Simple On My Couch explanation.

Curnow ran with Issac Smith. Smith had his second lowest possession count of the year.

Mitchell is a very good player, but Hawthorn had won something like 4 of their last 11 when he'd racked up 40+ touches, so the MC declared that either, a) Smith was the more damaging option or b) Was the most taggable due to him having a more dominantly outside game compared to Mitchell.

Run two tags and we'd be getting slammed for being too negative....

_________________
"They're [REDACTED]'

Mitchell is rarely tagged by any team.

Shit “journalism” is shit.

_________________
WADA medical director Dr Alan Vernec describes Essendon* FC drug case as biggest scandal in team sport the world of sport has seen. #WC2WB

#GUILTY

I wouldn't worry about the team or coaching anymore this year tap, it looks like everyone has packed up and headed home.
We are looking at #1 and building positional versatility, well that will be the reasoning when the afl start knocking.

Hey Jim, go support one of those clubs then. Not once have I read a positive post from you about Carlton.

You have no clue what you’re talking about to make it worse.

Like Blueboy and Don, I have to stick up for Bolts on the Mitchell decision. That guy is by far the most overrated player in the league, his possession stats are meaningless. I've watched games where the breathless Ch 7 commentators let us know that he is now on 30... 35... 40... 42... 46 POSSESSIONS WOWEE, and I'm scratching my head trying to remember any of them.

I'm not for or against any tactics, as I'm no real position on the couch to comment, hence those blokes - despite having played the game - are also not privvy to any inner sanctum decisions.

Bolts gave Mitchell full coaches votes, so he obviously believed he had an impact, but I was merely offering a vague outside view on what the thinking may have been.

At the end of the day, its one of those damned if do/dont scenarios that made little difference to the fact we would have been thumped anyway.

Last year when we beat Hawthorn Mitchell had 44 touches, so I wonder if it was a point of discussion after that game?.....

_________________
"They're [REDACTED]'

Might want to book mark this come Brownlow night

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

Paul Roos has an overly defensive philosophy IMHO. I hope Bolton isn't the same.

So the umpires are now the arbiter of how influential a player is?

Plenty of other, shock, successful coaches also haven’t tagged Mitchell.

It’s hardly the silver billet of proof that you’re looking for.

_________________
Everything before the word "but" is horseshit - J Snow

Two words: Maurice Rioli

I don't think Mitchell is the game-changing superstar his stats show, but they use him as the deliverer of the footy with his give-get-give-get trademark possession style.

Putting pressure on that would've been handy.

_________________
end of message

I love posts like this. Roos was doing the typical media "put the boots in by claiming not to understand why something was/wasn't done" ... and here's a simple answer. Perhaps they should try to figure it out or even ask him.

Nice one BB.

you have to go back as far as Woewodin as to when they didn't get it right
Maybe Swan got his when it should of went to Judd - but Judd got his when it should have went to Swan
the rest have deserved theirs
I am not saying Mitchell has won it but he should go very close

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

Murphy got 35 possessions, did anyone tag him?

I wouldn't mind him at the CFC.

_________________
"Get ready, Teddy - you're on": Ron Barassi half time 1970 Grand Final

Yeah they could've put Graham on him.........he gives us little anyways.

only 12 of our list have played 13 games this year according to the CFC site.

_________________
Let slip the Blues of war (with apologies to William Shakespeare) (and Sir Francis Bacon, just in case)

Edit....13 games or more

Its amazing.
We have been decimated.
No wonder Fev thinks this team is the worst in our history
The 2002 first ever spoon was to an injury decimated team, but that team at least had a sprinkling of Premiershiip players... Braddles, Ratts, Campo...

Things turn around. History says so.
We will attract some big name players, let alone good players 23-27yo.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

I'm not interested in what you think as I don't respect you. I have made plenty of positive posts. Right now it is not warranted at a team level unless you think being on the bottom near winless is all ok. What part of my post is wrong? It's called telling it as it is. They are the figures, the facts. Just because you don't want to hear it doesn't make it wrong, it makes you weak. Only weak people can't handle the criticism of the coach when it is there to be called. You are one of them. You the same with everything else in life?

I'm seeing a side on the bottom, near winless, poor game plan, players confused as to their role, terrible skills. poor effort, the worst season in our history and you tell me i'm wrong and have a crack at me for being negative! I learn in life not to listen to idiots.

I'll remember when I see you post to ignore them as you have no idea. Facts aren't a part of you're psyche, just Fantasyland.

I don't see any big names heading our way yet. In fact, after Bolts' first year, two big-name mid-20s players wanted out. That wasn't a good start.

At the time I thought that that was their problem. Now I'm thinking there was more to it.

And Jim's right - those stats are facts - not opinion.

_________________
end of message