deanox

8th and 9th in the last two best and fairests, suggests that maybe you aren't sure what you are looking for? His defensive forward efforts and hard running were solid today. And he kicked a clutch goal.

Well we really worked hard to contain the overlap and spare man than quarter. Pushed them wide but cut off options back in board. We dominated possession that quarter, +14 contested possessions, +30 disposals, for the quarter.

Expected score at half time 33 - 27 our way. Inaccuracy letting us down again. Other stats supporting that we have a small edge in a close game, leading tackles, takes inside 50, marks inside 50, contested marks, clearances, and contested possessions. Collingwood with more disposals - 20 more handballs. There is a tactical battle with structures, Collingwood trying to get an overlap on the outside, which they then seem to use to cut inboard while we work to man back up. When they get it, they have scored. When we've denied it they have struggled to move the ball threateningly. Scoring a couple of goals from stoppages early was a real boon for them. Evenly poised, and it might come down to individual brilliance or team fitness.

I don't care where Essendon finish, as long as they don't win a final.

@binmanI've finally gotten around to the pod for this week. I had asked a question about sloppy vs pressure, and it has been talked about the game was actually low pressure based on the rating points. Reflecting further, I don't think the game was "high pressure" in the way the pressure rating measures (pressure on the ball carrier) but as described above I thought our work to set up structures, zones, etc was first rate, and that created indirect pressure (I guess you can call it). It's interesting because I thought that the way we played placed them under a lot of pressure: no where to go, not many options, forward thrusts neutered or repelled. But all without "pressure" according to champion data's definitions. They had 10+ turnovers more than their average. I think this was as much because we forced them to take low percentage options through great zone and defensive work, as anything else. So "pressure" was low, but we generated turnovers through structure. This is probably the best case scenario for Goody and the team. Our strategy (zone) results in turnovers without the aerobic effort to apply manic pressure. Both are needed against great teams and in finals. But it's important to get the first one working.

This is really salient. Historically AFL was pretty light on for strategy: get ball and bang it forward. So throwing around the magnets was a genuine tactical move that made sense. Nowadays, the equivalent of throwing magnets around is more likely to be getting your wingers to hang back defensively, pushing an extra HFF closer to the midfield stoppages, or maybe having your ruck dropping back deeper to cover the D50 instead of the half back line. Ok so sometimes there is a swing man, but it's often more of a hail Mary (like Petty forward in last year's finals).

Was he a mystery injury withdrawal? I don't think he is a listed injury is he? And he has played recent weeks with Casey.

I haven't watched Casey play this year and would appreciate the thoughts of anyone who has regarding Jefferson. He has kicked 14 goals in 11 games this year, but not been named in the best players yet. I feel that a knack for finding goals is a good trait for a forward, even if he isn't earning them the traditional way (contested marks etc). Wondering how we think he is developing?

Love this quote: "Coach Simon Goodwin is letting this team play different styles for minutes, quarters and full matches." The author has clearly recognised that we've been experimenting tactically this year. Also this: "They’re ranked third for marks inside 50s..." Combined with being the second highest scoring team for the season, it really makes it hard to understand people who are calling the forward line a disaster.

I'm in redlegs, Level 2 Punt Rd end directly behind the goals. I've sat there as standard as long as I can remember. The view of the structures and zone moving up the field, how it shifts side to side, and even how we lengthen it at times, is really clear there. Against Carlton was a mile ahead of anything else I've seen us do this year. I was surprised to see the pressure rating low because of how well we were constantly setting up, shifting and forcing them to just stop. I guess that running hard to space to set up a defensive zone doesn't qualify as a "pressure act" for the purpose of preasure points because it isn't about directly pressuring the ball carrier. I wasn't surprised that Goody was happy with what he saw. Last time I sat on the true wing I was really frustrated. It's better than TV, but it is so hard to see what's happening with shape.

I think some people don't see the forest for the trees. And subconsciously expect us to win every single game. 2021 was out best season since 1964. 2022 was our 2nd best home and away season since 1964 as well! In 2018 we were 8-4 after 12 games, but with a lower percentage and we were 5th not 3rd. There are only a couple of other seasons since 1964 that we have passed the half way point in a better position. We're doing ok and should try enjoying it. We've earnt it!

We've also been experimenting with throwing two very deep (ie one in the goal swaure and one next to it), something I haven't seen other teams doing. @DemonWA and @IRW in modern footy, there aren't really many "throw the magnets around" type in game tactical moves anymore, because the game is too professional, and because a lot of the time the reason a team is losing is because they aren't playing their game plan right, not because the match ups are wrong. Throwing things around confuses everyone on the field, destroying zones and structures, disrupting team harmony. But examples this year have included Petty forward (as well as trialling TMac and BBB, plus Smith), McVee's role in the back 6, the various ways we've used Gulrundy and Gawn, etc.

Bolton is a genuine match winner isn't he?

That looked like it changed direction off the post.

No wonder Jackson was hell bent on Freo.

@kev martin thanks for your report! Do you think this implies we were pushing the fitness work a bit harder than a usual mid week session?

I know we can bemoan lack of depth at times. But that Casey side would push some of the Melbourne sides I've seen us out on the park over the years!

2023 looks much more like 2022 so far, with the mid year dip But really in 2022 it's the trailing away from round 17 that looks like the problem. It looks like we loaded but injuries and fatigue etc caught up to us. It bodes well if we've made changes this year.

I don't know how relevant or reliable this date is, but if you look at our "total KMs" and "KMs at high speed" per game this year this is a distinct drop off in round 10-12 (so starting from the Port game). So there are lots of factors that would influence this stat: size of ground, style of play, weather, opposition game style, length of break, travel, accumulated fatigue etc. It could be an indicator that we increased some load that week. I'll be interested to watch these stats in the coming weeks to see if there are any trends. Round - Total KMs - KMs at high speed R1 288 43 R2 293 35 R3 284 44 R4 276 40 R5 289 43 R6 283 43 R7 294 45 R8 292 43 R9 284 47 R10 273 36 R11 276 37 R12 272 40 Data is available on the AFL app under "Tracker", including opposition data. Sorry I'm on my phone so can't graph nicely!

I'd be open to a red card system only with a couple of caveats: - It needs to be administered by a live, offfield MRO, not on field umpire and not a powerless "tv ref". Red card must also equal suspension/tribunal. We can't have MRO downgrading a red card incident after the fact. -Intentional assault type, off the ball, can be a red card. -In play activities should only be red card if another player is ruled out of the game through injury as a result of the reportable action.

Hawthorn are so bad the AFL app is trying to time travel back to 2015 for them.

I hate to spoil you fun, but we have lost a few on King's birthday. Fair to say we've never lost to Collingwood on King's Birthday though! http://demonwiki.org/Queens+Birthday

I think I was trying to say that I was judging him as not being on top of his game too, and then realised that's because my expectations for him had gotten so much higher. If he played that hasn't in the first couple of rounds I'd probably have been pretty happy.

I was thinking during the game: Wow my expectations of Rivers have significantly increased, given I think he is playing just ok tonight. He had equal 5th disposals on the ground, and equal third for demons.

On the footy field, skills can be poor because they are executed badly, or skills can be poor because they are executed under pressure. Was the Blues match a "high pressure" match or a "sloppy, low skilled" match? What statistics would guide/justify your assessment?