titan_uranus

Agree, I assume the delay is because the hope is we can get into the NT. Another day or two (max) might be the difference, if we get a decent run on numbers in Victoria. If not, then NSW.

If we win the flag this year I don't care what happens in the drafting/trading period.

You're entitled to be pessimistic given what's happened over the last 15 months. But this is pure pessimism. It isn't "clearly running away from contact tracers". If it were, we'd be seeing spiralling new case numbers. Testing rates are significantly up (over 45,000) but positives are flat at 4-5. That's not "running away" from us. And we went about 1 day earlier in February than we did this time. It's not that big of a difference.

Everyone said the 5-day lockdown in February was going to be extended. It wasn't.

I see a lot of people asking for us to have a plan B or something different. We already do. Sometimes Salem or Rivers takes the kick. And sometimes, and it happened on Friday, they shape to go left but then hit a target right. And sometimes May goes short to Salem in the pocket. We're the right level of predictable IMO.

This is a massive fortnight for us and it's going to cost us a lot of money. The NT game was going to net us $800,000, according to Pert, and in pre-lockdown conditions even with Collingwood struggling we'd have hoped to draw 60,000+ to Queen's Birthday. We are going to be hit as badly as any other club from this.

I really don't get this whole media/umpire/AFL hatred conspiracy theory stuff. We've had more media than most sides this year. Heaps of articles, podcast/video discussions. It's been way, way up on previous years. If we're not getting coverage on Sunday that might be because there were five games played yesterday and we got covered yesterday before any of them had been played.

Yes but why is he covering that ground? Does the FD want Brown to cover that ground as well, and he's not capable of it? Or do they not care if Weid covers that ground but he finds himself doing it to try to get his hands on the ball more? Either way I find it interesting. Doesn't change the fact that right now Weid's got the spot and he's not going to lose it back to Brown until Brown's form improves. But if Brown's form does improve, Weid's needs to improve.

It will be flipped to a Sydney home game, there is a return game later in the year that can be flipped to a Saints home game in the hope it will be at Marvel.

It's incredible that West Coast think it's OK for him to only be capable of playing 70% of a match. Each week he needs Allen to give him a chop out so he can get through a match. It's easy as to travel, although they're going to have to stay in Perth for Dreamtime this week. COVID-aside, they've already had five road games and only one to come, plus a trip to Geelong. Stacks of Marvel/MCG games, again COVID-aside. But it's not all easy as to opponents. They do, extremely fortunately, get to repeat against all three of the clear bottom three (North, Hawthorn, Collingwood). But they're still yet to play Richmond, us, Geelong and the Dogs, and they've also got GWS, Sydney, a possibly-now-half-decent Adelaide, plus the Gold Coast away. Assume they bank the wins against the bottom 3 - that gets them to 8 wins. They've got a good percentage so they may get in on 12. So they need four more from Richmond, us, Geelong, the Dogs, Adelaide, GWS, Sydney and Gold Coast. They're certainly thereabouts. As you say, the pressure is on West Coast and Sydney (theoretically Richmond but I just don't see them missing) to hold their spots.

It's not stupid. They want to keep playing games while they can. If you give everyone a bye next week you then have to play 9 games the week after and again after that. Using the byes over three weeks allows them to use some grounds repeatedly (e.g. SCG/Giants Stadium) to get through a week. The hope here is that by the end of the bye period Victoria will be closer to "normal" and games can continue down here.

100% Weid holds his spot over Brown this week. But Weid was for most of last night poor and in their three AFL games so far this year I've seen a lot more from Brown than I have from Weid. I'm in the camp, with @binman, of whose who think Weid should have been dropped after the Carlton game rather than Brown, and I don't think Weid has done much to hold his spot. He will hold it, but that's because Brown had a shocker at Casey and doesn't get a chance to do any better this week. On the second of the above posts, those stats are marginal and as last night's game showed us, they don't always tell the entire picture (the Dogs cleaning up many stats but on the park being much worse than us). From what I saw of the Carlton game (which was most but not all of it) there was very little between Brown and Weideman. On the former, I had a look into those stats earlier this week. What I found interesting was that Weid's stats shade Brown's in many categories, but not when it comes to inside 50. So, for example, Weid's averaging 4.3 marks per game to Brown's 3.3, but Brown averages 2.3 marks inside 50 to Weid's 1.7 Similarly, Weid averages 2 tackles to Brown's 0.7, but Brown averages 0.7 tackles inside 50 to Weid's 0.3 (i.e. that means in three games Brown's laid two tackles inside 50 whilst Weideman's laid just one). And on pressure acts, Weid averages 7 to Brown's 5.3, but forward half pressure acts Brown averages 4.3 to Weid's 4. Makes me think about whether Weid is being asked to play a different role to Brown, roaming up the ground more, or whether Weid gets higher up the ground to get more involved (possibly through struggling inside 50)?

If West Coast win all their Perth games from here they finish on 11. But their remaining Perth games include Richmond, the Dogs and us. So if they drop one of those home games, they'll need to find at least two, if not three, road wins, and that's just to make the finals, let alone top 4 which will be another 1-2 wins. Their road wins are Carlton (in Sydney), Sydney, Adelaide, Collingwood and Brisbane. Essentially that says to me if they drop the Carlton game next week they are in real trouble to even make the finals.

I wonder whether this decision may be made quite late in the piece. The situation in Victoria is going to be a hell of a lot clearer in 2-3 days. The numbers will either flatline/decrease, and the panic will subside, or they will increase, and the lockdown will become a longer-term thing. If it's the former (and let's all hope that's the case), the NT government may decide the risk is small enough given the players have been isolating for a while now and are returning negative results. There's a major financial incentive for the NT to get the game going in Alice on a standalone Friday night with the two best sides in the comp (I'm not suggesting finances should win over public health but it's just a factor). If it can't go ahead in Alice, I imagine the AFL will offer us (as the home team) options, and those options are likely to be the two NSW stadiums, as I suspect NSW is least likely to kick up a fuss about us coming into their state.

Essendon's win has mucked this stat up unfortunately, pushing GWS down to 11th.

I mean, the OP can't be suggesting we muck around against Brisbane, then the next three are Collingwood, GWS and Essendon. Essendon just beat West Coast and are in the top 8 tonight with a percentage over 100%.

West Coast is going to lose to Essendon. That will put us 4 games clear of the Eagles at the halfway mark of the season. Huge. Meanwhile Essendon will be 5-6 with a percentage over 100%, and (COVID aside) they're only scheduled to travel once more this year.

There aren't words strong enough to describe how much I disagree with the OP.

As I've said in other posts, the AFL's decision to deem our jumper a clash with the Dogs is a disgrace. It's exacerbated because of it being an indigenous jumper designed to be worn in Sir Doug Nicholls round, but the core problem is the AFL's "policy" treats most clubs one way, but treats Carlton, Richmond and Essendon in a different way. They let Essendon wear a black jumper as the away side on ANZAC Day when their opponent, Collingwood, also wore a black jumper. It's embarrassingly and unfairly inconsistent.

I actually have to agree, not with the Razor Ray bit but the umpiring overall. Unlike last week, I didn't think they were continually making mistakes. There was a deliberate I didn't like, but generally I didn't notice them that much and that is always a good thing.

No, that was Carey. Daisy Pearce stands out in this commentary line up. The rest are morons.

If that was your first thought you need to chill out a bit. We're 10-1. We just beat a side almost no one thought we'd beat. We're 4-0 against the top 8, 5-0 if you include Richmond.

We're wearing it next week, we were always going to for a game in the NT I think. We'll presumably wear it again later this year in a home game against GWS or something, but this was Sir Doug Nicholls round, this was the round where the league shone its light on our indigenous players, this was the round it meant the most.

And once more: the AFL's clash jumper "policy" is a [censored] disgrace. We can't wear red vs the Dogs, and in the Sir Doug Nicholls round to boot, but Essendon can wear a black jumper on ANZAC Day against Collingwood, and Carlton gets to wear its home jumper against Richmond, Collingwood and Essendon. Steven May was talking during the week about how much it meant to him to be able to wear the jumper in Sir Doug Nicholls round. To some it's a small issue but for a competition that wants to be elite, it's a disgrace.