titan_uranus

But isn't the argument that this week he's being "moved" out of May's role and into Hibberd's role (which in turn is Hunt's role)? (Which, by the way, I'm not a fan of).

Google, then random websites like Triple M.

Round 1 2014. Only TMac in the side (Jones the only other member of that 22 on our list). B: Dean.Terlich, James Frawley, Jack Grimes HB: Lynden Dunn, Tom McDonald, Bernie Vince C: Jimmy Toumpas, Jack Watts, Dom Tyson HF: Rohan Bail, Jack Fitzpatrick, Daniel Cross F: Shannon Byrnes, Cameron Pedersen, Jeremy Howe Foll: Jake Spencer, Nathan Jones, Jack Trengove I/C: Viv Michie, Matt Jones, Jay Kennedy-Harris, Alex Georgiou EMG: Daniel Nicholson, Sam Blease, Michael Evans Round 1 2018. Only 8 of that 22 in the side this week (Lever, Salem, Petracca, Harmes, Fritsch, Gawn, Oliver, ANB), plus Brayshaw an emergency and a further 4 (Hibberd, Jetta, Hunt and Melksham) on the list. B: Michael Hibberd, Jake Lever, Neville Jetta HB: Jayden Hunt, Oscar McDonald, Nathan Jones C: Bernie Vince, Jordan Lewis, Christian Salem HF: Christian Petracca, Cam Pedersen, James Harmes F: Bayley Fritsch, Jesse Hogan, Jeff Garlett Foll: Max Gawn, Clayton Oliver, Alex Neal-Bullen I/C: Jake Melksham, Mitch Hannan, Corey Maynard, Josh Wagner EMG: Angus Brayshaw, Dom Tyson, Sam Frost, Tom Bugg

I disagree with Smith holding his spot over Hibberd and Sparrow holding his spot over Jordon. But, neither is an egregiously bad decision. If Port wins, I truly hope Smith proves me wrong.

Except that if we lose this week, there's a chance Port ends up our preliminary final opponent. The best way to avoid playing a final in someone else's territory is to finish top 2 and win the first final.

Funnily enough, 1964. So that record has now been broken.

If Port wins, Saturday night is very much a live rubber. A neutral venue hosting Geelong or the Dogs is a better option than having to play Port in Adelaide or Geelong in Geelong for the first final.

The Age is reporting that the clubs who get to host week 1 finals are going to be allowed to choose their venue, but Melbourne venues are off the table because the choices will be limited to venues with crowds. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/melbourne-could-face-difficult-venue-choice-for-qualifying-final-20210817-p58jin.html

On current form I'd have the Bulldogs as my preferred opponent. Port away from Adelaide Oval is a beatable side but as you say, they've been reintegrating missing stars into their 22 the last few weeks and they're probably as good now as they've been all year, whereas the Dogs I think are tracking the other way.

Hyperbole all round. "So elite with athleticism". He's athletic, sure, but you're making him sound like some super-human. He's not, and no amount of athleticism fixes his repeated instances of being in the wrong spot at the wrong time. Our backline works because we have reliability between May, Petty and Lever. Smith still doesn't look to have curtailed his desire to leap and run, and whilst it didn't hurt us too badly against Adelaide, from here on out we're only playing seriously good sides and it's a risk I'd rather we don't take. Ridiculous, too, is the argument that Oliver is as likely to "cost us a final" as Smith. There is no reasonable basis to equate the two. In saying that, I don't agree with @A F going that strongly on Smith. I don't think he's best 22, but it's not all that bad.

Whilst that may be so, a loss potentially consigns us to a trip to Adelaide to play Port, or to Geelong to play Geelong. There will be a crowd in Adelaide and possibly one in Geelong. Depends a lot on what happens on Friday night, though. If the Dogs win, we can't drop below 2nd and therefore none of this becomes an issue any more.

Yep, there is increasingly little doubt that you have to be in some sort of form at the end of the season to be relevant in the finals. It's not essential, given that Richmond aside every premier has lost at least once late in the season, and some lost multiple times, but it's relevant. If we win this weekend our 4-1-1 formline will be completely fine, but obviously Port is peaking at the right time. Totally misread the post I quoted and thought the discussion was in relation to over 40s access to the vaccine, not under 40s.

Well deserved. I reckon we've found one here.

I couldn't care less if you think the 8 is set, reality is it isn't, and coupled with there being two match ups that haven't yet happened, and the obvious ridiculousness of coming this far and then stopping, your idea is insane.

As @Demonstone said, I meant Fremantle missed out on Hawthorn in 2015. We beat Hawthorn before the draw so that counts. The only side we didn't beat this year was Collingwood. A far cry from the long losing droughts we used to have.

Pfizer was made available to Victorians 40 and over in late May https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/vaccine-roll-out-expand-all-victorians-40-and-over Edit: my mistake, thought the discussion was about over 40s, not under.

Not sure if serious? The top 8 isn't currently set. It's not fair, in the extreme, to shut West Coast and Fremantle out of their shots at the 8. The more so given St Kilda v Fremantle and Brisbane v West Coast are match ups that haven't yet happened this year.

Part of the problem was the field umpire calling it touched - it's impossible for the umpire to have seen the touch off the boot, so he's gone off the Adelaide player calling it touched. That shouldn't happen. There also shouldn't be an "umpire's call" option for these sorts of kicks, because the umpire's call is just a guess. It's very different to the goal umpire standing on the goal line and seeing a touch. The ARC was never going to definitively say that wasn't touched because of how blurry it was - unless they were forced to by removing the umpire's call.

We've tied the record with Fremantle in 2015, who beat 16 of the 17 other sides, missing out on Hawthorn only.

Agree. The MRO box-ticking exercise is as big of a problem as anything. The box-ticking for what Selwood did should result in a suspension (i.e. even with little-to-no injury, if you run past the ball, bump, and hit the head, that should be a week). That's not a good argument. No one ever "has to" lay a tackle. Take the anti-Geelong bias out of the equation, and imagine it was TMac who was chasing down Joyce in our forward line with the game and top 4 arguably on the line. I maintain there's very little chance you'd be arguing for a suspension.

Whilst I agree with the sentiment and how the stats show we're as well-placed to win it this year as anyone, it's not a simple as the bolded line. We don't need a "horror out of the box performance" to miss. There are four other very good sides in it: Geelong, Port, Brisbane and the Bulldogs (albeit the Dogs appear to be trending the wrong way at the wrong time). We know we can beat them but it won't take a "horror" match for us to lose, particularly if we lose to Geelong this week and end up playing Port in Adelaide in the first final (or, almost worse, we avoid them in the first final but lose to, say, Geelong, and then end up in Adelaide in the prelim...).

Hate Hawkins all you want, but I'm extremely confident if it were a Melbourne player who had laid that tackle you'd have been livid for a suspension. The bigger question to come out of this week's MRO is why did Hawkins get nothing but Zaine Cordy, who did the precise same thing, got a fine. They're either both fines or they're both nothing. Again, the MRO is a broken failure.

Sure, but we were without May, Viney, TMac and Hunt, with top 4 locked up, a near dead rubber game, and playing in front of an empty stadium. We didn't play well for 4 quarters but in those circumstances I essentially don't care. Also what does "we haven't played a proper side for 3 weeks now" mean? West Coast in Perth might not be the force they've been in previous years but they're all of a sudden not a "proper side"?

Average age 24 years 6 months, average experience 86.2 games. Adelaide was younger and less experienced (24 years 4 months and 66.3 games - they had 14 players with less than 50 games yesterday, compared to our 8, and only 6 players over 100 games compared to our 12). The entire comp from Round 22 in order of age: Essendon: 24 years 0 months, 79 games Gold Coast: 24 years 1 month, 68.2 games Fremantle: 24 years 2 months, 64.3 games Adelaide: 24 years 4 months, 66.3 games Collingwood: 24 years 5 months, 95.3 games St Kilda: 24 years 5 months, 88.3 games Melbourne: 24 years 6 months, 86.2 games GWS: 24 years 7 months, 90.1 games North: 24 years 9 months, 85.9 games Hawthorn: 24 years 10 months, 100.7 games Sydney: 25 years 0 months, 92.3 games Carlton: 25 years 3 months, 97.8 games Bulldogs: 25 years 6 months, 101 games Port Adelaide: 25 years 7 months, 104 games Richmond: 25 years 9 months, 111.4 games Brisbane: 26 years 1 month, 115.4 games West Coast: 27 years 0 months, 131.2 games Geelong: 27 years 6 months, 143.8 games

Wasn't even close to our worst performance. Can't believe you'd think that. Each of the North, first Adelaide, Collingwood, GWS and Hawthorn games was significantly worse than today. We did precisely what we needed to do in what was in almost every respect a dead rubber of a match.