Demons season opener v Saints

[pitmaster 3,513]

Last week's inside 50 stat does not count for those times any pair from the combination of Hogan, Clark, Howe and Dawes is up forward. They will straighten us up instantly and we'll see much less of the lateral movement we had against the cats.

[binman 42,681]

Yeah, but equally blindingly obvious is that we stand more of a chance of winning with 100 more possessions than with 100 less possessions.

and that if we have the ball they don't

[Pates 9,660]

After the last few seasons and the "relax we've got this" threads heading into round 1, I'm a bit nervous about this game. ......

So help me if someone does another thread like that this year they have to be given a life-time Demonland ban!

I'm nervous but we are playing much better football than the Saints at the moment and I know it's pre-season but it counts for something as it gives us confidence in the structures been put in place. If we manage to come through the Hawks game unscathed than i think we should be confident of a win, our recruiting this year has been nothing short of brilliant. I can't see one lost pick from Salem to Georgio! Cross, Tyson, and Vince have been exactly what we needed, throw in JHK for some excitement and Georgio with an unexpected pick up; Viney and Co should be very pleased with themselves.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Whatever way you cut it though, that stat, in isolation is a very positive one

It's a highly misleading stat.

Granted, we won our fair share of the ball but as Dunstall continued saying, we were making two or three kicks to reach a particular target when all we needed was one at times.

There was also a lot of pointless sharing of the ball in the back half which clearly contributes to this stat. I am well aware we are still getting used to playing this way so these two practice games have been the first two where we've been testing it out.

Not as much risk taking. Etc etc.

It can be positive, and it has been a positive. But in isolation, that stat can be very misleading.

Yeah, but equally blindingly obvious is that we stand more of a chance of winning with 100 more possessions than with 100 less possessions.

Sure. But if you're chipping pointlessly back and fourth, you're not necessarily progressing anywhere and you'll rack up plenty of possessions....

I'm not saying that's how we are playing, because clearly we've been competitive in both games, however there have been passages where there have been too many disposals and possessions needed which as I've said, contributes to the high possession number.

[bing181 9,193]

I'm not saying that's how we are playing, because clearly we've been competitive in both games, however there have been passages where there have been too many disposals and possessions needed which as I've said, contributes to the high possession number.

Agree, but we could never have managed those chains of possessions last year, excessive or not. Clearer game plan, better positioning, even better skills are all major contributors.

Still a way to go though.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Also another thing to add to this 'higher possession count' talk.

If you watch the game against Geelong, have a look at how much pressure they put us under when we have the ball. There are constant quick handballs, little chips, fumbles, more handballs, chips backwards etc etc by our players.

This is bound to happen to a team who is not as skilled or solid in their game plan and don't share the same trust in one another. So in this particular context, it's not a 'positive' that we've got high possession numbers.

When Geelong won the contested ball, they were clean and direct with their disposal and so their inside 50 count was much higher than ours.

The 'holding of possession' in this context is more ambiguous and in that particular game, was due to a number of reasons. Not all being positive.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

It's a highly misleading stat.

Granted, we won our fair share of the ball but as Dunstall continued saying, we were making two or three kicks to reach a particular target when all we needed was one at times.

There was also a lot of pointless sharing of the ball in the back half which clearly contributes to this stat. I am well aware we are still getting used to playing this way so these two practice games have been the first two where we've been testing it out.

Not as much risk taking. Etc etc.

It can be positive, and it has been a positive. But in isolation, that stat can be very misleading.

Sure. But if you're chipping pointlessly back and fourth, you're not necessarily progressing anywhere and you'll rack up plenty of possessions....

I'm not saying that's how we are playing, because clearly we've been competitive in both games, however there have been passages where there have been too many disposals and possessions needed which as I've said, contributes to the high possession number.

fair points

clearances 30-31

cont poss 115-118

stoppages 18-19

so almost a complete dead heat in the stats that indicate who was wining the hard ball

I guess i'm saying that the reason we had so many more disposals is in part for the reason you suggest (we shared around it a much more indirect manner) but also because we won a hell of a lot more of it than we are used to seeing the MFC do. So I agree with you in that it is a promising stat, but it is somewhat misleading

[beelzebub 23,313]

we're learning

making mistakes but not truckloads

we will evolve

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Agree, but we could never have managed those chains of possessions last year, excessive or not. Clearer game plan, better positioning, even better skills are all major contributors.

Still a way to go though.

Well, I'd argue that we could have managed those chains of possessions in years previous had our coach at the time shared a similar philosophy in game style/plan.

Perhaps not as well, (due to some of the inclusions to our list), but still.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

fair points

clearances 30-31

cont poss 115-118

stoppages 18-19

so almost a complete dead heat in the stats that indicate who was wining the hard ball

I guess i'm saying that the reason we had so many more disposals is in part for the reason you suggest (we shared around it a much more indirect manner) but also because we won a hell of a lot more of it than we are used to seeing the MFC do. So I agree with you in that it is a promising stat, but it is somewhat misleading

Yes, most of the other stats were even, except for inside 50's which they dominated.

The only way that the 'possession count' stat is a positive, is if we're dominating a team in every other stat including inside 50's!

[furious d 463]

Yes, most of the other stats were even, except for inside 50's which they dominated.

The only way that the 'possession count' stat is a positive, is if we're dominating a team in every other stat including inside 50's!

I'll take being trounced in one stat over being trounced in every aspect of the game like we were last year. Nobody is claiming we don't have stuff to work on, but whichever way you look at it we've been much better this preseason.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

I'll take being trounced in one stat over being trounced in every aspect of the game like we were last year. Nobody is claiming we don't have stuff to work on, but whichever way you look at it we've been much better this preseason.

Yes, nor am I claiming the opposite...

I am just responding to posts that were to do with 'possession count' in a game. If you'd bothered to scroll up, you wouldn't have needed to post what you did.

[daisycutter 29,604]

rule 1 in footy - GET BALL

ya gotta walk before you run (so to speak)

small steps and we are on the right track

nice to have a coach with a strategy that the players can believe in

give it time

[Biffen 12,940]

rule 1 in footy - GET BALL

ya gotta walk before you run (so to speak)

small steps and we are on the right track

nice to have a coach with a strategy that the players can believe in

give it time

rule 1 in footy - GET BALL

ya gotta walk before you run (so to speak)

small steps and we are on the right track

nice to have a coach with a strategy that the players can believe in

give it time

"It's Time"

(but we may not be ready to govern)

[Alcho Dee 269]

fair points

clearances 30-31

cont poss 115-118

stoppages 18-19

so almost a complete dead heat in the stats that indicate who was wining the hard ball

I guess i'm saying that the reason we had so many more disposals is in part for the reason you suggest (we shared around it a much more indirect manner) but also because we won a hell of a lot more of it than we are used to seeing the MFC do. So I agree with you in that it is a promising stat, but it is somewhat misleading

We had 31 inside 50's compared to their 62. You know that this is a long way off the mark. To be a finals team average inside 50 (last year) averaged about 55 inside 50's, which generally resulted in 100points on the scoreboard. This is a big concern as over both pre season games we have averaged 35 inside 50's. This number may be lower because we are not bombing the ball in long, more trying to be patient and hit a target. But still, as you know, this number is a big concern and it will be hard for us to win any games in 2014 with an average of 35 inside 50's!!!!

[The Song Formerly Known As 6,479]

i hope for no injuries and a good crack at it. that is all.

[KingDingAling 3,752]

We will smash St Kilda, it will be a big win.

[rjay 24,887]

We had 31 inside 50's compared to their 62. You know that this is a long way off the mark. To be a finals team average inside 50 (last year) averaged about 55 inside 50's, which generally resulted in 100points on the scoreboard. This is a big concern as over both pre season games we have averaged 35 inside 50's. This number may be lower because we are not bombing the ball in long, more trying to be patient and hit a target. But still, as you know, this number is a big concern and it will be hard for us to win any games in 2014 with an average of 35 inside 50's!!!!

It's not a big concern at all mate, it's pre season and we've looked the most coherent I've seen us look for a long time.

[DeeSpencer 25,477]

We had 31 inside 50's compared to their 62. You know that this is a long way off the mark. To be a finals team average inside 50 (last year) averaged about 55 inside 50's, which generally resulted in 100points on the scoreboard. This is a big concern as over both pre season games we have averaged 35 inside 50's. This number may be lower because we are not bombing the ball in long, more trying to be patient and hit a target. But still, as you know, this number is a big concern and it will be hard for us to win any games in 2014 with an average of 35 inside 50's!!!!

I don't mind if we only get 35 inside 50's we just have to decrease the differential. By spreading the ball around our back half we can control the time of possession and in turn stop the other teams inside 50 count swelling. Geelong's went through the roof in those periods they had the wind and control of the game.

One thing I haven't seen us do a lot yet that isn't really related to tall forwards is lock the ball in our forward 50. So far Roos has been dragging the ruck behind play as a spare man which makes it easy for the other team to win a clearance and Spencer isn't all that useful as a loose behind the ball. I'd rather he pushed in and we used a midfielder like Watts just skirting between the pack and the other teams remaining forwards.

Another thing I'm yet to see is enough intercept marks between the 50's. Garland is our best at that. But Frawley back and hopefully freeing up McDonald, Dunn and Grimes across half back should result in them halting attacks there. Terlich started to grab some marks on the weekend and it's something he brings to his game.

[Carrot Top 947]

It's a highly misleading stat.

Granted, we won our fair share of the ball but as Dunstall continued saying, we were making two or three kicks to reach a particular target when all we needed was one at times.

There was also a lot of pointless sharing of the ball in the back half which clearly contributes to this stat. I am well aware we are still getting used to playing this way so these two practice games have been the first two where we've been testing it out.

Not as much risk taking. Etc etc.

It can be positive, and it has been a positive. But in isolation, that stat can be very misleading.

Sure. But if you're chipping pointlessly back and fourth, you're not necessarily progressing anywhere and you'll rack up plenty of possessions....

I'm not saying that's how we are playing, because clearly we've been competitive in both games, however there have been passages where there have been too many disposals and possessions needed which as I've said, contributes to the high possession number.

Yes... and no.

It's misleading if it means that a turnover is coming.

However if it's ugly and you keep the ball then it's good. After all if you have it then they don't, and if they don't have it they can't score. That'll be the real test of the list and the plan.

[Alcho Dee 269]

It's not a big concern at all mate, it's pre season and we've looked the most coherent I've seen us look for a long time.

If you look at all the stats for inside 50's in nab challenge games there is a consistency for all teams, except for ours, with possessions-inside 50's-final score. Generally, 55 inside 50's a game resulting in 100 points. Breaking that down to quarters winning teams are getting 25 points a quarter with 15 inside 50's a quarter, so getting a goal 1 out of 4 times going inside 50.

Our first nab challenge game vs Richmond...40 inside 50's score 98.

Second game vs Geelong 31 inside 50's score 84

This a statistic we will need to improve on to be competitive in 2014

Surprise suprise the more we go inside 50 the more we score and the more games we win.

[Alcho Dee 269]

I don't mind if we only get 35 inside 50's we just have to decrease the differential. By spreading the ball around our back half we can control the time of possession and in turn stop the other teams inside 50 count swelling. Geelong's went through the roof in those periods they had the wind and control of the game.

One thing I haven't seen us do a lot yet that isn't really related to tall forwards is lock the ball in our forward 50. So far Roos has been dragging the ruck behind play as a spare man which makes it easy for the other team to win a clearance and Spencer isn't all that useful as a loose behind the ball. I'd rather he pushed in and we used a midfielder like Watts just skirting between the pack and the other teams remaining forwards.

Another thing I'm yet to see is enough intercept marks between the 50's. Garland is our best at that. But Frawley back and hopefully freeing up McDonald, Dunn and Grimes across half back should result in them halting attacks there. Terlich started to grab some marks on the weekend and it's something he brings to his game.

Yeh I think a defender must have enough support from his other defenders to be able to leave his man and take an intercept mark, Grimes' move back to the backline has changed the look of our defence, it's great to have a leader like him back there and players like Frawley and Dunn should be able to show their attacking side of their game more often in 2014 and taking intercept marks, not just worrying about their man.

2 players who I always see taking intercept marks between the 50's are Brendan Goddard and Dyson Heppel, but these blokes aren't afraid to put their bodies in front of opposition forwards and take a grab, hopefully Watts can show a bit of that this year.

Edited March 4, 2014 by J VINEY FAN

[rjay 24,887]

If you look at all the stats for inside 50's in nab challenge games there is a consistency for all teams, except for ours, with possessions-inside 50's-final score. Generally, 55 inside 50's a game resulting in 100 points. Breaking that down to quarters winning teams are getting 25 points a quarter with 15 inside 50's a quarter, so getting a goal 1 out of 4 times going inside 50.

Our first nab challenge game vs Richmond...40 inside 50's score 98.

Second game vs Geelong 31 inside 50's score 84

This a statistic we will need to improve on to be competitive in 2014

Surprise suprise the more we go inside 50 the more we score and the more games we win.

Well we won one and lost another close one. You might not want to believe this but the only stat that really matters is the final score.

Sydney Premiership win 2012 Hawthorn inside 50's 61 score 81, Sydney inside 50's 43 score 91. Looks like we are already converting better than Sydney.

Look, I'm sure we will improve our inside 50's but at the end of the day all that matters is we score more than the opposition. If that means we play kick to kick around the back line for a bit then go forward and score so be it. Stats really are misleading in isolation as is that Sydney Hawthorn stat by the way.

[Deez 298]

Lets hold back Hogan who been dying to play for over 12 months and our only true big forward at the moment, dumbest post Iv read for a while though I'm hardly surprised.

i don't think its dumb.

if you had seen him training the past few weeks you might have observed a taped up knee and a bit of a limp.

Not sure if thats anything.

He has had some knee issues as everyones aware, he's a kid, i would think he will be held back to an extent, i.e. he won't play every round.

[Akum 2,660]

I'm not going to disagree with all the nervous nellies that it's going to be a long season if we maintain i50 counts of 31 against 62.

But the less fragile among us are confident that's probably not going to happen. Due to the many one-off factors from that game.