Finals 2021

[binman 39,650]

19 minutes ago, Colm said:

I’m a bit surprised that the bookies have the cats as favourites. $4 with bet365. We are $4.20, dogs $5.25 and Port $6.50. 

That is a function of the betting pool and how much has already been bet on the Cats

Around the time of the bye rounds kicking off the Dogs, dees and cats were essentially all equal favorites for the flag.

In the 3-4 weeks post that period we were perceived to be struggling and the dogs had come off the boil.

However the Cats were unbeaten in that same period and the money came for them, and punters were not keen on the dogs and the dees. The weight of money meant the cats became favorites at around $4 (where they remain). 

Three weeks ago, prior to the Suns game,  we were $5.50 and i think the dogs $4.50. I know that because I took the $5.50 ten minutes before the Suns game started on the logic that it represented great value as i was confident we would win our next two games and tighten considerably. 

Regardless of the result on Friday night the Cats are likely to drift, as punters will back the winner and increase the pool and decrease the cats percentage of that pool (essentially maintaining the bookies profit margin). If Port are impressive they will come in and the same goes for the dogs

If we win this week punters will back us and the Cats will likely drift again. Particularly if they end up having to play Port at Adelaide oval as even more money will bt on Port in that scenario.  

I think we will win and the dogs will win. If that occurs i suspect we will be slight favorites for the flag at $4 and the dogs second favorite at $4.20.  The dogs will be aprox $5.50 and Port remain at $6.50.

If you are punter, the $4.50 you can get on the dees atm still represents great value. We are the best team in the AFL and we are in the best shape injury wise of any team too.

If i was framing a fresh market (ie no money in the pool yet) i would have dees $3.50 favourites. 

[Pates 9,562]

43 minutes ago, binman said:

If you are punter, the $4.50 you can get on the dees atm still represents great value. We are the best team in the AFL and we are in the best shape injury wise of any team too.

It’s funny you say that because aside from our really strong system that has shown it to be solid against all the best teams in the competition, our fitness and our lower injury list is something that really sets us apart. Pound for pound I don’t think our players are better or worse than the other top teams, but we’ve had the best access to our best 22 for most of the year and aside from TMac and May, they don’t seem to be carrying too many niggles. 

It’s certainly reason enough that should Port beat the Dogs on Friday night (I don’t think they will) we should seriously consider resting any players that are carrying niggles. 

[rpfc 27,692]

50 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Why not just a negative test? Vaccinated people can still get the virus and still transmit the virus.

There's no logic in not letting in unvaccinated people who test negative.

 

It’s risk minimisation, the vaccinated are far less likely to be as symptomatic as the unvaccinated should it be a false negative or too early in the stages of getting the disease.

The Las Vegas NFL team has a vaxx mandate for the new season coming up. The availability of vaccinations is different in the US of course but negative tests not enough is the message.

[Sir Why You Little 35,359]

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/08/grim-warning-israel-vaccination-blunts-does-not-defeat-delta
 

We will all need Booster shots for the next 5-10 years

[old55 21,913]

We'll win this week, win next week and go on to win the flag and everyone will say "well that was obvious wasn't it - they are the best team"

[Lucifers Hero 37,524]

4 hours ago, Pollyanna said:

I think we need to look at the big picture re finals home ground advantage.  The GF is played at the MCG every year (except last year and this year), it's our own fault we haven't taken advantage of this in the past like Hawthorn and Richmond have.

That doesn't sound like our Polly 🤔

59 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

We'll win this week, win next week and go on to win the flag and everyone will say "well that was obvious wasn't it - they are the best team"

This does 

[Dr. Gonzo 22,844]

1 hour ago, Pollyanna said:

We'll win this week, win next week and go on to win the flag and everyone will say "well that was obvious wasn't it - they are the best team"

I've been thinking along those lines too just too scared to put it in writing - D'OH!

[Mr Steve 3,820]

Just listening to C Scott on the news. Wants finals played on neutral grounds.  Is he a bit worried about Sat night and does not want to face Port in Adelaide the week after. 

[WalkingCivilWar 35,251]

1 hour ago, Mr Steve said:

Just listening to C Scott on the news. Wants finals played on neutral grounds.  Is he a bit worried about Sat night and does not want to face Port in Adelaide the week after. 

I actually agree with him on this point. Victorian teams who are entitled to a home final will be denied such because the no crowds option is off the table. For the purposes of a level playing field, all games should be played on neutral grounds. 
I just saw Koch on the news adamant that if his team earns a home final then it will absolutely be played at home. It sucks that if/when we end up on top of the ladder we can’t demand the same. 
And I know life isn’t always fair. But where fairness is possible, it should be exercised. 

Edited August 19, 2021 by WalkingCivilWar

[radar 1,858]

Sure Goodwin said interstate teams entitled to home final if they were hosting. 

[titan_uranus 23,254]

7 hours ago, radar said:

I’d like to see a R1,MFC team v St K - first game under Roos. Was it 2014?
Also same team for Goodwin’s first game in R1 2018.  

Interested in personnel changes. 
Thinking only Gawn and TMac from current best 22. 
Hibberd, Melk and Brown at other clubs. 
 

Other than Giants, MFC only team in finals that hasn’t won a flag this century. 

Round 1 2014. Only TMac in the side (Jones the only other member of that 22 on our list).

B: Dean.Terlich, James Frawley, Jack Grimes
HB: Lynden Dunn, Tom McDonald, Bernie Vince
C: Jimmy Toumpas, Jack Watts, Dom Tyson
HF: Rohan Bail, Jack Fitzpatrick,  Daniel Cross
F: Shannon Byrnes, Cameron Pedersen, Jeremy Howe
Foll: Jake Spencer, Nathan Jones, Jack Trengove
I/C: Viv Michie, Matt Jones, Jay Kennedy-Harris, Alex Georgiou
EMG: Daniel Nicholson, Sam Blease, Michael Evans

Round 1 2018. Only 8 of that 22 in the side this week (Lever, Salem, Petracca, Harmes, Fritsch, Gawn, Oliver, ANB), plus Brayshaw an emergency and a further 4 (Hibberd, Jetta, Hunt and Melksham) on the list.

B: Michael Hibberd, Jake Lever, Neville Jetta
HB: Jayden Hunt, Oscar McDonald, Nathan Jones
C: Bernie Vince, Jordan Lewis, Christian Salem
HF: Christian Petracca, Cam Pedersen, James Harmes
F: Bayley Fritsch, Jesse Hogan, Jeff Garlett
Foll: Max Gawn, Clayton Oliver, Alex Neal-Bullen
I/C: Jake Melksham, Mitch Hannan, Corey Maynard, Josh Wagner
EMG: Angus Brayshaw, Dom Tyson, Sam Frost, Tom Bugg

[radar 1,858]

Wow. Thx so much - really appreciate it. Been wondering and shows how far MFC have come in 7 years. 
Poor Roos didn’t have a lot to work with. 
From 2018 to today, every extra player a real upgrade. 
Jackson

Kossie

Rivers

Jordan

Bowey

May

Langdon

Petty

Brown

 

Matter of interest, where did you manage to locate those teams?

Edited August 19, 2021 by radar

[Superunknown 3,664]

6 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Why not just a negative test? Vaccinated people can still get the virus and still transmit the virus.

There's no logic in not letting in unvaccinated people who test negative.

 

False negatives? Which test positive at day 13?

[Superunknown 3,664]

5 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/08/grim-warning-israel-vaccination-blunts-does-not-defeat-delta
 

We will all need Booster shots for the next 5-10 years

Or not

https://dalewharrison.substack.com/p/there-are-no-breakthrough-infections

[Superunknown 3,664]

6 hours ago, binman said:

That is a function of the betting pool and how much has already been bet on the Cats

Around the time of the bye rounds kicking off the Dogs, dees and cats were essentially all equal favorites for the flag.

In the 3-4 weeks post that period we were perceived to be struggling and the dogs had come off the boil.

However the Cats were unbeaten in that same period and the money came for them, and punters were not keen on the dogs and the dees. The weight of money meant the cats became favorites at around $4 (where they remain). 

Three weeks ago, prior to the Suns game,  we were $5.50 and i think the dogs $4.50. I know that because I took the $5.50 ten minutes before the Suns game started on the logic that it represented great value as i was confident we would win our next two games and tighten considerably. 

Regardless of the result on Friday night the Cats are likely to drift, as punters will back the winner and increase the pool and decrease the cats percentage of that pool (essentially maintaining the bookies profit margin). If Port are impressive they will come in and the same goes for the dogs

If we win this week punters will back us and the Cats will likely drift again. Particularly if they end up having to play Port at Adelaide oval as even more money will bt on Port in that scenario.  

I think we will win and the dogs will win. If that occurs i suspect we will be slight favorites for the flag at $4 and the dogs second favorite at $4.20.  The dogs will be aprox $5.50 and Port remain at $6.50.

If you are punter, the $4.50 you can get on the dees atm still represents great value. We are the best team in the AFL and we are in the best shape injury wise of any team too.

If i was framing a fresh market (ie no money in the pool yet) i would have dees $3.50 favourites. 

Thanks for the explanation!

I put $10 on the Dees at start of year at 26. Ladbrokes now offering a cash out at  4.90. Wish I’d put more!

also went on trac and Oliver for brownlow at start of year 

 

 

 

 

[Winners at last 4,949]

Is everyone overlooking the fact that the GF has always (until last year) been played at the MCG, despite interstate teams sometimes being the higher ranked team?

[jnrmac 19,519]

11 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

False negatives? Which test positive at day 13?

Then surely this applies to vaccinated ppl as well that might be infectious?

[Sir Why You Little 35,359]

25 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

Or not

https://dalewharrison.substack.com/p/there-are-no-breakthrough-infections

But the problem facing Israel now is that a lot of Patients in Hospitals have been double vaxxed

Boosters i think will become a standard for quite a while 

[Demonland 66,987]

 

[titan_uranus 23,254]

1 hour ago, radar said:

Wow. Thx so much - really appreciate it. Been wondering and shows how far MFC have come in 7 years. 
Poor Roos didn’t have a lot to work with. 
From 2018 to today, every extra player a real upgrade. 
Jackson

Kossie

Rivers

Jordan

Bowey

May

Langdon

Petty

Brown

 

Matter of interest, where did you manage to locate those teams?

Google, then random websites like Triple M.

[Chook 14,709]

33 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

I would imagine the boat captains would be vaccinated.

[Timothy Reddan-A'Blew 4,339]

Has this already been noted?

In the (likely?) event that both teams from the west lose, and if(?) the Tigers win...

 

...Ninthmond.

[Demonland 66,987]

 

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 6,124]

How can you change the date of the AFL Grand Final from the 25th to the 18th of September?

You can change the location of the GF to where ever in these times, but to think about changing the date of the GF is ludicrous, that has to remain sacrosanct.

[Delusional demon 82 1,197]

I think hosting it earlier would definitely suit us better and removing the bye all together with our fitness levels . Definitely more of a benefit to the top 4 (maybe not the cats)

grand finals (going back a bit here) under the old finals system were often around the 17/18th Sept , the 64 GF was on the 19th !!!