Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

315 Excellent

About bananas

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just having a quick play with the Ladder Predictor, I set it with us having a 10 point loss, and Geelong go past our percentage with a 50 point win, but fail to go past us with a 40 point win. The extra thirty points they got out of Freo after they cracked the ton were the real killer. That win was so huge that the Cats passing us on percentage went from 'possible but unlikely' to 'more likely than not'. What are the chances Gold Coast get within fifty points of them?
  2. It's a different kind of X-factor, but Gawn is the guy. Remember the 2nd bulldogs game, which was pretty close until just after half-time when we got (i think) four straight goals from perfect centre clearances, every one of which started with a brilliant Gawn tap. We won the game in a five minute burst, and it was all because of a series of perfect hit-outs to advantage.
  3. Assuming Collingwood beat Freo and Assuming Geelong pulverise Gold Coast (enough to make up the percentage gap to us) Then A win has us fifth and playing Geelong (we leapfrog GWS and overtake the loser of Haw v Syd on percentage) A loss has us eighth and going up to Sydney for a re-match with GWS.
  4. Since TMac returned for the Essendon game, he and Jesse have combined for ... v Essendon: 4 goals, 24 disposals, 10 marks v St Kilda: 5 goals, 37 disposals, 14 marks v Gold Coast: 8 goals, 39 disposals, 15 marks v Carlton: 5 goals, 35 disposals, 11 marks v Adelaide: 7 goals, 38 disposals, 18 marks v Bulldogs: 9 goals, 43 disposals, 21 marks That's 38 goals between them in just six games. And given those stats are on a generally upward swing, just how good can they get? (If anyone has access to the 'kilometres covered' stat, I'd be interested to include those numbers too … I just don't know where to find that info!) I'll admit, I thought TMac's forward line form last year was likely to be a bit of a mirage (like Colin Garland being swung forward and winning us that game against Essendon that one time), but he's been in close to All-Australian form since he's returned. The way the two of them work together has given our forward line a real point of difference, and it seems like no opposition defence is able to set up to properly counter them.
  5. After the commentators had drooled over the size of Fogarty for the whole first half, to see Viney literally throw him off after picking the ball up was GLORIOUS. Somebody GIF it for me, pretty please!!!
  6. That thirty metre handpass to Trac in space which led to Hogan's 5th goal? Yeah … that was better than any [censored] kick.
  7. Renewed yesterday, chose Nev Jetta for the player on my membership card. The smartest thing the club ever did was start putting the 'Consecutive Years Membership' on the cards, there's no way in hell I'm breaking my streak. (And I suspect, as the sour taste in people's mouths lessens the closer we get to the 2018 season, most die-hards will do the same. Might take a little longer than usual for some, and tbh I couldn't blame anyone for that.)
  8. Hahaha … oh wait, you're serious? That's a completely ridiculous (and monstrously selfish) argument. Imagine for a second that the situation was completely reversed. Gay people can legally marry, and straight people can't. In that scenario, would you seriously think that your rights as a straight person weren't being impeded? Would you seriously make the case that "I have the right to marry, I'd just have to marry a man"?* Of course you wouldn't. So … have a little imaginative empathy, and put yourself in their shoes. Also, on the "nobody's rights are impeded because (gay) men can still marry women" thing ... So … somewhere between 0.01% (low end estimate) and 1.7% (high end estimate) of babies born are born either A) without genitals/gonads/hormones that aren't identifiably male or female; or B) with a combination of chromosomes other than a simple 'XX' or 'XY'. Those people are called 'Intersex', it's the 'I' in LGBTQIA, and it's a well-documented medical fact. To borrow your phrase, that IS "existing biology." Here's the wikipedia article to get you started. So those people, neither men nor women, have no right to marry anyone at all? Even if we accept the logic of 'gay people could legally get married to people they aren't attracted to', some people's rights still ARE being impeded by specifying "between a man and a woman" in the marriage act. I'm in favour of equality. To be otherwise is monstrously selfish. *I'm assuming Wrecker45 is a straight man. If I'm incorrect in that assumption, I apologise.
  9. Person A: "I demand the right to (do X). I ALSO demand that Person B NOT have the right to (do X)." There aren't many circumstances in which Person A is in the right to think this way. At its heart, it's really just monstrously selfish.
  10. Being a realist, it's very very very very very unlikely we're going to win the premiership this year. That being the case, I wouldn't mind playing Sydney in Sydney, because that's the kind of finals experience that will hold all our players in good stead in the coming years. And hey, given our form interstate. maybe we'd even give them a shake ... Still, let's just make it first, eh?
  11. 6. Hogan 5. Hibberd 4. Pedersen 3. Melksham 2. Jones 1. Oliver
  12. Because of the percentage gap to Port and Sydney, for us to overtake either of them and get a home final, one of them would need to drop both of their remaining games. In round 23 Port play GC and Sydney play Carlton, so it's hard to see either scenario eventuating. Realistically, seventh is the best we can aim for. Of those two, I'd MUCH rather play Port in the first week than Sydney, so if the Swans do lose to the Crows on Friday night, we need to be barracking for the Dogs to beat Port on Saturday, otherwise Port move to 5th, Sydney drops to 6th, and we're (likely) off to the SCG. That's contingent, of course, on us winning both of our remaining games. The absolute best case scenario would be if us, the Swans and Port all win in the last two rounds, and Richmond drop one (they've got Freo over there and the Saints at the MCG). In that scenario, Richmond are 6th and we're 7th, and the stage is set for a blockbuster MCG elimination final. Given the abysmal form of the Dockers and Saints, I doubt it would happen, but it's Richmond, so you never know.
  13. A strange quirk of the draw this week is that the top nine teams on the ladder are all playing against the bottom nine teams on the ladder. This would be absolutely the wrong week for any of the top teams to drop a game as it's likely that most of the teams around you on the ladder will be winning. Must. Win. Game.
  14. bananas

    The Run Home

    Three games against top four sides. Three games against bottom four sides. And the Saints game. The optimist in me pencils in four wins and hopes for an upset against at least one of Crows, Power, or GWS to (possibly) get us a home final in the first week. If that win comes against the Power, it *may* be enough for us to leapfrog them (despite their percentage) and really challenge for the top four. But then the pessimist in me sees North and Pies as loseable games, and if the Saints play like they did this weekend then we could easily get done there too. I was playing around with the Ladder Predictor this morning, and this season is too crazy, with too many possible permutations left, to make any kind of predictions this far out. This season is INSANE.
  • Create New...