titan_uranus

There are only two of them: Collingwood and Essendon. Prior to that are the two games you've just referenced, Brisbane and the Dogs. It's not a long term trend yet. It's one game where the whole side was off, and then Essendon (which, by the way, I do not agree was our third worst game for the season. Essendon was a good opponent and that performance was superior IMO to the North and Hawthorn wins at least). These are just guff statements that aren't true. We currently average 87 points per game and have a percentage of 131.4%. Here are the last four premiers (in full seasons): 2019 Richmond averaged 86 points per game and had a percentage of 113.7%. 2018 West Coast averaged 91 points per game and had a percentage of 121.4%. 2017 Richmond averaged 90 points per game and had a percentage of 118.3%. 2016 Bulldogs averaged 86 points per game and had a percentage of 115.4%. If we keep doing what we're doing we will be right in the mix in terms of scoring, with a percentage that well exceeds any of these four recent premiers.

That's a sample size of two games. Against Essendon we did only score 68, which is low, but we also had 23 scoring shots, which is bang on our season average of 24.5 shots per game. The issue there being inaccuracy. Prior to Collingwood, our previous four scores were 97, 87, 95 and 94. The first two of those scores were produced against two of the best sides other than us, Brisbane and the Dogs. I am arguing that we can improve our scoring but that it's nowhere near the problem that is being suggested on here (although by clarifying your post it's clear you don't think it's as bad as I had thought you did). Well not the sentiment that we have the least potent forward line in the league. I also don't agree that our elite defence is irrelevant to considering the effectiveness of our forward line. It's essential, for context. We don't need to score big every week. Maybe some other clubs in the competition do (Essendon would be one example) because they're less capable of stopping sides scoring. In 2018 that was us. I also don't agree that scoring has been the primary reason for both our losses this season. We scored 95 points against Adelaide. The issue in both those games was that our opponents scored at a rate well higher than any of the other 12 sides we've played this year. But the key point remains: despite all of the so-called weaknesses, we have scored the fourth-most points in the league. We're 68 points behind Brisbane across 14 games, which is the equivalent of 4.86 points per game, i.e. less than a goal per game. Another metric is average scoring shots per game: Bulldogs - 27.57 Brisbane - 25.07 Melbourne - 24.50 Essendon - 23.76 Geelong - 23.07 Sydney - 23.07 Richmond - 22.64 Port Adelaide - 22.50 West Coast - 22.14 We generate the third-most shots on goal and the fourth-most points per game in the competition. If anything, these stats show me that our inaccuracy is holding us back. I agree with your final line, though. I'm confident this is a glass half full situation.

Who are you referring to here? Pickett? A second-year player with 28 games under his belt? Who else?

I wholly dispute the proposition that the fourth-highest scoring side can simultaneously be described as having the "least potent and least reliable forward line in the league". As to the bolded line, Fritsch is averaging 2.1 goals a game which, if he plays every game from here will result in 44 goals. Now, I accept that we're lacking a dominant forward, and I accept that our forward half connection was poor vs Essendon and has been poor in many games this year. But despite that, we're still outscoring 14 teams, and we're doing so with our elite defence (i.e. compare that with a side like Essendon who scores more than us but at a major cost to its defence). The "problem" exists but it is being blown wholly out of proportion.

We're third for average inside 50s per game, behind the Dogs and Brisbane. Essendon is 9th. I can't find average scores per inside 50, though. I'm not sure it matters much if the end argument is "we don't score enough". The end product from how we're playing is that we've scored the fourth most points of anyone. We know we prioritise time in our forward half and repeat entries, so if we have lots of inside 50s but comparatively fewer scores, but still end up outscoring 14 of the other 17 clubs, does it matter?

That's still three weeks away. Queensland's gone into lockdown very early, with only three new cases today. Previous very early lockdowns in Perth, Brisbane and Adelaide have been short and successful. Even though this is the Delta variant, I'd say the odds right now are that Queensland will be out of lockdown by the time of our game against GC. Indeed, I foresee a modicum of bad luck against us with this arrangement. The Dogs had no crowd vs West Coast. Carlton's going to get its trip to Perth brought back to Victoria, as is Richmond with its trip to the GC. Our next interstate trip is to Adelaide and right now that is the only interstate trip that is not in COVID jeopardy. So we won't "benefit" from a Victorian hub unless the SA-Vic border closes in either direction, and at the moment that's not on the cards. And that's on top of us being the only side to have two home games lost during the Victorian lockdown. Not trying to make this a "woe is us" thing. Just pointing out what I foresee to be bad luck - we could lose home games to the Victorian lockdown and then not "benefit" from the NSW, Queensland or WA lockdowns.

Just a reminder that, since 2018, we've won more finals than Brisbane. This is complete and utter bull[censored]. We have scored the fourth most points in the league. Read that again. We are top 4 for scoring. One of the three sides above us is Essendon, which means only two current top 8 sides score more than us.

Now even you're saying this? If we're fully fit, as we currently are, which midfielder is vandenBerg replacing?

Meanwhile The Age is reporting both Brisbane and GC are leaving Queensland today: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/lions-head-to-melbourne-suns-on-the-move-20210629-p5854s.html Whilst Brisbane was always planning to come here early before going to Adelaide, GC is supposed to be hosting Richmond on the GC on Thursday night. So if this report is correct, change is afoot. A Victorian hub for the next 1-3 weeks is looking increasingly likely.

Agree, but it's not just chopping and changing advice, it's letting distrust, misinformation and panic set in by being lax (in the extreme) on messaging around the entire vaccination program.

McGowan's just announced Perth's going into a four-day lockdown from midnight tonight after a third case was discovered. That will run until midnight Friday at the earliest. Aside from the country starting to spiral out of control, you'd have to think the Fremantle-Carlton game will be moved from Perth.

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.