deanox

Coach 1: 5 Gawn 4 Quaynor/Crisp 3 Petracca 2 Sidebottom 1 Crisp/Quaynor Coach 2: 5 Crisp/Quaynor 4 Hill 3 Gawn 2 Quaynor/Crisp 1 Oliver

If Lachie Hunter (who had effectively stopped moving and trapped the ball) has a duty of care to Rozee that extends beyond stopping all momentum, then Maynard has a duty of care to Brayshaw when attempting to touch the ball too.

Me too. I've been really flat since the game. I thought at first it was because we lost. But I actually think it was this incident and the response of the Collingwood crowd that left me feeling this way.

Here is some info: https://www.championdata.com/glossary/afl/ (check under P) Pressure Factor: Pressure points per pressure chance. Measure only at the team level. Pressure Chances: The number of opportunities a team had to apply pressure i.e. opposition disposals, including tackles that prevent an opposition disposal. The description seems pretty cloudy, but best interpretation is: Total pressure points / opposition possessions Where possessions include every time an opponent gets the ball, whether they dispose of it or not. This implies that if no pressure is applied at all, then potentially it is factored as 0. But the definition of corralling is so lenient that I think someone would always be corralling. I wonder if standing on the mark is corralling for the purpose of this calculation? Pressure Act (Corralling): The lowest form of pressure a player can apply, where they are simply occupying space in front of the ball carrier to prevent them moving forward, or have a run at them, but not quickly enough to record ‘closing’ pressure.

I am pretty sure "Pressure Factor" (the whole team one) is the average of all pressure acts. The lowest pressure act you can do is corralling, so that's why 120 is the lowest possible score. It seems sensible that if a player has the ball in space with no pressure act applied by an opponent, that doesn't contribute a 0 to the calculation. The team factor would only average the actual recorded pressure acts. If one team plays lots of "contested football" e.g. short chipping to free players, there are no relevant pressure acts during that period. Maybe there is a bit of low pressure acts with some chasing etc before hitting up a lead. But if the ball hits the deck and there is a tackle, then pressure factor is super high, because this game style means there are less opportunities for pressure acts, but they are high value in the points system. We play a scrappy game with lots of contested ball winning, ground ball gets etc. So our opponents pressure will naturally trend upwward because the game is played in tight and there is more physical pressure. I think this is why the Pressure Factor for both teams tend to track closely: Pressure Factor is more an indicator of game style than actual pressure.

i was, but swapped from chrome to edge and it cleared up.

I'm not an MCC member so have no skin in the game, but surely actual members should get priority to visitors tickets for big matches like this?

I really think "team pressure" is a weird stat that is named wrong. The pressure score is not the total amount of pressure applied, but it is the average type of pressure when pressure is applied. So every pressure act gets a score of 3.75, 2.25, 1.5, 1.2. All pressure acts are averaged. And then multiplied by 100 to give the pressure score. So 180 means that the average score was 1.8, somewhere between closing and chasing. I don't believe that "no pressure situations" count as 0 or similar. So the score will always be between 120 and 375. Basically the "team pressure" stat is situational. For example, there are times when corralling is better than commiting to a tackle because it slows the player down and forces them to kick down the line. If an opposition plays tight in close we can get lots of tackles and our "team pressure" goes up. If they play wide and uncontested, we are more likely to coral and chase and our "team pressure" goes down So "team pressure" is more about game style and game situation. "Team pressure" is a measure of "is the average pressure situation more physical or less?". Not a measure of how much and how often pressure is applied. I do think that "total pressure acts" and "sum of individual player pressure points" gives a better measure of pressure as a function of work rate for the game. But also, if the number of those acts are up versus average, then we probably don't have the ball.

"Made him earn it" is actually code for created a realistic and significant physical threat that most of the time is just hard physical impact but also has the potential to cause serious injury. "Made him earn it" completely disregards duty of care.

In Maynard's defense I felt he hung near Angus trying to check on him. And I don't believe he intended to do this kind of harm. But it's a bit like the bloke who throws a shove or a punch at a pub and then gets a shock when his victim drops. Of course he didn't mean to knock them into next week but when you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. Maynard deliberately tried to put physical pressure on the kicker. And did it in a careless, uncontrolled manner that resulted in concussion.

It was the anniversary of Danny Frawleys death yesterday. I'm sure these issues are resonating around the Brayshaw household (his wife Danielle is Danny Frawleys's daughter). I hope they are holding together.

Genuinely no weak links in this squad. Even the "lesser lights" are seriously good.

Give her the 3 votes already

Injuries.

Honestly I love Demonland, with its literary and graphic design critique of opposition banners.

I agree with that completely. I'm actually less concerned about "where our goals will come from" than "how we will generate scoring opportunities once inside 50 by nullifying opposition defenders". It's why I don't think Turner forward is a terrible idea. Telling him to play as a tall defender but in the F50 actually might achieve what we need to achieve in bringing the ball to ground and creating opportunities. That's what Melk brought.

Just as an aside, Melbourne has only seven players who have kicked more than 12 goals this entire season. Only 2 of those are missing next week: JVR and Melksham. Those seven have played a combined 141 games this year out of 168 possible. So on average, less than six of the seven have played each week. Yeah it's not great, but this year our goals have come from everywhere not from a small group of key players. And that will need to be the plan next week.

6 Gawn 5 Oliver 4 May 3 ANB 2 Petracca 1 Langdon

It's almost like something had a lasting affect in your immune system...

You'd assume that Hunter and Langdon are sure things for an extension due to age and FA status. So really it's just Bowey and Sparrow that I'm sweating on for next year. And Petty and JVR for 2025. Sure it'd be nice to keep Jordan and Laurie, but at this point neither are critical. Pretty amazing really.

I think the AFL decision for a Thursday game is the problem. If either game was Friday night instead, these players could probably get a run. That would improve the quality of the AFL finals and the VFL product too (obviously less important to them)

I'm not MCC but I understand a big selling point is "you're a member of the MCC so have the opportunity to attend any event". If you limit ticket sales to club support members only it limits that benefit, so it is a major change. I suspect there are many casual AFL supporters amongst MCC members who just love sport, and attend a variety of club games each year. But I do think it would make it a better spectacle and atmosphere if that could be achieved. Perhaps a similar ballot system could be used but with increased chance of getting tickets if you are a club support member rather than an absolute priority? For AFL members, I absolutely think the club supporters should get first access.

And/Or do tickets as a ballot system for club members. Enter your barcodes and your credit cards. Choose your preferred seating option, then click submit. Once the ballot period closes, the computer randomly selects ballot winners and allocates them tickets and charges their credit card, finalising the purchase. This way we aren't dependent on internet connections to try to get live access to their system to buy tickets, we only have one person per group transaction entering details. Ballot can be allocated in priority if they want. Any unallocated tickets after ballot can then be opened for public sale.

We had 9 players under 24 playing last weekend, and ask holding their spot pretty well (Laurie is really the only one of the 9 who is still finding his spot). And then you can add Petty and potentially Spargo to our under 24 squad. So we've got a nucleus of a future squad, but do need to add a whole group more. I can see the benefit of loading on up a super star at pick 1 to help carry that next group through, knowing that we'll be able to fill a few more holes in the 25-28 year old bracket with free agency as our older superstars contracts end.

I suspect that might also cover things like medallion club?