On 24/04/2025 at 23:18, binman said:

How many games have we all seen where a team where has the game wrapped up with 20 minutes on the clock only to give up easy goals late

As a punter who often backs the over 39 line for value I can tell you it happens ALOT - for me most recently the port hawks game (I backed port for the win and over 39)

It took all of two games for there to be an example of this occurring.

Much like us, Freo put the Crows to the sword in the 3rd (5 goals to zip) and were 42 points up at three quarter time, a team they will be competing with for finals position (meaning percentage is partic relevant).

But with game in the bag, Freo's pressure (the key reason for their 42 point lead) drops off, the Crows score 5 unanswered goals in the last quarter and the winning margin is only 18.

12 minutes ago, binman said:

It took all of two games for there to be an example of this occurring.

Much like us, Freo put the Crows to the sword in the 3rd (5 goals to zip) and were 42 points up at three quarter time, a team they will be competing with for finals position (meaning percentage is partic relevant).

But with game in the bag, Freo's pressure (the key reason for their 42 point lead) drops off, the Crows score 5 unanswered goals in the last quarter and the winning margin is only 18.

It's fascinating how people interpret the same process/outcome, and infer meaning, when it is their team versus when it is not.

That of course is what the brain is designed to do, look for patterns, extrapolate and place assumptions for an expected outcome.

Edited 21 hours ago21 hr by Engorged Onion

Just now, Engorged Onion said:

It's fascinating how people interpret the same process/outcome, and infer meaning, when it is their team versus when it is not.

1 minute ago, Engorged Onion said:

It's fascinating how people interpret the same process/outcome, and infer meaning, when it is their team versus when it is not.

That of course is what the brain is designed to do, look for patterns, extrapolate and place assumptions for an expected outcome.

Once upon a time I did a thesis on some acronyms BIRG'ing and CORF-ing on sports fandom. Basking in Reflected Glory and Cutting off Reflected Failure.

Here's an excerpt

There's a unique brand of frustration that bubbles up within a fanbase even after a victory – the agony of a comfortable lead carelessly squandered. We've all been there, haven't we? Up by a seemingly insurmountable margin, only to watch the opposition chip away, goal by goal, point by point. The initial elation morphs into nail-biting anxiety, the celebratory cheers replaced by nervous murmurs. Even when the final whistle blows in our favor, a bitter taste lingers. We won, yes, but the dominant performance we anticipated dissolved into a messy, unnecessarily stressful finish. This internal disappointment, this feeling that we should have done better, speaks volumes about our deep investment as fans and our high standards for our team.

This frustration becomes particularly interesting when we contrast it with our reaction to a rival team in the same situation. Suddenly, the narrative flips. Their near-collapse, even in victory, becomes a source of (perhaps slightly smug) satisfaction. It’s as if they’ve "put the cue in the rack" too early, (maybe they can afford to) - a sign of potential arrogance or a lack of focus. We might interpret their ability to concede goals and still win not as a display of dominance, but rather as evidence of a certain carelessness born from having "too much" capacity. It suggests they aren't as sharp or disciplined as they could be, almost as if they have the luxury of being so far ahead that they can afford such lapses – a luxury we might not perceive our own team to possess.

Ultimately, this duality in our reactions underscores the passionate and often irrational nature of sports fandom. We hold our own team to a higher standard, feeling the sting of dropped points even in victory. Yet, that same critical lens becomes a tool for comparison and, at times, a source of comfort or frustration when observing our rivals. The frustration we feel with our own team's imperfect win doesn't negate the final result, but it certainly shapes our immediate emotional landscape and fuels the ongoing narrative of competition and rivalry."

Edited 21 hours ago21 hr by Engorged Onion

35 minutes ago, binman said:

It took all of two games for there to be an example of this occurring.

Much like us, Freo put the Crows to the sword in the 3rd (5 goals to zip) and were 42 points up at three quarter time, a team they will be competing with for finals position (meaning percentage is partic relevant).

But with game in the bag, Freo's pressure (the key reason for their 42 point lead) drops off, the Crows score 5 unanswered goals in the last quarter and the winning margin is only 18.

You're talking to yourself again.

9 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

You're talking to yourself again.

9 minutes ago, binman said:

No, you're talking to you!

6 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

No, you're talking to you!

While disappointed we gave away 4 soft goals at the end, the 3rd quarter was very good and resting Gawn and May is smart!

What I really liked:

• Gawn great game (whether he is 15 or 55 out he should kick it the same when shooting for goal).

• Bowey having a terrific year.

• Chandler stepped up a cog or two this year, the double tackle/effort that led to Trac goal was excellent.

• Viney as stopper.

• Oliver 3rd quarter.

• Moving the ball faster, it appeared that was part of reason for better 3rd quarter, puts opposition defence under much more pressure!

• Kids in Windsor, Langdon and Lindsay all look promising, even if Windsor skills were off!

Challenges:

• Fullerton looked like a schoolboy being pushed aside. ( Replace with JVR)

• Trac, Oliver not going at 100% for 4 quarters!

• Fritsch needs to be made more accountable, he is a smart footballer but not doing much of team things. I would send him to a defender and say your role is to beat your opponent, if he could perform that role, will still kick a couple!

• Salem playing safe, even if he was better this week.

Did we really take our foot off the pedal in the 4th?

We kicked 1.4 and they kicked 4.1. So we had our chances even without Gawn and May. We didn't kick straight, they did.

34 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Did we really take our foot off the pedal in the 4th?

We kicked 1.4 and they kicked 4.1. So we had our chances even without Gawn and May. We didn't kick straight, they did.

I think we did, but only late. For the first 20 mins of the last, the sting was out of the game but it was still played more or less on our terms. We should have kicked 3-4 goals, not just 1.

11 hours ago, Willmoy1947 said:

My favourite movie will always be Dr Zhivargo

“Your attitude is noted you know, yes it is”

On 24/04/2025 at 22:19, Webber said:

Top 5 worst games of AFL footy I’ve ever seen

Yeah I actually couldn't watch the whole game it was so bad. I don't read replies or reactions.

Can someone explain to me why we couldn't play in this game like we played against Fremantle? Richmond are a worse team and we couldn't do it.

Edited 17 hours ago17 hr by lorn

7 minutes ago, greenwaves said:

Yeah I actually couldn't watch the whole game it was so bad. I don't read replies or reactions.

Sounds like you should follow another sport.

16 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

I didn't see much of Fritta without the ball in this one Daz.

In a team where we're trying to bring back 2021 type pressure in the F50 is Fritta going to change his early / recent ways in terms of clamping down and bringing serious heat on the oppo when they have possession ?

Vs the Tigers (a bottom 4 rated team)

Tackles 0

One Percenters 2

Pressure Acts 4 That's one less than Fullo and the worst result of all forwards. Also bottom three for the team. To put that into more perspective, Sharp as the sub had the same number of pressure acts in one third of the time on the ground vs Fritta.

While i'm certainly not saying Fritta should solely be judged on what he does / doesn't do without the ball, these numbers aren't exactly awe inspiring.

Also disappointing given he was coming back from a stint at Casey after potentially working on stuff (without the ball?).

There is also his role in the team which we have no idea what is being asked. Maybe the Coach / coaches are more than happy and obviously have much more info / intel to go on. However i can't see that they'd be in any way satisfied with what he brought without the ball last night.

Let's see what he brings in the next few weeks eh. Hopefully he turns this part of his game around significantly.

Yeah I think all this is pertinent.

There’s potentially a role for a silky, gold-laced opportunist like Fritta - I mean, he’s a joy to watch in full flight when brim-full of confidence, but most teams are so good at bouncing out of defence and running the ball to the other end in audacious chains, that you do pay a price to include a player like that. Where’s the threshold / risk/reward?

15 minutes ago, lorn said:

Can someone explain to me why we couldn't play in this game like we played against Fremantle? Richmond are a worse team and we couldn't do it.

We got beaten in the middle and Richmond pressured us really well in the first half. We also kicked 12.2 against Freo and 5.4 against Richmond to half time.

So really, if we hadn’t kicked so straight in that first half against Freo, we probably would’ve lost.

1 hour ago, lorn said:

Can someone explain to me why we couldn't play in this game like we played against Fremantle? Richmond are a worse team and we couldn't do it.

In a basic explanation Freo zone off and play more aggressive so it was easier to get through their zone with handball.

Richmond flooded back into our forward half more so trying to run through with handball would ultimately see us hit a brick wall

4 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Did we really take our foot off the pedal in the 4th?

We kicked 1.4 and they kicked 4.1. So we had our chances even without Gawn and May. We didn't kick straight, they did.

the pickett reverse goal took the wind completely out of our sails

if that had been paid, i was confident we were looking at a 7+ goal win

12 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

In a basic explanation Freo zone off and play more aggressive so it was easier to get through their zone with handball.

Richmond flooded back into our forward half more so trying to run through with handball would ultimately see us hit a brick wall

Spot on

They played completely differently the previous week against the suns - fast attacking, transition footy for the rhe first 3 quarters.

For whatever reason (i sespect because they were gassed), they set up to minimise a loss not in - hence the uncontested mark.and disposal differentials, not to mention how hopeless they were offensively.

In regard to the latter point, It's worth noting that of the 9 goals they scored 2 were in the last minute of the first and four in the last 5 minutes of the game

4 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Did we really take our foot off the pedal in the 4th?

We kicked 1.4 and they kicked 4.1. So we had our chances even without Gawn and May. We didn't kick straight, they did.

We had a lot of scoring shots for sure, we also rested some important players too