1 hour ago, Webber said:

Great pod again guys, love the very human dichotomy of Andy’s tendency to throw a negative veil over current form against binman’s tossing that veil to the gutter and just letting it run to the stormwater drain (whence there are a decent pile of veils now collecting). Thanks for the shout-out on the Max and Jack painting, which needless to say also has me greatly disturbed. @binman’s quite justifiable concern that he’s ignited a ‘curse’ over our form - by hanging said print - of course implicates me in the curse! What to do?! Firstly, @Demonland, burning yours is NOT the answer, and don’t think I haven’t contemplated the same action. The footy gods would not look kindly on such behaviour, dare I say it would likely institute a fresher, more malign curse. 
As such, I have committed new paint to canvas. Importantly, the attached photo was taken whilst the paint was still wet, making it ‘live’ into perpetuity. I trust that this (and a win in Alice Springs) will settle the matter. 

Firstly love your work. 

Secondly, I never blame the object (or creator) just my purchasing/acquiring it. 

One of my OCD triggers in regards to thinking it will curse me was the purchasing of merchandise before a game or during the season. Don’t ask me why. Ok I’ll tell you. It goes all the way back to begging for a Mel Ruckle (those cute Demon plush toys) before a game. My dad finally relented before a match which we subsequently lost and I forever blamed the loss not on the Mel Ruckle but on the purchasing of anything pregame. 

During the finals last year my wife purchased Melbourne merch for me for Father’s Day which was just before or during finals. I told her that she just ruined our season yet we won the Flag. 

Therefore I decided that the curse has finally been lifted and I could buy all the merch I ever wanted. Well I think I went a little bit overboard during the post Grand Final bliss and I fear that the curse is back. 

My only recourse is to burn it all and bury the ashes under the turf of our most holy of holy sites at Optus Stadium.

Very enjoyable podcast, lads - some genuine laugh out loud moments. I love the 3 viewpoints and I think we have a bit of all them within us. @binman makes a very compelling argument - if correct, would be fantastic. It would be fascinating to see how much of his theory is on the mark.

Keep up the great work.

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

Firstly love your work. 

Secondly, I never blame the object (or creator) just my purchasing/acquiring it. 

One of my OCD triggers in regards to thinking it will curse me was the purchasing of merchandise before a game or during the season. Don’t ask me why. Ok I’ll tell you. It goes all the way back to begging for a Mel Ruckle (those cute Demon plush toys) before a game. My dad finally relented before a match which we subsequently lost and I forever blamed the loss not on the Mel Ruckle but on the purchasing of anything pregame. 

During the finals last year my wife purchased Melbourne merch for me for Father’s Day which was just before or during finals. I told her that she just ruined our season yet we won the Flag. 

Therefore I decided that the curse has finally been lifted and I could buy all the merch I ever wanted. Well I think I went a little bit overboard during the post Grand Final bliss and I fear that the curse is back. 

My only recourse is to burn it all and bury the ashes under the turf of our most holy of holy sites at Optus Stadium.

He looks in outstanding nick, would make a tidy pile of ashes indeed. The thing about the merch/clothes superstition is how quickly (mine/they) go from indispensable to a win to cursed by a loss, and vice versa. One I’ve maintained however is “only purchase after a win”. This is of course, unlike all other superstitions, based on unbeatable logic. 

7 hours ago, Demonland said:

If we lose this week the gloves will be right off. 

“Binman 2022”

3 hours ago, 1964_2 said:

This coaching group has runs on the board. What makes you think you know more than them? 

It’s not speculation, but actual fact that we didn’t show our cards R19 last year when we lost to the dogs by 20 points. Who knows, maybe if we did we wouldn’t have beaten them in the granny. 

The cats this year are a similar threat to what the dogs were this time last year :- So sure, I get it’s a new year and things change, but this is a very relevant comparison. 
 

Never said I know anything more than the coaches. My point is that people are assuming we 'didn't show our cards' as if it was some sort of tactical master stroke. Ie. Assuming it was a coaching tactic. Perhaps it was, but perhaps the coaches just wanted to stick with the method - we got quite close to hitting the lead in Q4.  

Making the assumption it was a deliberate tactic makes the loss easier to take, because the alternative is that were sticking to our proven method but unable to match it with the cats (due to form, fitness, ground size or whatever). 

This is all pure speculation but....

During the H&A season last year, I think we needed some wins against top sides to prove to the players and coaches that our system stacked up.  However much trust and faith there was in what we were doing, there also had to be some doubt, doubt that wins against certain oppenents would quell.  I think this could have led us to set ourselves from a training load point of view for some games at the loss of some potential longer term fitness gains we could of had.  In amongst our poor losses to lowly sides, we also had some strong wins against some very good sides.

This year, post premiership and the confidence that brings, there are no lingering doubts.  There is strong belief based on what happened last September that our best will beat anyone.  This means the team can stick more rigidly and umcompromisingly to their loading plan, believing that the footy IQ on the coaching staff combined with the primed fitness and talent of the playing group will put us in the best position to go back-to-back in September.

The risk of belief and confidence however is that it can very lead to arrogance, selfishness and complacency, which the leaders on and off the field will have to be constantly vigilant against.

Reminder, that is all pure speculation.

21 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

Never said I know anything more than the coaches. My point is that people are assuming we 'didn't show our cards' as if it was some sort of tactical master stroke. Ie. Assuming it was a coaching tactic. Perhaps it was, but perhaps the coaches just wanted to stick with the method - we got quite close to hitting the lead in Q4.  

Making the assumption it was a deliberate tactic makes the loss easier to take, because the alternative is that were sticking to our proven method but unable to match it with the cats (due to form, fitness, ground size or whatever). 

There is every chance that we just wanted to persist with our method and back our guys in. You do make a good point.

Edited July 12, 20223 yr by layzie

1 hour ago, DemonWA said:

Never said I know anything more than the coaches. My point is that people are assuming we 'didn't show our cards' as if it was some sort of tactical master stroke. Ie. Assuming it was a coaching tactic. Perhaps it was, but perhaps the coaches just wanted to stick with the method - we got quite close to hitting the lead in Q4.  

Making the assumption it was a deliberate tactic makes the loss easier to take, because the alternative is that were sticking to our proven method but unable to match it with the cats (due to form, fitness, ground size or whatever). 

The argument around “assumptions” goes both ways. 

Over a two year period now, our best has been the best in the comp by a fair margin. With this in mind, it’s also a very aggressive assumption, to say we were simply beaten because we are not good enough etc. 

Anyway, at the end of the day we are all guessing, with the benefit in time of being able to look back over old posts and see who’s assumptions were correct. 
 

Thanks guys.  Win, lose or draw, I always enjoy the Demonland Podcast.

Listened to the rest on the way home. Geez Andy got even more fired up. Cussing and shouting. I would recommend watching 100-7 to calm down a little.

55 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

With this in mind, it’s also a very aggressive assumption, to say we were simply beaten because we are not good enough etc. 

Is it though? I think it's quite factual to say the team that wins the game is the better team on the day. 

16 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

Is it though? I think it's quite factual to say the team that wins the game is the better team on the day. 

Best team on the day, sure. But unless that particular day is GF day, it’s not the main focus.

16 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

Best team on the day, sure. But unless that particular day is GF day, it’s not the main focus.

Indeed and I've never suggested they are the same thing.

1 hour ago, Clintosaurus said:

Listened to the rest on the way home. Geez Andy got even more fired up. Cussing and shouting. I would recommend watching 100-7 to calm down a little.

That will depress me even more at the moment. I just can't envision us climbing those heights again.

MFCSS Variant DL.2.0

7 hours ago, demoncat said:

.First, it is a fact that we have versed more top 8 sides during this period than we did during this time last year. It may well be the case that had we versed Fremantle, Sydney, Collingwood or Geelong earlier in the year that we would have beaten them. Obviously this is hypothetical, but I don't think it is a factor that can be dismissed if you believe that we are/have been loading through the middle part of the season.

All top 4-6 sides would be loading. So in these matches I assume both teams are impacted to a similar extent. Therefore our losses are telling in terms of our form at that time imo.  

I get that during the loading phase we might come up short against a 6-10th placed team that are just trying to to make the finals and are not loading, but I don't accept that we are loading to a greater extent than any of the other top teams,  which is why I'm not supporitng the loading logic all the way through - we can't blame loading for the loss against the cats who have publicly indicated they're also loading. 

Your points around injury are very valid though

7 hours ago, Demonland said:

This was another thing that got me fired up.

With all due respect to my learned cohost Binman, who I have the utmost respect for and defer to in the tactical side of our onfield game, if I am to accept his narrative, a he may very well be correct, then the Lions threw (perhaps too strong a term) the match against us because they too were in their loading phase and knew they couldn't beat us so they laid down their swords. If that is the case then we in fact still have not beaten anyone of note because you can't consider that a true reflection of where we are at if the other team wasn't showing their finals hand.

I sincerely believe this is the case. The Lions were not "on", when we played them, nor were they against the Bombers.

I'd be very interested in understanding the relationship between injuries, especially soft tissue injury and loading. Do any Demonlanders have knowledge in this area?

 

12 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

All top 4-6 sides would be loading. So in these matches I assume both teams are impacted to a similar extent. Therefore our losses are telling in terms of our form at that time imo.  

This is an aggressive assumption. 

No other team was 10-0, so why would you expect them to load to the same level we have? 
 

Good pod. We lost to Geelong in Geelong in a game where we could not have played much worse... Let's keep things in perspective. We are trying to win the flag, not one game in July. Have faith. 

 

 

36 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

This is an aggressive assumption. 

No other team was 10-0, so why would you expect them to load to the same level we have? 
 

I believe we were 10-0 because of form/confidence/trust. Injuries, infighting, and some form issues are costing us. I don't think teams that are loading would vary their approaches to such a great extent, as you seem to suggest. 

18 minutes ago, Boots and all said:

I'd be very interested in understanding the relationship between injuries, especially soft tissue injury and loading. Do any Demonlanders have knowledge in this area?

 

I’m not an expert so hopefully others who are better qualified also chime in.

All physical work done when fatigued has increased risk of injury, and the main side effect of loading is fatigue. So, absolutely, it is a risky proposition, but when done by professional athletes with all the sports science that brings, those risks are mitigated.  GPS records distance and pace run during games and training sessions.  Strict recovery processes would be enforced.  Massage.  Diet and hydration.  Proactive reporting of all niggles.  And I’m sure there’s other things done to mitigate the risks.

Each individual player would also being doing their unique program depending on their age and fitness profile (Trac vs Langdon vs Gawn etc etc).

We have had more injuries this year than last year, but still very few sort tissue injuries, so compared to our past years and other clubs currently, it appears we are in good hands with our current fitness and medicos.

10 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

I believe we were 10-0 because of form/confidence/trust. Injuries, infighting, and some form issues are costing us. I don't think teams that are loading would vary their approaches to such a great extent, as you seem to suggest. 

Being 10-0 and 2 games clear of everyone else gave us the opportunity to go harder than any one else.  The Cats were 6-4 so they couldn’t go as hard as us (despite Scott saying they were risking making the finals).

 

11 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

I believe we were 10-0 because of form/confidence/trust. Injuries, infighting, and some form issues are costing us. I don't think teams that are loading would vary their approaches to such a great extent, as you seem to suggest. 

Of course they do. The loading/training program of a 10-0 team be very different to the 7-3 team. That is not speculation, but fact. 

 

28 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

Of course they do. The loading/training program of a 10-0 team be very different to the 7-3 team. That is not speculation, but fact. 

 

Yeah, Nah. 

Footy departments would consider the remaining fixture in the decision-making. No way it's based on W/L at a stage only. 

Some of the teams on lower W/L at 10 rounds would have gone just as hard if they believe their run home allowed them to do so

1 minute ago, DemonWA said:

Yeah, Nah. 

Footy departments would consider the remaining fixture in the decision-making. No way it's based on W/L at a stage only. 

Some of the teams on lower W/L at 10 rounds would have gone just as hard if they believe their run home allowed them to do so

Ok, no point continuing this discussion then.