titan_uranus

9 minutes ago, dees189227 said:

That's a great win by Port. Cats fans have no right to complain about umpiring. You let port get out to a 49 point lead.

Cats now dropped 2 in a row 

Did you read Demonland last night? 

3 hours ago, binman said:

Personnel helps that's for sure.

But I agree with hoyne their system is flawed.

I mean they gave up  17 scoring shots in the second half (by way of contrast the cats only had 14 in their second half in their high scoring win over the blues).

They had a 38 point lead halfway through the third quarter and on a slippery night almost got run down.

And a big factor in that was they were all over the place marking tracc. I was sitting at the punt road end (the end we were kickimg to in the last q) and had blues fans around me screaming at them in the last to man tracc up and stop leaving him all alone so often.

It was bizarre. Their structure was all over the place.

Blokes on fire and they were frequently letting him to sit out the back free. And we got ot to him multiple times.

Almost cost them the game.

The best I'll accept is that it's a mix of both but the way in which people suggested it was nothing to do with missing players was ridiculous. They may still have defensive weaknesses but they aren't the same if they have Kemp and McGovern instead of Young and Williams.

On a side note, I had Carlton fans sitting around me who spent the whole game expecting us to run them down and the final 10 minutes convinced we'd lose. There must be a CFCSS which is worse than MCFSS!

3 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

This needs to be a 10+ goal victory to make up for last night. No excuses, no mucking around. Get to work and get it done. We need to get on a 5-6 win run to bolster top 4 chances. Top 2 is almost out of reach atm. Cats and Sydney wont be dropping many more games from here. 

Have you been watching West Coast lately?

Their recent form at home includes a win over a top 8 side (Fremantle), a close loss to a top 8 side (Essendon), and a win over Richmond.

Prior to that run, they led Sydney away from home for a half and lost by 26.

A 10+ goal margin is far too high of a bar. Right now, West Coast in Perth is not a walk in the park.

3 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Toby Greene's 3 times the footballer, and I'd probably rather Jake Waterman, Will Hayward, Ollie Henry, more complete players who provide more than goals.

Good second half for Fritsch, but why did it take a new role for him when he had the easy match up for a half and could've found the ball if he was willing to lead up every now and then and provide anything more than a witches hats effort when the ball hit the deck?

Fine if it was a one-off but he was the same against Geelong, the same against Richmond. He's too talented and vital to just be Bayley the Goose out the back for half a game each week. And if that's what he'll be we may as well have him as sub so someone else can have a go for the first half.

There's no denying he's our most talented forward but he can't have invisible halves with really poor effort level. And I get the supply is bad and the forward line dysfunctional but he has chances to impact and doesn't give it his best.

As much as your posts often take the extreme view of things, there's definitely merit to your views on Fritsch. Last night he showed the poor parts of his game too often: lazy/soft when it hits the deck, and playing from behind far too often.

He was pushed up into the middle at one point in the second quarter (IIRC), which I thought was interesting.

IMO he has more than enough runs on the board to guard against being dropped but that doesn't mean we can't call out the poor parts of his game and you'd hope/expect the FD see it and are working on it.

I agree that the response after quarter time was more than encouraging given how on top they were. There aren't that many sides in the competition this year who are capable of coming back from 37 points down when Walsh, Cripps and Weitering are playing as well as they were.

But there are problems we have to address. One of them is our first quarters. We're 4-5 in first quarters, but over the last six weeks it has felt like we've struggled to get going on the scoreboard early:

1. 3.2.20 vs Port was pretty good but they were 4.1.25
2. 2.0.12 vs Adelaide against 2.5.17
3. 2.0.12 vs Brisbane against 4.2.26
4. 2.3.15 vs Richmond against 1.3.9
5. 3.2.20 vs Geelong against 2.4.16
6. 0.0.0 vs Carlton against 5.0.30

2-4 in that period. Admittedly not an easy fixture run but equally one of the two wins was against Richmond. Last night the only blowout loss but accuracy was a big part of that. Regardless, it just feels like we're too slow to get started and give ourselves more work to do in the middle of the game than we'd like.

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

For like couldn't turn up until the last quarter.

Do you seriously think this?

The middle two quarters were intense and even. If we didn't turn up until three quarter time, do you really think the game would have been as close as it was?

1 hour ago, binman said:

By the by, I've been critical of the blues defence this season.

But credit where it is due - they were excellent defensively last night, particularly in the first half, won some critical one on one battles and were a huge factor in the win - perhaps the biggest.

I have to stop myself from OTT posting about this but ask Carlton supporters for their views on Young and you'll get a strong majority telling you he's a real problem. Williams was struggling defensively too.

Replacing them with McGovern and Kemp was enormous for them structurally.

Daniel Hoyne on radio wanted people to believe it was a system problem, not personnel. In a not-uncommon occurrence, he is wrong. 

32 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

I don’t have them handy but I recall Collingwood knocking off Adelaide last year and Carlton knocking off Sydney in 2022 off 5 day breaks. And obviously we won a 5 day break in Adelaide in round 4, and also won off a 5 day break last year (Richmond into North round 7).

Meanwhile Adelaide just won a showdown off a 5 day break, and Brisbane put in a shocker on Anzac Day Vs GWS off a 5 day break.

I honestly don’t think 5 day breaks are as bad as what people make them out to be. It’s the accumulated condensed breaks that probably trouble clubs.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/1125436

More wins than losses for sides on 5 day breaks so far this year. 

This also says clubs can have up to 3 5 day breaks, which I wasn’t aware of. If we cop a third, when others so far haven’t had any…

23 minutes ago, Buzzy said:

I am so bloody sick of dominating inside 50's and losing due to forward efficiency.

Over and over and over.

First time this has happened all year. 

We’ve been losing the inside 50 count most weeks to date. 

43 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

I wasn't one of the people that complained about prime tv spots. I go to the games as opposed to watching them on TV so I couldn't care less what time slot we're on. I love Saturday afternoon footy which has become a TV dead zone.

The point I was making is that we clearly have an issue with Thursday night games given the record I quoted. If we have preparation issues heading into Thursday night games, I'd therefore be happy to not play in them.

Classic case of causation vs correlation.

Are we actually losing because of the timeslot? Or because the opponents were Sydney (away), Brisbane and Carlton, three sides we match up on poorly? And one game was humid and another rained?

50 minutes ago, Brownie said:

So who reckons Newman will get rubbed out for his elbow to ANBs jaw?

Late, left the ground. 

I reckon he'll get a fine. Because Carlton.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/live-afl-scores-2024-carlton-blues-vs-melbourne-demons-round-9-updates-stats-video-how-to-stream-watch-news-blog/news-story/53a0904ddc0a2d7d0ca5e4062062263a

If he contacted the head it has to be a week, same principle as Pickett v Adelaide. Low actual contact upgraded to medium on potential to injure.

If he didn’t contact the head then it‘s nothing. 

Just now, binman said:

This is where x score is useful.

I have zero doubt goody would have used it at quarter and half time to reinforce that the scoreboard didn't reflect the relative performance levels, and certainly not the effort levels.

It shows their kicking for goal, particularly early was brilliant- but anomalous.

Their set shots from say 40 are 50-50 chances.

Credit to them for kicking them, but once kicking for goal there's nothing we can do about their chances of kicking the goal.

In most circumstances they are something like 3.2 or 2.3 at quarter time and the game looks very different.

And our accuracy was bang on average.

Like the lions game, it wasn't a game we threw away because of innacracy. The lions and blues won because of their accuracy

Yes, we could point to bad misses, Petty comes to mind. But take that miss. On average that goal is still only kicked perhaps 70-75% of the time. 

For me the issue in terms of our kicking was tge ladt kick inside 50, fior most of the match but particularly the first.

The game was actually pretty evenly balanced performance wise in the first 10 mins, but we butchered the ball going inside 50 - and credit to their defence, they were excellent- so had nothing to show for our efforts.

A couple of decent inside 50s and we get an early goal or two and the game looks different.

I agree with your interpretation of the stat but there’s no doubt we had some really bad misses (Petty as you say, but Fritsch before that and Chandler too) that cruelled our chances. That can be true despite what you day about xScore.

4 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

I looked at it frame by frame last night with what was on the telly and said it wasn't clear enough. My gripe was more aimed at the dangerous tackle which was far more conclusive and the officiating in the first half.

So frustrating given they took a goal off us in the final last year. This time inconclusive, last time conclusive. 

There’s no doubt the dangerous tackle free was wrong. I don’t think Kemp staged, I just think his knee stuck in the turf. Either way, the tackle was fine and it was either holding the ball or play on.

2 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Yes that is what appeared to happen. But it wasn't an official score review so they just stick to the normal routine.

If we lose another game to stupid umpiring error(s) again, im done. I can handle being beaten fair and square by an opposition, but when its due to poor officiating, its a different feeling - being cheated doesn't sit well with me.

Is there any evidence floating around that May touched it? Has anyone gone back and looked at the footage? Sometimes people talk about it on Twitter/etc afterwards but I haven’t seen anything yet.  
 

At the ground you couldn’t see on the screen but it’s rare for a player to be that animated about a touch without actually touching it. 

9 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

To be fair the second half of the draw hasn’t been set yet, but I’m sure AFL darlings like Sydney and Collingwood will avoid those short breaks 🙄

7 minutes ago, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

If they haven't had one yet i can't see them having one, lets have a look when it all unfolds.

There won’t be any more Thursday night games in the rest of the fixture so the need for 5-day breaks will be reduced. 

I have a bit of a problem with some clubs getting two of them whilst others get zero. 

But unless the short break was a factor in our poor start I don’t think it was relevant otherwise. We ran the game out much better than they did.

58 minutes ago, Winners at last said:

Spot on.

Demons have a poor percentage. A draw would have been as good as a win having regard to that.

Such a poor start to the match. Yes, good comeback but I can't help feeling disappointed. 

Huh? Our percentage is 121.%. It’s top 4 (only Sydney, Geelong and GWS are better).

Carlton’s is 109% by comparison.

16 minutes ago, Dodos Demons said:

Would be nice if we could kick that straight regularly. Other than the Port game, we never seem to be the team that is in the game because we have kicked straight. We are the team that keeps the opposition in the game because we don’t kick straight.  

That’s not really what tonight’s expected score says though. 

Our score was pretty much bang on expected. So whilst we missed easy shots, we also nailed harder ones. 

They were +20 though, which means they kicked above expectation. 

A bit incongruous because of our bad misses but tonight was more about them not missing almost any shots. That 6.0.36 start could have been 4.2.26 and the game would have felt different. 

7 minutes ago, layzie said:

At the end of the day while Carlton deserved the win and were great early on, I don't think they can play much better than that. Apart from Saad, Williams and Motlop that was pretty much a full strength team. 

We relied on Trac to keep us in it a lot. Plenty of underperformers that I can't see staying quiet next time round. And we still nearly won it! Yes we were 2nd best tonight in my opinion but I am encouraged.

Williams is part of the reason they’ve struggled to defend recently. Not sure he’s best 22. But Fogarty and Marchbank might be. 

Still, they got peak Weitering, Walsh and Cripps, Curnow found 2 goals on May, it rained, and they kicked straight all night. It’s a super effort to be as close as we were despite all that, but equally a reminder that they play so well against us.

6 - Petracca
5 - ANB
4 - Langdon
3 - May
2 - Rivers
1 - Windsor

Not sure Turner is the answer but not sure we have any better options available. 

Ditto Billings. 

Probably no change at this stage. 

Carlton are a top 4 side, match up brilliantly against us, and love playing us. And we suck in wet weather.

We started awfully. Being down 36-0 makes beating anyone hard, let alone a top 4 side. 

It was incredible to see us stem the tide and end up feeling like we could have won, so that is a clear positive. Ultimately their cleanliness in front of goal early and our four awful misses (Petty, Fritsch, Pickett, Chandler) cost us the win. The fact it came to that despite Walsh, Cripps and Weitering playing stellar football is remarkable.

Don’t give me “the umpiring cost us” though. [censored] me. We were gifted a goal from the non-mark call late in the third and there were a stack of calls that either went in our favour or were missed. Yes, the JVR tackle was a pathetic free, but we lost this game ourselves. 

We have a midfield problem though. All three losses are hallmarked by opposition mids dominating. I liked the different looks in there tonight with ANB but we are not capable of winning it this year if we keep having games where we’re beaten this badly in the middle. 

Woke up this morning feeling very nervous. Can’t shake the feeling of last year’s two losses to them and my overall view that they are a much better side than their 4-3 record suggests. 

Was surprised to come on here and see many in this thread sharing my view. I suppose it’s a byproduct of last year but I think also comes from us being favourites after winning last week. There’s a bit more pressure tonight and I’m feeling it. 

Can’t have a night like Sydney or Brisbane where we are belted in the middle - we won’t win if that happens. We also probably can’t afford to concede territory too much tonight either. But if we get enough ball in our forward half, I’m confident enough that we can hold them to a score we can beat.

7 hours ago, Demonland said:

This is a good table IMO.

Sydney at 26 players used, and 18 playing every game, is insane.

Far too much downplaying Carlton's ins for my liking.

McGovern and Kemp in the backline is an upgrade on Young and Williams. Martin's an upgrade on Fantasia, even if he's underdone (Fantasia may as well have been unfit given how little impact he's been having). And Hollands is probably an upgrade on Cuningham.

They are IMO a very good side, a legitimate flag contender despite their recent form slump. They are more than capable of beating us if they bring what they're capable of in the middle, and particularly now that they're stronger behind the ball with McGovern and Kemp. 

8 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

No it doesn’t. If the Crows didn’t get the answer they were hoping for, then it sounds like Petty’s manager called to say Petty is no longer interested in going to Adelaide. 

7 hours ago, Dee Boys said:

The "they" in the first tweet is Adelaide.

I think @Dee Boys might have it - I totally read the "they" as being Petty's camp but if it was Adelaide instead, they both make sense. 

3 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm not convinced about the "expected scores" stat because (apart from shots at goal after the siren at any quarter), the result of every kick for goal changes the next play. Every time a team kicks a behind, they give the ball back to the opposition.

A more impressive analysis would point out that Melbourne is still trying to work out what its best forward mix is while all the while having won 6 out of 8 games. (Credit where it's due: This was stated by David King after round 7, obviously when it was a 5 out of 7 score line). 

As @WheeloRatings says, you can use it to understand whether or not your misses were shots you should have taken or were just tough shots. That gives it value. It then gets mis- and over-used such as is the case by Fox in the discussed article.