titan_uranus

The Harmes-Libba thing is interesting. Do we do it again because it worked so well last time, or do we avoid it because they may have prepared for it and either it won't be as effective, or we could maybe surprise them by sending Harmes to someone else? I'm inclined to think Libba won't be tagged out of it by the same player twice in one year, so I'm not sure it will work as well for us again this time.

Is it, though? It's one thing to stop May and Lever taking intercept marks, but you then have to do something with it when the ball hits the deck. I'm sure, though, that they won't have all of Naughton, Bruce, Ugle-Hagan, Schache and English forward at once. Most likely English/Bruce will be in the ruck, and one of the others will be on the bench, meaning three at a time with mediums/smalls around them. Ugle-Hagan was good last week but nowhere the week before when the pressure was on vs Sydney. Schache is just meh. My concern remains, as it would have been regardless of selection, on Naughton and their midfield.

English too. I wonder whether this is a ruck issue - they don't want to be too small when Bruce is in the ruck giving English a rest, so they want to ensure that at any time they have Naughton, Ugle-Hagan and one of Bruce/Schache forward to keep May and Lever honest.

Obviously! Fixed. Also Mitch Hannan comes back.

Dogs have gone tall, bringing in Schache to play alongside Bruce and Ugle-Hagan (and Naughton, of course).

Emergencies are Bedford, Sparrow, Weideman and J Smith (i.e. Sparrow, last week's medi-sub, is "out").

Harmes in for vandenBerg.

I agree with this. On a disruption basis, our fixture has been good. But this is also true: On a financial basis, we've copped it bad. I haven't read that Herald Sun article but it would be no surprise to me at all if we had the worst financial result from the COVID disruption this year of any club. We've had four home games impacted by the two Victorian lockdowns, two of which were huge (Alice Springs and Queen's Birthday), one of which is this weekend's 1 v 2 game that you'd expect to have filled whatever capacity the MCG was allowed up to maybe 60,000 in a non-COVID year, and another vs a Victorian club in Hawthorn. A contrast is Hawthorn, who so far have had one home game impacted: their Round 14 home game vs Essendon, which was moved to their other home ground in Tasmania and drew a huge crowd. Every other game they've played in the two Victorian lockdowns has been an away game, including again this week. So whilst disruption wise it's been a good year, financially it's been terrible.

The COVID stuff is draining but jeepers, "return to 2020 form and results"? We've lost a grand total of zero consecutive matches. One draw, the week after belting a top 4 side on their home ground. And we're top of the [censored] ladder!

Those are last year's stats, @jnrmac. The menu at the top allows you to select a season and you've got it on 2020.

Brown's key responsibility is to be a good forward. That might mean kicking goals one week, but if he's not kicking goals he needs to be leading, making contests, being a threat, etc., to help release pressure on TMac/Fritsch and to bring our smalls into play. Given how we played vs Essendon and GWS, I remain of the view that we can't go into games with just TMac as the tall, and Fritsch/Jackson as support. We need, IMO, a second tall. Our options really are Brown or Weideman. Brown's now had five games, the same as Weideman, and his stats are now almost universally better than Weideman's for the season. Weideman averages more tackles per game and more defensive half pressure acts, but Brown otherwise is doing more: he gets more disposals, has more kicks, generates more inside 50s, has a higher disposal efficiency, gets the ball at ground level more (ground ball gets), takes more marks (contested and uncontested), kicks double the goals, and has more shots on goal per game. So in my view, we have two options, and the one currently in the side is outperforming the other one, and we need one of them in the side, so there shouldn't be any debate right now about Brown holding his spot, not unless/until his performances are inferior to what we'd expect from Weideman.

Where did you see that? Footywire has us 4th in the comp, at 61.8 tackles per game (GC, Sydney and St Kilda the three clubs above us). And we're 9th for team/opponent average differential of tackles, at +1.4 (i.e. we average 1.4 more tackles than our opponent each week). We're 9th for average clearances per game, and 7th for team/opponent differential at +1.0 (i.e. we average 1 more clearance than our opponent each week). Or were you referring to a recent period?

This seems to be the AFL's position. Don't have a bye if the games can go ahead. If Port-Collingwood and Adelaide-Hawthorn can proceed in Melbourne, then they should proceed. Save the bye for a week where it's impossible, rather than just difficult The problem is that the harder it gets, the more unfair the solutions become. Having Fremantle host Carlton at the MCG is unfair. Ditto Port hosting Collingwood. Both are instances of one side getting two home games in one season against a particular opponent, with Carlton already having hosted Fremantle in Melbourne and Collingwood the same with Port. The AFL will say who cares, just play, but it's becoming harder and harder to justify that.

The concern I have isn't losing to teams outside the 8, it's specifically against the four clear bottom 4 sides of 2021: Adelaide, Collingwood, Hawthorn and North. I can't off the top of my head think of any top 8 side with a record as poor as our 2-1-3 record against those four sides. I'm not suggesting that good sides should never lose to bottom 10 sides: that's unrealistic. And ultimately if we're going to lose games it is less damaging to lose them to bottom sides than our competitors around us. But to be at less than 50% against bottom 4 sides says to me that we don't prepare for those particular games, where we are overwhelming favourites and there is an expectation we'll walk it in.

But most of these stats were the same when we were 11-1. We've been mid-table for hit outs to advantage and clearances all season, it's not like we were dominant and have fallen away. So the two areas that are of real concern IMO are pressure and transition, and for mine pressure takes the cake - it's elite when we're the hunters, against a strong side, etc., but it's nowhere near as good when we're the hunted and our lesser opponent throws caution to the wind. I don't consider our ball movement to be a big concern - we're generating plenty of inside 50s, marks inside 50 and shots on goal, and if we were nailing our easier set shots we'd probably have beaten GWS and Hawthorn. By leaving 10 out of 12 premiership points on the table vs Adelaide, Collingwood and Hawthorn, we're forcing ourselves to bring elite pressure every time we play a top 8 side, including again this week. I have faith we can do it, but one slip up vs the Dogs, West Coast or Geelong and we could well lose our top 4 spot.

Last time they belted us in clearances 36-27 (including 25-14 at stoppages), had 54 more disposals, 6 more inside 50s and, despite having more of the ball, they had 11 more tackles (57-46). But we still won. The confidence I take from that is that they got on top in areas they usually get on top in, but couldn't work out how to turn that into an effective method of scoring.

I agree re: Martin. In our game last year English rucked the first half and we led at half time. Beveridge was so angry at the ruck situation he swapped English and Bruce. Bruce ended up doing better than English in the ruck (was a low bar to cross) and English kicked 2-3 goals and helped win them the game. They're a better side with Martin first ruck and Naughton, Bruce and English in their forward line. They're close to getting Libba, Wood and Vandermeer back from injury. I'm not 100% sure if Wood and Vandermeer are best 22 but I would have thought so. But Martin's not ready this week. Presumably they'll stick with a Naughton, Bruce and Ugle-Hagan forward line.

This is happening literally every week. There's merit to your argument that the AFL has better things to think about than this, but it's not that much of a strain on the AFL to move this game. And if the shoe was on our foot, there's no way you'd call it a "minor inconvenience". I mean, look at how we reacted to being asked to play in Darwin.

Here is some statistical comparisons (on averages) for this season between Viney, Petracca, Oliver, Jordon and Harmes: Tackles: Viney 7.4, Oliver 5.2, Harmes 5.2, Jordon 5.1, Petracca 4.1 Tackles inside 50: Viney 1.4, Jordon 1.1, Harmes 0.7, Oliver 0.5, Petracca 0.4 Pressure acts: Viney 26.7, Harmes 24.2, Oliver 23, Petracca 22.1, Jordon 18.2 Score involvements: Petracca 7.8, Oliver 7.4, Viney 4.6, Harmes 3.9, Jordon 3.7 Goal assists: Oliver 0.5, Petracca 0.5, Harmes 0.3, Jordon 0.3, Viney 0 Inside 50s: Petracca 7.3, Oliver 5.2, Viney 4.2, Harmes 3.4, Jordon 2.4 Clearances: Oliver 7.5, Petracca 6.3, Viney 4.4, Harmes 3.1, Jordon 1.7 Centre clearances: Oliver 2.9, Petracca 2.9, Viney 1.6, Harmes 1.1, Jordon 0.3 Stoppage clearances: Oliver 4.6, Petracca 3.4, Viney 2.9, Harmes 2.0, Jordon 1.4 Contested possessions: Oliver 16.6, Petracca 14.1, Viney 10.8, Harmes 9.8, Jordon 6.1 Turnovers: Petracca 6.9, Oliver 5.2, Viney 4.9, Harmes 3.7, Jordon 3.4 Clangers: Petracca 5.3, Oliver 5.1, Harmes 4.0, Viney 3.9, Jordon 2.5 Ground ball gets: Oliver 10.5, Petracca 9.5, Harmes 7.4, Viney 6.1, Jordon 4.8 Metres gained: Petracca 545.1, Oliver 420.5, Viney 274.8, Oliver 243.2, Harmes 231.2 Marks: Petracca 5.3, Oliver 4.1, Harmes 3.3, Jordon 2.9, Viney 2.2 Viney rates top for some defensive stats (tackles and pressure acts) but mid-table for offensive stats. Which makes sense, tbh.

I wouldn't have expected us to be favourites in the betting market but: The game is at the MCG, where the Dogs are 1-1 this year, with a run of the mill win vs Collingwood and then a second-half trouncing by Richmond, and they haven't played there since Round 7 The Dogs aren't really in form - they're 4-3 over their last 7 games (we're 4-2-1 by comparison) and the only one of their 4 wins in that stretch of note was vs West Coast, who aren't in any form to speak of themselves (and there was no crowd at their game in Perth) - remaining wins were vs Fremantle, North and Gold Coast Each of the last two weeks they've only generated 20 scoring shots (equal third-lowest they've had all year) and each of the last three weeks they've conceded 24 scoring shots (second-worst they've had all year) They scored 100+ points in 6 of their first 10 games but since Round 11 (losing to us) they've only reached 100 once We've already comprehensively outplayed them once this year

It's unbelievably bad luck that the AFL has had two 1 v 2 games this year and both of them have occurred during lockdowns. This is now three of (you'd expect) our top four most profitable home games lost due to COVID (Brisbane, Queen's Birthday and this, with the fourth being ANZAC Eve). We also lost a home game vs Hawthorn, a larger Victorian club. Even if we get a crowd vs Adelaide, the best we'll do this year is to finish with six home games at the MCG in front of crowds for the season, and of those games four will have been against interstate sides. I have no idea how that stacks up against other clubs but I'd be surprised if many clubs had a worse set of home game crowds. Edit: I missed the Carlton game. So it's a bit better - crowds at 6 home games, 7 if we get Adelaide.

It's very simple and brought about by some very lucky fixturing. Melbourne, the Dogs, GC, Adelaide, Hawthorn and Brisbane all play each other in the original Round 19 fixture, and the original Round 20 fixture. So the three games are flipped, because they can be, and it doesn't affect any of the other clubs or games. So GC now plays Brisbane this week instead of next week, and Adelaide now plays Hawthorn this week instead of next week. That allows us to play the Dogs this week, and then next week we return to GC v Melb, Hawthorn v Brisbane and Bulldogs v Adelaide.

Except none of this was apparent last week vs Port. The playing like individuals thing seems only to show up when we struggle against bottom 10 sides - i.e. I think the struggles kick in first, and then those players you've mentioned return to pre-2021 form and start trying to be the hero. The root cause of that, IMO, is that we don't prepare properly for bottom 10 opponents (i.e. the ruthlessness and intensity we show vs top 8 sides is missing from the first bounce). So whether it's a bad start (Collingwood, GWS) or it's getting a lead and then feeling too comfortable (Adelaide, Hawthorn), we let bad teams fight back and get belief, and when the pressure of "oh no we're going to lose this game when we're not supposed to" sets in, our players deviate from the system that has won us 13 games. What about our draw is a positive? Repeat games against the Bulldogs and Geelong, the two best sides in it. As much travel as any other Victorian side, including two trips to Adelaide, a trip to Perth, a trip to Geelong, and a possible trip to Darwin. At least three games after this week without a crowd (Dogs x 2, Hawthorn), and a further two home games in front of almost no Melbourne supporters (Brisbane, Collingwood). Whilst I'm supportive of the argument that we have an attitude problem in these games, I actually think too much is being made of the Oliver-Spargo thing. I'm not entirely sure Oliver was all that angry, and it's possible Spargo ignored Oliver's call or something like that. Oliver was also fresh off running the length of the field to make that option, so it's not as if he wasn't doing the team thing to get there. In-game stuff like that is not as big IMO as stuff like laughing at half time, or Gawn smiling on the bench - stuff like that IMO shows me what's really going through our players' heads by way of preparation and thought. Selwood's a good example - I can't imagine he'd ever be laughing at HT of any match, but on field does anyone whinge at the umpires more than him?

The AFL loves the flexibility associated with moving the repeat games around, so I'm not sure they'll immediately go for the first 17 games being 17 opponents. It surely won't happen. We'll likely be in lockdown until the end of this week at the earliest, and I can't see the NT allowing anyone who has been in Victoria this weekend (which we will be, when we play the Dogs) to enter the NT next week. Surely the game has to be moved to Queensland. Why? Finals are still just under two months away. Last time things got dire in Victoria was a similar time period ago, and we'd recovered to the point of having decent-ish crowds back by last week.

Tom Morris reporting that we're playing the Dogs on Saturday night: Friday Port Adelaide v Collingwood (Adelaide Oval) Saturday Carlton v North Melbourne (Marvel Stadium) Gold Coast v Brisbane (GABBA) West Coast v St Kilda (Optus Stadium) Adelaide v Hawthorn (Adelaide Oval) Melbourne v Western Bulldogs (MCG) Sunday Sydney v Fremantle (Metricon Stadium) Geelong v Richmond (MCG) Essendon v GWS (Metricon Stadium)