titan_uranus

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.

I'm still shocked that by now there haven't been more negative/pessimistic posters arguing Geelong put the cue in the rack at the 44 point lead mark and didn't care about the win.

Caleb Daniel also missed out.

I love Fritsch and Salem but Boak isn't in the squad. That's insane. Edit: Riewoldt and Crisp have also missed out on squad selection. But Sean Darcy (he's not getting picked over Gawn or Naitanui so why is he in the squad), Lyons and Seedsman all get picked?

Oliver, Lever, Petracca and Gawn should all be in the 22. May is on the fringe. Salem is a chance for the squad. Fritsch and Pickett have had good seasons but I can't see them making the squad. I maintain my view Gawn is the superior ruck to Naitanui. Naitanui is fawned over for his hit outs and clearances. Well he can have all the clearances he wants, they don't translate into superior impact: he and Gawn average the precise same number of score involvements per game (5.4), whilst Gawn averages more metres gained (309.9 per game to Naitanui's 211.3). And then of course Gawn outdoes Naitanui in many other respects: he gets more disposals (including effective disposals), he gets back into defence more and therefore has more rebound 50s and intercept marks (the latter stat is 1.9 to 0.4 per game), he takes more than 3 times as many marks per game (5.2 to 1.5) and hits the scoreboard more (1.4 shots at goal to 0.6).

We were given repeat games against Geelong (2020 runner up), Bulldogs (2020 finalist but finished in the middle six), GWS (10th in 2020), Hawthorn (bottom 4 in 2020) and Adelaide (bottom 4 in 2020). It wasn't that bad - GWS ended up moving up into the top 8. What's interesting is that Port and Brisbane both made prelims last year but only had one repeat game against a 2021 finalist. Port got two repeat games against 2020 top 6 sides but not only were they the two worst top 6 sides from 2020 in Collingwood and St Kilda (losers of the two semi finals), but both of them fell apart in 2021 and missed finals. They otherwise got the Bulldogs (a 2020 finalist but finished middle six), and Carlton and Adelaide. Brisbane got both Richmond and Geelong (i.e. the two Grand Finalists) plus Collingwood, Gold Coast and Fremantle. Again, whilst that looked reasonably tough pre-season, Richmond and Collingwood fell apart and GC and Fremantle were always going to be mid to poor sides.

And the top 8's record vs the top 4: Melbourne: 4-0 Bulldogs: 3-3 Brisbane: 2-2 Sydney: 2-2 Geelong: 2-3 GWS: 2-3 Port Adelaide: 0-3 Essendon: 0-4

We can now finalise the top 8's record vs the top 8: Melbourne: 8-2 Sydney: 6-3 GWS: 5-5 Port Adelaide: 4-4 Brisbane: 4-4 (note that they played 7 of these 8 games by Round 12, before their bye) Geelong: 4-5 Bulldogs: 4-5 Essendon: 1-8

There's no way the AFL didn't know. They've known what's going on with crowds and restrictions often before the public is informed. I hope Gerard Whateley is happy.

Jake Lever was too expensive ("two first rounders" etc.). Steven May was too expensive ("we gave up Hogan/pick 6/Ben KIng for May" etc.). Whatever happens from here, I hope (but do not expect at all) that Demonlanders learn from this the next time we trade out a high draft pick for an established player.

When we played them in Round 12, their first half dominance came not through the smalls but the talls. Daniher and Hipwood were marking everything and that gave them their scoring opportunities. In the second half our tall defenders improved and when we started spoiling their marks, they struggled to score. Interestingly we may well have five changes from the side that beat them - Hunt, Hibberd, Jordon, Weideman and Melksham all played. Would be replaced, on yesterday's 22, by Bowey, Brown, Smith, Langdon and Viney.

Most years people see upsets happening but most years the top 4 make the prelims. Indeed, since 2000 I think only 7 sides have gone out in straight sets. That's 7 out of 80. Less than 10%. So whilst Sydney and GWS and Essendon are all in good degrees of form, the odds suggest that the losers of Melb-Brisbane and Port-Geelong will make the prelims. Whilst Sydney is in good form, they don't match up well against Port or Geelong, who they'll have to beat in the SF. I'll back the loser of Port-Geelong to make the prelim, therefore (and FWIW I smell a Geelong win this week). On our side of the draw, I think we'll beat Brisbane, which means I think we'll play Port in the prelim.

They'll have to wear their red clash jumper, as they did in 2019 (our only home game against Essendon since 2010 and only our second since 2005:

Depends on which season is the precedent. I believe 2015 is the only time this has happened - West Coast finished 2nd, Hawthorn finished 3rd. They played each other in the first final (WC won) and then again in the Grand Final. In the Grand Final, Hawthorn wore its home jumper but white shorts. West Coast wore its then-away jumper (royal blue). It's unknown territory I think. This tweet shows you that the AFL makes it up as they go along:

Great summary. King was trying to argue that Geelong walk away from that game pleased because our score from turnover was around their season average. It was a really flimsy argument which made little sense in the context of the game. I much preferred Montagna pulling up the footage suggesting we'd rolled our spare defender up into stoppages in the first half but reverted back in the second half. Hard to know if that was true given we only saw footage of two stoppages but if so, a really interesting insight into what we were thinking.

40 seconds left on the clock when Tomlinson took his shot last year. Also you've missed Round 4 this year in your summary. We were pretty good that day.

1443 points against is also, by a very long way, the fewest points we've conceded in a 22-game season. The previous best was 2018, which was 1749. Also, not including last year's shortened games, this is the first time we've gone through an entire H&A season without conceding 100 points since 1962.

With the win last night we have set a record for most wins by the MFC in a season with 17.

It's not, it's the two Elimination Finals. We're in Adelaide.

We'd be required to wear the clash strip if we become the "away" side vs Port, Brisbane, GWS or Essendon. But that can only happen vs Port in the prelim, if we lose to Brisbane and they beat Geelong. We'll obviously be the "home" side in the QF, and the SF if we lose, and the PF if we win the QF. If we make the GF, even if we lose the first final, I believe the rule is that we get to wear our home jumper because we were the higher ranked side.

It's not a terrible match-up. Smith did a number on Papley last year too. I'm not convinced he's a better option than Hibberd but equally it's not like Hibberd's been setting the world on fire. My principal concern with Smith is he still makes mistakes he shouldn't be making, largely through loose positioning, and which we've worked so hard to eradicate from our back-half. I just can't stomach the thought of him spoiling Lever or May in a final.

Don't agree with this for a few reasons. Firstly, I don't think we're good enough to win finals with just the Brown-Jackson combo. We tried the TMac-Jackson combo post-bye and it didn't work for us. We used it again vs West Coast (wet) and Adelaide (bottom.4 side). IMO we need two tall marking options alongside Jackson and Fritsch, not including them. Secondly, I don't think your analysis of TMac's form is reasonable. We've seen plenty of players this year struggle in their first game back from injury. Prior to his injury he hit the scoreboard in each of his four most recent games but whilst he didn't kick bags of goals, the games we played included Hawthorn (entire side was off) and the Dogs (it was wet). His best games have been big games against good opponents: 3 goals vs Port, 3 goals vs Brisbane, 3 goals vs the Dogs (the first time), 4 goals vs Sydney, 3 goals on ANZAC Eve. I don't think there's much merit to the argument he should, or even might, be dropped. Not after one game.

Smith had 6 disposals, 4 of which came from marks, along with 0 rebound 50s and 6 metres gained. If he was in the side to play any sort of rebounding/offensive role, he failed to do it. If, though, he was in the side to be a defender, that's fine, but my concern is balance-wise we don't need four mid/tall defenders playing a defensive role. We already have May, Lever and Petty. I don't think we also need Smith to be that sort of player. Leaves too much to too few. Either he is freed up to be more aggressive (in the Hunt/Hibberd mould), or we play Hibberd in his place.

An incredible round of football. Would have been the GOAT if Fremantle had won today and forced Essendon into a win-and-in situation, but not to be. Although for the Dogs it was 3rd they were hoping for, not 1st. Had we lost and they won, Geelong would have finished 1st, we would have finished 2nd, and they would have finished 3rd.