Changes v Bulldogs

[Good Times Grimes 2,396]

Thought it interesting to note how many changes (7) there are between our match last week vs the win over the doggies 11 weeks ago:

OUT: Vandenburg, Toumpas, Newton, Pedersen, Fitzpatrick, Riley, Bail

IN: Viney, Tyson, Dawes, Michie, Gawn, Jetta, Harmes, Neal-Bullen

Of course many of these changes are to do with who is/was injured at the time, but nonetheless the end result is a vastly different side to be taking on the dogs for the 2nd time.

Based on those ins/outs we should be fielding a much better side this weekend.

[rpfc 28,843]

i just get annoyed sometimes with idiotic posts

like ignoring real facts in favour of an apparently cursed venue (it's haunted ooooooh)

obviously you had nothing genuine to say about those facts so you just pretended they weren't there huh

par for the course round here

like I said, 'whatever'

Would you be over or under par?

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,950]

The last time we played the Bulldogs a major reason for our win was M Jones and Bail stopping the run of Murphy and Johanisen.

I expect Salem to return and possibly Bail. If Salem plays on the half back flank, it frees up one of Cross, Lumumba, Howe or Grimes to move on ball or forward.

However, I would have thought Howe, who was seriously hobbling only 10 minutes into the game last week, to be out injured. While I assume he had a jab or two and actually played very well after he came back on, I expect there was enough damage there for him to miss this week. Assuming no other injuries I think Harmes needs a rest. He was clearly out of puff at the end of the third quarter last week and was the obvious player to be subbed off.

So, IN: Salem and Bail; OUT: Howe (inj) and Harmes (omit...but actually rested).

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Would you be over or under par?

Way under. I actually take a second to at least address the content of the person I'm disagreeing with.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

The tangible explanation is that we lost everywhere & to everyone, it's not just Docklands...

Mate, that is obviously wrong. You have missed the point completely.

Our last win there was R18, 2007. Since then we have played 175 matches.

At Etihad, we have had 0 wins and 21 losses - 0%

Everywhere else, we have had 41 wins and 114 losses - 26%

So yes, we have been terrible but there is obviously some truth to the notion that we are EXTRA terrible at Etihad.

What I am trying to get to the bottom of, is whether it is just plain coincidence or some other unknown reason.

Is that spelled out clearly enough now or do I need to break it down further?

[Slartibartfast 17,789]

Can you go further please. I've no idea what you're getting at.

[boydie 655]

Mate, that is obviously wrong. You have missed the point completely.

Our last win there was R18, 2007. Since then we have played 175 matches.

At Etihad, we have had 0 wins and 21 losses - 0%

Everywhere else, we have had 41 wins and 114 losses - 26%

So yes, we have been terrible but there is obviously some truth to the notion that we are EXTRA terrible at Etihad.

What I am trying to get to the bottom of, is whether it is just plain coincidence or some other unknown reason.

Is that spelled out clearly enough now or do I need to break it down further?

Personally I'd suggest that having a good key forward and playing at Etihad could be something to do with it. In perfect conditions having a strong marking forward that can kick goals will no doubt help lead towards a win, Hogan has played 1 game there and he tore St Kilda apart.

Since our last win in their 2007 we have had no decent key forwards that could take a grab and convert. Post Neitz we've had Miller, Newton, Bate, Dunn, Watts, Clark and Dawes play that role.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,950]

I'm not sure if this is the right place, but whenever Matt Jones plays his next game it will be game 50 for him, for which he deserves to be congratulated. That will qualify him for inclusion in various stats tables. The one he won't like will be inclusion in the list of current players with worst win:loss ratio. At best (ie, if the team wins next time he plays) he will have 9 wins from 50 games, ie, 18.0% placing him 4th on this table (scroll down).

On the plus side, one of Bail or Pedersen (each on 25.0% with Stefan Martin) should drop out of the top 20.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Personally I'd suggest that having a good key forward and playing at Etihad could be something to do with it. In perfect conditions having a strong marking forward that can kick goals will no doubt help lead towards a win, Hogan has played 1 game there and he tore St Kilda apart.

Since our last win in their 2007 we have had no decent key forwards that could take a grab and convert. Post Neitz we've had Miller, Newton, Bate, Dunn, Watts, Clark and Dawes play that role.

It would be interesting to see a breakdown of all opposition sides highest goalkickers compared to our own, in those 21 losses

[Little Richard 6,265]

so I suppose you have some tangible explanation as to why we lose there so often apart from pure coincidence

I didn't say anything about coincidence or hoodoo as a reason. However, I think it's entirely possible that the players could have some kind of mental block about the ground. Or they just don't like playing indoors. Who knows.

[ManDee 7,239]

I didn't say anything about coincidence or hoodoo as a reason. However, I think it's entirely possible that the players could have some kind of mental block about the ground. Or they just don't like playing indoors. Who knows.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I didn't say anything about coincidence or hoodoo as a reason. However, I think it's entirely possible that the players could have some kind of mental block about the ground. Or they just don't like playing indoors. Who knows.

Only problem with that is the group from 2007 has been almost entirely replaced bar about 3 players

[stuie 7,374]

I'm no Michie fan, but I thought he was actually ok last week. I'm gonna be controversial and suggest this:

OUT: Garland, Brayshaw
IN: Salem, Riley

Roos said this week we're going to start resting the younger guys and Brayshaw deserves a week off. Struggled last week and Riley can play a similar role (albeit nowhere near as well) and deserves a shot (BOG last week for mine).

No point playing Bail, we've seen enough surely.

Garland is giving us no drive whatsoever so against a smaller team bring Salem in to give us some rebounding power.

[rjay 25,203]

Mate, that is obviously wrong. You have missed the point completely.

Our last win there was R18, 2007. Since then we have played 175 matches.

At Etihad, we have had 0 wins and 21 losses - 0%

Everywhere else, we have had 41 wins and 114 losses - 26%

So yes, we have been terrible but there is obviously some truth to the notion that we are EXTRA terrible at Etihad.

What I am trying to get to the bottom of, is whether it is just plain coincidence or some other unknown reason.

Is that spelled out clearly enough now or do I need to break it down further?

Not really...

If you are looking for more, the home teams win/loss at Etihad v other grounds. The Dogs, Saints & EFC all seem to play their best footy there.

[3Dee 1,153]

BRING BACK TOUMPA LOOMPA

[Grimes Times 1,278]

Bail & Salem IN