6 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Just these two points...  please understand they are mutually EXCLUSIVE. 

Totally agree with first point. They were...absolutely.   The game was really won in the first 5 mins of the last qtr. ( as things turned out )

However...there is no escaping the reality and plausibility that despite that ( the above ) the umpiring over all was pox...and specifically the adjudication applied to Tracs goal was appalling; and that IT specifically decided the game.

It's not terribly often in games that despite an overall judgement that there were umpiring stuffups that anyone will seriously point to one particular event. That's not the situation regarding this game.

If ever a game was decided by how a spinning coin fell..this is a serious contender...and mores the point ( npi ) it should never have been uponthe coin's fall.

It WAS a goal.

And that deserves MASSIVELY  lambasting. 

 

Also to add, we win on expected score. So if Carlton were generally playing better all over the ground for longer, then it would most likely come through the stats and expected score convincingly i.e. > 10 pts. Its not an exact science but it does tell you the story. In this case it was +2 pts to Melbourne, but that alone doesnt mean we should have won, it just means that Carlton were not as dominant as some have proposed. 

The other factor is games decided < 2 goals either way are almost always very very even contests and its 1 or 2 moments in the entire game that decides the final score. This game was even statistically on all fronts. Its just unfortunate that the moment that decided this game  was in the hands of umpires, which is what infuriates everyone, because it looks more like a goal than it does a point. 

If Trac had been tackled before he kicked or kicked Out-of-Bounds, then you take the loss and move on. But to have a goal taken away from us, which from every perspective and process should have been granted and to hear the Blues talk about luck and gloat like they had stolen the win and for the impact of the result to cost the Dees a likely 2nd spot is salt in the wound. 

I applauded the way the Demons played (considering it was wet) and that's coming from a devout pessimist. Look at my previous posts and you will see that i shredded the Dees mid-year given the games we were dropping and the way we were playing. But the Blues were a respectable opposition and could not have played any better with the players they had out. On paper we are probably the better side, but we are not too far off our best as well. As others have said, Carlton would have beaten any of the other 16 sides by 4+ goals with that performance. 

4 minutes ago, bobby1554 said:

I am very concerned about Sundays game. I think Hawthorn will be tough to beat. Would I say it is likely, no. But very possible.

Sure.  We will struggle to come after that brutal game -as will the blues (just as the Pies and Port did in the week after their brutal epic - both lost as short priced favs)

I wont be backing against the dees, but the hawks and the suns to make their line are both good value bets.

But the only way we don't finish top 4 is we lose our last two games and the blues win both of theirs (and of course that is the only way the blues can make top 4)

Regardless of how you rate the blues or the dees, that is statistically a very unlikely scenario.

So, as i wrote, in all likelihood we will have a double chance and the blues wont. So therefore we are a better chance of winning the flag. 

13 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Also to add, we win on expected score. So if Carlton were generally playing better all over the ground for longer, then it would most likely come through the stats and expected score convincingly i.e. > 10 pts. Its not an exact science but it does tell you the story. In this case it was +2 pts to Melbourne, but that alone doesnt mean we should have won, it just means that Carlton were not as dominant as some have proposed. 

The other factor is games decided < 2 goals either way are almost always very very even contests and its 1 or 2 moments in the entire game that decides the final score. This game was even statistically on all fronts. Its just unfortunate that the moment that decided this game  was in the hands of umpires, which is what infuriates everyone, because it looks more like a goal than it does a point. 

If Trac had been tackled before he kicked or kicked Out-of-Bounds, then you take the loss and move on. But to have a goal taken away from us, which from every perspective and process should have been granted and to hear the Blues talk about luck and gloat like they had stolen the win and for the impact of the result to cost the Dees a likely 2nd spot is salt in the wound. 

I applauded the way the Demons played (considering it was wet) and that's coming from a devout pessimist. Look at my previous posts and you will see that i shredded the Dees mid-year given the games we were dropping and the way we were playing. But the Blues were a respectable opposition and could not have played any better with the players they had out. On paper we are probably the better side, but we are not too far off our best as well. As others have said, Carlton would have beaten any of the other 16 sides by 4+ goals with that performance. 

And on expected score, forget the bulltish you might hear that the blues should have been 5 goals up at the end of the first quarter, on expected score they were only 4 points up - only one more than the actual margin.

1 minute ago, binman said:

And on expected score, forget the bulltish you might hear that the blues should have been 5 goals up at the end of the first quarter, on expected score they were only 4 points up - only one more than the actual margin.

And it should be said, that failure to convert in a period of domination is actually contrary to the definition of domination. The fact that we basically defended staunchly was a massive failure of their forward line. 

Or in leymans terms for Q1:

Their mids better than ours

Our defence better than their forwards.

 

I'm away so haven't watched the game but surely it was lost when we let through 3 stoppage goals at the start of the 4th?

It's been a problem all year and we need to work on our defensive stoppages surely?

On 8/13/2023 at 11:04 AM, Binmans PA said:

Spargo will replace a mid, ie JJ. We're playing too many mids now. 

JJ is not impacting at all. For mine he is outside our best 22/23.

We will get up for Max’s 200th this weekend. Hawks are a threat because they play like they have nothing to lose. 
Saturday’s loss will burn the players and I’m sure they’ll come out hard. 

After two poor first quarters in a row, I hope we put a lot of emphasis on coming out strong in the first quarter. We need to let the Hawks know early that we aren’t another contender they can push around. 

On 8/13/2023 at 12:49 PM, gregdemon said:

Yes l believe in you to just miss top 4 and go out first week.  Hawthorn and sfydney Will beat us.  Carlton win next 2. Carltank to 4th.    The port Or GWS or Geelong loss will cost us in the end just one win from any of them and we wpuld be safe. Still angry te last night losing to a good ordinary side like Carlton

I’m very sorry, I might have caused you more pain. I can see you’re a dedicated Dees’ supporter, and I understand what you said. I hope you are feeling better now after three days of suffering.

Whatever dislike or hatred we hold for Carlton, we still have to face the reality, don’t we?

Carlton didn’t just win a game week after a week, they were on the rise as well. As a reference, foxfooty’s Pressure Gauge showed Carl 238 vs Melb 200 in the 1st quarter, 238 is unheard of. We also know the number of the 50m entries in the 1st quarter was Carl 21 vs Melb 4. I watched the game on tv and the replay. I’d say we actually prepared well for this game, as I had expected, we indeed applied more pressure on them than we did on Collinwood in Rd13. Unexpected things happened, they were capable of applying even higher pressure on us which they had never shown before, at the same time, they handled our pressure ok, much better than Collinwood did in Rd13. If they had applied the same pressure on some other team in the 1st quarter, we might have probably heard something like “A Quarter of Bloodbath''.  We played really well, absorbed the pressure, and allowed them to score only one goal and 3 behinds. The footy pitch was ok in the 1st quarter, if it had stayed that way, I believe we would have won the game. In a dry condition, I think we would gain more advantage than they would gain.

We’re where we are. Brisbane and PA have shown significant improvement this year, but I can't say the same for us. We had a few young players join the team, and we were forced to try something new, which I really liked. Meanwhile, we’re the team who is capable of beating any team in MCG in a dry condition. We need some luck to maintain the 4th, defeat Collingwood in the QF, have one extra week off, and then our chances will improve. By the way, the bookies still consider us the 2nd favorite to win the premiership, indicating they hold the Carl vs Melb game in high regard.

Have a good day!

39 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

We will get up for Max’s 200th this weekend. Hawks are a threat because they play like they have nothing to lose. 
Saturday’s loss will burn the players and I’m sure they’ll come out hard. 

After two poor first quarters in a row, I hope we put a lot of emphasis on coming out strong in the first quarter. We need to let the Hawks know early that we aren’t another contender they can push around. 

1) Hawks do have nothing to lose....

2) ...tbh.......ive seldom seen this "burnt" angst.... would be handy.

No idea about this one... i thought we were a good 5 goals better than the scum....alas..

Dees to win.....by bitten finger nails 

 

1 hour ago, binman said:

You think there is a greater likelihood the blues will have a double chance than us?

Actually the notion of a double chance is a furphy. Lose your first final and you have a second chance. Win your first final and you lose your second chance.

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

I'm away so haven't watched the game but surely it was lost when we let through 3 stoppage goals at the start of the 4th?

It's been a problem all year and we need to work on our defensive stoppages surely?

They weren't goals from D50 stoppages. They were centre clearance goals. It's very rare for us to give up goals out the front of centre stoppage, let alone multiple goals.

The only other game we've done this is the Geelong game, as pointed out by @layzie.

I don't remember the third goal coming from a stoppage. Pretty sure it came from a turnover, but I have no interest in watching the replay to confirm.

I agree our D50 stoppage work has been really ordinary this year, and this to me, is mostly a result of Max's poor tap work in D50. He taps to really dangerous areas and rarely seems to be on the same wavelength as the mids.

We tightened this up against Carlton though, possibly because they were down mids from their starting 22, but I don't recall us conceding a goal all night from D50 stoppage.

Edited August 15, 20231 yr by Binmans PA

3 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Who thinks Carlton are a genuine premiership contender?

Not just an honourable semi final contender but a team that go all the way.

I think they have every right to believe.

I mean, why couldn't they? Have some star factor still to return and history will say if you're hitting strong form going into finals then that will hold you in good stead.

They can absolutely go deep that's for sure.

36 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I call BS because like everyone other normal human, he is watching his left arm given thats what a normal human is drawn to look at. There is absolutely no way his eyes can follow the footy from that proximity to his right wrist. 

This IMO is the goal umpire trying to defend his guess. 

Edited August 15, 20231 yr by Gawndy the Great

18 hours ago, ChaserJ said:

I can understand that Marchbank and the Blues were just so desperate to get a win at all costs.

Conning the umpires in this instance is a bit like going up for an appeal, when you reckon it wasn’t really out, but you go up anyway to see what the ump thinks.

Worked out for Carlton this time. Made me think what Dee players might have done in the same position. Marchbank might have been injured for this one (odds on at least) so might have missed the example set by Koz:

 

Remember when Malthouse called one of our players (Hunt? Blease?) a cheat for claiming a ball was touched against the Blues? C'mon Mick, speak up 🙄

I made peace with the call, even in the moment once the umpire said "touched" I knew it wouldn't be overturned - but I was listening to the Demonland podcast on the way home from work tonight and @binman got me all riled up again!! Thanks binners 🤣

15 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Remember when Malthouse called one of our players (Hunt? Blease?) a cheat for claiming a ball was touched against the Blues? C'mon Mick, speak up 🙄

I made peace with the call, even in the moment once the umpire said "touched" I knew it wouldn't be overturned - but I was listening to the Demonland podcast on the way home from work tonight and @binman got me all riled up again!! Thanks binners 🤣

Addam Maric

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Yet when asked, Marchbank himself said that it hit his fingers 🤔

12 hours ago, Cyclops said:

Actually the notion of a double chance is a furphy. Lose your first final and you have a second chance. Win your first final and you lose your second chance.

Finish 5-8 and you have to win four knockouts vs 3 or 2 for finishing 1-4!

You also get home ground advantage finishing 1-4 against any winners from 5-8!

So while not a true double chance,  aside from qualifying finals, definitely a better chance!

 

13 hours ago, Min Xie said:

Carlton didn’t just win a game week after a week, they were on the rise as well. As a reference, foxfooty’s Pressure Gauge showed Carl 238 vs Melb 200 in the 1st quarter, 238 is unheard of.

It's unheard of as, Leigh Montanga noted - due to the impact of the +1 at the contest that Carlton  employed compared to Melbourne's -1, on the data that goes into compiling 'pressure'.

Generally speaking, be aware of aligning the 'pressure gauge' with the desire to win or hunger...

Edited August 15, 20231 yr by Engorged Onion

13 hours ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Yet when asked, Marchbank himself said that it hit his fingers 🤔

"Fingertips"

Told the war office on Monday, prior to this article, that if this is the way the AFL's going to adjudicate a goal review and they're "happy with the review"  then every close goal (where there's an oppo player/s on the goal line) should now be claimed as "touched" straight away regardless of whether it was or wasn't.

Nice to see we are the first cab off the rank for a change.  Maysie on the front foot...

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/08/15/ive-instructed-the-other-defenders-mays-revelation-after-score-review/

13 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Remember when Malthouse called one of our players (Hunt? Blease?) a cheat for claiming a ball was touched against the Blues? C'mon Mick, speak up 🙄

I made peace with the call, even in the moment once the umpire said "touched" I knew it wouldn't be overturned - but I was listening to the Demonland podcast on the way home from work tonight and @binman got me all riled up again!! Thanks binners 🤣

I calmed down too, and then I watched a replay of Monday nights 360 and robbo said the umpire heard a clip, 'just like cricket when you hear  nick'. 

Heard something?

70k people going ballistic, the Demon army screaming 2 metres behind him, players colliding at speed?

And he heard the sound of a football brushing a players wrist(because if I did hit his right wrist, it could have only brushed it because even those who say it did acknowledge there was no deviation)????????

In cricket, with a quieter crowd 100 metres away, there is frequently confusion from players and umpires as to whether there is a nick, hence the frequent debate about whether to use up a review.

5 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

Told the war office on Monday, prior to this article, that if this is the way the AFL's going to adjudicate a goal review and they're "happy with the review"  then every close goal (where there's an oppo player/s on the goal line) should now be claimed as "touched" straight away regardless of whether it was or wasn't.

Nice to see we are the first cab off the rank for a change.  Maysie on the front foot...

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/08/15/ive-instructed-the-other-defenders-mays-revelation-after-score-review/

Invariably the only way to instigate change is to ridicule the dolts beyond redemption. 

Embarass the fools into change

Just now, binman said:

I calmed down too, and then I watched a replay of Monday nights 360 and robbo said the umpire heard a clip, 'just like cricket when you hear  nick'. 

Heard something?

70k people going ballistic, the Demon army screaming 2 metres behind him, players colliding at speed?

And he heard the sound of a football brushing a players wrist(because if I did hit his right wrist, it could have only brushed it because even those who say it did acknowledge there was no deviation)????????

In cricket, with a quieter crowd 100 metres away, there is frequently confusion from players and umpires as to whether there is a nick, hence the frequent debate about whether to use up a review.

We know there were at least 2 ppl talking [censored] at that instance  😉

21 minutes ago, binman said:

I calmed down too, and then I watched a replay of Monday nights 360 and robbo said the umpire heard a clip, 'just like cricket when you hear  nick'. 

Heard something?

70k people going ballistic, the Demon army screaming 2 metres behind him, players colliding at speed?

And he heard the sound of a football brushing a players wrist(because if I did hit his right wrist, it could have only brushed it because even those who say it did acknowledge there was no deviation)????????

In cricket, with a quieter crowd 100 metres away, there is frequently confusion from players and umpires as to whether there is a nick, hence the frequent debate about whether to use up a review.

Nonsense....the mainstream press will often make anything up to run with the preferred "AFL" view of things.

There was an interview with a Carlton player who was near the goal line contest and they asked him the same thing.... he said no way you could make anything out as the crowd noise was just too loud to hear anything like that.  Brodie Kemp i think.

Edited August 15, 20231 yr by Demon Dynasty