Scott on the second half turnaround

I mean there were a few structural things from our end that we thought we needed to shift. I am not saying that was the reason for the turnaround necessarily.

The opposition were probably what we expected, they are stacked with talent and really good around the contest. The numbers this year suggested that, but the numbers at this early stage can often be a little bit deceiving, depending on your opposition.

But it was clear that their stoppage work was a problem for us, and they did have a really seasoned ruckman as well who was playing well.

We just felt like we needed to support that a little bit more, that helped change the way the game was played.

Even then, I don't think it was the whole second half, it was really only probably the last 10 minutes of that third quarter where it really felt like we got on top. 

Scott on Max Holmes' performance

We thought he was really influential.

There were a number of things, but one of the things that we needed to change was how we looked in front of the ball.

I was going to say it is a luxury, but most of the good teams have those sort of players. North Melbourne are a good example, they have got these top three or top five picks everywhere that they can move around and have an influence.

Max is our version of that.

It is a little bit unusual for him to be spending so much time in the forward half, but we thought the game called for it and we were pleased with his output. 

Scott on the even contribution

We still thought Bailey was able to help the team, but I think your question is a good one about others standing up.

I wouldn't have gone straight to him, I probably would've been thinking a bit more about Connor O'Sullivan behind the ball. Again, he was on a really top line player in Larkey for most of the game. His improvement continues to be pretty rapid.

Even though Xerri was very effective, he was one of the more effective players on the ground, I am sure that will be my conclusion when I review it a little bit closer. But I still thought our young guys in there were competitive enough and had their moments as well.

There is a bigger list than that, but we feel like we are getting some guys who have had little lumpy preparations back, closer to their best form.

You can throw some names out there like Close looked more like himself tonight, Lawson Humphries was really good, Zach Guthrie is looking good, Shaun Mannagh was better. 

Scott on Oisin Mullin 

Speaking of rapid improvement, I tend not to explain these things publicly and in too much detail, but we don't think of him as a lockdown tagger.

He can certainly help in those roles, but he is so much more than that.

I am assuming there is a fair bit of commentary out there around if you run with these guys or don't you. I would suspect that if coaches had the players that could do it as effectively as him, they would probably do it more often.

Those jobs are hard to do, it is not as if you go lets just take him out and it is done.

I think we laud the really good players well and rightfully so, but the guys that can play those defensive roles like Oisin, he has become a really important player for us. 

Scott on the ruck battle

We really liked the way that he was going late in the game.

He had relatively low game time as well, which was part of our plan. De Koning played a little bit more in the ruck as well, so two younger guys against a seasoned opponent.

Again, I think it is one of those situations where both teams can be happy. We can be happy with the way Mitch played and the improvement that he is showing, without it necessarily being a reflection of how he competed against Xerri.

If nothing else, I thought it was good ofr both of our guys to have that experience.