titan_uranus

Jon Ralph "reporting" that Port will get to host a prelim if it wins tonight (which seems likely). We and Geelong will be going to Perth after this round no matter what.

I'm quite glad we avoided this final, and the six-day break that comes with it. Happy to let Geelong cop it.

It was just an excellent night last night. but obviously bigger fish to fry tomorrow. Stringer correctly wasn't picked. It's a side based on a season of form, not half a season. If it were half a season, Salem would have made it off his first half.

Brisbane bring back Adams and Robinson. Ah Chee and Lester both out.

You have to feel for Hibberd and Jordon, both of whom have been mainstays of our best 22 this year but now find themselves on the outer. Well done to Smith and Sparrow for standing up at the right time to get their spots. Would love for Jones to be the sub but you'd expect Jordon is the more likely option.

I'm pretty sure the award goes to a literal 1st year player (i.e. someone who was drafted in 2020).

No change Jones, Hibberd, Melksham and Jordon the emergencies.

(14-4, not 14-6) It's been covered already but of those 14 wins, 10 of them were against sides not playing finals. The only top 8 sides they beat in those 14 wins were: Essendon, in Round 5 when Essendon was worse than they are now, and at the Gabba Port Adelaide, in Round 7, and at the Gabba GWS, in Round 11 when GWS was worse than they are now, and at the Gabba Geelong, in Round 15, and at the Gabba See a theme there? Indeed, they only played 5 games since Round 5 against finalists, the 5th game being their loss to us in Round 12. By comparison, since Round 5 we are 13-1-4, we played 8 games against finalists in that period, won 6 of them, and that included wins vs the Dogs at Marvel, Brisbane on neutral territory, Port Adelaide in Adelaide and Geelong in Geelong. Having said all that, they are a good side and deserve our utmost respect. They do have a strong midfield and we know from the first half in Round 12 that if they dominate stoppages and hold marks forward of centre they can put a big score on us.

Welcome to Demonland. I doubt we'll be dropping a defender to bring in Melksham. That throws the balance of the side out.

There is indeed a very valid debate to be had around the morality of these sorts of decisions. I will say, though, that for at least some of these examples you've cited, those actions are either criminal or at least capable of being punished by fines (e.g. not wearing a seatbelt or having a BAC over .05).

Kind of a shame that Dr D was banned. I was hoping we could all discuss his post-bye W-L predictions.

It's not that long ago that we were a shambles, with continued off-field disasters compounding our on-field woes. I agree that Carlton's mucked this up royally, but maybe let's just reflect on how hard it can be to get things right after years of underperformance.

Whilst 6th has won 15 games, 7th only won 11 and with a percentage under 100%. It's funny that despite 7th and 8th having relatively terrible records to make finals, it's still feels like a very even first week of finals. Most of their big scores were either at the Gabba or against weak sides. 6 of their 7 losses this year were away from the Gabba. They're still dangerous of course, but I think much of their prowess comes from having had a very easy fixture (no top 8 opponents in the last two months), and they only left Queensland five times since ANZAC Day.

Good to see that you haven't lost your ability to post absolute rubbish despite the side sitting top of the ladder. Remember how you spent large portions of 2020 complaining about our trade for Pickett?

If we go in unchanged, we'll have five changes: In: Bowey, Smith, Viney, Brown, Langdon Out: Hunt, Hibberd, Jordon, Weideman, Melksham They'll be missing Hipwood but otherwise will be pretty much the same side as last time we played.

Your arguments are just silly. It's not just the AFL who want us on prime time. We want to be on prime time. After all the hard work we've done to make ourselves relevant, you want us to be off broadway. Why do you care about the Dogs? If they win their EF they have to back up into a 6-day break for their next game, against a side (us or Brisbane) on a 7-day break. See how that's an advantage for us? And we'd be on an even playing field with Brisbane as to days break no matter what day the game is played. You're arguing conspiracy theories and AFL "shafting" when the reality is the AFL has made a really obvious decision (I'm talking timeslot, not venue) that shouldn't need to be explained. On the issue of playing in Adelaide vs Melbourne, I share some sympathy with the argument that for a crowd of 15,000 max (with no guarantee we get the full 15,000 there), there is little benefit to playing the game in Adelaide as compared to an empty MCG. But such is life. It would have happened last year but it was coincidental in the extreme that 1st and 2nd were Port and Brisbane, who then both won their QFs, which took the decision out of the AFL's hands.

Back surgery is intense. Not that ACL surgery is easy, but back surgery is different. And he's 30. That aside, and assuming he's fully fit with no long term increased risk of injury, I'm not convinced this is the right fit. Where would he play, and at whose expense? He's too good to be depth (i.e. he'd only go somewhere to be best 22), so he has to be a walk-up start in our 22, which means he has to be an upgrade on TMac/Brown, or Fritsch, or Spargo/ANB/Pickett.

Yes. "he is needed on our list we have no other tall forward" - well that's obviously incorrect. "Lets be honest, TMac hasn't been any good for the last 12 odd weeks" - in the last 12 weeks TMac has kicked 3 goals each against the Bulldogs, Brisbane and Port Adelaide, and had a 22 possession + 10 mark game vs GWS where the only thing missing was accurate goal kicking. "the start of the season amazing but has fallen away" - yes he was kicking more goals at the start of the season but his relative form slump coincided with the entire side slumping somewhat in the first few weeks post-bye. "B Brown isn't really setting the world on fire kicking some goals but yet to really have an outstanding game" - Brown's kicked multiple goals for five straight games, has had at least 5 marks in each of those games, and importantly has lifted his tackling and pressure numbers across that period "M Brown isn't getting any younger" - sure, but Weideman also "isn't getting any younger" "Daw isn't a forward" - probably the only part of the post I agree with. Of course, the overall point you're making in general doesn't take into account our forward line as a unit, ignores Fritsch's presence (he was just named to the AA squad FFS), and ignores Weideman's struggles with form when in the seniors this year.

The two night slots are the prime time slots. The club and the AFL want us playing in one of them. 7 days is more than enough for us to prepare. If you're of the view that 7 days is light on, how does Brisbane feel? Why give our opponent more time to prepare? And why would you put us on Sunday, the dead zone timeslot - whoever loses that game then would have a shorter break into the semi, despite finishing above their opponent. That would be unfair. You're complaining about the Dogs being "given" the Sunday game. They have no choice but to win it, and if they do they'll then be on a six-day break into their semi whereas we or Brisbane will be on a 7-day break. It's blindingly obvious why we're not on the Sunday. And as to venues, there is evidence to suggest we were offered a choice of venue and chose the Adelaide Oval. Which probably makes sense, given that AFAIK the Melbourne Football Club has never, not once, played at York Park. Do you really want us to go play at a venue we've never played at before for a massive final, against a side who played there just a month ago? Meanwhile just a few weeks ago we were stuck on a plane for a day, then belted the Suns by 100 points, then got put in a hotel for a week, then beat West Coast in Perth with a 95% pro-Eagles crowd. The "choice" was as blindingly obvious as the reason we're playing on Saturday night.

It's easy to be in good form when your last three games are against Fremantle, Collingwood and West Coast. It's also easy to drop a game or two when your last three games are against GWS, St Kilda and Melbourne. IMO, Brisbane's and Essendon's formlines are mirages. Port's and GWS' formlines are far stronger.

Of course the true answer to this question is the land that is now the Holden Centre. We should underwrite a redevelopment of Victoria Park on the basis that Collingwood moves there and we can then use the Holden Centre oval and land.

Someone had to play on the Sunday so someone was going to get an 8+ day break. Who cares. We got 7 days, which is better than 6. Yes but this year's game was vs Adelaide, a bottom 4 side. They didn't play there in 2020. In 2019 they beat Port there, but in 2019 Port didn't make the finals. In the same time period we've played there four times to their twice, and one of our wins is far more meritorious (Port this year) than any win they've probably ever had at that venue.

I'm surprised and quite pleased to see the number of people who agree he does it, and those who say they'd prefer it if he didn't. We have collectively lost our [censored] at Selwood, Shuey and Mathieson in years gone by, so it would be hypocritical to say Spargo doing it is fine. It's as much "not a good look" as Viney's incident with Collins was, and I'd prefer he stop doing it.

It's just a sign of 2021 Demonland, I think. Certain posters who are relied upon for negativity have either turned it around (credit to them), or disappeared (less so).

Naitanui beats Gawn in these stats: Contested possessions: 12.4 to 10.5 per game Ground ball gets: 5.4 to 4.0 Clearances: 7.2 to 4.5 Hit outs to advantage: 12.3 to 10.3 (and on percentages 39.3% to 32.2%) Pressure acts: 13.4 to 10.5 Tackles: 3.0 to 2.6 It's the clearances (combined with ground ball gets) and hit outs to advantage that stand out. They're flashy moments which people remember and think "wow, he's influencing this game". But the rest of his game is so weak. He doesn't hit the scoreboard, he doesn't take marks, doesn't drop back to defend, and spends 22% more of each game on the bench than Gawn (68.1% to 90%). My firm view is Gawn is the deserving number 1 ruck and Naitanui, if a second ruck is to be picked, can sit on the bench.