titan_uranus

Port beat Richmond a few weeks ago. They're not terrible. They're just inconsistent. Collingwood hasn't beaten anyone of note other than us. Port is inconsistent. Sydney was a kick away from losing three on the trot. Geelong lost to the Dogs. Hawthorn lost twice to Brisbane. Richmond can't win away from Melbourne. West Coast lost to Essendon. As @ProDee has said numerous times, there are no stand-out sides, there are just slightly more consistent sides (Richmond, West Coast) than others. If we make the 8, then we deserve it, by definition. Can't believe how many times that needs to be said. However, if we lose to all of Geelong, Adelaide, Sydney, WC and GWS, we won't make it (11 wins is not enough), so we are going to have to beat at least one, probably two, and possibly three, of those five to make it. So, if we make it, we'll have scalps, and we will deserve it. Indeed. Essendon's beaten Port, Adelaide, Geelong, GWS and West Coast, but will struggle to make the finals. They're not going to end the year saying "oh well, we beat those top 8 sides so that's good enough for us". In fact, us last year is a perfect example of it. We beat Adelaide, West Coast, Essendon and Port last year - four finalists. But when we missed the finals, no one said "well we deserved it because we beat top 8 sides". If you finish in the top 8, you deserve it. End of story.

Agreed. At any rate, Collingwood, Port and Sydney all have tough runs home (Port's gets even tougher if they somehow can't beat Fremantle today): Collingwood - North, Richmond, Sydney (away), Brisbane, Port, Fremantle (away) Port - GWS, Dogs (Ballarat), Adelaide, West Coast, Collingwood (away), Essendon Sydney - GC, Essendon (away), Collingwood, us (away), GWS (away), Hawthorn Of course, our run home is just as hard, but our destiny remains in our hands. And you never know, with those three sides having runs home like that, if we can outperform what we all think we're going to achieve (i.e. we get past 13 wins), we could go up on the ladder (I doubt it, personally).

Sydney had no business winning that, really. Bunch of players out, Kennedy goes down early. Would have preferred a North win given I don't really like Sydney, but possibly the better result for us. We're now a game and percentage clear of all of Geelong, North and Hawthorn. North still have Collingwood, West Coast, Brisbane (away) and Adelaide (away) in their run home. They needed that.

This is a ripping game. But hey, let's see more St Kilda and Carlton in prime time though.

Would keep North a game (and percentage) behind us.

TMac. Did well, IMO.

Righto, guess that's that then.

I suppose that makes Collingwood a pretender, just like us?

If we didn't pick Tyson to replace Viney when faced with a side which had already beaten us in the CPs and clearances once this year, what makes you think we'd be picking him next week? I wouldn't be going near Smith (or Pedersen, or Weideman). We've finally found some balance in our forward line and I wouldn't be throwing that out the window just because Geelong play a taller defence. That's not to say I think Hannan automatically stays in the side, but I don't know whether replacing him with height is the right call. As to OMac, I doubt it's any coincidence that he's looked less confident since Lever's injury. Yesterday was our best defensive performance since Lever went down so I don't think now is the right time to be calling OMac out.

Ah, Footywire doesn't include rushed behinds, so it thinks we had 25 scoring shots whereas the Footy Live app says we had 29 scoring shots. It certainly felt like, to me, we were more efficient going inside than we were against Fremantle (or St Kilda or Port). As to Vince, agreed, there isn't necessarily an obvious replacement, but I just don't think Vince is adding much at all. As to Jones, he wasn't really adding much to our clearance game in the first half which I'm sure is part of the reason he was the one squeezed out to get Harmes in there to tag Macrae. He may well be carrying an injury but it could just be a form slump.

Nothing special, but I thought he got better as the game went on. Defensively he was good, tackling and chasing/pressuring. Offensively, though, not as much. Didn't appear very confident with the ball, didn't seem to get involved in the play too much. I'd be happy to give him another game next week, see if he can build on this, but I wouldn't be holding my breath.

6 - Gawn 5 - Oliver 4 - Brayshaw 3 - Salem 2 - Melksham 1 - Hogan

Hawthorn and Geelong losing is obviously helpful, but GWS winning is a reminder that there are still plenty of sides ready to take our spot if we slip up. If we can beat Geelong next week, that will go a long, long way to securing our finals spot. Silly comment. We've had an easy run so far, only 4 games against the current top 8. And wrong, too. Sydney still has to play North, Essendon, Collingwood, us, GWS and Hawthorn. GWS has to play Port Adelaide, Adelaide, Sydney and us. Port has to play GWS, Adelaide, West Coast, Collingwood and Essendon. Plenty of sides have tough runs home, even if Geelong and Hawthorn don't (meanwhile Geelong lost to the Dogs two weeks ago and Hawthorn just lost to Brisbane).

There is a lot to be pleased with about today's performance. At half time Macrae and Hunter were destroying us in the middle, we were being beaten in CPs and clearances and we couldn't get scoring chains going from anywhere. A couple of small positional changes in the third quarter were critical (Harmes to Macrae, Jones out onto a wing and Lewis to half-back, with a deeper FF starting at the bounce), and we turned the game on its head. Interestingly, today we were much more efficient going inside 50 - scoring from 56% of our inside 50s compared to last week's 47%. And the Dogs got a lot of inside 50s against, but didn't score all the time (33% compared to Fremantle's 46% last week). These are complete reversals of the standard 2018 MFC. Much more efficient going inside 50 (this is in part due to the Dogs' defence being poor), and more importantly, much tighter in defence. Gawn, Oliver and Brayshaw were all stunning and their third quarter propelled us. Also thought Salem was terrific. Fritsch is a gem, Spargo's got a bright future, and Garlett adds something that our forward line was definitely missing during the three losses. I thought Lewis was good today. His kicking is getting worse unfortunately, but I thought his courage and running were much better today. However I just don't see what Vince adds to the side at all. Also thought Jones had a shocker, which didn't help our clearance numbers.

Source?

The more upsets we can get out of the rubbish sides, the better. St Kilda and Brisbane holding some form for the rest of the season helps us. Fremantle knocking over Port, Hawthorn or Collingwood (all of whom they play at home) could help too. But we have to take care of our own destiny. We have to get to 13-9, which means we absolutely have to beat the Dogs and GC and then win two of the "harder" five.

Nope, sorry. I apologise to all in advance. To be fair I think we held up defensively against Port much better. But yes, I'm pretty confident the Dogs will play the same way St Kilda and Collingwood did, and Fremantle tried to, stacking the backline and trying to run it out using the width of the G to break down our press. Last week our press/zone held up wonderfully, albeit against rubbish opposition, but I think at least partly also due to the narrow ground. Things I'd love to see, in order: A win No injuries Seeing our defensive zone/press hold up on the G Percentage Fair gap between 1 and 2, though.

Agreed. I love seeing the positivity around VDB, but he's played one VFL game in 2.5 years. There's a bit of water to go under the bridge yet. And if/when he is knocking on the door, he's not an ANB replacement.

I have been to five games this year. We've lost them all. Guess what I'm doing today...?

Sensible changes, I think. We wouldn't be seeing JKH if Stretch wasn't injured, but he is and so we are. I'm not a fan of Lewis and Vince in the same side but Smith was adding nothing and/or was injured anyway so Vince is a logical replacement.

If we finish in the top 8, then by definition we deserve to play finals, if that's what you're getting at. Any opportunity to play finals after 12 years of missing them is an opportunity worth having, whether or not we win that final. My view, though, is that we'll need to get to 13 wins to make the finals. In order to do that, we need to beat the Bulldogs and GC, and then win two out of the other five (Geelong in Geelong, Adelaide in Adelaide, Sydney, West Coast in Perth, GWS). So, if we've made it, we will have won at least two of those five games. But if we make it with 12 wins, then fine, we will have deserved to play finals even if we lose four of the those harder five games.

Terrible news, just so unlucky. Hopefully the recovery goes smoothly.

If we lose to all of Geelong, Sydney, West Coast and GWS then we will finish on 12 wins (assuming we beat the Dogs, Adelaide and GC). We'd be more likely to miss the finals than make them but "make up the numbers" in that scenario. I think to make finals we need to get to 13 wins, and to do that we have to win one of the four games you've identified.

Worst bit was he was absolutely useless yesterday until one fourth quarter mark (barely took it) and goal.

Agreed. The other thing I felt we did more of was work on not having multiple mids go inside and no one wait for the handball receive on the outside. Just felt like I noticed more players holding off on the contest and waiting to be the outlet option (Brayshaw in particular I recall doing this well).