deanox

To expand on this, it felt like we scored a lot from intercepts/ turnovers/ rebounds/ counter attack although I haven't seen that stat specifically. In the tough fought games (including our losses) we definitely struggled to generate scores fullstop. So are we too reliant on opposition mistakes (forced through our pressure, structure, zone etc or unforced?) without enough means of generating as scores ourselves? Or (as we saw in the opening minute with Kossies goal) is it just about whether we are on?

I tend to agree, except we've had plenty of other weeks where we could have done a similar thing (a relatively low grade injury that the player has played the game out on reduced minutes). I thought the evidence of potential "impact" was worth a highlight. Maybe not worthy of the pod, unless we do it again in finals week 1!

James Jordan only played 10 minutes but Telstra Tracker said he was our hardest working in attack for the match (obviously because he was fresh and could run hard). This use of the sub isn't something we've really seen from Goody this year. Will we see more use of the "super sub" in September? (Might be a question for next podcast)

I agree that Gawn might take votes off him, but when it comes to the coaches votes I think they often recognise unheralded players who played very well, including defenders, and those in opposition. Those guys don't get Brownlow votes, so as the 4th or 5th best player on the field Clarry might still get the 2 votes as the best midfielder in the winning side.

I'd like him to win the Brownlow though (and our BnF and AA of course). That would give him 4 Blueys, 2 AAs, 2 AFLCA awards, and a Charlie in only 7 years (and at age 25). And solidify his place as one of our greatest ever.

He is neck and neck with Petracca in the AFLCA champion player award with try games to go, and 2 votes behind Touk Miller and Lachie Neale. Neale shouldn't poll much in the last 2 rounds. No idea how Miller will poll as he was the GCS best when they got belted by Geelong, and a couple will take votes off him this week Sexton 6 goals, Swallow, Anderson both 30+ touches). Whereas id expect Clarry will poll a few both weeks. So it's tight there with both Track and Clarry probably finishing top 3.

Reminiscent of the Selwood/Headland incident. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/a-sledge-too-far-or-a-blunder-in-the-heat-of-battle-20070418-ge4orf.html

Could be distracted by the Petty issue or could be focused on finals because that is all that counts.

https://www.liveladders.com/AFL/ check here

Jordan covered 14.6 km last week, our 3rd highest, including 2.6 km at high speed (over 18km per hour), our 2nd highest.

It sure was complicated https://www.draftguru.com.au/trades/2015-jeremy-howe-ben-kennedy-paul-seedsman-jimmy-toumpas

There was a discussion about crowds, focussing on the last two weeks. It's worth noting that we are 5th on the list for average home crowds in 2022 with 39200. However take out our home game in Alice Springs and we average 42500, putting us 4th behind only Collingwood, Richmond and Carlton (all between 45900 and 48600). https://afltables.com/afl/crowds/2022.html Turns out the Demons have been turning up!

I wonder if the full zone is more effective, but more taxing so we shift deeper during the earlier stages of the year (including during loading) and we'll see the zone get closer to our goal as we get closer to finals.

I think this has been recurring in a lot of stats and discussion around the effectiveness of our small forwards. I've wondered if it was a factor of the following: - Lack of continuity with our tall KPD players (Petty (6), Lever (5), May (2)) all missing games, been unfit/injured etc. When these 3 aren't set, we need to defend deeper because we can't rely on their reading and impact contests. - Langdon missed 1 and the effect on our zone showed - TMac has missed 10, Brown has missed 5. Last year with both playing, they linked up the field and delivered i50 to the other. With only one most of the year, have the smalls (and thus our forward zone) had to play higher/deeper?

Just let that sink in.

Between this, and the other messages from the club in the last week, I think we've got a clear strategy on how to manage this. Radical empathy. We're not going to pressure the kid. It's his decision and we'll put a case forward at negotiations, but more importantly he is part of the team and enjoys being here. If he leaves that next year fine, but while he is here enjoy it. This demonstration of cultural excellence and empathy, is a big counter offer in itself when the other club and media are heaping pressure on you.

Yeah the patches looked bad and you could see how different they were underfoot. I recall the commentators describing the patches as being slick on top and hard/dry underneath compared to the existing surrounds, which were soft and waterlogged right down deep due to longer term rain in recent weeks. They said it was noticeable walking across it I cringed everytime someone ran across it.

Just to add to our "forward half concerns: After 19 games we've scored 22 points more than last year. And we've only had 16 more points scored against us. Our percentage is slightly higher than this time last year. So interestingly the woes haven't resulted in less scoring, or more scoring gainst due to the ball bouncing out fast. Attached is the top 10 this year so far. I cant find the same list for last year to compare who has dropped out and who has come in.

How much impact do you think the weather has? For example we only took 64 marks (vs 99 when we played Adelaide) and part of that is probably weather. Are marks rated high points? Are there other stats that might be affected by the weather are kicking efficiency (bombing it long affecting effective disposals)?

I've found that I often get surprised by the TOG% stats because they way they were sitting at half or 3/4 time are very different than end stats. I think if someone was interested and dedicated, they could use the AFL app and manually record them after each quarter and back calculate. It's not something I'd encourage every week, but a sample size might reveal a few trends.

One thing is that he might get a hard wrap on here but the collective will of all MFC supporters just want him to succeed. To heat the crowd yell "Weid!" in unison when he takes a mark or kicks a goal is fabulous, and I hope gives him a feeling of support and encouragement.

And was charged with staging during the 2nd quarter! Anyone have the vision?

1. I'd argue that what you described isn't "out on the full" because the player didn't actually kick the ball (the definition of "kick" in the rules includes both disposing the ball and contact below the knee). But instead should be a free kick against the player who handballed under Law 18.10.2 b) 18.10 OUT OF BOUNDS 18.10.1 Spirit and Intention Players shall be encouraged to keep the football in play. 18.10.2 Free Kicks - Out of Bounds A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player who: (a) Kicks the football Out of Bounds On the Full; (b) Kicks, Handballs or forces the football over the Boundary Line andd oes not demonstrate sufficient intent to keep the football in play; or ... 2. Handballing into space doesn't seem to be cheating? The onus is definitely on a player to correctly tackle a player with the ball, and if they dispose of the ball legally - whether to a team mate or space - the outcome is the same. I do think that if someone is tackled right as they handball it then that probably play on, not a free kick for holding the man. So this is more about umpires feel for the game rather than players cheating. 3. Blatent cheating. This is against Law 18.2.2.

I'm pretty sure one of the players (Petty?) did this late in 3rd when we had the ball deep as well. Brought back good memories.

I think I understand what you mean. The game has rules, and using them is legitimate. But I don't think this is about exploiting rules tactically, I think this is about going against the spirit of the game and rules. And the spirit is specifically listed in those Laws: 18.3 PROHIBITED CONTACT 18.3.1 Spirit and Intention A Player who makes the football their sole objective shall be provided every opportunity to do so. 18.3.2 Free Kicks - Prohibited Contact A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player when that Player makes any of the following Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player: ... (c) makes high contact to an opposition Player (including the top of the shoulders) with any part of their body; When a player deliberately causes a tackler to make prohibited contact, the football is no longer their sole objective, instead their objective is to try to draw a free kick. The tackler has not - through their action - inhibited the players' opportunity to win the football. The player chose to forfeit their opportunity to make the football their sole objective, so arguably the rule isn't intended to apply. So even if it's not cheating, it definitely goes against the spirit of the game and therefore the rule.