Jump to content

Featured Replies

15 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

So, as it stands with the Brisbane win over Collingwood:

  1. Collingwood still seal 1st with a win over Essendon next week
  2. If Collingwood loses to Essendon, a Brisbane win over St Kilda likely (subject to percentage - they're currently even on 123.2%) sees them finish 1st
  3. We can only finish 2nd now if Brisbane loses to St Kilda
  4. We will likely finish 3rd if we go 2-0 and Port goes 1-1, or If we go 1-1 and Port goes 0-2, or if we go 0-2 and Carlton loses at least once
  5. Given the Round 24 fixture, we will know at the time the ball is bounced whether we can finish 3rd or not (if Port win this week and have already won next week, we will know we can't move up). We will also know whether Brisbane has passed Collingwood. If we lose to Hawthorn and Carlton beats Gold Coast however, we will not know if we are locked for top 4 because Carlton plays after us.

No, we go 0-2 and we can't fiinish higher than 4th. If we win 1 game more than Port we will definitely, not likely,  finish above them because of the percentage differential.

6 hours ago, Travy14 said:

I think we finish 4th and play Collingwood in first round of finals.

I actually think this would be a good result, getting Collingwood with a few players coming in after time out of the game!

i would be happy to go to Adelaide to but that now is all but ruled out.

Bris in Bris is the only fixture that really worries me!

I agree. Normally of course 3rd is preferential to 4th but this year, given Brisbane are highly likely to finish 2nd, 4th is preferential. I accept that Collingwood are looking pretty wobbly missing crucial players but can't see them losing to Essendon and sliping below Brisbane.  

2 hours ago, old55 said:

I think we want Port to defeat Freo so we finish 4th. I think it's most likely that Collingwood defeats Essendon next week and finishes top. QF vs Collingwood at the MCG has more appeal than vs Brisbane at the Gabba.

I have mixed feelings. No, we don't want to play Brisbane at the Gabba but I still  think we'd be a big chance in that game, and if we lose I'd definitely prefer to play whoever finishes 6th or 7th in a Semi rather than Carlton who we are likely to play if we lose to Collingwood. Also we cross over and Collingwood in a Prelim at the MCG is probably preferable to Brisbane in a Prelim at the Gabba. I guess in a nutshell I'm saying Brisbane in a Qualifying is not a disastrous matchup.

 

Right now all I care about is beating Hawthorn tomorrow. Even better if Carlton lose today and I can relax a day early. I'm planning on going to the Sydney-Melbourne game next weekend and I don't think I could handle being there knowing we need to win to finish Top 4.

7 hours ago, Glorious Day said:

The traditionalists here will be disappointed that we will most likely have to wear our clash royal blue jumper throughout almost all finals we play (aside from the Semi Final if we lose the Qualifying Final, and the Preliminary Final if we win the Qualifying Final) unless some major finals upsets occur (i.e. teams outside the Top 4 progressing through). Yep, we’d be wearing it in the Grand Final without question too if we got that far. 

4 hours ago, old55 said:

Not in the PF or GF if we finish a lower ranked team gets thru to play us.

In H&A we wear the clash against all three of our top 4 opponents. 

In a QF, or in a PF if we lose the QF, we will probably have to wear the clash. However, I don’t know if finals permit tweaks to the rules, because IMO we don’t clash with Collingwood (we didn’t wear a clash jumper against them until 2019 IIRC) and we shouldn’t clash with Brisbane (Carlton, Essendon and Adelaide don’t have to wear their clash jumpers against them).

The GF gets more confusing. If we make it against a side who finished above us on the ladder you’d expect the same clash rules to apply but the rules have been confusing over the years.

 
On 8/17/2023 at 8:51 PM, beelzebub said:

Very interesting...in a way... but to be honest it makes not an iota of difference.  I mean no disrespect.  I simply observe every meeting ( game ) has its own dynamics and thats supposed upon any number of ifs buts maybes . Its about as predictable as the bounce of our belived ball. It ought to do A...but the minute you bank that..it wont.

The very best of odds brokers have very elaborate algorithms to predict outcomes. Invariably across a round they come out ok, but that in and of itself doesn't address the aberrations. Its just that they're covered.

No one's won from fourth does not prevent anyone from doing so as immediately someone does the algorithms,  narratives and predictions accommodate.

I still stand by my coin analogy as its applicable.  At any contest any number of variables comes into play. They can not be pre-ordained . The outcome is dependent upon 36 individuals at any given time... the influence of 6 others...the weather...and not forgetting...the ball.

How does statistical analysis integrate and interpret any of that. A fair question might be..does it have to ?. Does not overviews smooth over irregularities?  In a perfect environment the normal allowances prevail.  Is a game of footy so perfect, so precise, so normal that standard deviations can exist or be applied ? I don't  know, tbh.

I look at statistics..and associated predictions in the same light i do stock market charts..  they are actually very similar..especially in terms of how derived. Both work off history... but history is neither finite or constrained.  Anything can happen because so many variables are volatile.  Ive asked chartists to lay money down on their prescience...strangely none do . They just love their charts...their lines.. their hypothesis... and when something untoward,  unusual happens..their charts change..their narrative changes.. 

There's a classic line often... " no one's done that before ".    The strangeness of that to me is not that ut happened...but that supposedly it couldn't.  

The minute it does...all mathematics agrees. Why...because nothing is finite.

This year 4th can win. Why ? Well why not.

Knock yourselves out folks..do the table predictor...do the finals scenarios. Its entirely possible.  Actually not only possible...it may be the best place to finish....THIS year...for THESE teams.

 

I mean no disrepect but I have no idea what you're talking about. Yes, there are a whole lot of variables that are hard to predict. But you seem to be saying that just because there's unknown variables we just assume that predicted outcomes are toss of a coin. Are you saying that you can't make a prediction that Western Bulldogs are highly likely to beat West Coast Eagles tomorrow because we don't have complete information and sometimes teams win against the odds?

I agree that statistics aren't perfect, that any model trying to predict future results will be necessarily flawed, and that anomalous results do happen. I also accept that any team can win from any position if it's mathematically possible. I also accept that just because no side has won from 4th in the 23 years of the current system doesn't mean it can't or won't happen in the future. Statistics don't tell the whole story and should always be considered with a certain about of skepticism, but that doesn't mean you just ignore past evidence and predictions based on extrapolations into the future based on it.

34 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

No, we go 0-2 and we can't fiinish higher than 4th. If we win 1 game more than Port we will definitely, not likely,  finish above them because of the percentage differential.

Correct. I muddled up my points - 0-2 is 4th so long as Carlton lose a game. 5th if they win both. 


9 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Correct. I muddled up my points - 0-2 is 4th so long as Carlton lose a game. 5th if they win both. 

Nightmare scenario!

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

In H&A we wear the clash against all three of our top 4 opponents. 

In a QF, or in a PF if we lose the QF, we will probably have to wear the clash. However, I don’t know if finals permit tweaks to the rules, because IMO we don’t clash with Collingwood (we didn’t wear a clash jumper against them until 2019 IIRC) and we shouldn’t clash with Brisbane (Carlton, Essendon and Adelaide don’t have to wear their clash jumpers against them).

The GF gets more confusing. If we make it against a side who finished above us on the ladder you’d expect the same clash rules to apply but the rules have been confusing over the years.

In 2017 Crows finished above Tiges at Round 22, and Tiges were made to wear away strip in GF

24 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

In 2017 Crows finished above Tiges at Round 22, and Tiges were made to wear away strip in GF

But a case could be made tgat their strips clash

 
14 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Very clear equation here. 

Win tomorrow, or else send Demonland MFCSS through the roof. 

Too late TU, too late, it's already here

Nicole Byer Netflix GIF by NailedIt

Edited by TRIGON


4 hours ago, Demon17 said:

In 2017 Crows finished above Tiges at Round 22, and Tiges were made to wear away strip in GF

GF is a coin toss to decide "home" team isn't it?

46 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

GF is a coin toss to decide "home" team isn't it?

Goes on higher ladder position 

48 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

GF is a coin toss to decide "home" team isn't it?

No idea. But Dee's wore home strip in 2021. Finished above dogs that year.

3 hours ago, TRIGON said:

Too late TU, too late, it's already here

Nicole Byer Netflix GIF by NailedIt

Tonight is showing the flakiness of so called contenders. Blues cats and crows

We're going for top 4 finish 3rd year running. Seasoned leadership.

Will take care of business tomorrow. Just like other legitimate teams did today in giants and swans.


4 hours ago, Roost it far said:

But a case could be made tgat their strips clash

That was the issue. So times as lower team had to change 

Lions aren't over the line yet. Saints playing well tonight and will be playing for a home final next week and to avoid elimination by percentage at worst.

Edited by John Demonic

Interesting stat from the past

Under the old final 4 system (which ran from 1931 until 1971) no team that finished 3rd ever won the premiership

Yet at least a couple of teams won the flag under that system from 4th position

And North won their first 2 premierships from 3rd place under the final 5 system (which came into operation in 1972)

Edited by Macca

After all the [censored] we have been through sometimes you have to sit back and say we are a top 4 team. the last 3 years and probably the next 3. the Cats [censored] the bed after winning the flag. the bombers and WC are a rabble. 

just a note to enjoy the good times 

Reasonable outcomes tonight for next week.

Swans finals now locked in. 

Giants must beat blues for finals.

They win our 4th spot not in peril.

Of course win tomorrow and Dee's all good irrespective 


So we are down to 9. Dogs already have percentage over GWS and will get more tomorrow vs WC, which will see them move to 8th and GWS 9th. 

A Carlton win seals finals for St Kilda, Sydney, and the Dogs (unless they lose so badly to Geelong that somehow they go below GWS on percentage).

If GWS beat Carlton though, then any of St Kilda (v Brisbane, Sydney (v us) and the Dogs (v Geelong) can miss with a loss (although St Kilda would have to shed percentage).

6th also still up for grabs (5th too if Carlton lose).

1 minute ago, Demon17 said:

Reasonable outcomes tonight for next week.

Swans finals now locked in. 

Giants must beat blues for finals.

They win our 4th spot not in peril.

Of course win tomorrow and Dee's all good irrespective 

Nope, not yet. If the Dogs beat WC and then Geelong, a Sydney loss to us will put them at risk of being passed by GWS who play after us. 

Sydney may be locked in by the time of our game if the Dogs have already lost to Geelong (or WC tomorrow…lol). But even if so, they will likely be playing for a home final.

2 hours ago, Macca said:

Under the old final 4 system (which ran from 1931 until 1971) no team that finished 3rd ever won the premiership

I understood only Richmond in 1967 from 4th and none from 3rd?

 

I don't mind playing away first final from 3rd.  It gets the away final out of the way while we still have a double chance.  Our interstate opponent (win or draw) goes into the other side of the draw.  We get a "home" prelim final against Collingwood if we both last.  If we lose this first final, we next get a home final against 5th to 8th.

3 hours ago, redandbluemakepurple said:

I understood only Richmond in 1967 from 4th and none from 3rd?

Carlton won from 4th in 1945, Essendon in 1949 & 1965 won from 4th and Richmond in 1969 won from 4th

And no team ever won from 3rd until we entered the final 5 era in 1972


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
    • 1 reply
  • 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
    • 139 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
    • 423 replies