titan_uranus

Whatever the umpires have done to Geelong this game, that free kick against them for a "hold" in defence is just terrible. That was just strong bodywork from the Geelong defender. No hold. Never should have been penalised.

I don't care. I like Salem. He's playing really well. That's all I care about.

Good to see I'm not the only one thoroughly unimpressed with Geelong. Now of course they'll probably come out next week and play a manic fast game or something, but if this is how they play next week, I like the chances of our defensive set up against their ball movement.

Mate you can't get upset at my use of stats and then "hang your hat" on kicking efficiency, which isn't a precise stat. By the way, according to the AFL website his kicking efficiency was 64.7%. That was better than Daniels, Hopper, Ward, Taranto, Toby Greene and Haynes, as well as Spargo, ANB, Hunt, Petracca, Viney, Oliver and Jones. In other words, he was above plenty of mids on both sides on the night. Efficiency was generally down yesterday I suspect in part because of how GWS chose to play, sinking players back into defence and clogging up our forward half. He gained us territory whilst doing his part in the defensive half. I don't think those stats are irrelevant, certainly no more so than the KE stat. And if we're going to start talking misquoting (which I clarified), I don't disagree that he can perform to a higher standard. I'm not satisfied with this output on its own: as I said, I thought yesterday he was good but not great. I want him to be great. I think he can be great.

Yeah I liked the play-by-play commentary last night. Kelli Underwood's voice is no more or less grating than Brian Taylor's or James Brayshaw's. She called the game fine. So did Leigh Montagna, by the way. The special comments, though, were no good. Brereton is awful, just genuinely a terrible commentator. I've never been a Healy fan either.

Geelong didn't add Smith, Higgins and Cameron to be anything less than a premiership contender and top 4 finisher. Which means they have no business losing to Hawthorn today. Pressure is on.

Did Geelong, Hawthorn or Richmond ever refuse to sign the song after any of their wins during their respective dynasties? What you're arguing is that by singing the song they're incapable of critiquing their performance or reviewing the game. That is patently ridiculous. There's no statement to make or signal to send by not signing the song. If anything, it will get people riled up that we have rifts between players and coaches. Wins are to be enjoyed. It's why people play football. If you can't reconcile celebrating a win with getting better, then you'll never get there.

Jeepers, just paraphrasing. From memory you described him last week as "filling space". Feels akin to "contributing nothing", but anyway, semantics. So he had our third most metres gained. He also had our sixth most defensive half pressure acts (Salem, Oliver, Rivers, Viney, Sparrow ahead). And our fourth most intercepts, including our second-highest intercept marks. He floated forward for a goal, too. Again, nothing spectacular, but a decent performance IMO, and a sign he's building into his role.

Why not? You've criticised Brayshaw for contributing nothing on that wing. Well, he's providing drive and is "linking up forward".

We were not at the "bare minimum", ridiculous to imply as much. Yes, our skills were poor, as they have been all year so far, but the way we set up across the ground was consistent and indeed it was our reliable structures and systems that ensured we got back into the game early. As to whether we'd have won without their injuries, you'd imagine it would have been closer but we were already turning the tide in the first and early in the second before the injuries took place. Plus Davis has been a shadow of his former self so far this year. Brayshaw was good today. Not great, just good. Some mark him too easily, I accept that. But I get the sense you mark him too harshly. 3rd highest metres gained for us is of major importance for our non-Langdon wing.

Not sure you'll get an answer until olisik returns after our next loss.

Fair re: Sparrow. 4th most pressure acts for both sides despite only 66% time on ground. But on the other side of the coin, just four touches. Melksham won't offer us that level of pressure but at his best links us up better from the back half to the front. If we're honest, Melksham's spot is probably being taken by Jones right now. Hunt is all about balance. The run is important, but to be fair to him he's doing more than that. His bodywork and aggression is better than it's ever been. But yes, his errant kicking is an issue and he needs to tighten that up, and not let himself get completely sucked up the ground too frequently.

WTF? No idea what you're on about here. Skill errors were a problem. Effort was not.

Reviewing some of the stats on the AFL website. Jordon and Sparrow only played 66% game time, Jetta 67% and surprisingly ANB only 68%. We're able to rotate them so heavily because Lever played 100%, Tomlinson 96% and Gawn 95%. Langdon a whopping 903 metres gained, Hunt then had 540 and surprisingly again, Brayshaw came in third at 483. Our forwards did their bit pressure wise: TMac 4 tackles inside 50, Fritsch 3 (big improvement in this area in his game), ANB 3, Pickett 2, Jackson 2. The only stat that gives some context to Sparrow's involvement was that he had the 4th most pressure acts for anyone from either side with 24 (Taranto 33, Viney 26, Oliver 25).

OK. The last time we went 4-0 was 1994 (which was also the last time we went 5-0).

I know we're 3-0 but tonight we had, IMO, four strugglers: TMac, Jetta, Jones, Sparrow. If Brown or Weideman were fit I'd make that change for TMac, but as it stands I don't think Petty/Daw are good enough replacements. I'd back TMac in on the G, at least one more game, before we make any pre-Brown or pre-Weideman changes. Jetta was good last week but terrible today. Is Hibberd a replacement for him? That's a change I'd consider. Jones and Sparrow are just going right now. Sparrow only had four touches all game, but did lay four tackles which I'm sure is part of his role. Jones has 15 but just one tackle. He also reverted to early-career Jones, taking too many players on and not releasing when he had options. His 300th is due to be played on ANZAC Eve. It will happen, barring injury. It's possible they move him to the sub, though, but then they risk there not being a spot to bring him back for the 300th and they simply cannot make him the sub on his 300th. So I suspect Jones stays for the next three, but then risks being shifted to the sub and then out of the side. So I'd probably consider Hibberd for Jetta. Melksham needs a run, having sat on the bench all day today, so I'm not sure he gets Sparrow's spot.

6 - Gawn 5 - Pickett 4 - Langdon 3 - Salem 2 - Fritsch 1 - Hunt

Let's start with the main one: why were we wearing our clash jumper? We've never worn it against GWS if my memory serves me right. There's no clash with our home jumper. Anyway, moving on. Obviously GWS had fitness/injury issues which limited them in the fourth. But we started turning the tide midway through the first and into the second, before Coniglio went down (prior to which they had a full bench, given the medical sub). Like last week, we were turning the game back in our favour through workrate, fitness and our structures. We still make far too many fundamental skill errors and against better sides that is going to cost us. We drop too many marks, and we miss too many kicks, including easy set shots. We gave up so many goals today through simple errors. But whilst it might be hard to know how much to draw out of that game at a team level, there's plenty to draw at an individual level. Pickett backed up last week with another great game. I thought Hunt was excellent despite some turnovers. Langdon's run is integral to our success: it is insane how frequently he will be in a back pocket and a forward pocket in the same scoring chain for us. Gawn dominated, but obviously didn't have a decent opponent. I thought Salem was great too, and I thought Brayshaw really played his role well. Possibly one of the biggest wins we got today was the time Jackson spent in the ruck and on the ball. His touch is improving. He's fumbling less, he's nailing handpasses more, and he's getting more involved generally. His pace and mobility is insane for someone his size. The more he can ruck, the more we can throw Gawn back or forward. It's a major boon for us. And of course, we did this with Petracca putting in a stinker by his standards, Oliver being shut out of a half, and May and Lever making mistakes. Regrettably TMac returned to 2019/2020 form, losing that brief foray back to 2018 TMac. If Brown was ready next week that would be the first change we'd make. Jetta struggled too. But without Brown/Weideman or Lockhart fit, there's not much competition for their spots. Possibly Hibberd for Jetta. All in all, we're 3-0 with a percentage of 137% to start the season, including a win at Marvel and a road win. There are plenty of negative posters on here who I guarantee would have taken this start had it been offered to them pre-season. That's not to say all is well: we have much sterner tests to come than the three we've had, starting next week. But we've given ourselves a platform to have a real crack at the top 8 this year. Let's go.

Not yet convinced. Improved that quarter but still struggling to stop then when they go forward.

When you think warning signs, you think that quarter. Ball spends heaps of time in our forward half but inefficiency and missed set shots mean we don’t capitalise. They break fast and score 6 times from 11 inside 50s. I do not like the look of this.

Agree with the majority, it's appalling. It used to be much better but as they've changed it over the years they seem to be focused on pushing videos down our throats. They've made more stats accessible to us, but the page is so incredibly terrible to use it's hard to actually be able to review the stats they're making available.

Indeed, across the first two rounds we had 56 scoring shots. I believe the only sides to generate more in those two rounds were Sydney and Port (61 each). Obviously if we keep kicking inaccurately it won't help so much, but we've been generating plenty of scoring shots, giving us good chances to win both games.

Big test IMO. We should win this game on paper and on form. That sort of situation doesn't usually bode well for us, but of course in 2018 the one thing we were reliable at was beating the bottom 10. It's 17 assuming GWS don't score. As they score, the margin will need to increase: currently we're +40 in points for/against, whilst Sydney is +109. So the more GWS score, the closer our margin will need to get to 60 to bridge that gap.

Aside from the impact on our attempt at finals this year, this is the big motivation for tomorrow. Get ourselves to 3-0 and sit alongside the Dogs and Sydney, and amongst contenders like West Coast, Port and Richmond, as the sides deserving of prime time TV.

Big chance for us tomorrow. We currently have the third best percentage in the AFL and sit third. A win puts us a game clear of 4th and opens up a two-game gap over most of the bottom 10 (depending on who wins out of Carlton-Fremantle and Geelong-Hawthorn). More importantly IMO, I'd love to see a win brought about by the same sort of football we've played over Rounds 1 and 2. So far only the Dogs and Sydney have been consistent through their three games. I'd love for us to stake a claim alongside them to be one of the better, more consistent, sides this year. Even if it's not accurate, I'd just like to feel like we're setting ourselves up early for a real tilt.