Leaderboard

From the lovely guy that is Andrew Stafford in The Age "Spare a thought for Petracca and Oliver. Both were far below their best, with 38 possessions and just three clearances combined for the match. But the Dees were playing their third game in just 13 days, after backing up a narrow win over Port Adelaide on March 30 with a 15-point victory over the Crows on April 4 for Gather Round. Both games were Adelaide Oval. Is it any wonder they looked flatter than the Nullarbor? The early start to the season – with eight teams playing opening round and byes everywhere you look – has resulted in some deeply iniquitous scheduling. Collingwood also played three games in 13 days after a shortened pre-season. They will play another three in 13 after their bye this week. The fixture is contentious enough already without placing such insane demands on the athletes, who need adequate time to recover between half-marathons. Moreover, the staggered schedule means it won’t be until the end of round seven – when all 18 teams will have played the same amount of games for the first time this year – that we will truly know where clubs sit on the ladder. In an attempt to compete with the NRL’s Las Vegas adventure, the AFL has only succeeded in further distorting the fixture picture in a way that serves no one except broadcasters."

I find this sort of reaction to our losses funny. Each time it's "we've been worked out", "this is the blueprint". Most of the time the result was brought about by something different anyway. We haven't been beaten this badly in the middle in 5+ years. At any rate, the idea that smashing us in the middle puts you in a good place to beat us is hardly earth-shattering, is it? It's almost akin to saying "the blueprint to beating Melbourne is to play really well".

Nice of the blues to make my point so soon by losing a home game against the winless and hapless Crows. But seriously, how many posters actually objectively think that loss is evidence the Blues are not contenders, won't make top 4 and can't win the flag? And the giants were very lucky to win at home against a middle of the road saints. Yes they won, but if the dees won a home game against the Saints in such an unconvincing fashion there would be plenty of DL posters saying it was evidence we are not contenders.

Getting back to yesterday's results, I see that Carlton fans were visibly rocked by that close loss.

Characterising Petty as a below average kick is somewhat unfair. His scoring returns are: 2019: 6 goals, 5 behinds; 2022: 1 goal, 0 behinds; 2023: 12 goals, 1 behind; 2024: 1 goal, 4 behinds. His shot at goal accuracy for his career is, currently, 55.6% which places him into the 'average' category (cf. Fritsch, who is going at 56.9% for his career and has a ranking of 'above average'). Interestingly, McDonald is going at 65.87% goal accuracy (166 goals, 86 behinds). Your observations about the TMac and Petty comparison could well and truly be correct, but we're comparing two very different bodies of work with reference to games played forward. Goal outputs for Petty / Fritsch* are as follows: Petty: 0.3 per game (below average); Fritsch: 1.7 per game (above average). Personally, I do feel Petty's ability to play forward in an ongoing and significant manner (i.e., as our primary KPF) are somewhat overstated and his forward-craft has been magnified by the Richmond game where he went 6 straight. Noting the next week he kicked another two straight against North before going off after halftime with the Lisfranc. His other results for 2023 were: Round 4, Sydney: 1 goal; Round 6, Richmond: 1 goal, 1 behind; Round 9, Hawthorn: 2 goals. (Note: I am unable to recall if Petty started as a forward in all those games in 2023 - others may be able to shed light on that facet). I think he's got some great attributes, especially his strength at marking. But I think the jury is still out on whether he's going to be the forward many have hoped for. At the current stage I'd agree he's more suited to a backline role, though then we get into the issue of the 'over-supply' of backman that we seem to have. *AFL.com.au stats for McDonald omitted, as he is now classified as a backman which skew his goals per game ranking.

Genuinely confused how any of our forwards should get any criticism this week. We had no connection or semblance of ball movement but we expect Petty to be the difference, makes no sense.

really want Max to get AA number 7.

Corruption plain and simple, sub-conciously or not they have different outcomes for different people depending who they are. Any one who looks at what's going on can see that. Just not sure what anyone can do about it. It's really not on and very very unfair. That's all anyone wants, pure fairness across the board. Is that just too much to ask?

Christian gives the appearance of being of very limited intelligence and cannot explain why two almost identical incidents attract different penalties. He has been there far too long and becomes more inconsistent every week. Time to move him on.

Nah, what's he saying? How dare he proffer that fitness has anything to do with the result. Why doesn't he just come out and say we're loading?! Bloody excuse maker.

Further proof that the AFL protects high profile players and Brownlow hopefuls If this same action was done by a nobody, say I dunno Hunter, it would result in suspension. And has.

I've got less buy into the '3 games in 13' days narrative than some others. If every side played a game every 7 days they'd still be playing 3 games in 15 days. We had a 7 day gap leading into the Port game and the same leading into the Brisbane game. Travel time was a 1 hour flight each way over a week apart. From a psychological perspective we then had a 13 days gap that included some 'down time' to look forward to after throwing everything at the Lions. I certainly think it started to show in the last quarter of the Crows game however when we were coming off a 5 day gap and went goalless. That said, almost the entire side looked flat on Thursday night, couldn't cover ground and spread quickly or break lines, made poor decisions and fumbled possession constantly. Losing Salo early didn't help our ball movement and transition and being without Kozzie's pressure (both perceived and real) and dynamism robbed us of the ability to create goals out of half chances and made it easier for the opposition to move the ball out of their own defence. In our engine room we know that Vines had been ill the week before and Clazz was playing literally with one hand. We were also robbed of both Koz and Salo as midfield rotations. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think our performance had more to do with injuries and suspension to some of our most important players which our B graders couldn't make up for unfortunately.

The hit rate on category B rookies is very low, but the hit rate on the dregs of under 18/VFL/country league players is also low. Recruiters aren’t trying to draft VFL players, they’re drafting potential AFL players. There are heaps of guys who can play VFL but have a ceiling that is almost worthless at AFL level, so drafting any of them is a waste of time and resources. Recruiters can be pretty certain what they’ll get with those players, with the range of potential outcomes being very narrow. At least drafting a 206cm kid who hasn’t played much before exposed you to a very wide range of outcomes, some of which might include being a valuable AFL player. Whilst the average category B rookie will be much worse than a state league player, the likelihood that they’ll be a valuable AFL player is probably significantly higher. Jason Taylor isn’t a VFL recruiter, he’s an AFL recruiter.

Brilliant. Finally a footy journo makes the bog obvious point about the impact of the insane aerobic demands on AFL players in the modern game. I love this line: 'The fixture is contentious enough already without placing such insane demands on the athletes, who need adequate time to recover between half-marathons' And even more importantly factors the impact of those demands into their analysis of the game. The job of footy journos is helping fans understand the game. They do fans a complete disservice if they ignore a critical factor like physical readiness and the impact of fatigue on performance. Take the loss to the Lions. What are the reasons we lost? In the this thread factors such as poor coaching, poor selection, players mentally not strong enough, smashed at the contest, not enough pressure and not running two ways have all been highlighted. And fair enough too, all are potential factors. But if the impact of fatigue is also not factored into any analysis of our performance, you are only left with such factors as potential reasons for the loss. Which means the assessment is off. For example our all team defence is incredibly taxing, as is winning the clearance count, as is applying elite pressure, as is setting up one down at stoppages etc etc etc. Logic says that if the players are fatigued, these, and other key elements of our method will be more difficult to implement (which will be reflected in the stats) and our chances of winning will decrease. Factoring in fatigue is not making excuses, it is simply ensuring all potential reasons for a performance are considered. Were the dees fatigued against the lions? The eye test says yes, absolutely. What was the cause of the fatigue? Who knows. Perhaps, as Stafford suggests it was simply that we were playing our third game in just 13 days, which included a physically draining and intense win over Port Adelaide and backing up 5 days later to beat the Crows. It is clear they targeted those games and in order to maximise our chances of winning both they would have designed their high performance program to peak for both games. If so, is it possible to then be in peak shape for the Lions game? Or perhaps in addition to the above, we also took the opportunity to get a heavy training block in ahead of our bye to take advantage of the two week week break to the tigers game (ie, so players have time to recover and taper)? That may not be the case of course, but equally it shouldn't be rejected out of hand. In that context, as another poster noted, it's worth noting the pre bye record of the teams that played in the OR: Dees: 22 point loss to the lions Lions: 23 point loss to Freo Suns: 48 point loss to the dogs Tigers: 39 point loss to the Eagles Pies: led the hawks at half time by 38 points, stopped to a walk in the second half, only kicking 2 goals (none in the last) to luckily scrape in by 2 points Blues: scrappy, lucky 5 point win over the tigers Swans: beat west coast by 26 (having lost to the tigers the previous week) Giants: thumped Eagles

Assume they'll try say it was low impact and not medium impact? When we appealed for Kozzie the tribunal concluded that the contact had the potential to cause injury, surely the same logic should apply for a dangerous tackle?

Unlike the previous 4 weeks I was sulking on friday and saturday. Really no interest in sport then came late Saturday and all of a sudden the losing of a game of football became very small. Yesterday all I could think of was " it could have been my daughter, my wife, my grandchildren. What sort of world am I leaving my grandchildren? Thank god for sport it will help over the next week to escape the real world.

(did I read people having a go at Jeffo and other kids??) Jeffo is a kid, give him a break. Anyone slagging off a kid for playing a game...and don't forget this is a game...ought to have a good look at themselves. Not that I imagine any of them are silly enough to read what punters write on forums about them but on the off chance that they were, that could really do a number on their mental health. Perhaps go a bit easier on them until they get to the big leagues at least. I know it's elite and so on and so forth but it's a game, and these young guys are kids, don't sling too much mud at them until they get a bit older and more emotionally mature perhaps. I'm excited to see what Jeffo can do on the big stage eventually. Keep the kid's confidence up and he will keep trying and wanting to get better. OUR MAN JEFFERSON!!!

This is going to be a tough game - if y’all think the Tiges will just roll over and capitulate, youse need to reflect

It took Gawn 4 or 5 years make it consistently at AFL level. Tom Hawkins similar. Point is with younger players its more about the future than now or last year. A few thought Gawn was mediocre at best. You just have to trust the club and its processes. The players will get all they need from the club to eventually make the grade . If they don't the club will let them go.

Petty’s played 2.5 very decent CHF games. Then one stinker against great opposition. Was ok but not great in his half a game down back. Got beat deep a couple of times. (One on one defending was always his weakness though, just like Lever, better when in position to intercept.) Honestly I think he just needs the freshen up from the bye and will come out and be very good. And he needs some sports psychology against Brisbane because he’s been awful the last 2 times he’s played them and clearly they are in his head. Needs to find a way to get through that.

Nice idea SPC but you have to replace all three and they have to bring something decent to the table otherwise you risk a potential surprise loss. Who would you bring in? My take if this were to happen... May - personally i wouldnt flirt with his form. He gets the break anyway and isn't carrying a serious issue like Clarry & BBB (that we know of). BBB > Turner. Played his role up forward very nicely at Casey. Great overhead, vice like hands, super mobile, beautiful kicking action. Why not for this match? Clarry > Marty. Rivers into the middle. Looked at home here when switched in to replace Clarry on Thurs night and provided some drive out of the middle with 4 clearances and entries into 50 on minor CBA time. Marty takes over the Rivers role (for this match anyway). A mini pre-season program for Petty for the next four weeks or so to try and get him up towards AFL level match fitness might not hurt either. His output (or lack thereof... even given the poor supply) had to set alarm bells ringing surely. Fullarton for Petty until he gets back to full fitness. Had a VG game with Casey up forward and held his own in the ruck as well. Can take over the chop out ruck duties from Roo which frees him up to focus fully on his KF role where he's struggled of late. Very out there, cant see Goody trying any of the above and im sure many would say thank god, but nice to pontificate!

He is a category B rookie, meaning he had not played Australian Rules football for at least 3 years before being signed. I think he only played until he was about 12 before following the bball pathway due to his height. This is now his second year on an AFL list, similar to Jefferson he's had one true preseason. So what are we trying to achieve? We are rolling the dice on a 206 cm athletic prospect to see if he can pick up AFL football as he develops his body. We know tall players take longer. At 206 cm it's fair to expect him to take a while if at all. Basically,given the rarity of height, it's a free hit to see if something comes of it. And if it doesn't we let him go. On current situation, it doesn't seem like he is coming on or that the footy department have much faith in him. If that's correct then he'll be gone year end.

Not much love for Tom Fullarton, 21 touches, 4 marks, 7 hit outs and kicked 2.4 racked up 102 dream points and named in Casey’s Best but hasn’t garnered a mention? Will Verral is starting to show the class of football that his former coaches said that he was capable of, he is an exciting prospect for the future. As it stands we need Tom and Will to both keep improving and hopefully force their way into the side or be ready when needed. Sounds like Disco came back with a bang, Ollie stepped up along with Bill, Pup and Lachie Hunter. A great win considering we were 26 points down at one stage.

Don’t let’s be rude to dogs by comparing them to Maynard. I quite like the sobriquet “skunkhead”. Do other Demonlanders think it’s not inappropriate? Or is it offensive to skunks?

A Brisbane team fighting for their 2024 season took apart a tired looking Dees side. The late flurry of goals made the final losing score look respectable but reality is the Dees were taken apart. I don't see this happening regularly and suspect it was an aberration due to various factors. It happens. Good timing for a bye to rest up for a few days and then get to work on some aspects. 4 & 2 is still a solid start and a good base for the 2024 campaign. Chin up Dees ...

Totally reasonable questions. Which point to another aspect to not ignoring the issue of fatigue. If you accept fatigue plays a big role in the outcome of any given match then it is reasonable to critique the performance of the high performance team, decisions like not bringing in fresher players (eg would Laurie have been a better option than Clarry?) or target specific games at the potential expense of others.

I saw him on the tram after St.Kilda had beaten his Pies. He looked thoroughly miserable. This is of course completely irrelevant to the topic at hand, but hopefully it puts a sparkle in your day.

Get him a haircut and sign him up.

Bumping this thread in light of the growing noise that Bailey will be leaving the Doggies at the end of the year: https://www.sen.com.au/news/2024/04/12/bulldogs-ceos-frank-admission-on-smith-contract-talks/ https://www.sen.com.au/news/2024/04/15/two-key-dogs-expected-to-stay-but-club-none-the-wiser-on-bailey-smith/ Would you want the Dees to go after him? 12 months ago I would have been a hard no, but with Gus retiring we’ve been exposed for midfield depth and despite some flaws Bailey is still a top end player who will be coming into the prime of his career and would add to our 18-25 age group of players

Andrews did Sweet FA

In our game Tmac just touched the ball as he was trying to pick it up and then it went out of bounds and they called deliberate...one of the most non-deliberate acts I think I've ever seen. How they can rule on those things makes the mind boggle.

THE BUTTERING RAM A short graphic novel Mate, may I please have some duty of care please now? No. Look at me going for this ball... over here. 360 degree 'low impact' spin from contact to the face. Still looking for that other ball.

King going off on the first crack about Butters getting off, even said it was because he's a high profile player.

Yep its dissapointing that we invest so much effort and time / space into players 'like' Bradtke et al who've had zero exposure to AFL but choose to ignore looking into options who already have some pedigree in a very similar game offshore. Why not widen our horizon and do both and then filter towards the option that you feel has the most upside potential?

still no mention of this being official

...because every AFL team bases their decisions on 1 or 2 games. Cornes is paid to stir and he's good at it. If he was a list manager his tune would be a lot different. Taking a long term view is not a media strong suit.

He’s repeatedly tracked opponents all the way to the back 50. After May gave up the 50 he went and reassured the backline. There’s not a lot of evidence for this CBF’ed except maybe some confused efforts against Brisbane where everything he tried didn’t work.

Given how bad that Richmond are with injuries, I’d rest Clarry and BBB. Maybe even May. Use this as a block to get ourselves right for a solid period against Geelong and the Baggers

That’s why Hardwick got ‘tired’ of coaching and left to not be smeared with these type of losses

And fitness/conditioning.

He's a beautiful set shot but is lacking confidence this season, you can see it in his approach. I just think he is lacking confidence in his body at the moment. Get that right and he will be good to go, forward or back...

Agreed. Brisbanes midfield is very very good - if else we are going to be objective as a supporter base. Other teams may have the ideal of a blueprint just not the athletes to actually pull it off. We’ve been very very fortunate to have the players we have had in the midfield perform exceptionally consistently over many years now. This one (whilst consistent with trends/themes around clearances in 2024) felt like one out of the box.

I’ve owned Pit Bulls, Bull Terriers, French Bulldogs, and Tibetan Terriers. All loving, all very well behaved - because I trained them. The most lethal? The Frenchies. The farts. Unbelievable.

We have a young team, changing the way we play, and have question marks on some important players. This will not be an isolated problem for 2024.

Following on from my question: Can the panel discuss whether there are alternative, better approaches or strategies to fully utilise the list for these matches during the season when we know our best 22 will be 10% or even 20% below their usual output because of the fixture. For example, the following players were available this week: - Hunter (who has been best 22) was available, could he not have replaced Windsor who was understandably down on his past performance? - Laurie also available, could he not have replaced a tired and indeed injured Oliver? - He’s not “best 22” in normal circumstances, but could not Schache have come in for BBB who really looked exhausted this week (and that’s not to knock his performance the past few weeks)? You get the drift … Given the importance of fitness to the outcome of games these days as well as how well everyone is drilled on our systems, I just wonder whether we could more strategically use our second string of players to manage the long season.

I’d like to add Steven Icke to the list of great recruits from other clubs. Courage personified in a weak team. I guess you’d have to add Peter Moore, though he didn’t shine in the above feature. Brian Wilson, too, who helped get strong again in 1987.

So Dazz, I would be intrigued as to what u make of Jeffo??

A disappointing loss but not an unforeseen one given it was our third game in two weeks and we were coming up against a Premiership contender desperate to make a statement My question for you all is how much of the loss can be attributed to being physically exhausted after our Adelaide road trip vs the systemic problems that were identified around us consistently losing inside 50s, contested possessions and time in fwd half in our last few games? In other words, would simply having fresher legs allowed us to better employ the ‘Red and Blueprint’ binman has been discussing? Or were those statistical losses in our previous games a canary in the coal mine that pointed to larger issues and suggested we were playing in a way that wasn’t sustainable? Look forward to the discussion and go Dees 🔴🔵

What drives me nuts is how agreeable the media is with this decision and yet were nowhere to be seen with Maynard’s hit. Nobody was prepared to stick their neck out, which has to say something.