titan_uranus
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by titan_uranus
-
-
On 8/25/2021 at 10:43 AM, Stiff Arm said:
People make stupid choices on an all too regular basis, doesn’t mean we exclude them from accessing public health care (which their taxes also contribute towards).
Should we also restrict health care for those who fail to wear a seatbelt, or whose BAC is over .05, or swim outside the flags at the beach? Or, god forbid, play contact sports such as football? Of course I'm being a bit facetious with that one
Who decides where we draw the line? Happy-clappy ScoMo? No thanks.
Exclusions from day-to-day activities should be enough of a penalty. And hopefully enough of an incentive to get the jab.
There is indeed a very valid debate to be had around the morality of these sorts of decisions.
I will say, though, that for at least some of these examples you've cited, those actions are either criminal or at least capable of being punished by fines (e.g. not wearing a seatbelt or having a BAC over .05).
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:
Kind of a shame that Dr D was banned. I was hoping we could all discuss his post-bye W-L predictions.
-
3
-
-
It's not that long ago that we were a shambles, with continued off-field disasters compounding our on-field woes.
I agree that Carlton's mucked this up royally, but maybe let's just reflect on how hard it can be to get things right after years of underperformance.
-
8
-
-
11 hours ago, rpfc said:
Agreed CB. 6th has won 15 games... That doesn't happen often. 2016 and 2012 are the only times I believe (i checked back to 1964 - FMD if I am going further).
Plus GWS are full of good players and Essendon are full of themselves.
That's mean but they are full of belief.
Will be a ripper series and I just hope we show ourselves for 3 games and continue to trust ourselves, our teammates and the gameplan. We will win if we do that.
Whilst 6th has won 15 games, 7th only won 11 and with a percentage under 100%.
It's funny that despite 7th and 8th having relatively terrible records to make finals, it's still feels like a very even first week of finals.
11 hours ago, At the break of Gawn said:The fact they are the highest scoring side in the league worries me by itself. I honestly feel this could be our toughest game of the finals series. I’d honestly love for us to win all 3 games by 50+ points but I somehow think it won’t come that easy to us.
Most of their big scores were either at the Gabba or against weak sides.
6 of their 7 losses this year were away from the Gabba.
They're still dangerous of course, but I think much of their prowess comes from having had a very easy fixture (no top 8 opponents in the last two months), and they only left Queensland five times since ANZAC Day.
-
5
-
-
9 hours ago, olisik said:
Least I’m not the only one concerned by Laurie and what has (or hasn’t) been shown to date. First year I get it but usually you see something worth working on. By all accounts Laurie hasn’t set the world on fire in any matches played so far. Hope I am wrong.
We traded our first rounder this year for him.
Good to see that you haven't lost your ability to post absolute rubbish despite the side sitting top of the ladder.
Remember how you spent large portions of 2020 complaining about our trade for Pickett?
-
10
-
1
-
-
If we go in unchanged, we'll have five changes:
In: Bowey, Smith, Viney, Brown, Langdon
Out: Hunt, Hibberd, Jordon, Weideman, Melksham
They'll be missing Hipwood but otherwise will be pretty much the same side as last time we played.
-
3
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, kev martin said:
That is right, the script is for the benefit of the AFL not MFC.
My argument is not about the effect on this game but on the finals campaign. We are on an even playing field against Brisbane.
That is why I feel the Dogs get a hand up. Nine Days to prepare for the next phase of the season. I wouldn't be surprised if they turn their form around and give the finals a shake.
I understand the choice for Adelaide. The beautiful stadium, neutral crowd, accessibility, but it still involves that quarantine. Which again disrupts our pre-finals preparation.
You can keep saying, my arguments are obviously wrong, but it is my opinion.
We are being shafted.
The last 4 weeks of Home and Away were tough, good teams, excessive travel, quarantines, we did alright finishing top. Though, no benefits what so ever, from it.
My preference would have been, play Brisbane at the MCG on the Sunday.
Allow fully vaccinated spectators in, or no crowds.
Your arguments are just silly.
It's not just the AFL who want us on prime time. We want to be on prime time. After all the hard work we've done to make ourselves relevant, you want us to be off broadway.
Why do you care about the Dogs? If they win their EF they have to back up into a 6-day break for their next game, against a side (us or Brisbane) on a 7-day break. See how that's an advantage for us? And we'd be on an even playing field with Brisbane as to days break no matter what day the game is played.
You're arguing conspiracy theories and AFL "shafting" when the reality is the AFL has made a really obvious decision (I'm talking timeslot, not venue) that shouldn't need to be explained.
On the issue of playing in Adelaide vs Melbourne, I share some sympathy with the argument that for a crowd of 15,000 max (with no guarantee we get the full 15,000 there), there is little benefit to playing the game in Adelaide as compared to an empty MCG. But such is life. It would have happened last year but it was coincidental in the extreme that 1st and 2nd were Port and Brisbane, who then both won their QFs, which took the decision out of the AFL's hands.
-
1
-
-
Back surgery is intense. Not that ACL surgery is easy, but back surgery is different. And he's 30.
That aside, and assuming he's fully fit with no long term increased risk of injury, I'm not convinced this is the right fit.
Where would he play, and at whose expense? He's too good to be depth (i.e. he'd only go somewhere to be best 22), so he has to be a walk-up start in our 22, which means he has to be an upgrade on TMac/Brown, or Fritsch, or Spargo/ANB/Pickett.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, drdrake said:
Was the comment incorrect.
Yes.
"he is needed on our list we have no other tall forward" - well that's obviously incorrect.
"Lets be honest, TMac hasn't been any good for the last 12 odd weeks" - in the last 12 weeks TMac has kicked 3 goals each against the Bulldogs, Brisbane and Port Adelaide, and had a 22 possession + 10 mark game vs GWS where the only thing missing was accurate goal kicking.
"the start of the season amazing but has fallen away" - yes he was kicking more goals at the start of the season but his relative form slump coincided with the entire side slumping somewhat in the first few weeks post-bye.
"B Brown isn't really setting the world on fire kicking some goals but yet to really have an outstanding game" - Brown's kicked multiple goals for five straight games, has had at least 5 marks in each of those games, and importantly has lifted his tackling and pressure numbers across that period
"M Brown isn't getting any younger" - sure, but Weideman also "isn't getting any younger"
"Daw isn't a forward" - probably the only part of the post I agree with.
Of course, the overall point you're making in general doesn't take into account our forward line as a unit, ignores Fritsch's presence (he was just named to the AA squad FFS), and ignores Weideman's struggles with form when in the seniors this year.
-
8
-
2
-
-
12 hours ago, kev martin said:
The Dogs got 9 days.
They also don't have quarantine procedures, fly in fly out.
Would prefer at least some advantage to being top of ladder.
We have had flown a fair bit in the last 3-4 weeks.
I care! Why did we not get the Sunday game?
The two night slots are the prime time slots. The club and the AFL want us playing in one of them.
7 days is more than enough for us to prepare. If you're of the view that 7 days is light on, how does Brisbane feel? Why give our opponent more time to prepare?
And why would you put us on Sunday, the dead zone timeslot - whoever loses that game then would have a shorter break into the semi, despite finishing above their opponent. That would be unfair.
You're complaining about the Dogs being "given" the Sunday game. They have no choice but to win it, and if they do they'll then be on a six-day break into their semi whereas we or Brisbane will be on a 7-day break.
It's blindingly obvious why we're not on the Sunday.
And as to venues, there is evidence to suggest we were offered a choice of venue and chose the Adelaide Oval. Which probably makes sense, given that AFAIK the Melbourne Football Club has never, not once, played at York Park. Do you really want us to go play at a venue we've never played at before for a massive final, against a side who played there just a month ago? Meanwhile just a few weeks ago we were stuck on a plane for a day, then belted the Suns by 100 points, then got put in a hotel for a week, then beat West Coast in Perth with a 95% pro-Eagles crowd.
The "choice" was as blindingly obvious as the reason we're playing on Saturday night.
-
10
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Dwight Schrute said:
Get the feeling the Lions are the most in form team in it at the moment, Cats last 3 they're 1-3 and only fell over the line against the Saints,
It's easy to be in good form when your last three games are against Fremantle, Collingwood and West Coast.
It's also easy to drop a game or two when your last three games are against GWS, St Kilda and Melbourne.
IMO, Brisbane's and Essendon's formlines are mirages.
Port's and GWS' formlines are far stronger.
-
3 hours ago, MadAsHell said:
If only there were a ground close to the city which we could make our own that has room for the facilities we're after!?
Of course the true answer to this question is the land that is now the Holden Centre.
We should underwrite a redevelopment of Victoria Park on the basis that Collingwood moves there and we can then use the Holden Centre oval and land.
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, kev martin said:
With such a hectic finish to the home and away and there are not many privileges for a top of ladder.
How did the Dogs get an 8 day break going into the finals?
Someone had to play on the Sunday so someone was going to get an 8+ day break.
Who cares. We got 7 days, which is better than 6.
20 hours ago, At the break of Gawn said:Lions have won their past two at Adelaide Oval. I feel you can only really count their form from 2019 when they became good. I know we play AO well, but it’s not a venue that has troubled them.
Yes but this year's game was vs Adelaide, a bottom 4 side. They didn't play there in 2020. In 2019 they beat Port there, but in 2019 Port didn't make the finals.
In the same time period we've played there four times to their twice, and one of our wins is far more meritorious (Port this year) than any win they've probably ever had at that venue.
-
1
-
-
I'm surprised and quite pleased to see the number of people who agree he does it, and those who say they'd prefer it if he didn't.
We have collectively lost our [censored] at Selwood, Shuey and Mathieson in years gone by, so it would be hypocritical to say Spargo doing it is fine.
It's as much "not a good look" as Viney's incident with Collins was, and I'd prefer he stop doing it.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:
We're legit @titan_uranus, and we all know it...but don't quuuuuuuite know what to do with it - so we internalise it.
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).
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Jaded said:
I don't understand how there is even an argument that Gawn isn't the best ruckman in the competition. He is the most consistent, and has the most impact both in the ruck and around the ground. Nic Nat can't play more than 10 minutes without blowing up. Good player but not Gawn level.
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.
-
3
-
-
-
Edited by titan_uranus
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?
-
8
-
-
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).
-
4
-
-
2 hours ago, Jaded said:
Not only have we won this stat by a mile, we also played the most amount of games against the top 8 sides along with GWS.
Gotta wonder how that happened considering we didn't even make the 8 last year!
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.
-
1
-
-
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
-
4
-
1
-
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
-
2
-
1
-
24 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:
AFL got sold a lemon with this one. Got sucked right in.
And to think Adelaide are pushing their case for a GF gig when they won't even put it up to 50% capacity for its first final.
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.
-
1
-
CHANGES: QF vs Brisbane
in Melbourne Demons
Welcome to Demonland.
I doubt we'll be dropping a defender to bring in Melksham. That throws the balance of the side out.