Ladder Watch

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,325]

It was a pathetic draw tonight.

However, before tonight we needed to either go 4-2 or 3-2-1 to make top 4, so technically we’re still on track to make that achievable target of 16-5-1.

I’ve got Port and Brisbane both going 16-6.

A draw helps us make top 4 tonight. A clean centre clearance  by hawthorn in the last minute would’ve been an epic disaster for us.

[Dr.D 1,771]

58 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

It was a pathetic draw tonight.

However, before tonight we needed to either go 4-2 or 3-2-1 to make top 4, so technically we’re still on track to make that achievable target of 16-5-1.

I’ve got Port and Brisbane both going 16-6.

A draw helps us make top 4 tonight. A clean centre clearance  by hawthorn in the last minute would’ve been an epic disaster for us.

How does that even work?
 1. Dogs - 18-4
2. Cats 18-4
3. Brisbane 16-6
4. Port 16-6
5. Syd 16-6
6 Melbourne 15-6-1 

???

So you have us beating WCE in Perth, dogs or Geelong in Geelong? I hope you're right. I just don't see it happening. 

Edited July 17, 2021 by Dr.D

[Lord Nev 13,511]

3 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

How does that even work?
 1. Dogs - 18-4
2. Cats 18-4
3. Brisbane 16-6
4. Port 16-6
5. Syd 16-6
6 Melbourne 15-6-1 

???

So you have us beating WCE in Perth, dogs or Geelong in Geelong? I hope you're right. I just don't see it happening. 

We've already beaten the Dogs and Cats this year, Optus is hardly a fortress in 2021.

I mean really, more chance we lose to Suns and Crows and win the other 3 if you're actually going by our season so far.

Also, there's probably a lot of things you don't see happening...

[Dr.D 1,771]

5 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

We've already beaten the Dogs and Cats this year, Optus is hardly a fortress in 2021.

I mean really, more chance we lose to Suns and Crows and win the other 3 if you're actually going by our season so far.

Also, there's probably a lot of things you don't see happening...

Yeah, but we beat Geelong at the mcg. without Rohan and Cameron. Cameron may or may not be back for the round 23 clash.

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,325]

13 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

How does that even work?
 1. Dogs - 18-4
2. Cats 18-4
3. Brisbane 16-6
4. Port 16-6
5. Syd 16-6
6 Melbourne 15-6-1 

???

So you have us beating WCE in Perth, dogs or Geelong in Geelong? I hope you're right. I just don't see it happening. 

I agree we’ve got our work ahead of us to go 3-2 for the rest of the year.

My point was that a win or a draw tonight makes no difference for the run home. We Still need to win 3 games to claim a top 4.

[Lord Nev 13,511]

1 minute ago, Dr.D said:

Yeah, but we beat Geelong at the mcg. without Rohan and Cameron. Cameron may or may not be back for the round 23 clash.

Yeah and we lost May during the game, had Jetta and Jones in the team. Plus, who knows where that game will actually end up being played too.

[Min Xie 284]

In my calculation, WB and Geel would finish as the top two, most likely we would end as the 4th. Hopefully, we play one of them in MCG in first week final (AFL needs money).

[GCDee 3,064]

5 hours ago, Dr.D said:

How does that even work?
 1. Dogs - 18-4
2. Cats 18-4
3. Brisbane 16-6
4. Port 16-6
5. Syd 16-6
6 Melbourne 15-6-1 

???

So you have us beating WCE in Perth, dogs or Geelong in Geelong? I hope you're right. I just don't see it happening. 

You answered your own question in your post... seriously bud, just calm down with your over the top posts they are getting old. 

Anything can happen this season, we are 3 wins a head of Brisbane and 2 wins a head of Port with 5 games to go. There is a bees [censored] chance Brisbane catch 3 games on us in 5 games unless we have an absolute capitulation and go 0-5 or 1-4 even then Brisbane have little margin for error, they are hardly setting the world on fire at the moment. 

[Forest Demon 4,681]

A draw is far from a disaster (the result that is, not the performance)

[BDA 20,397]

If past performance is any guide we'll finish 16-5-1.

We'll beat Doggies, WCE and Geelong and lose to GC and the Crows

[GCDee 3,064]

6 minutes ago, Better days ahead said:

If past performance is any guide we'll finish 16-5-1.

We'll beat Doggies, WCE and Geelong and lose to GC and the Crows

I think we will beat GC, dogs, crows & Eagles and drop the Geelong game finishing the season 17-4-1.

 

[Demon17 4,624]

5 hours ago, Min Xie said:

In my calculation, WB and Geel would finish as the top two, most likely we would end as the 4th. Hopefully, we play one of them in MCG in first week final (AFL needs money).

And realisitically thats about the right spot for our season given the flakiness against lower teams. Certainly worthy of top 4 but not top 2.

[Kent 2,605]

Im wit the good doctor after last night

5th for me unfortuantely

[Lucifers Hero 37,207]

We haven't won 3 games in a row since round round 9.  We haven't won 2 games in a row since round 12.  

Regardless of where we end up in the 8 we need to get our act together if we want to go deep into the finals.  At some stage we will need to win at least two in a row to make it to the big dance.

[dl4e 5,624]

For us to sit in the top 4 infact top 2 for the year up until round 20 and then drop down to fifth would be a pot of tea with Melbourne written all over it.

[titan_uranus 22,631]

The draw is like a win when you compare us with the Dogs and Geelong: they both have better percentages than us so the draw does the same job as a win.

But the draw is like a loss when you compare us with Brisbane, Port and Sydney, who all have lower percentages (particularly Port and Sydney, who are 8%+ behind us). The draw does nothing for us because we likely would be finishing above them on equal wins.

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

We haven't won 3 games in a row since round round 9.  We haven't won 2 games in a row since round 12.  

Regardless of where we end up in the 8 we need to get our act together if we want to go deep into the finals.  At some stage we will need to win at least two in a row to make it to the big dance.

We haven't played two top 8 sides in a row since Rounds 11-12.

I'm not suggesting it's that simple, but our biggest flaw is our inability to switch on vs bottom 10 sides (and particularly bottom 4 sides).

We won't have that issue in the finals.

[titan_uranus 22,631]

13 hours ago, Dr.D said:

How does that even work?
 1. Dogs - 18-4
2. Cats 18-4
3. Brisbane 16-6
4. Port 16-6
5. Syd 16-6
6 Melbourne 15-6-1 

???

So you have us beating WCE in Perth, dogs or Geelong in Geelong? I hope you're right. I just don't see it happening. 

It's quite easy to make a negative case for us when you assume every single competitor is going to win every single game on their respective runs home, except the one game you have to give someone a loss (Bulldogs v Port).

[Deesprate 1,185]

All the permeations mean diddly keep winning it becomes irrelevant

[picket fence 15,366]

On 7/13/2021 at 10:14 AM, Jaded said:

How are we at more of a risk to be kicked out of top 4 than the other 3 below us who have won one or two less games?

 

Harder run home!

[Lucifers Hero 37,207]

3 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

We haven't played two top 8 sides in a row since Rounds 11-12.

I'm not suggesting it's that simple, but our biggest flaw is our inability to switch on vs bottom 10 sides (and particularly bottom 4 sides).

We won't have that issue in the finals.

So you really think if we had played two top 8 sounds in a row we would have beaten them?   

Hmmm, I'm not buying the 'we beat top 8 sides but not the lower sides' pattern will continue or continue into finals.   

A closer look at some of our early wins shows: 

• Geelong were missing Rohan, Dangerfield, Higgins, Smith and Cameron.  And Geelong by their own admission hadn't twigged to the impact of the new 'stand the mark' rules.
• Bulldogs were missing Dunkley and adjusting to their first week without Treloar in the middle.  They won't fall for the 'tag Libba out of the game trick' again.
• Richmond were missing too many players to list here.  Dusty and someone else went off injured during the game.  And like Geelong they hadn't twiigged to the impact of the new 'stand the mark' rules
• We were missing Weideman and Brown for but our selections since suggest they weren't missed.

So anyone thinking because we beat the top 8 sides in the H&A games we will do so the next time we play or in the finals is in for a rude shock.

We wont have to wait to finals to find out as we play Bulldogs, Eagles and Cats in the next few weeks.

Edited July 18, 2021 by Lucifer's Hero

[titan_uranus 22,631]

36 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

So you really think if we had played two top 8 sounds in a row we would have beaten them?   

Hmmm, I'm not buying the 'we beat top 8 sides but not the lower sides' pattern will continue or continue into finals.   

A closer look at some of our early wins shows: 

• Geelong were missing Rohan, Dangerfield, Higgins, Smith and Cameron.  And Geelong by their own admission hadn't twigged to the impact of the new 'stand the mark' rules.
• Bulldogs were missing Dunkley and adjusting to their first week without Treloar in the middle.  They won't fall for the 'tag Libba out of the game trick' again.
• Richmond were missing too many players to list here.  Dusty and someone else went off injured during the game.  And like Geelong they hadn't twiigged to the impact of the new 'stand the mark' rules
• We were missing Weideman and Brown for but our selections since suggest they weren't missed.

So anyone thinking because we beat the top 8 sides in the H&A games we will do so the next time we play or in the finals is in for a rude shock.

We wont have to wait to finals to find out as we play Bulldogs, Eagles and Cats in the next few weeks.

You're entitled to be pessimistic but this is unfair revisionism.

If anyone on here tried to justify a loss to a side in Round 4 for not having "twigged" to the stand rule, they'd get pilloried. But if you want to give Geelong that cop out, then it's only fair to note in response that we'd spent all pre-season preparing for a Brown-Weideman forward line and so were still "twigging" to having to play without them. Smith played for them and Higgins has been dropped this year as being borderline best 22. Plus we were missing May after the first quarter.

The Dogs wasn't an "early" win, it was in Round 11. Reducing that win to "we tagged Libba and they missed Dunkley and Treloar" doesn't do our hard work anywhere near the justice it deserved.

Your revisionism reaches new heights on the Richmond win though. "Missing too many players to list here"? They were missing a grand total of two best 22 players, Vlastuin and Prestia. Martin went down midway through the third after having been tagged out of the game by Hibberd. They were at peak Richmond in the first 15 minutes, where most sides fall apart, but we weathered the storm and turned it around. 

Feel free to argue we'll lose to the Bulldogs, West Coast or Geelong in the run home, but don't do it by undermining our strong wins against every single top 8 side we've played this year. 

So to answer your question - who knows what would have happened if we'd played two consecutive games against top 8 sides. But a "closer look" at our wins doesn't reveal anything you're arguing for here. Indeed, I'd argue that the "closer" you look at our wins, the more you realise we lift and play premiership winning football.

Edited July 18, 2021 by titan_uranus

[Lucifers Hero 37,207]

22 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

You're entitled to be pessimistic but this is unfair revisionism.

If anyone on here tried to justify a loss to a side in Round 4 for not having "twigged" to the stand rule, they'd get pilloried. But if you want to give Geelong that cop out, then it's only fair to note in response that we'd spent all pre-season preparing for a Brown-Weideman forward line and so were still "twigging" to having to play without them. Smith played for them and Higgins has been dropped this year as being borderline best 22. Plus we were missing May after the first quarter.

The Dogs wasn't an "early" win, it was in Round 11. Reducing that win to "we tagged Libba and they missed Dunkley and Treloar" doesn't do our hard work anywhere near the justice it deserved.

Your revisionism reaches new heights on the Richmond win though. "Missing too many players to list here"? They were missing a grand total of two best 22 players, Vlastuin and Prestia. Martin went down midway through the third after having been tagged out of the game by Hibberd. They were at peak Richmond in the first 15 minutes, where most sides fall apart, but we weathered the storm and turned it around. 

Feel free to argue we'll lose to the Bulldogs, West Coast or Geelong in the run home, but don't do it by undermining our strong wins against every single top 8 side we've played this year. 

So to answer your question - who knows what would have happened if we'd played two consecutive games against top 8 sides. But a "closer look" at our wins doesn't reveal anything you're arguing for here. Indeed, I'd argue that the "closer" you look at our wins, the more you realise we lift and play premiership winning football.

Again you accuse me of 'revisionism' and being 'unfair'.  Like last time my views (which have been far from pessimistic) have been consistent all year.  Can't be bothered looking for them for you.  And I'm optimistic for finals but I don't accept the premise that because we beat top 8 teams before we will beat them again.

"Feel free to argue we'll lose to the Bulldogs, West Coast or Geelong in the run home, but don't do it by undermining our strong wins against every single top 8 side we've played this year" .   That is taking more than poetic licence with my post.  You have a strange idea of 'undermining'.

If you want to believe we will beat all the top 8 teams again, go ahead.  

Edited July 18, 2021 by Lucifer's Hero

[Mr Steve 3,820]

13 hours ago, Min Xie said:

In my calculation, WB and Geel would finish as the top two, most likely we would end as the 4th. Hopefully, we play one of them in MCG in first week final (AFL needs money).

Geelong will demand a home final and Im guessing so will WB. 

[titan_uranus 22,631]

12 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Again you accuse me of 'revisionism' and being 'unfair'.  Like last time my views (which have been far from pessimistic) have been consistent all year.  Can't be bothered looking for them for you.  And I'm optimistic for finals but I don't accept the premise that because we beat top 8 teams before we will beat them again.

"Feel free to argue we'll lose to the Bulldogs, West Coast or Geelong in the run home, but don't do it by undermining our strong wins against every single top 8 side we've played this year" .   That is taking more than poetic licence with my post.  You have a strange idea of 'undermining'.

If you want to believe we will beat all the top 8 teams again, go ahead.  

Jeepers.

It's revisionism when you now argue that Richmond was missing so many players you couldn't name them when in reality it was just two. 

What about your post isn't undermining our wins? You're going back to three strong wins against top 8 sides and putting up arguments that in my view are either blatantly wrong (e.g. the Richmond injury one) or unfair criticisms which don't take into account the things we did right (e.g. Geelong not "twigging" to the stand rule - which by the way is news to me).

There isn't an ounce of "poetic licence" in my post. You're arguing our previous wins against top 8 sides don't automatically mean we''ll win the remaining games against top 8 sides. That's a completely fair argument. But you're doing it by arguing our wins against Geelong, Richmond and the Dogs weren't actually that good. That's not a fair argument, for the reasons I've outlined above. Nothing "poetic" about it.

And for the record, I've never argued we're going to beat all of Geelong, the Dogs and West Coast in the run home. But given how we've played against top 8 sides this year, it's not unreasonable at all to think we can, or even that we're more likely to beat them than we are to beat Gold Coast or Adelaide.

[Watson11 1,910]

Does anyone know what is happening with our training loads? Elite athletes in heavy training  do 1 week heavy training/1 week backed off, and peak their loads 4-5 weeks before their competition. I’m wondering if Burgo is following this type of program to have us peak by finals, but has modified a bit according to the fixture (heavy weeks against bottom teams).

I have noticed that in all of our poor games, I have expected us to outrun our opponents in the final quarter, but we have had nothing.  Compare this to our wins, where most games could probably go either way at 3/4 time but we have been all over the opposition in the final quarter.  We probably won’t know until finals.