason most A League clubs in history dont have 2nd strikers that either arent Australian journeymen or kids.

Atkinson i think

Absolutely. He also had as good a work rate in terms of closing as anyone ive seen play for us; the energiser bunny role. Clearly we very much struggled to replace him imo.

It's a good question and a valid concern. Ultimately i don't really have an answer as to whether VdV is more a Metcalfe or a 10 until i see him play, but its entirely possible they are cut from the same cloth. Battochio to me has better credentials in terms of a 10 than VdV, but its really hard to know until we see them in action. Ultimately i have more trust in the guys that do it for a job than anyone else in terms of picking the men for the job in advance though. Hindsight is obviously much easier to criticise.

I dont really care whether he's a name, i tend to think the league is a better standard that wheeling in some geriatric name, given thats about all we can afford as clubs on the global scale. I tend to think Battocchio reads reasonably well CV wise. Still only 30, plenty of experience at strong European leagues and interestingly, looking at how often he is substituted in and out, he's definitely a player that performs a specific role. Seems to me to be exactly the sort of player that you would want when teams set up a low block against you; in which case im very interested as its really been our achilles heel.

The Fabrizio tweet is a photoshop fabrication that it seems everyone, including Optus, have fallen for. I'd still suggest the mutual termination is possible, or even likely, but either way theres some jumping the gun here.

They still do, but its more for the purposes of making sure clubs arent using it to rort the system. When the guest slot, and for Cahill the marquee guest slot were used, they were subject to more stringent marketability criteria when being approved by FFA. Agree re being transitional rules.

Largely no difference to my knowledge, but im of the understanding that the Designated player spots are kind of like mini one player salary caps as well ie you cant just swap players in and out of that slot like you can with the marquees and have no wage considerations. I could well be wrong here but i can't really see how else they could do it For example maybe you sign player a as marquee on 800k a season fro two years, but after half a season decide he's not what you want and pay him out either fully or partially. FA will let you replace the marquee with a new one, provided they dont think you are trying to rort the system, and they wont consider the financial terms of either the existing or new player. If Player B is a designated player, signs for 600k a season but we get rid of him in Jan, with 300k paid to date, you still have to fit within the 600k for the slot for the entire season. Likewise any payout is counted towards that mini cap. As for rationale, i'd suggest the designated player probably started as a concept to keep the under the cap players that were starring in the league as clubs were getting frustrated at losing the likes of Buijs and Leroy George over cap restraints and it morphed into effectively marquee-lite. I'd say it didnt just become '4 marquees' due to opposition from the clubs that can barely afford to pay 1 marquee as it is ie CCM, Adelaide, etc

"Marquee' is purely a label tho. Ultimately its just a player designated out of the cap. Doesn't have to be a promotional style player, its just a concept that the league started with. I think the league is better than novelty players personally, and whilst you'd always take their marketability into consideration when signing players, it shouldnt be at the cost of being good enough to play in the league, or disproportionate wages.

IMO this marquee stuff is largely pie in the sky shit. We, as in Australian football, don't have the $$$ to get anyone thats close enough to their best that will cut through to the wider sporting public, so you either end up with a good quality but not particularly nameworthy player liek a Ninkovic or Mierzejewski, or you end up with a name that's over the hill and really, ends up more of a disrespect to whats actually a decent quality league imo. Nani will be a flop both on and offfield imo, despite people kinda knowing who he is.