Jump to content

Featured Replies

Posted

You need to grab the opportunity when it presents itself as it’s clear they should be in the top 4 not fighting to stay in the 8 . Let’s hope they haven’t missed a golden chance!

5D5436A1-04A0-4355-9B17-A9F0EE249F0A.thumb.png.08e739d98e07ccc343b1eda851f8c43e.png

 

0A6C5EA7-328D-43A0-B491-2C279954F042.png

6F746D3F-CEB8-4AAD-BDFA-D80841D60AEE.png

Edited by Hogan2014
Spelling

 

It's funny that our strength is our ruck/midfield dominance/ability to clear the ball forward, yet we love to play a lose behind play somewhat limiting our dominance by allowing the opposition to outnumber us in our forward line.

If i was a coach i would be evening the numbers up in our forward line most of the time, to give our dominance the best chance to be successful (i.e., quick tap to a midfielder at a center bounce and long kick long to an even numbered forward line).

6 minutes ago, Wunders said:

It's funny that our strength is our ruck/midfield dominance/ability to clear the ball forward, yet we love to play a lose behind play somewhat limiting our dominance by allowing the opposition to outnumber us in our forward line.

If i was a coach i would be evening the numbers up in our forward line most of the time, to give our dominance the best chance to be successful (i.e., quick tap to a midfielder at a center bounce and long kick long to an even numbered forward line).

I'd be playing a small defensive forward line and kicking grubbers, then locking it in for another stoppage, where our dominant ruckman and great clearance players get to go again.

 
1 hour ago, Chook said:

I'd be playing a small defensive forward line and kicking grubbers, then locking it in for another stoppage, where our dominant ruckman and great clearance players get to go again.

At least that way an intercept defender wouldn’t keep chopping us off in the air!

STOP LONG BOMBS AND CONVERT SET SHOTS!!!!

 

 

 

 

Sorry to shout.

Edited by Moonshadow


The spare defensively is probably because we tend to turn the ball over a lot and get scored easily on the counter attack.

Also if we lose clearances we get scored against too easily. 

If we can fix that, well....

24 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

The spare defensively is probably because we tend to turn the ball over a lot and get scored easily on the counter attack.

Also if we lose clearances we get scored against too easily. 

If we can fix that, well....

Everyone we play knows the stats and they put a spare back.  We don’t want 7 on 7 in our forward line so end up with 6 on 7 with our defence basically 6 on 5.  Result is crowded Melbourne forward line and open backline.  Harder for us to score and harder to defend.

Can't help noticing that with each stat there is a true bottom-level club in the top few. That'd be the 'with a grain of salt' reminder. But to be so strong on multiple important stats and still failing...

If we are playing with stats, worth also mentioning that are third (as in third worst) for clangers per game, 17th for rebound 50s, and 18th (as in worst) for 'least opponent rebound 50s'.

We also have the most tackles against us, so the truth of that stat is sumply that we have games with an awful lot of tackles by both sides.

Long statistical story short, our games are mostly mad scrambles and when we get the upper hand we can rapidly blow teams away, and when we are overwhelmed we get smashed.

It's like two bulls fighting, balanced on a pole.

I'm kind of heartened by the thought of what will happen when we get the upper hand just that little bit more, and that little bit more often. This also makes sense of our problem battling the other quality teams. Hell, we could end up climbing the ladder almost directly according to the the list of teams we are better than.

 
6 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

Can't help noticing that with each stat there is a true bottom-level club in the top few. That'd be the 'with a grain of salt' reminder. But to be so strong on multiple important stats and still failing...

If we are playing with stats, worth also mentioning that are third (as in third worst) for clangers per game, 17th for rebound 50s, and 18th (as in worst) for 'least opponent rebound 50s'.

We also have the most tackles against us, so the truth of that stat is sumply that we have games with an awful lot of tackles by both sides.

Long statistical story short, our games are mostly mad scrambles and when we get the upper hand we can rapidly blow teams away, and when we are overwhelmed we get smashed.

It's like two bulls fighting, balanced on a pole.

I'm kind of heartened by the thought of what will happen when we get the upper hand just that little bit more, and that little bit more often. This also makes sense of our problem battling the other quality teams. Hell, we could end up climbing the ladder almost directly according to the the list of teams we are better than.

Excellent analysis Little Goffy. I agree that we are doing much right but also have deficiencies which we will improve when our core group becomes more experienced.

I am still quite confident we will win one of our next two games and play finals

3 hours ago, Wunders said:

It's funny that our strength is our ruck/midfield dominance/ability to clear the ball forward, yet we love to play a lose behind play somewhat limiting our dominance by allowing the opposition to outnumber us in our forward line.

If i was a coach i would be evening the numbers up in our forward line most of the time, to give our dominance the best chance to be successful (i.e., quick tap to a midfielder at a center bounce and long kick long to an even numbered forward line).

So, could this ridiculous 6-6-6 knee jerk reaction by Big Chief Knee Jerk Gillon actually help us, against our will?

1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

STOP LONG BOMBS AND CONVERT SET SHOTS!!!!

 

 

 

 

Sorry to shout.

Moonshadow - can we nominate you for coach?  

It is quite clear that nobody on our coaching panel or in our leadership group have ever even considered this simple solution to all our woes, otherwise they would have put it in to action and have it executed perfectly and precisely.

Please forward it to Mr Goodwin.

Edited by monoccular


10 minutes ago, monoccular said:

Moonshadow - can we nominate you for coach?  

It is quite clear that nobody on our coaching panel or in our leadership group have ever even considered this simple solution to all our woes, otherwise they would have put it in to action and have it executed perfectly and precisely.

Please forward it to Mr Goodwin.

I am Simon Goodwin.

13 hours ago, Wunders said:

It's funny that our strength is our ruck/midfield dominance/ability to clear the ball forward, yet we love to play a lose behind play somewhat limiting our dominance by allowing the opposition to outnumber us in our forward line.

If i was a coach i would be evening the numbers up in our forward line most of the time, to give our dominance the best chance to be successful (i.e., quick tap to a midfielder at a center bounce and long kick long to an even numbered forward line).

Bang on.

I think I wrote something similar on here recently.

13 hours ago, Wunders said:

It's funny that our strength is our ruck/midfield dominance/ability to clear the ball forward, yet we love to play a lose behind play somewhat limiting our dominance by allowing the opposition to outnumber us in our forward line.

If i was a coach i would be evening the numbers up in our forward line most of the time, to give our dominance the best chance to be successful (i.e., quick tap to a midfielder at a center bounce and long kick long to an even numbered forward line).

 

3 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Bang on.

I think I wrote something similar on here recently.

Good points, one I hadn't thought of. So basically we are being negative when we should be going for the jugular. 

16 hours ago, Wunders said:

It's funny that our strength is our ruck/midfield dominance/ability to clear the ball forward

That hasn't been our strength against the 'smart' teams this year. 

For example, #hitouts and #clearances in isolation show we dominate (most of the time).  But to measure the team's effectiveness from ruck contests the ratio of clearances/hitout gives a clearer picture.  Against the teams that have convincingly beaten us this year (and happen to be the only ones above us on the ladder) this is what that measure shows:

Total Team Clearances to Total Own Ruck Hitouts:

image.png.d6e724900beacf72e3742f9953ca7224.png

A very consistent pattern emerges.  It is saying the 'smart' teams don't worry about winning the hitouts but rove to Max better than us, so neutralise our greatest asset.  The Coll ratio is closer because they had Grundy to neutralise Max nonetheless they still roved to Max better than us.

The difficulty with raw stats is it is just data until it is used in a meaningful measure of effectiveness.  Champion Data (and the media) rarely do that.  So conclusions are often drawn on 'Total' this or 'Total' that which can be skewed by a handful of good games. 

So I would say we have taken our opportunities against the bottom half of the ladder where the stats in the op are most pronounced.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero


In the spirit of sharing stats. I saw the attached on an afl page which showed the ave median games played over the 20 rounds.

I think we as a group tend to get caught up on stats and issues and lose focus that this team has a lot of growing to do. And in comparison to other teams theyve done pretty well.

Do i want them to do better this year.. obviously. Have they shot themselves in the foot? Yes.

But lets take a step back from time to time and look at the big picture.

 

FB_IMG_1534379832342.jpg

1 hour ago, Unleash Hell said:

In the spirit of sharing stats. I saw the attached on an afl page which showed the ave median games played over the 20 rounds.

I think we as a group tend to get caught up on stats and issues and lose focus that this team has a lot of growing to do. And in comparison to other teams theyve done pretty well.

Do i want them to do better this year.. obviously. Have they shot themselves in the foot? Yes.

But lets take a step back from time to time and look at the big picture.

 

FB_IMG_1534379832342.jpg

Sorry to be pedantic but is that a table of the 'Average' or the 'Median'?  They can paint quite a different picture as the Average is easily skewed.   (I don't think it is statistically possible to have an average median, is it...?)

I'm not suggesting we are not relatively young and have a lot of growing to do - would just like to understand what that table refers to.  Cheers.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero

The post wrote

Average median games played for all 20 games this season

Feel free to interpret as you wish @Lucifer's Hero, its no skin off my nose

 

For me it just backed up my thinking that this team has a lot of development left and that the more exposure to big games now the better.

 

Suns and Geelong are interesting as well on that ladder

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Sorry to be pedantic but is that a table of the 'Average' or the 'Median'?  They can paint quite a different picture as the Average is easily skewed.   (I don't think it is statistically possible to have an average median, is it...?)

I'm not suggesting we are not relatively young and have a lot of growing to do - would just like to understand what that table refers to.  Cheers.

I think it originally came from here 

From the comments, it looks like the median games experience from each game then average by 20.

Edited by DemonWorshipper
Formatting

4 hours ago, DemonWorshipper said:

I think it originally came from here 

From the comments, it looks like the median games experience from each game then average by 20.

This


22 hours ago, Chook said:

I'd be playing a small defensive forward line and kicking grubbers, then locking it in for another stoppage, where our dominant ruckman and great clearance players get to go again.

As high kicks into the f50 have been repeatedly marked by the oppo in the last 2 weeks, I expect I haven't been the only one who has been shouting "kick a grubber".  At least that gives us a 50% chance at minimum. 

5 hours ago, DemonWorshipper said:

I think it originally came from here 

From the comments, it looks like the median games experience from each game then average by 20.

Gen Y here with a 21st century maths education. Can you explain what the [censored] that means? lol

 
23 minutes ago, praha said:

Gen Y here with a 21st century maths education. Can you explain what the [censored] that means? lol

It means the twitter person 'Sgt Pepper.....' (aka the 'data scientist') doesn't know what he is talking about or is being a smart alec to impress his followers. 

That aside, 'Unleash Hells' point that we are a relatively inexperienced side with a bit of growing to do is valid.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 528 replies