PREGAME: Rd 16 vs GWS

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

7 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Question for yourself and those that have liked this post. You reference flicking the switch, understandably it’s hard to be up all the time, the only games this season I think we’ve been on and ready for the fight have been 

Rd 1 v Dogs

Rd 3 v Swans 

Rd 13 v Pies (our goal kicking halting what should have been a 5/6 goal win against a supposedly unbeatable side)

Why can’t a team that only won the flag two season ago and is stacked full of talent just flick the switch for a qtr / qtr and a half to either put a lead on the board early in the game or later in the game to get some separation from a team that refuses to die? At times throughout this season we’ve been caught playing some really dumb predictable and some might argue arrogant footy which has resulted in losses. Against Port we had one good qtr which was the 3rd but other than that it’s all or nothing with us. 
 

I said at the start of the season as far as the H & A season goes we should really only be judging ourselves by how we perform against 4-5 other teams. Wins against lower placed teams are a given in most cases regardless of our mindset due to our talent.

My take is that the reason the switch flicking doesn't happen is because there are only small margins against each team.

Have a look at most competition wide stats.

The media language is a team is 1st or 18th on any given particular stat, which is voiced as an absolute. Typical supporters would assume that anything drifting south of 8th position (ladder?) would be problematic, but in reality it's such fine margins of small percentages from 1st to 15th typically. Though I assume explaining this to the average supporter, doesn't drive clicks.

Jump on to @WheeloRatings  and flick through any stat at random for team averages...

ie:

Possessions - St Kilda average 390 a match in 1st - Port Adelaide 338 in 18th (that's a difference of 15%) and no real baring on ladder position

Disposal Efficiency - 1st to 18th 5.3% difference

Clangers - 1st to 16th 51-60.5 a match

Clearances 1st to 18th 43-33 average a match

Shots at Goal 1st to 16th 30-23 average a match

Accuracy for Goal 1st 52% and 18th 42% (Carlton) - Average is 48%

 

The more I have looked at the stats this year, rather than going on the 'eye' test and listening to non informative commentating, the more I realise how genuinely tight the competition is and how this is not discussed in the media, to the detriment of supporters experiences.

I have dropped my expectations for the MFC to dominate teams, let alone win matches that my brain says we 'should' on paper.

 

[Demon17 5,184]

10 hours ago, Docs Demons said:

Weather appears to be clearing up in the Alice for the arvo. BBB to get a few. Kozzie to finally fire for first time since re-signing. May to keep Hogan to zippo, Bedford does nothing and all we have to do is keep Greene quiet and win the mid battle and it's a 10 goal win.

Is that all?

No problem then. But I'm ever the optimst too and hope your'e on the money here.

[loges 6,767]

11 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

I’m having difficulty buying that, wouldn’t we rather him mark it considering how good a set shot he is?

I'm sure he'd rather mark it too. He does it when he's out possitioned or flying against multiple opponents.

[Kent 2,905]

Petty in hmmmmm He had better perform!

Tomlinson still out What has he got to do?

Harmes in  He  Hasnt earned it

Melks not in   Just what we need hopefully the sub

Ruckman at full forward not enough marks.

Very poor selections in my view Green will thrash Harmes

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

1 hour ago, Engorged Onion said:

My take is that the reason the switch flicking doesn't happen is because there are only small margins against each team.

Have a look at most competition wide stats.

The media language is a team is 1st or 18th on any given particular stat, which is voiced as an absolute. Typical supporters would assume that anything drifting south of 8th position (ladder?) would be problematic, but in reality it's such fine margins of small percentages from 1st to 15th typically. Though I assume explaining this to the average supporter, doesn't drive clicks.

Jump on to @WheeloRatings  and flick through any stat at random for team averages...

ie:

Possessions - St Kilda average 390 a match in 1st - Port Adelaide 338 in 18th (that's a difference of 15%) and no real baring on ladder position

Disposal Efficiency - 1st to 18th 5.3% difference

Clangers - 1st to 16th 51-60.5 a match

Clearances 1st to 18th 43-33 average a match

Shots at Goal 1st to 16th 30-23 average a match

Accuracy for Goal 1st 52% and 18th 42% (Carlton) - Average is 48%

 

The more I have looked at the stats this year, rather than going on the 'eye' test and listening to non informative commentating, the more I realise how genuinely tight the competition is and how this is not discussed in the media, to the detriment of supporters experiences.

I have dropped my expectations for the MFC to dominate teams, let alone win matches that my brain says we 'should' on paper.

 

I'll add to that, that the coaches press conferences (Goodwin's, whoevers) are often really measured (some would say boring, some would say not enough fire and brimstone, and needs more words like disgraceful and pathetic) rather than reactionary. I'd imagine that if you are a coach, who has been in the AFL industry and immersed in statistics for the best part of 20 years, unlike supporters who have different levels of access, you're going to relate to the typically evocative win/loss binary ratio quite differently to the average punter.

Who knows, you might even talk about "connection" or "process" in these press conferences, ... without telling the punters,  'Well actually we're hitting a range of metrics that we are genuinely satisfied in, considering the specific context about today's (win/loss) this will hold us in good stead for a tilt at the finals. I won't go into what those internal measures are, but I want you to know that our system is built around this.

[Demonland 71,216]

 

[binman 42,540]

59 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

I'll add to that, that the coaches press conferences (Goodwin's, whoevers) are often really measured (some would say boring, some would say not enough fire and brimstone, and needs more words like disgraceful and pathetic) rather than reactionary. I'd imagine that if you are a coach, who has been in the AFL industry and immersed in statistics for the best part of 20 years, unlike supporters who have different levels of access, you're going to relate to the typically evocative win/loss binary ratio quite differently to the average punter.

Who knows, you might even talk about "connection" or "process" in these press conferences, ... without telling the punters,  'Well actually we're hitting a range of metrics that we are genuinely satisfied in, considering the specific context about today's (win/loss) this will hold us in good stead for a tilt at the finals. I won't go into what those internal measures are, but I want you to know that our system is built around this.

I think one of the hardest things for fans to get their head around is the idea of a campaign that has as its goal peaking in September.

Goody has said a variation of this at least five or six times in post match pressers.

But his comments don't land, the instinct is to wave them off as coach speak.

I think people get the concept in the abstract (premierships are not won in june).

But not in terms of it informing their assessment of individual games.

We have all been conditioned to see every game as critical and as some sort of litmus test or accurate meaure of the chances of ultimate success.

Each game becomes a stand alone event unconnected to the arc of the season.

The dees get beaten mid winter by the reigning premier on their home deck, a ground they have a home ground advantage bettered only by the lions.

That loss confirms for many why we aren't a contender - despite the fact we had just vanquished the flag favourites. 

And there is the attendant gnashing of teeth and criticisms of: selection (why bring an underdone petty in! Spargo as sub?), coach (why so many handballs?) and players (dumb - just get it forward, no skill).

But see the game as a stepping stone in our campaign and the perspective is different.

Petty is selected, despite being underdone because it is the best thing for his individual program (and therefore the team) in terms of peaking later in the year.

Or maybe they had been really worried Brown would not ever be fit enough to play the key tall forward  role. And decided they needed Petty up there.

Perhaps they got good news on Brown, changed course and decided they want Petty down back and wanted to give him as many games in defence as possible to get into the rhythm of the role. That might also explain why they didn't send him forward until near the end of the game after Cameron's injury.

There are better, more versatile options for sub than spargo, but as flagged by goody at the start of the year they will use the sub role for both tactical AND load management reasons.

Another sub might have increased our chances of winning this particular match, but the eyes are on the prize and spargo being in peak shape is an important piece of the puzzle. Give something up now and be rewarded later.

We have had real struggles in the wet with our ball handling, but want to be prepared to stick to our method of chaining out handballs come finals - even if wet.

So the direction is to continue to use handball in the cats game because the best way to embed something is apply it in a match.

We turned it over way too often and as a result, for one of the only times this season , we were outscored on turnover.

But perhaps the team was encouraged to take the high risk kick on because we they weren't encouraged to do so against the blues and pies games and they want to turn the dial a bit more to risk in this phase of the season to get us ready to play like we did rounds 1 - 6.

These are all guesses of course. But they are possibilities not considered if the game is  assessed in isolation, as a standalone, discreet event where the only goal is to maximise the chances of winning that individual match.

But at the end of the day, for genuine flag contenders the campaign is about winning the war, not the individual battles.

If our sole goal was to beat the cats, I am 100% sure a lot of things would have been done differently. Even our preparation might have been different - would we have experimented with the staying over night in Geelong stuff if that was an absolute must win game?

Of course they wanted to win the game, but there were other objectives as well - winning wasn't the sole goal.

And I think it is helpful to assess games, at this time of year in particular, through that lens.

Edited July 1, 2023 by binman

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,322]

1 hour ago, loges said:

I'm sure he'd rather mark it too. He does it when he's out possitioned or flying against multiple opponents.

But it’s happening to often. So we either change the way we play (deliver the ball better and open up the fwd line) or don’t play him. He does apply himself defensively but it is limited.

[rpfc 28,246]

16 minutes ago, binman said:

.

If our sole goal was to beat the cats, I am 100% sure a lot of things would have been done differently. Even our preparation might have been different - would we have experimented with the staying over night in Geelong stuff if that was an absolute must win game?

Of course they wanted to win the game, but there were other objectives as well - winning wasn't the sole goal.

And I think it is helpful to assess games, at this time of year in particular, through that lens.

You were making a cogent argument until here - staying overnight down there so we could train on the ground is nothing other than an overt action trying to provide an edge to win the game. It isn’t an experiment, it’s going the extra mile to provide an edge. That last quarter may be an aberration caused by a litany of factors but as far as I can tell - it would have been seen as a disappointing way to end a game we were winning and prepared to win. 

[Adam The God 30,104]

4 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

But it’s happening to often. So we either change the way we play (deliver the ball better and open up the fwd line) or don’t play him. He does apply himself defensively but it is limited.

A coaching friend and I were discussing what we believe are the most important factors in ball movement and ability to execute. We were talking about under 19s in this particular conversation, but the answer is the same: fatigue and the flow on effects to concentration, ability to set structures and to get overlap, separation from your opponent and so on.

TMac from 3-4 years ago playing forward for us would be perfect right about now, because of his aerobic capacity and ability to work over his opponent up and down the ground. Nick Riewoldt would be another player that would excel under these conditions, however unlike Riewoldt in his prime, TMac rarely misses set shots and so it's this ability under a fatigued state to execute after your hard work that is the difference at this time of year.

As Goody alluded to in his presser and as I've said numerous times, we need to execute these moments better and hit the scoreboard and take our chances. We have at least an extra 2 or 3 wins if we execute fundamentals under late game duress and early game opportunities. 

The Sydney vs Geelong game last night was another game where fatigue played a huge role in the result. Despite the evenness of the inside 50s and Geelong's CP advantage, Sydney should have won that game by at least 6 goals, missing basic shots from the goal square numerous times.

Scoreboard pressure is vital in the modern game, because it's extremely rare to have 4 quarters of momentum and dominance all your way anymore. So you want to put separation between you and your opponent to ensure when momentum inevitably swings their way, they don't pass you.

Our inability to get separation from our opponents, move the ball quickly to free players, get strong overlap across 4 quarters and kick accurately is now common occurrence, but prior to this 5 week block, we rarely had these issues. These are all related to fatigue. But, if we want to make top 4, we have to be better and push through this, and take our chances when we get them. 

Edited July 1, 2023 by A F

[Roost it far 8,150]

32 minutes ago, binman said:

I think one of the hardest things for fans to get their head around is the idea of a campaign that has as its goal peaking in September.

Goody has said a variation of this at least five or six times in post match pressers.

But his comments don't land, the instinct is to wave them off as coach speak.

I think people get the concept in the abstract (premierships are not won in june).

But not in terms of it informing their assessment of individual games.

We have all been conditioned to see every game as critical and as some sort of litmus test or accurate meaure of the chances of ultimate success.

Each game becomes a stand alone event unconnected to the arc of the season.

The dees get beaten mid winter by the reigning premier on their home deck, a ground they have a home ground advantage bettered only by the lions.

That loss confirms for many why we aren't a contender - despite the fact we had just vanquished the flag favourites. 

And there is the attendant gnashing of teeth and criticisms of: selection (why bring an underdone petty in! Spargo as sub?), coach (why so many handballs?) and players (dumb - just get it forward, no skill).

But see the game as a stepping stone in our campaign and the perspective is different.

Petty is selected, despite being underdone because it is the best thing for his individual program (and therefore the team) in terms of peaking later in the year.

Or maybe they had been really worried Brown would not ever be fit enough to play the key tall forward  role. And decided they needed Petty up there.

Perhaps they got good news on Brown, changed course and decided they want Petty down back and wanted to give him as many games in defence as possible to get into the rhythm of the role. That might also explain why they didn't send him forward until near the end of the game after Cameron's injury.

There are better, more versatile options for sub than spargo, but as flagged by goody at the start of the year they will use the sub role for both tactical AND load management reasons.

Another sub might have increased our chances of winning this particular match, but the eyes are on the prize and spargo being in peak shape is an important piece of the puzzle. Give something up now and be rewarded later.

We have had real struggles in the wet with our ball handling, but want to be prepared to stick to our method of chaining out handballs come finals - even if wet.

So the direction is to continue to use handball in the cats game because the best way to embed something is apply it in a match.

We turned it over way too often and as a result, for one of the only times this season , we were outscored on turnover.

But perhaps the team was encouraged to take the high risk kick on because we they weren't encouraged to do so against the blues and pies games and they want to turn the dial a bit more to risk in this phase of the season to get us ready to play like we did rounds 1 - 6.

These are all guesses of course. But they are possibilities not considered if the game is  assessed in isolation, as a standalone, discreet event where the only goal is to maximise the chances of winning that individual match.

But at the end of the day, for genuine flag contenders the campaign is about winning the war, not the individual battles.

If our sole goal was to beat the cats, I am 100% sure a lot of things would have been done differently. Even our preparation might have been different - would we have experimented with the staying over night in Geelong stuff if that was an absolute must win game?

Of course they wanted to win the game, but there were other objectives as well - winning wasn't the sole goal.

And I think it is helpful to assess games, at this time of year in particular, through that lens.

 

10 minutes ago, rpfc said:

You were making a cogent argument until here - staying overnight down there so we could train on the ground is nothing other than an overt action trying to provide an edge to win the game. It isn’t an experiment, it’s going the extra mile to provide an edge. That last quarter may be an aberration caused by a litany of factors but as far as I can tell - it would have been seen as a disappointing way to end a game we were winning and prepared to win. 

I think these are both right. I think we were playing the long game that night but also wanted the win. I think we always want the win but as binman says it's not the sole objective. I'll be pretty surprised if we don't win tomorrow as I see it more in the must win category.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,322]

2 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

My take is that the reason the switch flicking doesn't happen is because there are only small margins against each team.

Have a look at most competition wide stats.

The media language is a team is 1st or 18th on any given particular stat, which is voiced as an absolute. Typical supporters would assume that anything drifting south of 8th position (ladder?) would be problematic, but in reality it's such fine margins of small percentages from 1st to 15th typically. Though I assume explaining this to the average supporter, doesn't drive clicks.

Jump on to @WheeloRatings  and flick through any stat at random for team averages...

ie:

Possessions - St Kilda average 390 a match in 1st - Port Adelaide 338 in 18th (that's a difference of 15%) and no real baring on ladder position

Disposal Efficiency - 1st to 18th 5.3% difference

Clangers - 1st to 16th 51-60.5 a match

Clearances 1st to 18th 43-33 average a match

Shots at Goal 1st to 16th 30-23 average a match

Accuracy for Goal 1st 52% and 18th 42% (Carlton) - Average is 48%

 

The more I have looked at the stats this year, rather than going on the 'eye' test and listening to non informative commentating, the more I realise how genuinely tight the competition is and how this is not discussed in the media, to the detriment of supporters experiences.

I have dropped my expectations for the MFC to dominate teams, let alone win matches that my brain says we 'should' on paper.

 

I’m the same.

I’m over most stats, regardless of your view on any aspect of our game you can find a stat to support your case unless your the WCE.

The game is over analysed for many reasons, but I don’t need stats to tell me  that if we played against the Cats like we did against the Pies we win. We didn’t even need the “flick the switch” factor, we just needed to play smart and kick straight.

 

[binman 42,540]

20 minutes ago, rpfc said:

 1. staying overnight down there so we could train on the ground is nothing other than an overt action trying to provide an edge to win the game.

2. That last quarter may be an aberration caused by a litany of factors but as far as I can tell - it would have been seen as a disappointing way to end a game we were winning and prepared to win. 

1. Maybe, maybe not. There could be any number of other drivers for that call - refocusing the players at the half way point in the season, some training away from prying eyes, to practice a routine for our inevitable game down there next season, strengthen squad mentality etc etc. 

Even if its only purpose was 'to provide an edge to win the game', it was still an experiment that risked increasing our chances of losing. In the strategy segment on SEN, Sanderson was asked about it and said he didn't think it worked and the players wouldn't have liked it because it would have thrown their routines out of whack.  My point is, would they have risked such an unusual change to their routine, and processes, if we absolutely had to win that game? I don't' think so.

2. Agree

Edited July 1, 2023 by binman

[Ingo27 18]

I don't think it hurts to take a look at BB and give JVR a rest. I would like to see BB and JVR in the same forward line at some stage.

BB leads up towards the ball, and we desperately need to lower our eyes and find better quality entries. Hopefully his presence helps us do that. The only other lead-up forward we have is Fritta.

JVR, Gawn, Petty, Grundy, Smith are all kick it to me long types which has its place, but bombing it in that way every time isn't serving us very well, and they're not taking many marks.

[kryton101 395]

4 hours ago, Bystander said:

I simply can't listen when Underwood is on. I can't think of anyone with a worse voice. And she is on radio! How did that happen? Is it deliberate ? Cliche after cliche. Who picks these people? How do they keep their jobs?

I wonder if Luke Hodge talks like he commentates?  Incomplete, spat out half sentences. 

[binman 42,540]

2 minutes ago, kryton101 said:

I wonder if Luke Hodge talks like he commentates?  Incomplete, spat out half sentences. 

Hodge makes Kelli Underwood sound like Dennis Commetti.

How on earth can someone get job as a commentator when they can't talk properly, or without that weird resigned inflection at the end of every sentence  - it is like fingernails down a blackboard. 

I mean, c'mon seven, cant you spring for some basic professional development and/or elocution lesson?

Jesus wept. 

[jnrmac 20,053]

1 hour ago, binman said:

If our sole goal was to beat the cats, I am 100% sure a lot of things would have been done differently. Even our preparation might have been different - would we have experimented with the staying over night in Geelong stuff if that was an absolute must win game?

Of course they wanted to win the game, but there were other objectives as well - winning wasn't the sole goal.

Do you mean that we wouldn't have had 158 handballs in a circle in wet and slippery conditions that invite pressure from the opposition? Or letting the Cats maintain a Goal keeper out the back to stop any quick fwd thrusts? Or letting Geelong switch back into the corridor at will? Or fumble at every opportunity because of that pressure?

We played dumb wet weather football for much of the game and our fwd entries were simply abysmal (I would have said worst of the season until last night's Sydney game)

If that was part of the plan we are in bigger trouble than I think we are.

[Diamond_Jim 12,511]

If we're giving JVR a "rest" why is he named for Casey at full forward?

"My kingdom for a functioning forward line"

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,322]

2 hours ago, binman said:

I think one of the hardest things for fans to get their head around is the idea of a campaign that has as its goal peaking in September.

Goody has said a variation of this at least 5 or six times in post match pressers.

But his comments don't land, the instinct is to wave them off as coach speak.

I think people get the concept in the abstract (premierships are not won in june).

But not in terms of it informing the assessment of individual games.

We have all been conditioned to see every game as critical and as some sort of litmus test or accurate meaure of rhe chances of ultimate success.

Each game becomes a stand alone event unconnected to the arc of the sesson.

The dees get beaten mid winter by the reigning premier on their home deck, a ground they have a home ground advantage bettered only by the lions.

That loss confirms for many why we aren't a contender - despite the fact we had just vanquished the flag favourites. 

And there is the attendant gnashing of teeth and criticisms of selection (why bring an underdone petty in! Spargo as sub?), coach (why so many handballs) and players (dumb - just get it forward, no skill).

But see the game as a stepping stone on our campaign and the perspective is different.

Petty is selected, despite being underdone because it is the best thing for his individual program in terms of peaking later in the year.

Or maybe they had been really worried Brown would not ever be fit enough to play the key tall forward  role. And decided they needed Petty up there.

Perhaps they got good news on Brown and changed course and want Petty down back and wanted to give him as many games down back and possible to get into the rhythm of the role. That might also explain why they didn't send him forward until near the end if the gane after Cameron's injury.

There are better, more versatile options for sub than sprago, but as flagged by goody at the start of the year they will use the sub role for both tactical AND load management reasons.

We have had real struggles in the wet with our ball handling, but want to be prepared to stick to our method of chaining out handballs come finals - even if wet.

So the direction is to continue to use handball in the cats game because the best way to embed something is apply it in a match.

We turned it over way too often and as a result, for one of the only times this season , we were outscored on turnover.

But perhaps the team were encouraged to rake the high risk kick on because we weren't for the blues and pies games and they want to turn the dial a bit more to risk in this phase of the season to get us ready to play like we did rounds 1 - 6.

These are all guesses of course. But they are possibilities not considered if the is only assessed in isolation  as a standalone discreet event where the only goal is to maximise the chances of winning that individual match.

But at the end of the day, for genuine flag contenders the campaign is about winning the war, not the individual battles.

If our sole goal was to beat the cats, a lot of things would have been done differently.

Of course they wanted to win the game, but there were other objectives as well - winning wasn't the sole goal.

And I think it is helpful to assess the game through that lens.

I think most supporters understand it’s a long season but to give ourselves the best chance in September a top 2 finish whilst not a necessity is highly desirable. Considering our list it’s not an unrealistic expectation.

Petty played because it’s the best thing for his individual program? Last week was rd 15, still 9 weeks of the H & A season left. If it was rd 21-22 yeah I would understand but selecting him was a mistake, Goodwin needs to own it. 
 

Winning wasn’t the sole goal there were other objectives? Well winning should be the sole goal and other objectives are to fall in around it. What are the other objectives, game plan sounds like important one, yet we went back to playing dumb predictable footy like we did in the majority of our games pre Collingwood. Getting games into players / working out our best line up, great idea, we’ve been trialing Smith up fwd which is starting to take some shape. Bringing players back into the side to regain form? Last week was the wrong game to do it, that loss has most likely cost us top 2 and if Geelong won last night could have also cost us top 4. 

I still believe we are a massive chance this season but we must settle on our best line up, fix our set shots and get back to playing smart unpredictable footy. Anything less than another flag this season or next is a massive failure.

Edit : The Petty selection wasn’t the sole reason we lost against Geelong but it didn’t help and was a mistake.

Edited July 1, 2023 by Bombay Airconditioning

[binman 42,540]

27 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Do you mean that we wouldn't have had 158 handballs in a circle in wet and slippery conditions that invite pressure from the opposition? 

Yep, that's exactly what I mean.

Of course, I am likely wrong.

But it is a possibility, one not considered if the game is assessed in isolation as opposed to being piece of the campaign puzzle

[rpfc 28,246]

33 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

If we're giving JVR a "rest" why is he named for Casey at full forward?

"My kingdom for a functioning forward line"

He was omitted. 

it happens.

[Maldonboy38 6,390]

Starting to have a rethink about the state of things this season. It is a very tight season, Port look good but I reckon they will struggle on the MCG during pressure games. We showed the competition how to beat the Pies, and they now look a long way off the premium team in the comp. Basically, every game is up for grabs - apart from WCE games. All very close, very tight, very unpredictable.

I reckon the Dees have sharpened up on some of the mid-year yips (handballing, intensity, defensive mistakes) but have yet to fix our kicking inside F50, and all-ground crumbing. 

Although I love Spargo when he is up and at it, we can only hold 2 active small forwards and Chandler and Kozzie do the defence and pressure stuff better than Spargo. I love the inclusion of Smith. He and Fritsch will cause major headaches if Smith can stay fit.

I disagree with the club on both Tomlinson and Jordon. Bot that I can do anything about it, and the club probably (definitely) knows better than me. 

I maintain that we are a better team with BBB in it, but 2023 is his last.

ANB is killing me this year. 

[640MD 3,350]

Just read weather app for the Alice.

1-8. For the day   20% chance of rain in the afternoon 

its going to be bloody freezing.  No locals will go out when it’s that cold. Then again they will not have a lot of firewood to burn to keep warm so might need to keep walking around 

how cold is 8C to be playing football 

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

1 hour ago, 640MD said:

Just read weather app for the Alice.

1-8. For the day   20% chance of rain in the afternoon 

its going to be bloody freezing.  No locals will go out when it’s that cold. Then again they will not have a lot of firewood to burn to keep warm so might need to keep walking around 

how cold is 8C to be playing football 

I want all players in long sleeves! My favourite style of playing the windswept grounds around Portland…

[640MD 3,350]

1 minute ago, Engorged Onion said:

I want all players in long sleeves! My favourite style of playing the windswept grounds around Portland…

If you have lived down this way port fairy

then you grew up in shorts and t shirt and continued into adulthood and winter 

still in the same shorts and shirt