titan_uranus

Meanwhile have just noticed that Brisbane have only played one current top 8 side since the bye: Geelong in Round 15. Their games post-bye have been against 2nd, 10th, 11th, 12th, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th, and they have 9th to come.

If we win next week we'll finish 17-1-4. That will be the second-best H&A season put together by any club since 2013 (Richmond in 2018 finished 18-4).

Assuming the top 8 doesn't change, it will be 10 for us in total, 9 for Geelong and the Dogs, and 8 for Port (given we all play top 8 sides again this weekend). Port's repeat games this season are Adelaide, Collingwood, Carlton, St Kilda and the Dogs. That's two bottom 4 sides, a bottom 6 side if Hawthorn passes Carlton this weekend and another bottom 10 side. Just one repeat game against a top 8 side.

Everyone please read this post. Repeatedly. Jon Ralph isn't worth listening to. He doesn't have any inside information and repeatedly his "breaking news" is just the latest thought that's popped into his head that he wants to turn into another click bait article on Fox Footy.

With Essendon replacing West Coast, here is the top 8's record the current top 8: Melbourne: 7-2 Sydney: 6-3 GWS: 5-5 Geelong: 4-4 Bulldogs: 4-4 Brisbane: 4-4 Port: 3-4 Essendon: 1-8

Essendon has won 5 games since the bye. Those wins have been over 4th, 14th, 15th, 17th and 18th. If they win next week, they'll add 16th. So that's the bottom five, plus the Dogs in a form slump. I maintain their form is a mirage. If Brisbane are getting their game to click, they're better than Sydney IMO. Would not want to draw them in the semi final if we lose the first final.

I read your post as a statement about the future, not a reflection on the past. You've concluded that, because he played Round 1 in 2017, which apparently (I'll take your word for it, it certainly sounds believable) is the only time he's been available for selection in Round 1, the FD likes him. I'll take his non-selection for the many weeks he's been fit in 2021 as better evidence of the FD's current views on him.

5th gets you Essendon/Fremantle, but 6th gets you GWS. For all the media-fapping over Essendon, I still don't rate them. I reckon 5th is preferable to 6th and drawing GWS in the first final. So I reckon Brisbane and Sydney will both be pushing to win their final games to avoid dropping to 6th.

I had previously posted this too but it's not entirely correct. if Port and Geelong both win, Port could pass Geelong on percentage (i.e. if Port wins by a lot and Geelong only wins by a little bit - the gap between them is only 1.3%). So it's possible if we lose and the Dogs lose that we could finish 3rd and play Geelong again the following week.

He had 28 touches, 5 clearances, 7 tackles, 348 metres gained, 8 score involvements, 28 pressure acts (our most) and got to spend 12% of the game on the bench.

Fremantle in 2015 beat 16 of the 17 sides, missing out only to Hawthorn.

Fremantle kicked 8.2 in the first quarter and 2.0 in two quarters since then. West Coast played like tripe for the first half but only 17 points behind. Two very average sides playing this game right now.

If the Dogs win on Friday night, we'll know that: A win gets us a home final vs Port A loss gets us a home final vs the Dogs Port's record against the top 8 is poor and if they lose to the Dogs it will get poorer. I'd prefer a home final vs Port than the Dogs, to be honest. But if there's no pre-finals bye, if the Dogs win and we know we're top 2 no matter what, I wouldn't be surprised to see some late outs to rest some players (and/or avoid injuries - e.g. May's never played a final, it would break my heart more than anything, ever, if he got injured in Round 23).

Didn't disgrace himself by any means but I'm still not a fan. We don't need looseness or unpredictability in our back half but that's what he brings. I felt he was caught out of position too much. Lever and Petty played well and helped cover some of the gaps but IMO today showed two things: Smith is more than adequate depth, but he remains depth. I have absolutely no idea how you draw that conclusion. When did Smith come off the injury list this year? Doesn't the fact he hasn't broken into the side at all this year until today as a late replacement really damage this statement?

No way.

Got some good resting minutes into some key players: Petracca 86% TOG (that's his least since Round 5 vs Hawthorn) Salem 86% Gawn 80% (lowest all season, by far) Jackson 69% (incredible influence despite spending nearly a third of the game on the bench) Lever 100%, Langdon 95%, Petty 93% allowed us to get some of those rests.

6 - Fritsch 5 - Petracca 4 - Jackson 3 - Langdon 2 - Salem 1 - Lever

The most obvious one is May for Smith. I'll admit I'm terribly biased against him but I didn't rate that game from Smith anywhere near as highly as others. Hasn't curbed his desire to run and push up the ground but was caught out of position a number of times by losing track of his opponent, getting sucked up the ground and then burnt on transition. Very handy depth and good to get a game into him pre-finals if we need him, but he goes straight out if May's fit. We're better with Viney than we are with Sparrow or Jordon based on their games today, so I think that's a second change. TMac should come back in as well, then the question becomes whether it's the other of Sparrow/Jordon, or Melksham. Brayshaw didn't get near it all day but having played all season, and with the ball on the other wing for lots of the game, I'd be surprised if he gets dropped now.

I actually think that was the perfect game for us. First and foremost, no injuries (as far as we know at least). Comfortable win in the end, and a comfortable final quarter (which meant A-graders got to rest in the forward line/on the bench). Got to trial new things - those final few centre bounces we had Jackson, Brayshaw, Sparrow and Jordon in the middle, for example. Found some form for Fritsch, Langdon, Spargo and Salem. Kicked 100 points with Brown and Fritsch both only playing a half of football and Pickett struggling for most of the game. And we got challenged, which IMO is far better preparation for next week and the finals than to have had a GC-like romp. The reality is this match was very close to a dead rubber - the only benefit we gain is that if the Dogs win, we'll finish top 2 even with a loss next week (but if Port wins, we have to win next week or we end up going to Adelaide for the first final). But all in all I'm really pleased with how that played out. Bowey looks so composed for a third gamer. Give Jackson the Rising Star award right now. Petracca played a more mature game, which I liked. Thought Lever and Petty did really well in May's absence (I'm going to need a hell of a lot more convincing about Smith).

Title should be "Games missed by best 22". It requires a subjective choice over who the "best 22" are. Brown's currently in our best 22, but he's missed 12 games. Tomlinson was best 22 before his injury and he's missed 13 games. That's 25 right there before you add everyone else's. That aside, we know we've had a great run with injuries this year. This stat doesn't show it (I mean, it has Brisbane at 104 games lost, but they've had a great run with injuries until the last month. There's no way anyone could argue Brisbane has had a worse run with injuries than the Dogs this year).

There's nothing at all in the Dangerfield report. On Hawkins I'm torn. That's pretty close to just a run of the mill run down tackle and if that was a Melbourne player, I reckon we'd be pretty upset with the notion of him being suspended. But he did pin the arm and he did drive him head first into the ground, in circumstances where he probably could have avoided doing so. And we know the MRO loves the outcome as much as the action, and with Joyce being concussed, you'd think he'll be given two weeks (careless, high, high = two weeks). Which presumably means the Tribunal will be sitting on Tuesday.

Even if so, the worst possible result for us is an away game against Port, which is probably the only option where we will find ourselves in "hostile" territory.

Record against the current top 8: Melbourne: 7-2 Bulldogs: 6-3 Sydney: 5-3 Geelong: 4-4 GWS: 4-5 Brisbane: 3-4 Port: 2-5 West Coast: 1-6 GWS, the Dogs and we have had the most games against the top 8, with the Dogs and us to get another one next week (although those figures will change if Essendon replaces West Coast in the top 8).

Well analysed. Just to round it off, if we lose to Adelaide tomorrow, then: If we beat Geelong: (a) we finish 1st and play Port if the Dogs beat Port; or (b) we finish 2nd and play Geelong if Port beats the Dogs If we lose to Geelong: (a) we finish 4th and play Geelong if the Dogs beat Port; or (b) we finish 3rd and play Port if Port beats the Dogs This means that, before tomorrow's game, we can finish anywhere from 1st to 4th, we can host any of the Dogs, Brisbane, Port and Geelong in the first final, and we can still be away to the Dogs, Geelong or Port in the first final.

Brisbane now just 1.8% behind the Dogs. If they beat West Coast next week and the Dogs lose to Port, there is every chance the Dogs miss the top 4. That would be ridiculous for a side that has been in the top 2 on the ladder since Round 3. Having said that, Port hasn't beaten a side in the top 4 all year, and they've barely beaten anyone in the top 8.