Training 2021 Preseason Training - Intra-club training report and highlights video in post #266

Remove this Banner Ad

Dero

Formerly "DERO"
Jan 22, 2013
20,476
29,348
TBC
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Mitcham FC
I didn't know Waterman was training with you blokes, but I am glad to hear it. I'd love to see him given an opportunity and it sounds like he may be close to getting on the list. Big jump from there to playing games obv but all the best with him.
What was the knock on him?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

11kgm

Premium Platinum
Sep 24, 2014
5,670
3,498
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Man Utd

originally an inside mid hmm
 

The Donners

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 26, 2007
13,322
1,024
Victoria
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Aston Villa
Having watched the tid bits of footage from the intra club, it appeared Wright was in the ruck and didn’t kick a goal. Could someone shed some light on what position he played and how he competed?
 

Howard Moon

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 14, 2008
17,963
27,293
AFL Club
Essendon
perhaps we sent the others home but can still take a good look at dunkley as hes already training with us via the vfl?

does that count as an allowable train on player?
 

ghostdog

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 18, 2008
9,110
4,854
gondawanaland
AFL Club
Essendon
Having watched the tid bits of footage from the intra club, it appeared Wright was in the ruck and didn’t kick a goal. Could someone shed some light on what position he played and how he competed?
Apparently Wright was forward but had a quiet game. Unsurprising that he rucked occasionally. He'll ruck forward I think, supporting Draper or Phillips if Drapes is injured. I read somewhere that Bryan has had an excellent preseason and it might not be inconceivable to think he could get a run this year. Whether that's as a ruckman remains to be seen.
 

Towno78

Premiership Player
Nov 6, 2009
3,576
2,749
AFL Club
Essendon
The problem I have with that is that we could lose someone else between now and then.

And suggesting we'd have "somebody in mind for the MSD" is a bit disingenuous because they'd be eligible for this one too
Perhaps they hoped to fill 2 but were not impressed with what they saw?
 

SloppyJoe

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 1, 2011
5,024
5,115
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Leeds United
What was the knock on him?
As mentioned above, he contracted glandular fever in his first season (2015 I think) and it really hit him for six. Never played a game for us and was delisted after a couple of seasons. To add insult to injury we then picked up his younger brother who has since played 30-40 games.

He made a return to the WAFL in 2019 as a mid sized forward and started kicking goals. Averaged 2-3 goals a game in 2020. At 182cm he might even fall in the small forward bracket at AFL level, but he plays taller than that.

I hear the glandular fever affected his tank and his midfield days are likely behind him. But that could just be conjecture.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

60sbomber

Club Legend
Jul 4, 2011
1,868
2,027
Frankston
AFL Club
Essendon
Dumbest rule change since the introduction of the protected area. It presents yet another opportunity for the umpires to step in and penalise trivial indiscretions with game changing penalties.
Do they really believe anchoring the man on the mark will open up the game by allowing more diagonal kicks? Absolute garbage.
Can we just forget about all the 50m penalty nonsense for trivial "transgressions"?
While we're at it, abandon the protected area, and just make a rule that players other than the man on the mark can't interfere with the kick taker before the umpire calls play on. Interfere being the operative word. No interference, no penalty. Simple.
 

boncer34

Inaugural Steward
Jul 11, 2005
49,354
54,064
Baghdad
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Melbourne Storm
Dumbest rule change since the introduction of the protected area. It presents yet another opportunity for the umpires to step in and penalise trivial indiscretions with game changing penalties.
Do they really believe anchoring the man on the mark will open up the game by allowing more diagonal kicks? Absolute garbage.
Can we just forget about all the 50m penalty nonsense for trivial "transgressions"?
While we're at it, abandon the protected area, and just make a rule that players other than the man on the mark can't interfere with the kick taker before the umpire calls play on. Interfere being the operative word. No interference, no penalty. Simple.
All umpires I've spoken to reflect the thoughts of the general public on this rule.
 

60sbomber

Club Legend
Jul 4, 2011
1,868
2,027
Frankston
AFL Club
Essendon
Yep. The umpires should not be blamed for being between the rock and the hard place the AFL continually places them in.
I definitely agree with that. All of the horrible interpretations we have been lumbered with have come from the rule makers and the umpires coaches/instructors. The umpires are just doing what they're instructed to do.
 

TheGrizz

Spec Moderator
Sep 29, 2016
4,631
5,716
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Bayern Munich
I imagine the player on the mark rule will be adjudicated similarly to the protected area rule last year.

They will be red hot early to make the point, there will be 1or 2 or a game like the Langford one where they take a step literally as they shape up to handball.
Then as the season goes on give a little more leeway and use a bit of discretion and call it when guys are taking multiple steps or moving off the mark whilst preempting handballs.
 

owen87

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 23, 2016
9,375
11,967
AFL Club
Essendon
Then as the season goes on give a little more leeway and use a bit of discretion and call it when guys are taking multiple steps or moving off the mark whilst preempting handballs.
Except when Essendon players are involved.

We'll see our players pinged for even considering moving, whilst whoever we're playing performs the nutbush around the mark and nothing is noted.
 

boncer34

Inaugural Steward
Jul 11, 2005
49,354
54,064
Baghdad
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Melbourne Storm
I imagine the player on the mark rule will be adjudicated similarly to the protected area rule last year.

They will be red hot early to make the point, there will be 1or 2 or a game like the Langford one where they take a step literally as they shape up to handball.
Then as the season goes on give a little more leeway and use a bit of discretion and call it when guys are taking multiple steps or moving off the mark whilst preempting handballs.
I only hope they become red hot on players coming off their line. And I hope someone tells BT the bloody rule, him screaming WHY IS THAT PLAY ON when a player has taken 5 steps sideways is incredibly annoying.
 

Ati Tude

Senior List
Mar 20, 2018
289
365
AFL Club
Essendon
I only hope they become red hot on players coming off their line. And I hope someone tells BT the bloody rule, him screaming WHY IS THAT PLAY ON when a player has taken 5 steps sideways is incredibly annoying.
But what's going to also happen is that the umpires' interpretation of the rule will be hot and cold over the season and just provide more angst. One of the benefits of a more normal pre season comp was that rules could be trialed but now they just bring them straight into the main season. We are all going to complain about the umpiring but gee the AFL makes it hard for them and this rule change is just stupid. Is there any other game in the world that changes and tinkers with rules as much as AFL?
 

Remove this Banner Ad