titan_uranus

We had a great run with injuries to this point so we're regressing to the mean, unfortunately. Fingers crossed we see some regression to the mean on our goalkicking accuracy, and that of our opponents. I see three options to replace Fritsch: A tall forward such as Daw or M Brown (B Brown if he was fit, but he's not) Melksham, with Melksham then being replaced by someone like Sparrow or someone like Chandler Petty plays forward, with Hibberd replacing May. Personally I think with Petty training back, he should only play back. So, I think the third option shouldn't be the answer. I think Melksham is the best replacement option overall but he can't match Fritsch's marking power or defensive abilities. But I think he's the best bet to ensure we don't become too tall or too slow. If we use Melksham in that role we have to replace Melksham's role but I think we can cover that reasonably well with Sparrow coming into the 22 for a full game.

Well to be fair, Jackson's played four games whilst Treacy's only played 1 and the others only 3. Still, on averages, Jackson is 2nd with an average of 1.25 contested marks per game. On averages, he's also 2nd for contested possessions and 4th for clearances.

I don't associate colour with success/failure. It's all been failure in my lifetime anyway. This is what I care about. The royal blue jumper looks great. I love it. But I only ever want to see it if there is a genuine clash. Why the [censored] did we wear it against GWS? We've never worn a clash jumper against GWS in the past (last year we wore our special heritage jumper which was navy blue). We've also started wearing it against Collingwood, which is stupid as there is again no clash with Collingwood. If we wear it this week vs Hawthorn...shudder...

Surely in contention for most improved this year. He's never been this good. What he used to have as a defender was the dash and dare. He's never had the two-way running or the physicality that he has this year. I don't mind him running halfway down the ground to drive us inside 50 because I'm more confident in our forward half game to keep the ball there that Hunt won't get exposed out of position. I'm also more confident in his ability to turn around and gut run back into defence if need be. And when we're in defence, I'm confident in his ability to win a one-on-one or to put his head over the ball when it's his turn. Loving his game so far this year.

After the game I was a bit down on Jackson's performance just in terms of his time in the forward 50. In the fourth quarter I felt we were desperate for a key forward to hold a mark when we needed to kick a goal to ice the game and he was targeted but dropped marks a few times. But on watching replays it's clear that I was far too harsh on him given his competition in the air. Whilst he wasn't clunking his marks, he wasn't being beaten either. Of course, the work he's doing when he goes into the ruck is critical to us as it gives Gawn the flexibility to drift wherever we need him, whether forward or back. Jackson can also shoulder the inside 50 ruck load which allows Gawn to sit a kick behind if need be. And Jackson's ability below his knees when playing through the middle is already good and improving.

One other stat that might be worth mentioning. We've won 12 quarters so far this year, which is the best of any club. The Dogs are on 11, Sydney 10, and Port, Richmond and Geelong are on 9. Of the four quarters we've lost, two of them were vs Fremantle in Round 1. That means in our last three games we've only lost two quarters (Q1 vs GWS, Q3 vs Geelong).

I can't help but share the concern. There is plenty of evidence so far this year to suggest these sorts of concerns are unfounded. But still. They used Worpel in a tag on Brayshaw vs Fremantle so I expect him to do the same against Oliver or Petracca. The rest of their midfield is good on paper but not performing: Mitchell, O'Meara, Wingard, Phillips. My main concern is turnovers across half forward with Jiath and Frost rebounding with pace. They butcher the ball, but we've looked our worst this year (vs St Kilda and GWS) when our opponent takes us on with foot speed through the corridor. I expect Jiath and Frost to attempt that against us.

Geelong hardly played "fast break" yesterday.

Yep, we're generating plenty of scoring opportunities, but the difference between us and two of those other sides is that we don't concede huge scoring shots against. The 39.25 (64 shots) against us is significantly less than Adelaide's 53.47 (i.e. 100 shots) or Sydney's 47.52 (99). Even the Dogs have conceded 34.35 (i.e. 69 shots). I haven't been through the rest of the comp but I'm guessing our 64 shots against is going to be close to the best. We've had some bad luck with opposition accuracy and we're missing too many shots ourselves. If those regress back to the mean...jeepers...

The stat about our opposition only scoring from 30.6% of their inside 50s is an amazing turnaround from 2017-18, where we couldn't stop sides scoring when they went inside 50.

Didn't Petty get taken off to ensure we had an emergency who didn't play a full game (Hibberd, Petty and Chandler the three)?

Wasn't sure where to put this but on On the Couch tonight they highlighted some stats: We are conceding scores from 30.6% of our opposition inside 50s, which is the best percentage ever recorded after four rounds We have six of the competition's top 21 pressure players (presumably this is measured by average pressure acts per game?) Our forward half pressure rating is the third highest rating by any club since 2013.

They play two rucks and rest one forward, and Koschitzke, and will likely replace Lewis with O'Brien. So they'll have three talls. We may need Petty for cover.

The teams we've played have a 7-5 record in their other non-Melbourne games. Same with Sydney. The teams the Dogs have beaten have a 4-9 record. Love this. It's critical to any good side.

The Cunnington one is line ball IMO. Bumping players late should be avoided. You risk hitting them in the head. But for that level of contact, surely a fine is sufficient.

I think if Jordon needs a rest, Sparrow gets his spot in the 22. IMO Sparrow earned another game with his performance after coming on. If Chandler gets Jordon's spot, in your team either Sparrow returns to being the sub or misses a spot altogether. I am biased, because I have never once rated him, but I would like to think that in 2021 we have moved beyond Joel Smith. We are winning in no small part because of our reliable team defence. Smith is a risk of doing the opposite. He is a Frost-esque loose cannon.

In this instance, I think it is. This isn't a sling tackle or a bump, which are actions that we can identify as problematic and to which we can then apply the careless/intentional matrix. This has to be one of the offences listed in the table. Is it a strike? If it's an accident, then I don't think so. Is it "unreasonable" contact to the face? If the latter, how can an accident also be "unreasonable"? If a player flies for a mark with outstretched hands, doing nothing other than playing the ball, but in the process his elbow hits another player's head, do we call that "careless" and suspend him? One of the problems with the MRO process is that we focus on the outcome too much and the action not enough. I think that's happening here again.

I reckon there's absolutely nothing to what Hawkins did and IMO if it wasn't a Melbourne player on the receiving end, and possibly if it was anyone other than Hawkins, not a single person would be suggesting otherwise. I'd say Kicking, then the fact that he hasn't trained as part of our defence, then what you've said. We are stifling teams' ability to score because of how we set up in our back half. TMac's done nothing to work on that all summer. Petty and Hibberd have.

Don't worry, old dee. We're going to lose a game at some point. And make no mistake, the usual suspects who have been conspicuously absent on here over the last four weeks are going to resurface. Then, you'll feel like things are back to "normal". Until then, though, lap it up! We're a genuine football team right now. It's been a while since we've been able to say that.

I don't think 33,000 is that bad for the game, given the weather and the timeslot. The trend is down with crowds. St Kilda v West Coast drew 16,710. Yes, St Kilda lost badly last week, but that's still terrible. Collingwood didn't crack 30,000 against GWS (the first time ever they've failed to do so at the MCG). Our crowd was only 14 less than what Port Adelaide got vs Richmond on a Friday night. With those trends in mind, 33,000 isn't so bad. However, in a "normal" year, you'd want to see that figure above 40,000. Next week is an away game but I believe a replacement game for our members. If we get some better weather you'd hope to see 40,000+ there.

6 - Gawn 5 - Viney 4 - Lever 3 - Langdon 2 - Petracca 1 - Oliver If we did 7, Fritsch would be next.

TMac won't play defence and nor should he. Hasn't trained there all summer and what is clear now is that our structures and systems are what is making us a good side. Petty to take May's spot, with the only contender being Hibberd if the opposition is small and we don't need another tall. Pressure IMO is on Melksham, Jones and Jordon, and to a lesser extent Jackson. Jackson needs to start holding his marks as the pressure on the talls mounts with B Brown and Weideman approaching selection. Melksham IMO didn't do much to justify his inclusion and IMO Sparrow's commitment once he got in as the sub was really impressive (16 pressure acts, our 7th highest despite being the sub). So whilst I'd be OK with Petty for May, I'd also be OK with Sparrow in the starting 22 to replace one of Melksham, Jordon or Jones.

An excellent performance and a hugely important win. What is noticeable about us this year is that when opposition sides get momentum, we stick with our structures and fall back on how we're drilled and trained. And it works. St Kilda, GWS and Geelong all fought back against us and in each game we relied on our structures and systems to overwhelm them. May going down is disastrous news, but the satisfying thing was the way Goodwin and the players reacted. Tomlinson stood up and played his role, Lever knew he had to play well and did (he dropped two easy marks in the first quarter but then didn't do a thing wrong and starred), we dropped Brayshaw back and he played his role, meaning we mad minimal changes to the side. We didn't throw TMac forward (and won't next week). We didn't mess around with backs/forwards. We had confidence that if we kept at it our way, we'd get it done, and we did. Already mentioned Lever but Gawn was unbelievable today. There's all this debate in the media about hit outs and their worth: well maybe the answer is Grundy is just out of form, because Gawn was turning plenty of hit outs into clearance wins for us whilst spanking Stanley around the ground. Petracca, Oliver and Viney all played well and when they're all on song, we're a good midfield. Spargo, ANB and Pickett are a joint pressure unit and each week it works. Thought Sparrow did his part when he came on, too. Hunt played even better this week, Salem is now producing consistent A-grade football, and TMac returned to Rounds 1-2 form. Based on what Goodwin and Lever said post-match I think Petty will get May's spot. Makes the most sense. Pressure will start to mount on Jackson, Jordon and Jones at some point (edit: and Melksham, too. Not sure he owned that spot today). That list pressure is a good thing, I think. The lid has to stay on a bit though: don't forget Geelong were missing Dangerfield, Cameron, Parfitt, Higgins and Rohan from their best 22. If May goes down and they have Cameron as well as Hawkins, that game plays out differently. But we're now two games and percentage clear of the majority of the competition. Last week our vanquished opponents didn't look so good but look at them this week. Maybe our form is starting to stand up. Maybe we are actually deserving of being in the top 2. Maybe we are a contender this year.

I agree with both @praha and @ArtificialWisdom. This is not new technology. The concept of buying a ticket to an event online is not groundbreaking, or a new invention post-pandemic. To the extent tickets have been able to be bought in-person or over the phone in the past is a reflection of the slowness of this particular part of our society to adapt. Even if the pandemic had never happened, moving to a cashless society is an important step forward in the current age and the use of simple online booking forms to obtain tickets is something we should have been doing for years. However, I also agree that the Ticketek website is unnecessarily confusing and cumbersome. There are aspects of the ticket purchasing process that make no sense and should be completely fixable. In the same way that this is not new technology for consumers, it is also far from a new experience for Ticketek. That its website continually is incapable of handling the rush of people trying to book when tickets are first opened for sale, that its system crashes repeatedly, that its terminology is difficult to understand even for the "younger" generations, and that it cannot work out how to send the confirmation tickets/QR codes out by email or text message prior to the game starting, are all pretty disgraceful failures for a business that should be well capable of doing better.

I wonder if going in with three tall forwards (B Brown, Weid, M Brown) is a trial of what we may want to do in the seniors, i.e. bring in B Brown and Weid to play alongside one of TMac/Jackson?