Round 22 - Around the Grounds

[Ethan Tremblay 30,861]

Just now, SaberFang said:

21 to 9 free kick count Norf's way. Surely that's wrong, surely the umpires couldn't be so shameless.

Schmitt has no shame. The other two weren't so bad, he honestly does attempt to impact a game.

[FireInTheBennelly 4,072]

6 minutes ago, dees189227 said:

Nic Nat has done his ACL. Poor guy but surely WC can't win the flag now. 

Wow never cheered the swans home so much. Was coming home from shopping and listening to the last few minutes. We are alive. But Im also happy to see Nth lose just to wipe the smile off Brad Scott's face. Im going to enjoy watching the last quarter. 

Come on melbourne just win tomorrow. Focus just on tomorrow and not think about the finals. That a job for us supporters. Plus the saints have jumped above us. 

How good would it be for next round for 8th spot to be alive. I think melbourne fans will be out and about tomorrow. 

nth %  107.6

ours %  104.8

I don't reckon you will. Umps threw everything at Sydney in the last qrtr, but thank [censored] they weren't even good enough at cheating to get their boys over the line.

[sue 9,106]

I think this is correct:

If North loses next week their percentage has to then be worse than 107.6.

If x=points we score in the next 2 games and y is total points scored against us in both games, then for our percentage to be better than a losing North's:

x has to be greater than 50+1.0762*y   This is the worst case because if North lose their percentage goes down and if they don't lose % is irrelevant.

A large margin would be nice of course, but if North lose in a high scoring game, their percentage will head down much more than if they lose in a low scoring game.    So we want GWS to win in a high scoring game.   The margin can be smaller as long as the scores are high.

Edit to add: It is not enough to just surpass North's current % tomorrow.  If we do and then beat Geelong by 10001 points to 10000 our % will head towards 100.

Edited August 20, 2016 by sue

[John Demonic 5,796]

4 minutes ago, SaberFang said:

21 to 9 free kick count Norf's way. Surely that's wrong, surely the umpires couldn't be so shameless.

North had the ball most of the day, it's not an uncommon discrepancy. Sydney capitalised on almost every opportunity going forward.

Edited August 20, 2016 by johndemons

[dworship 3,342]

3 minutes ago, SaberFang said:

21 to 9 free kick count Norf's way. Surely that's wrong, surely the umpires couldn't be so shameless.

Be prepared for it to be a similar count against us tomorrow

[Chook 15,013]

26 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

:LOL no! I pray you are not consulting the club in any way because this is not true. 120 to 80 is a better result.

Winning 100pts to 1 gives a percentage of 10000%.

Winning 200pts to 101 gives a percentage of just under 200%.

Both are a margin of 99 points.

[DubDee 25,869]

Assuming the GWS and cats games are close - eg 10 pts - and go our way 

we will need around 30-40 point win tomorrow

 easy

 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

2 minutes ago, sue said:

A large margin would be nice of course, but if North lose in a high scoring game, their percentage will head down much more than if they lose in a low scoring game.    So we want GWS to win in a high scoring game.   The margin can be smaller as long as the scores are high.

Not quite. The more North score, the more GWS have to win by to have the same impact.

A low scoring game makes it easier for them to drive North's percentage down.

[Watts the matter 1,235]

5 minutes ago, Chook said:

Winning 100pts to 1 gives a percentage of 10000%.

Winning 200pts to 101 gives a percentage of just under 200%.

Both are a margin of 99 points.

It's not round 1. Think about it and get back to me.

[sue 9,106]

1 minute ago, Ted Fidge said:

Not quite. The more North score, the more GWS have to win by to have the same impact.

A low scoring game makes it easier for them to drive North's percentage down.

 

No. If GWS win by a point 2 points to 1, North's % hardly changes.  If they win by the same margin but the scores are 10001 points to 10000 (to take an extreme case to illustrate the point), then North's % becomes close to 100 because that high scoring game dominates their previously accumulated overall for and against.

[deanox 9,922]

6 minutes ago, sue said:

...

Edit to add: It is not enough to just surpass North's current % tomorrow.  If we do and then beat Geelong by 10001 points to 10000 our % will head towards 100.

While your second statement regarding our percentage decreasing in the case of a small win is correct, I think it's worth noting that the statement "it is not enough to surpass north tomorrow" is incorrect. IF we have a better percentage than north at the end of this round then we cannot miss the 8 on percentage.  Because even if we won by only 1 point and our percentage decreases, North will also have to lose for us to make the 8 and their percentage wil also decrease. 

 

It will be nice to take percentage out of it. 

[Forest Demon 4,681]

8 minutes ago, dworship said:

Be prepared for it to be a similar count against us tomorrow

North got the better of it for sure, but geez this assertion that the AFL are out to get us gives me the Darren Britts. If it were up to the AFL, they would want as much drama packed into next weekend as possible.

[bing181 9,238]

21 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

I don't have time to de-garble this. Do the maths yourself and see.

Yes! As often, there's more than one way to skin a maths cat, and he's only seeing his way. He's right in this case that it's about a differential, but that's mainly a quirk of the points/for against being similar, and where we are in the season, which minimises the difference. In the first game of the season, a 50 point win over an opponent's score of 50 will give you a percentage of 200%, so no, it's not just about the differential.

Regardless, we really need a big win tomorrow, and keeping them to a lowish score would help, and I'll be keeping an eye on your calculations ...

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

5 minutes ago, sue said:

 

No.

 

Yes.

[Chook 15,013]

6 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

It's not round 1. Think about it and get back to me.

It doesn't matter what round it is. Outscoring your opponent by the same amount but keeping them to a low score is always better. Think about it and get back to me.

[bing181 9,238]

40 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

:LOL no! I pray you are not consulting the club in any way because this is not true. 120 to 80 is a better result.

Think he meant 120 to 90.

[Adam The God 30,259]

1 hour ago, Forest Demon said:

That was weird so actively supporting a game not involving the Dees. And yep, the umpiring was every bit as frustrating in that last quarter in particular. 

Haven't had to actively support a team in such a way for quite a few years. I remember it and I like it. It means we're in calculation for something.

[dees189227 12,394]

mmm said we have to win both of our game by at least 30 points. 

[sue 9,106]

10 minutes ago, deanox said:

While your second statement regarding our percentage decreasing in the case of a small win is correct, I think it's worth noting that the statement "it is not enough to surpass north tomorrow" is incorrect. IF we have a better percentage than north at the end of this round then we cannot miss the 8 on percentage.  Because even if we won by only 1 point and our percentage decreases, North will also have to lose for us to make the 8 and their percentage wil also decrease. 

 

It will be nice to take percentage out of it. 

I don't think that is right.   North can lose without their percentage falling much (eg lose 2 points to 1 point).  But if we beat Geelong by 1 point in a high scoring game, then our percentage goes down from wherever it is after tomorrow.  Percentage can go down even if you win. You will have noticed this in round 2 of most seasons. The team that is on top after round 1 finds it's percentage heading down even when it WINS  the next week.

Edit to fix lose to WIN

 

Edited August 20, 2016 by sue

[Watts the matter 1,235]

3 minutes ago, Chook said:

It doesn't matter what round it is. Outscoring your opponent by the same amount but keeping them to a low score is always better. Think about it and get back to me.

Read my post on the previous page......

Edited August 20, 2016 by Watts the matter

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

9 minutes ago, Forest Demon said:

North got the better of it for sure, but geez this assertion that the AFL are out to get us gives me the Darren Britts. If it were up to the AFL, they would want as much drama packed into next weekend as possible.

They're probably trying right now to think of a way for Essendon to make the 8.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

@petracca attack, I want to like your post more than once!

[FireInTheBennelly 4,072]

Does this help?

Current Situation
Club	F	A	%
NMFC North Melbourne	1893	1759	107.6
MELB Melbourne	1842	1758	104.8
Potential 5 goal margin scorelines
Melbourne	31	61	91	121	151	181	211
Carlton	1	31	61	91	121	151	181
New percentage	106.48	106.37	106.27	106.17	106.07	105.97	105.88

 

Quite clearly, the higher the score - the lower the percentage gain.

[Cards13 9,117]

Yeeewwww, can't wait for tomorrow. Even if we totally chit the bed it is a great exercise to show the group where we need to get to. As binny said, pressure footy at the pointy end of the season. 

Can we stack up? Such a young list and side playing tomorrow. We have been deplorable for so long this is going to be an interesting litmus test.

[Chook 15,013]

3 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

Read my post on the previous page......

Ok.

37 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

Yes and no. At this stage of the season when have 1800 and 1900 for and against already it does not matter as much, but you are correct in saying a win with a 50 point differential would be more beneficial if both teams had a low score. 

You mean this one?

1000 + 100 vs 1000 + 50 (for and against) = 1100 scored vs 1050 conceded (104.7%)

That's better for our percentage than

1000 + 200 vs 1000 + 140 (for and against) = 1200 scored vs 1149 conceded (104.4%)

 

...even though we've scored more in the second scenario (and even won by more).

 

Winning by a lot now means less for our percentage than it did in round one, granted; but it's still better to beat your opponent while also keeping them to a low score.