titan_uranus

We were 6.5 to 2.2 against the Dogs in the first quarter, and from then on the Dogs never got closer than 14 points. From halfway through the first quarter on ANZAC Eve onwards we were the dominant side and Richmond never, not once, looked like getting back into the game. We were four goals up on Fremantle at quarter time and aside from five minutes in the third quarter where they kicked two goals in a row, that margin sat at around the 20-point mark for three quarters. And we've only been behind in the fourth quarter for one quarter (Collingwood) and 40 seconds (Adelaide). We're doing far more comfortably than you think.

Agree. There are two forwards averaging 3+ goals per game - Walker and Mackay (both 3.1). This is the sort of reasoning that is all over Demonland. We don't lack "hardness" or "pressure". They're our hallmarks. I think there's a reasonable argument that he would, indeed, be the "worst in the team" in regard to disposals. In his previous AFL outings he's been a great tackler but that's about it. Last year he was a liability with ball in hand and repeatedly gave away dumb free kicks. We cannot afford that sort of player now that we're a genuine flag contender. And who does he replace? Don't tell me ANB, Spargo or Pickett, as he's not a forward. I love vandenBerg's endeavour, willingness to get back after all his injuries, and tackling ability, but he's not best 22 and IMO isn't even that close.

Interesting, this. Both coaches agreed May was BOG. Then the coaches barely agreed on anyone else in the top 5 (e.g. one had Lever 2nd and no Gawn, the other had Gawn 2nd and no Lever).

Yesterday Jon Ralph was all over Fox Footy and the Herald Sun telling everyone hubs and a footy frenzy were on the cards. Today:

Well the other way to know you're a close contact is to check the exposure site listings online. We don't know if the flight attendant was a close contact by way of an exposure site, but if they were, and they didn't check, that hurts. I agree with your question though. Who have we been vaccinating this whole time if not frontline workers? How was the limo driver both unvaccinated and allowed to work without a mask? These sorts of mistakes are unforgiveable in June 2021, 15 months in.

ANB had 31 pressure acts (only Viney for either side had more), 5 tackles (our most), and his opponent was Hind who didn't do much at all. The vandenBerg love in has got to be toned back. He's not best 22 and he doesn't have the speed, tank or forward nous to replace ANB.

Sure. I'm not of the view we can't beat them, but if I had to pick my biggest fear of our competitors, it's them.

Sydney's beaten Brisbane and Geelong, nearly just beat Port in Adelaide, and also beat Richmond on the G. They're not pushovers and are a bit like us in that they seem to do better against good sides than bad. But yes, we have the hardest draw of our competitors and it's going to require us to win some big 8-point games to hold our top 2 spot.

My biggest concerns from here are: COVID disruptions impacting our fixture or preventing us supporters from being there at finals time Injuries disrupting our stable line-up the Bulldogs Geelong

Is there any real doubt about us being able to play Port in Adelaide? SA's current rules don't prohibit it. By the time of the game we won't have been in NSW in the previous fortnight so unless things get worse from here, we'll be going to Adelaide won't we?

They've got Sydney, in the top 8, and Essendon, pressing for top 8. Their game against us is at the G, a ground we're undefeated at this year and not their strongest ground. Our "ordinary percentage" of 131.4% 0.1% behind Brisbane and then 9.2% or more in front of everyone else? FFS. See above. We're 10% ahead of everyone on percentage except Brisbane. That gets us, on your doomsday scenario, to 3rd. As to the draw, yes we have more games against good sides than anyone else, but: We're 5-0 against the top 8 and 9-0 against the top 12 It may be a good thing to be repeatedly tested in the final eight weeks prior to finals. Or would you rather play rubbish sides who we won't see again in September? We were missing Tomlinson, whilst McLean is not "pivotal" to their line up, he's arguably not even in their best 22 when Treloar and Dunkley are fit. The Dogs are good, obviously, but I'm sick of people always looking for reasons to doubt us.

You can't on the one hand be like "the other clubs are going to up their defence in finals" and then criticise me for arguing we could have kicked 14.9. There's no substance behind your argument that the other sides are, just cos, going to match our defence in finals. The point I am making about the 9.14 is that we still generated 23 scoring shots. Our forward half work can improve, no question, but it's nowhere near as bad as you've been arguing, and the net result of all that is that we're not "going nowhere" in the finals, as you claimed.

There are some huge issues facing the AFL. Talk of a footy frenzy is dangerous - they cannot reduce games to 16 minute quarters having had 15 rounds of 20 minute quarters. But asking players to back up full length games on 4-day breaks, which is what was required to compress the fixture last year, is dangerous (and the AFLPA will, rightly, revolt). Then there is "fixture integrity". They can't reduce the season to 17 games because some return games have already happened (Essendon v Hawthorn, Brisbane v Geelong, Richmond v St Kilda, North v GC, West Coast v Bulldogs were all repeat games). So the "least" number of games that can be played now is 18 per club, but then how does the AFL work out who everyone else's return game is against? Another example is Fremantle v Carlton next week. There is talk of that game being moved from Perth to Melbourne. But Carlton has already played Fremantle at Marvel earlier this year. How can Carlton get two home games against the same side? There are serious problems here if WA and SA don't let sides in.

Whilst this isn't an unreasonable argument, this GWS defence you speak highly of just conceded 90 points to Hawthorn. Dylan Moore, 176cm tall, kicked 4.1, whilst Tim O'Brien, a distinctly mediocre tall, kicked 2.2.

From the replay they showed at the ground it looked pretty clearly a goal to me. The entire ball has to cross the line before it's a score and on the replay looked relatively clearly like he got his boot to it before the whole thing had crossed. Why do we have to assume that? If our rivals haven't improved their defence after 14 games, why will it suddenly improve in the last 8? Meanwhile our "weakness" forward of centre isn't that bad anyway. We still had 23 scoring shots last night. 9.14 makes the score a lot lower than it ought to have been. 14.9 and no one's complaining about our ability to score.

GWS' recent "form" is a furphy. Since beating West Coast in Round 10 they've been thrashed by Brisbane, drew with North and had a win over an inept Carlton, and have now lost to Hawthorn. Right now, COVID aside, I'd argue Fremantle are as well placed as anyone to displace Richmond or Sydney from the top 8.

Jon Ralph and Eddie on Fox Footy have been going OTT hyperbolic with their statements about the AFL being close to crisis with COVID. However, they are raising issues worth considering. We know players don't want hubs, and we know the AFL has told players hubs are a last resort. Eddie's suggestion was that the AFL will do another "footy frenzy" to get a stack of games played in a short period, which limits the time the NSW and WA clubs may have to spend out of their home states, so that they can then go home to be with their families for a 2-3 week period, presumably during which the competition takes a break.

We're 15th for average centre clearance differential, at -1.4. Only Gold Coast, Carlton and Hawthorn are worse. But what I can't find is our average scores conceded from clearances and/or centre clearances. Because I'm relatively sure that stat will be strong in our favour. For example, we're miles in front on average intercept possession differential, at +7.6. Geelong's second at +4.4, Brisbane third at +2.8. So we might be giving up more centre clearances but we know we also win it back a hell of a lot more than our opponents.

Yes but you also "had us down" for a loss vs Essendon. Remember, you've been wrong before.

Hitouts to advantage: Gawn 10 Jackson 6 Draper 3 Wright 3 Everyone else 0 Centre clearances: Oliver 3 Merrett 3 Gawn 2 Draper 2 Harmes 2 Parish 2 Langford 2 Everyone else 1 or 0

Rubbish. We are going places in finals because of our defence. Remember, we're 5-0 against the top 8 and 8-0 against the top 11. Our gameplan stands up when it matters. Each of the Dogs, Brisbane, Essendon, Geelong and Sydney are top 8 for average points for per game (indeed, the Dogs. When they played us, they scored: Geelong - 9.6.60, their second-lowest score of the season and lowest number of scoring shots Sydney - 8.10.58, their second-lowest score of the season and third-lowest number of scoring shots Bulldogs - 8.9.57, their second-lowest score of the season and lowest number of scoring shots Brisbane - 11.9.75, their fourth-lowest score of the season and third-lowest number of scoring shots Essendon - 8.9.57, their second-lowest score of the season and second-lowest number of scoring shots

Dear lord this is a terrible take. It was just a mis-kick. He ran around the man on the mark to try to get the extra distance to score. He shanked it.

Mmm semantics maybe, but yes if anyone "dominated the centre" it was Merrett. I'd say Gawn dominated his opponent, which was critical to our win.

Yep they were insufferable at the ground.

You said we were beaten "time and time again" in a stat we broke even in. We had as many quick centre clearances as they did. If anything, the disappointment was from stoppage clearances.