Got an email from the club today with offer of two free GA tickets to Giants game.

Get on it!

Spargo was actually pretty good.  I agree that Trac had a quietish game.  I would have given Spargo more votes head to head. 

Oliver is an absolute gem.

Fritta had an average game, although he played some important moments (running back into the back 50 to slow the Eagles fast break)

Weidemann did really well  - applied pressure, took some marks, made contests.  Think he did more than enough to hold his place.

No change, unless someone pulls up too sore.

Most even umpiring I have seen in a Perth match - can we have these guys as ins for next week too?

Don't quite understand the negativity around Spargo as i also thought he pkayed well, i would not bring in Jeffy for him just yet. 

29 minutes ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

Gee i hope not, he is only 24 with a foot that could be Permanently [censored]

Could be that he is not right, l am not his foot although how do you keep a bull like Viney from not playing if Goodwin says he is right to go come first Final. On SEN about 90 minutes ago.

I think  Viney is professional enough to know better.   Time will tell.

9 minutes ago, Jibroni said:

i would not bring in Jeffy for him just yet.  

I don't think I'd bring in Jeffy ever, let alone "just yet". I'm very sceptical about his required performance in big games, and there's nothing bigger than finals.

Garlett isnt coming in.. he was woeful vs the Swans and from all reports, woeful at Casey.  Doubt he will even be on the list next year.

We have enough small-mid creative forwards anyway...  Hannan, Kent and Melksham a nice little trio indeed.

4 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

I don't think I'd bring in Jeffy ever, let alone "just yet". I'm very sceptical about his required performance in big games, and there's nothing bigger than finals.

If Jeffy ever decides to put in just 50% of Nev's effort......  then he'd be straight in.

As it is lately, he's like a spoilt kid.

 

Needs to pull the sulky attitude out of his, wherever he holds it, and help the cause.

This thread is virtually not required this week.

There will be no axings - we just won our first final and have just over two weeks before the real stuff.

There will be no restings - we have a week off coming anyway.

Hibberd has already been risked - he came back on yesterday - and unless he pulls up sore after the flight then he will be playing.

Vanders may miss a week - for his elbow on Rioli - but more than likely cops a fine. If he is to miss, then JKH or Wags will replace him. O-Mac is fine - he fell on him, he didn't sling.

Joel Smith would have come in had we lost, but we will now have the luxury of not rushing him back until week one of the finals. Ditto Jack Viney. 

 

 

VDB will cop a fine at worst. Low impact and looked accidental so careless

3 hours ago, Watson11 said:

Exactly.  The balance just needs to be right and we don't always get it right at the moment.  The most repeat maximum effort sprints in a game is shared by Sculley and Robertson at 36, which is only 9 per quarter and that is the elite level.  We spend too many of our maximum efforts spreading.  Hence we are the highest scoring team but we leak goals at times, and need to learn to balance the effort and slow it down when needed.  As supporters we all want every player to put in 60 repeat maximum effort sprints per game but it will never happen, and we call them lazy when we see them running defensively at 85% effort.  The lazy tag is used far too loosely.

Especially when we are 20-30 points up halfway through a quarter.

27 minutes ago, Deespicable said:

This thread is virtually not required this week.

There will be no axings - we just won our first final and have just over two weeks before the real stuff.

There will be no restings - we have a week off coming anyway.

Hibberd has already been risked - he came back on yesterday - and unless he pulls up sore after the flight then he will be playing.

Vanders may miss a week - for his elbow on Rioli - but more than likely cops a fine. If he is to miss, then JKH or Wags will replace him. O-Mac is fine - he fell on him, he didn't sling.

Joel Smith would have come in had we lost, but we will now have the luxury of not rushing him back until week one of the finals. Ditto Jack Viney. 

 

 

No 2JKH

33 minutes ago, Deespicable said:

This thread is virtually not required this week.

There will be no axings - we just won our first final and have just over two weeks before the real stuff.

There will be no restings - we have a week off coming anyway.

Hibberd has already been risked - he came back on yesterday - and unless he pulls up sore after the flight then he will be playing.

Vanders may miss a week - for his elbow on Rioli - but more than likely cops a fine. If he is to miss, then JKH or Wags will replace him. O-Mac is fine - he fell on him, he didn't sling.

 Joel Smith would have come in had we lost, but we will now have the luxury of not rushing him back until week one of the finals. Ditto Jack Viney. 

 

 

I don't even think it will be a fine. He was bracing for contact while trying to get the ball. Rioli slid in low and got collected. Nothing Vanders could have done.

The free that Cripps got for Vanders trying to spoil was als a BS decision. Free goal to them probably only offset by the non-free against Tyson on the goal line....

3 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I don't even think it will be a fine. He was bracing for contact while trying to get the ball. Rioli slid in low and got collected. Nothing Vanders could have done.

The free that Cripps got for Vanders trying to spoil was als a BS decision. Free goal to them probably only offset by the non-free against Tyson on the goal line....

The Tyson one where he was carried over the line could also have been called a high tackle - ultimately a correct no-call.

He got a bit lucky early with a free kick 15m out from goal when he ducked into a tackle - did you mean that one? 

There are two VFL games to be played before the first final. Garlett would need to be in the best for both and then maybe.

His VFL form last weekend was bordering on woeful. Must admit it's hard to think of many VFL games where he contributed much let alone starred. The game against Frankston was okay but not too many others spring to mind.

An enigma to say the least.

Can someone explain how we win by 17 but lose 1% on the ladder?

4 hours ago, Webber said:

Garlett is the definition of a front runner, which is very frustrating, because he has all the instinct and talent, but NOT what we want in finals. Watch Charlie Spargo rise to the occasion after a week off into finals.

agreed, unless Spargo has a shocker against GWS, it will be hard for Jeffy to regain a spot which is annoying because he has been a big part in our rebuild but at the moment he is lacking the forward half pressure that we desperately need 

1 minute ago, DemonLad5 said:

Can someone explain how we win by 17 but lose 1% on the ladder?

If we have a winning percentage for the game higher than the annual percentage, our percentage goes up; and vice versa. The percentage of yesterday's game was lower than our year-long percentage so the yearly percentage went down.

2 hours ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

A Sydney final has the least chance of happening.

Unfortunately that’s not true, here’s the possibilities:

WE WIN (over GWS):

• Collingwood lose we finish 4th, play Richmond in round one of the finals.

• Collingwood win we play a home final against Geelong.

•Or Collingwood lose, Sydney and Hawthorn draw we finish 5th and play Geelong in a home final.

WE LOSE:

• Geelong beat GC by less than a 50+ points differential (eg we lose by 20 Geelong win by 30) we finish 7th and play:

Sydney in Sydney if Hawthorn win

Hawthorn in Melbourne if Sydney win

Sydney in Sydney if Hawthorn and Sydney draw.

• Geelong beat Gold Coast by more than 50 point differential we play GWS in Sydney.

WE DRAW:

We play one of GWS or Sydney in Sydney or Hawthorn in Melbourne.

So the most likely outcome if we win is home against Geelong. 

If we lose we have a 3/4 chance of playing in Sydney.

If you are being positive and saying we will definitely win over GWS then I’m sorry and yes Sydney would be very unlikely.

Also no changes for me this week. I’m hoping for a Freo miracle and us smashing GWS to fly into top 4.

Edited August 20, 20186 yr by deejammin'

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

If we have a winning percentage for the game higher than the annual percentage, our percentage goes up; and vice versa. The percentage of yesterday's game was lower than our year-long percentage so the yearly percentage went down.

so it'll be harder for Geelong to gain lots of % this week because they gained so much last week?

11 minutes ago, deejammin' said:

Unfortunately that’s not true, here’s the possibilities:

WE WIN (over GWS):

• Collingwood lose we finish 4th, play Richmond in round one of the finals.

• Collingwood win we play a home final against Geelong.

•Or Collingwood lose, Sydney and Hawthorn draw we finish 5th and play Geelong in a home final.

WE LOSE:

• Geelong beat GC by less than a 50+ points differential (eg we lose by 20 Geelong win by 30) we finish 7th and play:

Sydney in Sydney if Hawthorn win

Hawthorn in Melbourne if Sydney win

Sydney in Sydney if Hawthorn and Sydney draw.

• Geelong beat Gold Coast by more than 50 point differential we play GWS in Sydney.

WE DRAW:

We play one of GWS or Sydney in Sydney or Hawthorn in Melbourne.

So the most likely outcome if we win is home against Geelong. 

If we lose we have a 3/4 chance of playing in Sydney.

If you are being positive and saying we will definitely win over GWS then I’m sorry and yes Sydney would be very unlikely.

Also no changes for me this week. I’m hoping for a Freo miracle and us smashing GWS to fly into top 4.

Great post thanks. My preference if I may:

1. Dawks at the G

2. Kittens at the G

3. Tiggies at the...uh....maybe Swans in Sydney

1 hour ago, DemonLad5 said:

Can someone explain how we win by 17 but lose 1% on the ladder?

Winning margin is far lower than usual for a 130% 

the higher the % the wider the winning margin

1 hour ago, DemonLad5 said:

so it'll be harder for Geelong to gain lots of % this week because they gained so much last week?

Not necessarily.  Think that there is the for and against points columns.  If they are on 120%, then the ratio is For:Against = 1.2:1.  If they get a score that is more that 1.2:1, then their percentage can go up.  If they win, but get less, this can go down.  So, consider a match score

126 points to 100:  this is 126%

However, at the end of a long season, 1903:1514 is their current percentage of 125.6%

2026:1614 (126:100 victory) would give them a percentage of 125.5% . Ther size of the against number also has an impact on the outcome.  So a 126:50 win is a 252% win, and their percentage goes up to 129.5%.  

Late in the season you need big results to gain or lose moderate percentage amounts.

3 hours ago, Jibroni said:

Don't quite understand the negativity around Spargo as i also thought he pkayed well, i would not bring in Jeffy for him just yet. 

I think Jeffy may have lost the trust of the FD.

3 hours ago, binman said:

VDB will cop a fine at worst. Low impact and looked accidental so careless

Hang on, why then doesn't  the west coast guy also cop a sanction then. they were both arriving at the drop at the same time one was higher off ground.

AVB went low as he doesn't launch high.

2 hours ago, deejammin' said:

Unfortunately that’s not true, here’s the possibilities:

WE WIN (over GWS):

• Collingwood lose we finish 4th, play Richmond in round one of the finals.

• Collingwood win we play a home final against Geelong.

•Or Collingwood lose, Sydney and Hawthorn draw we finish 5th and play Geelong in a home final.

WE LOSE:

• Geelong beat GC by less than a 50+ points differential (eg we lose by 20 Geelong win by 30) we finish 7th and play:

Sydney in Sydney if Hawthorn win

Hawthorn in Melbourne if Sydney win

Sydney in Sydney if Hawthorn and Sydney draw.

• Geelong beat Gold Coast by more than 50 point differential we play GWS in Sydney.

WE DRAW:

We play one of GWS or Sydney in Sydney or Hawthorn in Melbourne.

So the most likely outcome if we win is home against Geelong. 

If we lose we have a 3/4 chance of playing in Sydney.

If you are being positive and saying we will definitely win over GWS then I’m sorry and yes Sydney would be very unlikely.

Also no changes for me this week. I’m hoping for a Freo miracle and us smashing GWS to fly into top 4.

thanks for doing that.  insane that we can still play 5 different teams with one game to go!

Most likely would be:

Geelong if we win (Geelong should win by 50pts plus)

or GWS away if we lose.

GWS will have a few back in 3 weeks so this is the worst outcome of all in my opinion.