deanox

6 Lever 5 Melksham 4 Rivers 3 Viney 2 McVee 1 Petracca Apologies to Gawn, May, Brayshaw and ANB who all player vote worthy games. Even Roo is stiff, with 3 goals and some good ruck work.

Also, doing other things in your week is possible. They don't do this stuff instead of training and planning, they do it as well as.

With respect to "almost footballer": I think that's a bit harsh. He is doing ok for himself as a bloke who has played 175 games, and has a good shot at getting to 200 over the next couple of years. (ranked 915 out of all AFL/VFL players ever for games played, out of about 13000 players ever) I agree he has struggled with consistent positions though. A victim of his own versatility, and probably of changing game styles, list compositions and also his injury (the ACL).

I'm assuming this is a banner preview for his 200th game?

I don't understand why they don't do synchronised frame by frame from multiple angles. Like they do for "over the top of goal posts" or like how they do with edges in cricket. It would be clear as day that this wasn't touched if they lined up the two or three camera angles in synch.

If TMac is even serviceable tomorrow, I think he has to come in. He always takes a few games to find form, so better now than in the finals. I think Melksham is safe until Fritsch comes back. Although we could consider TMac, JVR and Grundy forward (Melksham out for TMac), Tomlinson/Hibber come in down back and Smith back to sub.

No way. The head coach reports to the GM of football. Effectively the CEO hires the GM of football to manage the head coach as well as other aspects of the football department.

6 weekends has him returning for prelim final. And it's a fracture in his knee, so my gut says he'll struggle to keep his fitness loads up during that time. For a first year player, that could be quite a drop off. Im concerned about Fritsch coming straight into finals without a match type run around. This is very worrying for the Pies as he has by far been their most important player this year (leading disposals, meters gained, score involvements, and 5th for goals amongst other stats).

Nah I reckon the Tiger made a mess of it.

Play for the free kick, get pinged for HTB

The Zone is lazy today. We're not working hard to get back and cover the spare that gets created when others push up. It's why there is constantly a free man ahead of the ball for the tigers.

Langdon having a shocker. Positioning, disposal, just struggling

It means that they don't have a lot of faith in Tomlinson playing well consistently, and are happy to throw Petty forward this week, then next week drop Tomlinson when he is slightly below par and swing Petty back and put Grundy forward after two strong weeks in the VFL. Edit: I think Tomlinson has been pretty good, but based on selection patterns this year the selection pattern don't think he is the answer.

I am absolutely shaken. This is the first time I have seen or heard anyone involved in AFL media use the word laconic correctly.

@Demonland and @binman on the pod there was discussion around why listing Grundy as omitted vs managed or soreness. I am pretty sure that the CBA requires players to continue to receive match payments when they were in the team, but are unavailable for selection due to injury. I would hazard a guess that this is part of the reasoning why clubs choose to manage players sometimes but omit other times. Unsure if it applies here.

Honestly, I had no idea, and couldn't find anything on the champion data website too describe it. But I found a research article published by researchers at Vic Uni (including a WB staffer) that stated Debits were points lost from dropped marks, no pressure errors, and missed tackles. So I think the champion data definition I quoted above is tautological.

Maybe they should listen to the Melbourne theme song over and over again in preparation for the match?

@joeboy I always enjoy your post because it's a great way to get a vibe and test my own thoughts against other thoughts quickly and easily. Whenever I disagree I always try to find an alternative three word assessment that captures my perception. It's harder than one would think! I can't imagine doing 23 each week.

Curse aside, it's a really interesting question. As drafting and recruitment gets better over time, there should be less speculation further down the draft board. But obviously luc, environment and development would play a big part in any drafting. I think what it really comes down to is how much of a lock the selected player is. At pick 1, there is often a standout, or maybe 2-3 in the convo. At pick 50 there might be 20 players in the conversation. So the likelihood of getting a good player may depend on when it starts opening up in any given year. In some years there are a clear top 3, then the next 4 might be not as clear cut. In the case 4 v 6 is going to be much more influenced by drafting nouse and development. If there is a clear top 4 though, then 4 v 6 is going is much more likely to be about skill/quality of the draftee.

Such a big game for our Swans!

Take that back sir.

I have been surprised with how we chose to deploy Gawn and Grundy this year, typically leaving one as a forward and one as a follower. I thought we may have tried to get both between the arcs, with one a kick behind play, offering two chop out options, but we never did it. With the recent form of Trac forward, I'm wondering if that offers an opportunity for playing two rucks like this. Effectively Gawn start at ruck (as does Track) and Grundy starts forward. However after the clearance, Petracca drifts forward and Grundy comes up the ground. It could create mismatches: does Grundys defender try to take Trac, leaving our opposition with an extra mid around the contest, but short string the ground? Yes we'd be one down at the contest, but with ANB and Spargo playing that high half forward role, we'd cover the extra running. And they wouldn't have proper cover for Grundy up the ground unless they run a tall defender with him.

Goody favourite could be translated as coaches favourite. To finish high in the bnf means 4 coaches are rating his game week in and out throughout the year. And he has multiple top 10 finishes. I can't see any reason why a coach wouldn't have players they rate for what they bring to the table, even if that's not outwardly obvious. I can understand "coaches favourite" being applied to someone who seemingly does nothing. But ANB clearly does. Even if he has flaws.

How's this for the dropped mark/clangers definition: Dropped Mark: An uncontested marking opportunity that is dropped, resulting in a contest at ground level. Does not include marking contests with an opposition spoil. Dropped marks inside 50 are recorded as clangers, however, they are only clangers in all other areas of the ground if you drop the mark and don’t pick the ball up again uncontested at ground level. So basically might be a clangers. Might not. Depends what happens after and where. I can see the reasoning but it also makes many stats genuinely useless. They are better off having extra stat categories to cover the different scenarios: Dropped mark possession retained without contest Dropped mark possession retained after ground ball contest Dropped mark possession lost

Nibbler had 5 clangers. Here is the definition of a clangers: Clanger: An error made by a player resulting in a negative result for his side. Disposal clangers are any kick or handball that directly turns the ball over to the opposition. Frees and 50-metre penalties against, No Pressure Errors, Dropped Marks and Debits are all included in clangers. Given he had 2 free kicks against, there was a maximum of 3 disposal related clangers. I have a recollection that he dropped a mark too, so perhaps it's only 2 disposal related clangers? Nibbler definitely isn't a one touch player, he is prone to fumbling at critical times (mostly because he has worked hard to get to the ball at those critical times). But the AFL definitions around effective disposal, disposal efficiency and clangers etc arent conducive to this type of analysis.