deanox

The club would have a whole bunch of other stats, which I'm pretty sure champion data records but doesn't release. I haven't seen the stats but I would expect measures like: Total tackle attempts: self explanatory Ineffective tackles: the tackle sticks but they get an effective disposal Broken tackle: physical contact is made but the attacker breaks free Missed tackle: player tried to tackle but doesn't grasp or gets side stepped or tries with one arm only. They'd also have data on the types of "pressure act" like corralling a player with a ball, instead of just group them all in as "pressure acts".

Gee when you look at that league it really doesn't make sense why they aren't playing a reserves comp. 14 of the AFL clubs are effectively fielding a reserves team either directly or by proxy, and they are travelling across three states. Take them out and you still almost have a full VFL grade with 7 standalones. Also, why do 3 clubs have a bye? Surely this comp should be playing as many games as possible to ensure that AFL stand by players are match fit and in form? Anyway, good luck Casey!

The way the record tackles isn't always consistent with what supporters expect either. The official definition is: Using physical contact to prevent an opponent in possession of the ball from getting an effective disposal. And Effective Disposals are defined as: A handball to a teammate that hits the intended target; or A kick of more than 40 metres to a 50/50 contest or better for the team or a kick of less than 40 metres that results in the intended target retaining possession. So if you grab and take someone to ground or spin then around and around, but they handball off, it isn't recorded as a tackle. This happens a lot in close quarters. If they slap it on the boot as you tackle and it goes 40 m it probably isn't a tackle. If you gang tackle, everyone involved gets a stat. So it is possible we are creating pressure without getting credited with tackles. Corralling players into ineffective disposal perhaps. Or tackling players unsuccessfully (they handball off but still creates pressure) and then the final player fumbles without the tackle being applied. Or perhaps we are starting out of the contest and having one person tackles instead of 2 or 3 person tackles. Unfortunately, it's a case of "they don't give us the real stats".

Either way, Demonland and the MFC pales into significance vs the 40,000 years of our first nations people which is why it's great we are renaming ourselves Narrm as a way of showing our respects and helping the continuation of that culture!

Aimoo. Much nostalgia. 💀😭

Pretty sure it's been there since about 2003!

That's for clarifying WCW! I guess I'm saying that by continuing to use the name in our chants it potentially has the same effect. I can see the position that Barmy Army related chant might be an issue, and would completely respect that position. I'm not in a position to be able to judge or approve that so would be guided.

New idea: Sub can be used for any injury, with no penalty (ie doesn't need to miss a week), BUT can only be activated in the first half (ie sub needs to enter the field before half time). The complaint is often that if you get an injury it gets very hard to compete as you lose rotations and the players get tired. Meaning the game is unbalanced and not fair. But obviously an injury in the last quarter isn't a big impact on rotations, but an injury in the first quarter is. So replacing an injured player in the first half helps take the "luck" or unfortunate random occurance out of injury affecting results. Of course you could still lose a key positional player, but you have 3 other interchange players to cover that.

I'm not sure that makes any sense at all. I clearly said it would need to be checked off by the appropriate groups. That isn't sh*ts and giggles, that's respectful. By adopting the name Narrm, we make it clear we are proud to be associated with this culture. For our supporters to adopt this language and placename to describe themselves who be as a badge of honour and be promoting it outside of the official indigenous round, demonstrating its importance. It doesn't make light at all.

Me too. I'd hope we could get it ticked off (that Naarmy doesn't change the meaning some way), but if all clear it would make me proud to roll this into our regular cheer squad chants.

Our crowds relative to everyone else are relevant insomuch as they allow us to compare apples with apples: crowds in 2022. I have just told you that we are currently exceeding our best ever season average, outside of '61-64. So apples v apples says this is the best Melbourne supports have ever done. In 2016 we averaged 31k per home game, this year it's 41k per game. So Melbourne supporters are turning up lots more than previously. In 2016 we had the 11th highest average home crowd in the comp, this year we are 4th highest. This shows that our improvement outstrips the other clubs, so it isn't just natural increase with time. Would you only be happy if we were first? Because we won't be. Probably never, but at best not for decades until we build the support.

Our average home game attendance this year is higher than the best seasons' average home game attendance EVER achieved by 10 sides: Hawthorn, Geelong, Brisbane, Fremantle, Footscray, St Kilda, North Melbourne, Sydney, GWS, GCS! It is equivalent to the top few seasons ever for Port Adelaide, West Coast, Carlton. And that includes a "shocker" crowd against GWS. Obviously Collingwood, Essendon, Richmond and Adelaide are way out in front. It'll probably drop a bit. We have home games against 4 interstate teams to come, including one at Trager Park. And our two marquee games this year (Anzac and QBDY) are away games, costing us probably ~5k in "average" attendance. More stats that show it is actually going well.

That may be one of the silliest things I've ever read on Demonland. No one is missing out on games at smaller venues because it is a sell out.

Here is another stat for you all. In 2022 Melbourne FC is tracking towards its HIGHEST EVER AVERAGE HOME GAME CROWD. So how about we start talking about how great it is to see our premiership success translate into bums on seats despite the pandemic? https://afltables.com/afl/crowds/melbourne.html Edit: perhaps "highest of the modern era" is a better statement. We are still going to be the below the attendance numbers of '61-'64.

It was only 700 behind the highest crowd for the round (Carlton v north). So maybe ask a different question: "What is the AFL going to do about lackluster crowds?" This isn't an MFC issue. For context, all year we have been the 2nd or 3rd most attended game of the round, except for the GWS game (no surprises). Again this shows we are actually doing pretty well. In round 7 we were the 3rd highest crowd (only 5 ppl off being the 2nd). In round 6, the 2nd highest crowd. Round 5, we were very low, vs GWS though. Round 4, away in Adelaide. Round 3, 3rd highest (pies v cats and blues v hawks were bigger) Round 2, away in Gold Coast. Round 1, 2nd highest for the round. I'm not sure why people think success means we magic 80k potential attendees over night.

Oh I'd absolutely have those 5 at the top. I was more noting the difference between a system that scores everyone vs top 3, 5 or 6. I don't think (for example) Fritsch has been "not-good". I dont think he's bean that much worse than Harmes. I also think Jackson has probably been much better than Harmes on average as well. Just the pros and cons of each system. And also the consistent dominance of Oliver, Gawn and Track.

I really feel like we've had great, all round contributions this year across the board but it's amazing to see Oliver, and to a lesser extent the top 4, so far out in front. It's also interesting to see Fritsch (our leading goal scorer), ANB, Kossi, Sparrow and Petty so low on votes overall. I reckon the BnF (where each player gets points each week) would look a lot different at this stage of the season.

I've said this a couple of times in the crowds related thread, good to see others noticing the same thing!

"Kick it!" "Just kick it!" "Oh stopping fluffing around and just KICK IT!!!!!!!" ... "Awwwww who'd you kick that to!??!?!?!"

Sitting behind the goals it was really interesting how Hawthorn tried pierce our zone by repeated switching. In the first it worked really well. And they kept troubling us all day. Similarly When running out of defence they did a good job of getting out of our zone, often having overlap players on the outside and then switching back over the heads of our guys who were slow to come across. I really thought that the loss of ANBs relentless work and Kosi's harrassing was a big part of this. Bedford tried but wasn't as effective. Melksham had his moments but doesn't have the defensive workrate. I really think those two are critical for our structure and it will be interesting to see if teams try to counter our structure by taking those two out of it in future games.

I reckon every time they play together with Brown we get the same nil all result.

6 Max 5 Tracca 4 Oliver 3 May 2 Brown 1 Bedford Big apologies to Viney, Hunt, Bowser and Brayshaw.

Viney, Lever, TMac, Hibbo, Tomlinson, Melksham, Daw, Mitch Brown That's 8 experienced and/or high quality players waiting in the wings right now as reasonable replacements. Plus some kids in Bedford, Chandler, Rodman, Laurie, Van Rooyen who aren't really best 22 but are developing along and would probably be getting a game in other AFL sides. Now is a good time to get covid in the club with virtually no injuries. Depending on who is out, we could lose 3-6 players and still compete/win.

We could be shorter odds to win the flag than our next game. I wonder if that has ever happened?

I haven't confirmed but I think Tom Mitchell may have actually managed this in his 137 game last year (seemingly under the radar news wise). So he'd need to average 41 per game to equal him.