15 hours ago, layzie said:

ANB is the 6 million dollar man 

And he never hesitated to sign up again.

26 minutes ago, John Crow Batty said:

Flawed system that weights theoretical perfection and what ifs over the reality.

That's not accurate.

In fact the opposite is true. It's nor theoretical, it's a calculation based on reality. 

So, for example since 2013 (when the data started getting collected), let's say there have been 2000 set shots from where maxy kicked his goal. And for the sake of argument only 30% of those shots resulted in a goal.

It's therefore not theoretical that most AFL footballers miss that shot, or that it was super impressive maxy didn't.

And whilst the model doesn't take into account all variables, most notably the record or skill of the person kicking, it does take into account quite a few key variables.

The model estimates the likelihood of a player scoring a goal, taking into account the shot type - such as set shots, snaps, and on the run - location on the field, and critically the pressure being applied on the player having the shot.

The last point helps explain why ports x score was only 11 points higher than their actual score. Many of their snaps on goal were under huge pressure. 

Edited March 31, 20241 yr by binman

1 hour ago, binman said:

I think there is a risk of a false narrative building around this game.

In particular, that port lost a game they should have won, and that we were lucky to win.

Yes, there were similarities to some of our losses last year in the way port dominated in key stats, in particular inside 50 and time in forward half.

But those numbers are a little misleading in terms of a comparison to our losses last year.

If an opponent had beat us in those areas so comprehensively last season we would have been hammered. Not this season.

That's because our method has  changed and those stats are not as significant as indicators this season.

The other thing is port's supposed  innacracy and the much discussed expected score.

Port won the evexpected score by 34 points, on its face suggesting we were lucky to win and port threw it away.

Last year we lost a number of matches where we were ahead on  expected score. But the differential was usually a result of our woeful inaccuracy.

So, for example in our semi against the blues, using expected score as a metric, we left something like 4-5 goals on the table IIRC.

We should have won that game.

The same is true of our loss to the giants in the Alice, and to a lesser extent our finals loss to the pies.

But that's not true for port last night, as evidenced by their expected score, which was only 11 points more than their actual score.

Meaning they were actually pretty good in terms of their accuracy (expected score is calculated by the percentage of goals from all shots from that spot on the ground from i think the last 24 seasons).

Port didn't lose because they fluffed their lines like we did in say the giants, pies and blues losses.

It was because OUR kicking for goal, particularly our set shots, was brilliant. That's not lucky, that's skill.

Take three goals as examples.

Browns and maxy's set shot goals from 50 are probably no better than something like 30% under x score.

Fritters set shot from 45 on a 45 degree angle is probably something like 25% of shots from that spot being goals. 

Drilling those, and other goals, was the difference in the game. 

We won the game because our goal kicking was elite. Not because we we were lucky.

We didn't steal the game, we won it

Good kicking is good football.

I'd also add that we clearly ran out the game better. We looked fitter and stronger, and looked the winner from halfway through the last.

As evidence, we got out to a 13 point lead, and had a late chance to make it 19.

We dominated the last 10 minutes and they’re lucky after the siren goal made it feel a bit more even than it actually was.

100% agree about the false narrative. 

It was just a bloody good game of footy. I generally dislike when supporters, including us, go down the road of ‘IF only X did/didn’t happen we would have won’… that applies to every disposal and decision throughout the entire game.

IF X player kicks this goal at this time, we would have won. Yes, but they didn’t, hence your/our team lost. 

 

I worked with a bunch of Collingwood supporters and they would talk like this ALL the time after a loss. They were never outplayed, always hard done by the umps even if it was only one bad decision. Drove me nuts. Always If only X, if only Y, if only Z had happened, we win. 
 

At no point watching the game did I feel like we were ‘lucky’ to be in it. We played really well and absorbed a lot of attacking footy especially in our D50 (I could say, IF May was in, we would have won by 6 goals), our forwards kicked the goals they had to kick and Port didn’t. Pretty simple. 
 

The word ‘IF’ does a lot of work sometimes that can paper over how hard and well a winning team has played.  

22 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Sound up 🔊

 

BBB.  👏👏👏Love it. 👏👏👏

every time they showed Port supporters in the crowd, it was mullets and missing teeth and goatees and tattoos … every time !!! Not just random!!! Port has the most feral supporters and now has passed the Pies for this metric 🤣🤣

Ben Brown just loving his footy. So wonderful to see.

1 hour ago, biggestred said:

Disagree. The port bloke was facing away from the footy with his arms around gawn. That's a free every time. 

 

1 hour ago, Jaded No More said:

Exactly right. You have to be facing the ball in a ruck throw in. If you’re facing your opponent in a wrestle you get pinged. Exactly the same way a defender gets pinged for holding if he’s facing his opponent and not the ball (which both teams got pinged for last night). It’s why they always say “eyes on the ball”. 
Finlayson (I think?) turned his body and was holding Gawn around the waist in that contest. You can’t do that. 

 

1 hour ago, fr_ap said:

Finlayson was facing Gawn because Max turned him round with a hold / shove of his own. Ruckwork vs strength vs infringement....a fine line. We've seen them call that against Max plenty of times and that's what the Port fans were upset about. 

If we conceded that free at home on the 3q siren I'd be pretty miffed

Overall thought we had the better of the umpiring in some key times....the early lop sided free kick count though was really their lack of discipline. They were just flying in the Port players 

@fr_ap shares my view - Gawn moved Finlayson around before Finlayson grabbed him. I’m confident if the roles were reversed there would have been outrage on here. 

Most of the early frees to us were there, I agree @fr_ap, but in a hostile interstate environment they don’t always get paid. It helped us that they did. 

1 hour ago, fr_ap said:

Finlayson was facing Gawn because Max turned him round with a hold / shove of his own. Ruckwork vs strength vs infringement....a fine line.

That’s the price you pay for playing a forward against a 6 time AA ruckman. Gawn worked him under the ball and made him infringe. 
Gawn > any other ruckman in the AFL currently, and arguably since Cox. 

2 minutes ago, old55 said:

Ben Brown just loving his footy. So wonderful to see.

He said he is playing every game as if it’s his last. And it shows. 
Like Jesus on Easter, he’s resurrected himself from the grave!

Love seeing a smiling Melksham behind the boys on the bench. 

22 minutes ago, BoBo said:

At no point watching the game did I feel like we were ‘lucky’ to be in it.

Agreed. I was remarkably relaxed for such a close match. It just felt like we had this for the entire game.

1 hour ago, whatwhat say what said:

i think derm just recalled beating up on us his entire playing career and, as such, considers us inferior

an inherent bias

He can’t shake the “Melbourne are a soft walkover club” mantra. He’s run with it for too long to turn his back on it now and damn any evidence to the contrary. It’s pathetic.

He does seem to genuinely love Max although I’m sure he wishes he wore just about any other jumper.

59 minutes ago, BoBo said:

100% agree about the false narrative. 

It was just a bloody good game of footy. 

Indeed.

The quality of the game should not be lost in the wash up.

It was a cracking game. High quality from start fom end and a finals like intensity.

Port were fantastic.

I was impressed by their defence (something they have to adress) and their midfield, and ability to link up by hands and go forward is elite.

I've watched the replay once, but it might get another this arvo.

Top game.Top win.

The Crows is a danger game. Hard to get up for on a five day break after the intensity of this game.

If we can tough out a win we'll go into the Lions game as favourites and 4-1.

Win and we go 5-1 into the bye, with almost a two week break till our Anzac eve game against the tigers. 

Beyond how good the game was in of itself, beating Port was huge in terms of increasimg our chances of finishing top 4 - the goal of the home and away season. 

We get the 4 points, an opportunity to build momentum, bank early season wins and get to 6-2, which would set up our season.

And Port, a competitor for a top 4 slot, don't get the 4 points at home, which given they started 1.45 favourites has to hurt.

Too early for an 8 point game, but it may well end up being a factor in shaping the top four.

Edited March 31, 20241 yr by binman

2 minutes ago, binman said:

Indeed.

Minutes That should not be lost in the wash up- it was a cracking game. High quality and port were fantastic.

I was impressed by their defence and their midfield, and ability to link up by hands is elite.

Port on a fast dry deck would be hard to handle

12 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

That’s the price you pay for playing a forward against a 6 time AA ruckman. Gawn worked him under the ball and made him infringe. 
Gawn > any other ruckman in the AFL currently, and arguably since Cox. 

He’s absolutely the greatest ruckman since Cox. The debate is really how he compares with Cox.

This is from a Hawks supporter on Bigfooty. I echo these sentiments:

‘Gawn is the best ruckman ever.... Up there with Polly. Definitely the best in my time of watching the footy. Better than Madden. Better than Stynes. Better than Cox.

It's just incredible to see someone 209cm tall who thinks so quickly on his feet and uses his hands so skilfully to win the contested ball and get it over to Petracca, Oliver, Viney, etc with clever handballs and tap ons. He is a unicorn.

Weird thing to say about a 6-time All Australian & premiership captain, but I still don't think people really appreciate just how good he is. Taken for granted, I think. His brilliant play isn't eye-popping like a Naitanui. He is just a natural footballer who provides a steady stream of excellence for the Dees.

Great endurance running too, to get up and down the ground like he does. Works his [censored] off. You don't notice his running like the quick 198cm-200cm guys, but he is a hell of an athlete. Fit as f**k. 32 years old and still blowing up his younger adversaries.

• Runs up and down the ground and racks up the disposals like Dean Cox
• Always get the first hand to the ball for the hitout and provides his mids with an armchair ride... just like Aaron Sandilands.
• Gives his team a 4th midfielder in the centre square clearance battles... just like Nick Naitanui
• Controls games with big pack marks across half back line.... just like Jimmy Stynes
• Goes forward and takes huge marks inside fifty and kicks goals... just like Simon Madden

He's got the lot!

Just always involved in the action like no ruckman I've ever seen.‘

6 hours ago, SPC said:

Gee Petty loves to be a pest. Would be annoying to play on. Was at Alir all night. 

Excellent point. When Petty went to Alir, Alir seemed to lose his influence, and up to that point was probably in their best. It seemed to free up BBB as well.

46 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

BBB.  👏👏👏Love it. 👏👏👏

every time they showed Port supporters in the crowd, it was mullets and missing teeth and goatees and tattoos … every time !!! Not just random!!! Port has the most feral supporters and now has passed the Pies for this metric 🤣🤣

That's impossible

 

21 minutes ago, P-man said:

He’s absolutely the greatest ruckman since Cox. The debate is really how he compares with Cox.

This is from a Hawks supporter on Bigfooty. I echo these sentiments:

‘Gawn is the best ruckman ever.... Up there with Polly. Definitely the best in my time of watching the footy. Better than Madden. Better than Stynes. Better than Cox.

It's just incredible to see someone 209cm tall who thinks so quickly on his feet and uses his hands so skilfully to win the contested ball and get it over to Petracca, Oliver, Viney, etc with clever handballs and tap ons. He is a unicorn.

Weird thing to say about a 6-time All Australian & premiership captain, but I still don't think people really appreciate just how good he is. Taken for granted, I think. His brilliant play isn't eye-popping like a Naitanui. He is just a natural footballer who provides a steady stream of excellence for the Dees.

Great endurance running too, to get up and down the ground like he does. Works his [censored] off. You don't notice his running like the quick 198cm-200cm guys, but he is a hell of an athlete. Fit as f**k. 32 years old and still blowing up his younger adversaries.

• Runs up and down the ground and racks up the disposals like Dean Cox
• Always get the first hand to the ball for the hitout and provides his mids with an armchair ride... just like Aaron Sandilands.
• Gives his team a 4th midfielder in the centre square clearance battles... just like Nick Naitanui
• Controls games with big pack marks across half back line.... just like Jimmy Stynes
• Goes forward and takes huge marks inside fifty and kicks goals... just like Simon Madden

He's got the lot!

Just always involved in the action like no ruckman I've ever seen.‘

I agree, best ever.

15 hours ago, Brownie said:

Is that their mum in front with her three brothers?

Melbourne had something like Eight or nine players from Adelaide/ Sth Australia

2 hours ago, binman said:

I think there is a risk of a false narrative building around this game.

In particular, that port lost a game they should have won, and that we were lucky to win.

Yes, there were similarities to some of our losses last year in the way port dominated in key stats, in particular inside 50 and time in forward half.

But those numbers are a little misleading in terms of a comparison to our losses last year.

If an opponent had beat us in those areas so comprehensively last season we would have been hammered. Not this season.

That's because our method has  changed and those stats are not as significant as indicators this season.

The other thing is port's supposed  innacracy and the much discussed expected score.

Port won the evexpected score by 34 points, on its face suggesting we were lucky to win and port threw it away.

Last year we lost a number of matches where we were ahead on  expected score. But the differential was usually a result of our woeful inaccuracy.

So, for example in our semi against the blues, using expected score as a metric, we left something like 4-5 goals on the table IIRC.

We should have won that game.

The same is true of our loss to the giants in the Alice, and to a lesser extent our finals loss to the pies.

But that's not true for port last night, as evidenced by their expected score, which was only 11 points more than their actual score.

Meaning they were actually pretty good in terms of their accuracy (expected score is calculated by the percentage of goals from all shots from that spot on the ground from the last 11 seasons).

Port didn't lose because they fluffed their lines like we did in say the giants, pies and blues losses.

It was because OUR kicking for goal, particularly our set shots, was brilliant. That's not lucky, that's skill.

Take three goals as examples.

Browns and maxy's set shot goals from 50 are probably no better than something like 30% under x score.

Fritters set shot from 45 on a 45 degree angle is probably something like 25% of shots from that spot being goals. 

Drilling those, and other goals, was the difference in the game. 

We won the game because our goal kicking was elite. Not because we we were lucky.

We didn't steal the game, we won it

Good kicking is good football.

I'd also add that we clearly ran out the game better. We looked fitter and stronger, and looked the winner from halfway through the last.

As evidence, we got out to a 13 point lead, and had a late chance to make it 19.

We dominated the last 10 minutes and their lucky after the siren goal made it feel a bit more even than it actually was.

I’m glad you said all of this as that is how this win is being spun by most media I have listened to. ie they  lost a game they should have won. ( Im not sure what u meant by their “ lucky after siren goal” though.  U mean the one they  kicked after the siren in the 1st? ) 

While I hate to discuss that team with blk and white stripes on this forum I consider how “ lucky” I thought they were in both 2022 and 2023. And in doing so how much I, and many,  under rated them. In the end Im happy if the media keeps under rating us too! 

 

5 hours ago, P-man said:

The ‘steal’ debate is an interesting one. I get the statistical argument but on the eye test it just felt like a classic game of momentum swings. We arrested theirs when we needed to and took full advantage of ours when we had them.

Not to mention coming home with a wet sail which should be praised in any sport.

As Max himself noted we are often on the other end of those types of battles so a refreshing change and a damn good win. 

Sitting in the crowd with no access to stats etc from the naked eye they got the better of us in clearances but we absolutely nailed our chances like I've never seen before.

We struggled to get the ball out of our D50 with any sort of fluency.

I think our ball movement Inside 50 was better also which ultimately won us the game.

 

31 minutes ago, P-man said:

He’s absolutely the greatest ruckman since Cox. The debate is really how he compares with Cox.

 

If he captains us to another flag it’ll be a no brainer that he’s the greatest ruckman the game has ever seen. 

And frankly to bring NicNat into the conversation is an insult to Gawn, Cox, Madden etc. NicNat had like 3 excellent seasons, was never fit enough to influence entire games, and had zero leadership skills. 
About as laughable as people saying English is better than Gawn. [censored] please. 


We are SO lucky to have Gawn. Not only a brilliant footballer but a brilliant leader. 

34 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

Port on a fast dry deck would be hard to handle

As they were last night.

They couldn't have got a faster or drier deck.

Ground is in great nick, and with no wind, or obvious humidity, it was perfect conditions for football.

Pity we don't get to play in those conditions every game.

37 minutes ago, P-man said:

He’s absolutely the greatest ruckman since Cox. The debate is really how he compares with Cox.

...

• Runs up and down the ground and racks up the disposals like Dean Cox
• Always get the first hand to the ball for the hitout and provides his mids with an armchair ride... just like Aaron Sandilands.
• Gives his team a 4th midfielder in the centre square clearance battles... just like Nick Naitanui
• Controls games with big pack marks across half back line.... just like Jimmy Stynes
• Goes forward and takes huge marks inside fifty and kicks goals... just like Simon Madden

He's got the lot!

Just always involved in the action like no ruckman I've ever seen.‘

This comparison really sells it. He's got elite attributes comparable to the best qualities of absolute greats but all put together in a single 7 foot tall bearded package.

9 minutes ago, Willmoy1947 said:

Melbourne had something like Eight or nine players from Adelaide/ Sth Australia

I believe there is only 6 on the list and 5 played last night

ANB, Chin, Kossie, Sparrow and Petty

50 minutes ago, He de mon said:

Agreed. I was remarkably relaxed for such a close match. It just felt like we had this for the entire game.

Samesies!