deanox

Rjay, Hogan, is 10+ kg heavier than King but ~5 cm shorter. He is also a year older, has had an extra season and preseason on the list and was touted as a potential pick 1. I think that statement applies to the tall skinny types, which King is, rather than the ready to go man children. Putting it in perspective at the start of the year, Spencer played ruck and Gawn played ruck/forward for Casey. So where could King, as a lanky 200 cm ruck/forward play? Then Jamar went back and still Casey already had two rucks. King has obviously performed at development league level where he had kicked 14 goals in 5 games to be leading the competition goal kicking and been named in the best 3 times. I agree he wants some games at VFL level and that's why I'm asking if someone who had seen him a bit this year thinks he is kicking goals due to playing well or just due to being tall. If he takes two more years to make his AFL debut I'm not fussed, as long as he continues to improve in that time.

Thanks KC. I'm excited to see King continue to kick goals. IMO forward/ruck is a real key position in modern footy, very valuable of you get it right. And if King could develop into that player in the AFL in the next 3 years I'd be very happy. Can you tell me if he is kicking goals because he is playing smart forward footy, if he marks well and reads the ball well? Does he contribute in other ways around the ground? Or is it just that he is very tall and playing development league. Big guys take time. At 19 years old, 200 cm and only 90 kg, I don't mind if he needs 2 more years to put some weight on and play consistently in the seniors, but just wondering if he is looking promising in the right way.

Pretty sure the players know the teams before hand in most cases mate. Obviously fitness tests, match ups etc. might change things but the players will know what is going on.

King would be getting a run in the seniors if we didn't have both Jamar and Spencer there. Hope he gets a run up there soon.

Breggsy that variable could be as obscure as weather, number of days between matches, home ground advantage etc. But I don't believe any stat (except goals scored) would correlated so well with margin. CP is a joke stat. People think of contested as tough and hard and uncontested as loose and soft. It is anything but. Gut running 150 m to make space and beat your opponent and their zone to win 30 m gain by making it is an uncontested possession. Picking up a loose bouncing ball inside your defensive 50 that was bombed long, while no opposition player is within 25 m is a contested possession. There are plenty of anomalies in statistics but at its core uncontested possession is a measure of how well you keep possession of the ball once you have won it. And that is the main driver in the modern game.

I agree with your first but not the second. He will get paid more at Melbourne than elsewhere. If we think he can be used to upgrade our midfield then I think we'll only offer him market value and let him try his luck.

Sorry you are right re FA. Same principle applies though. If the pick we will get is tradable for a quality mid then i don't mind if he goes.

I disagree strongly. This correlation existed for 22 games last year as well. The stat shows which team is able to pay the game on their terms, to their plan. The Big Question is: does UP differential drive the score, or does the score drive UP? Well it is safe to safe the second isn't correct. Kicking a score ends you UP chain either giving the opposition the ball or moving to a CP at the bounce. There may be other ways to increase score (i.e. constant kicking to contest, contesting marking etc. ) but these don't correlate with score anywhere nearly as well. The are other ways of increasing UP i.e. chipping around in the backline back and forth but in the average game that only accounts for a small % of UPs and when you eventually cough it up the opposition will have a chain of UPs as they score, evening it out.

Tradable. He is best 22. But if we can trade him for a player, or for a pick which is on traded for an experienced player (maybe as a package) that nets us a starting 6 midfielder then I'd take that. He isa solid player and part of the starting team but the back line is well stocked with a couple coming through. The midfield is undermanned.

If anyone doesn't realise the importance of UP after that graph (and last year's graph) then they aren't worth talking footy with! If be very interested to see if it holds up for all matches with all teams (I expect it would) and I'd also be interested to know if any other stat correlated that well. Have you identified what other stats that get published publicly tend to go hand in hand with UP? I assume UP marks, and DE% is related, but obviously not critical. I have a gut feeling that the GPS numbers (i.e. km run by midfielders) would be a direct correlation to UP.

Agree. Most of the rules make perfect sense as written. The problem seems to be the "changing interpretation to influence a specific scenario". You shouldn't need interpretations, the rules are written!

I did it for a few years. It was quite enjoyable. The biggest problem was that you were told specific ways to interpret events. Instead of umpiring what (I felt) was a natural interpretation.

They get it mostly right in Rugby union. "Dangerous tackle" not "over the shoulder high contact". Incidental contact is play on. If either the act or the contact is dangerous, then pay a free.

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2015-06-01/duck-season-is-over While i don't mind that they are doing something about this, the decision to make it prior opportunity is guaranteed to result in some inexplicable umpiring decisions this week, and for the rest of the season. The only reasonable change in interpretation was "if a player contributes to a high tackle on then it will be called play on". Anyone trying to burst through should already be considered to have had prior opportunity so that interpretation wasn't needed.

Is there a legal way to watch online? Normally I get to a pub with foxtel but can't today.

Have they officially had any late withdrawals yet?

We started the week at $4.40. What happened?

Not what i said either. I don't want Jones and bail in the midfield. And they didn't play there last week anyway. It is easier to sub someone into the game than out. Injuries happen. If Viney isn't ready for 120 minutes then he starts as sub, you can't plan for him to come off. Too many variables. Last week we had an inside mid as the sub thus it aligns and won't upset team balance at all. PF, your last post doesn't make much sense.

Why would you assume Jones sub? I'd be more inclined to make the guy return from a month off with a broken leg the sub.

While I have no problem with broadcasters getting first go, surely anti siphoning laws should state that if the broadcaster chooses not to show it, it becomes fair game?

Also needs to be noted that Bail and Jones played forward week while the two ins will pay mid and back respectively. Dropping them would require a major reshuffle. Viney for Riley is like for like.

Selection based on positions.

I wonder if these 2 and 3 years deals were significantly front ended? We didn't have anyone to pay the salary cap to, so it is easy to front end the contact, pay the cap, save the cash for bigger fish in future years and it is reasonably cheap to pay players out later if needed.

IMO Spencer's dominance was unrelated to the other ruck, it was about how he attacked the footy once it hit the ground. He used his strength and athleticism to win ground balls against other mids. If he keeps attack the contest like that, taking the game on and kicking to the first option when he gets the ball (instead of holding it to look for a handball) he will be successful. A bigger stronger better ruck may negate him somewhat but his attack will still be effective where he had the right position.

Didn't get a great view of the hit on Jones. Any thoughts? Also, did anyone notice we went man on man at kick outs after behinds?