titan_uranus

I was interested in this stat about Collingwood at the G so I had a look. You're right, they've won 14 of their last 17 at the G stretching back to the start of 2022. But of the 14 wins, only 4 of them were against sides of any note: us twice last year, the semi final against Fremantle, and this week vs Geelong. The other 10 wins last year were against sides which missed the finals, whilst the three losses were to Geelong twice and Richmond. In the same period we're 9-6 at the G. The 9 wins included the Dogs, Richmond and Brisbane last year (all finalists) and the Dogs this year (we'll see if they're any good). The losses were to Fremantle, Sydney twice, Collingwood twice and Brisbane - all 2022 finalists. So our recent fixtures at the G have been harder than theirs, and we've still won the same number of games in that time against good sides as Collingwood has. The difference is we had far more games at the G last year against finalists and didn't win them all. I'm therefore not convinced Collingwood has some sort of knack for playing at the G that we don't have.

So are we thinking something like Viney and Fritsch in for Pickett and Laurie?

I don't agree at all that it was just a "badly timed attempt at a smother". He decided to bump. IMO, it's a non-football act because he had time to decide what he was doing and it was unnecessary. It maybe isn't as far removed from the game as an off-ball punch, but I don't at all accept it was just an in-game smother gone wrong. I don't think the sport should tolerate that sort of thing happening. It's unnecessary.

Maybe. But we just went through a few weeks of pondering whether we had to pick someone specific to deal with the Dogs' forward line. Ended up reminding us all that our defensive system gets the job done more often than not. I'm not sure we're going to drop someone for Hibberd just for Charlie Cameron. Would be incredibly harsh on someone like McVee or Rivers or whoever else would have to make way for Hibbo, and I don't know if Goodwin is that level of horses for courses.

Dear lord Fremantle fans should be livid. St Kilda has a bottom 6 list and was missing a stack of best 22 players, Fremantle is supposed to be in flag contention and was missing I think just Walters. Should have been a comfortable 5 goal win, not a loss.

I agree but what does "deemed worse" mean? Chandler got 3 weeks last year for a tackle gone wrong because the opponent was concussed. But I would argue Pickett's action was "worse" because Chandler's was a football action gone (slightly) wrong, whilst Pickett's was an unnecessary non-football act. Under the current MRO system, there is scope to challenge the two weeks given to Pickett because of the lack of clarity as to how the MRO upgraded him from low to high, and by directly comparing with the concussion Buddy gave Collins.

Yeah Harmes started following Bontempelli but at no stage last night did I think that Harmes quietened Bont in any way. He was closer to him in the first half when Bont was better. Not sure, though, whether he only played because Viney missed. Suspect that might have been Laurie's spot.

I said this in my previous post but in answer to you both: yes, the system needs to focus more on actions than it currently does and less on outcomes than it currently does.

The fundamental problem is with the system. The box-ticking mechanism for grading incidents is broken and has been for years. It results in some actions being unpunished or fined when they deserve suspension (we see this commonly with punches and elbows) and other actions being overly punished when they shouldn't be (we see this commonly with sling tackles, which are routine football actions gone slightly wrong). The system here results in a difficult-to-accept situation in which Franklin concusses someone and gets graded lesser impact than Pickett who does no damage. We know this is because the MRO is allowed to upgrade severity of impact to account for potential, and I agree with that in theory, but the Guidelines don't explain how he's supposed to do it and here he's lifted Pickett's action by two grades, not one. IMO I don't think a two week penalty for his action is unreasonable at all. What he did was completely unnecessary, in no way was he contesting the ball or doing something he couldn't avoid, and the way he did it could have seriously injured Smith. I have, for years, argued that the system needs to focus more on the action than the outcome, so that we start properly punishing dirty Cotchin-style elbows and we stop overly punishing Chandler-style tackles which go wrong. So IMO, it is absolutely right to punish Pickett for doing something that could have seriously injured Smith. But the way we've come to this two-week penalty is deeply flawed, and I suspect those on here who think he should have received a lesser penalty are thinking about Buddy, and Cotchin, and Cripps, and Hawkins, and all the other "big names" who have escaped punishment for other actions. That's fair, but not a good reason for Pickett to escape punishment.

Hawthorn are likely bottom 2. Glad Essendon can have fun beating them. Fremantle meanwhile struggling to deal with an injury-riddled bottom 6 St Kilda. Not a great start to their supposed “Flagmantle” season.

I have absolutely no idea how or why you hold this view. Hunter is a proper wing, allows us to spread the field and to not rely on Langdon, plus he’s a strong two-way runner, a very good kick, and a smart read of the play. He’s a critical addition to the side and played his role well last night. Yes, you are probably alone. Petty is not at all close to being dropped. However, with Tomlinson playing well, the broader point that there is selection pressure on all players is valid. Who are the players you think are ahead of Hunter for that wing and why?

IIRC he was only booed at his first touch, which was shortly after Hunter’s first touch where the Dogs fans booed him. I felt like those who booed were doing it in response to the Dogs fans and it didn’t happen again. I loved the way our fans drowned out the boos for Hunter and Pickett as the game went on though.

I’d leave it, but if we want to challenge it has to be the grading of high impact over medium (not high contact over body). Smith got up straight away with no injury. That is “low”. The MRO has upgraded it two levels. He’s graded it more severely than Buddy, where his victim was concussed. I fully support the Guidelines allowing the MRO to upgrade the severity to account for potential to harm but upgrading it two levels may not be fair. Ultimately I’d cop the 2 weeks but this is where I’d challenge if I had to. Possibly the worst fortnight of games to miss, unfortunately.

There is perhaps a bit more complexity to the MRO grading than I had first though. Was it careless or intentional? Most of the time these are graded careless but Pickett leaves the ground - what else was he intending to do? Upgrading to intentional will add a week to his suspension. Severity should be medium - it was actually "low" but the Guidelines don't just allow the MRO to upgrade it to medium, they pretty much mandate it given the potential for severe injury. But then was it high contact or not? It's almost implicit that he didn't contact Smith's head because if he did, Smith would have been far worse off than he actually was. So was it just shoulder to shoulder/chest, and if so is that "high" or is that "body"? If he gets intentional, medium and high, that's two weeks. If it's careless, medium and body, it's a fine. So IMO it's anything from a fine to two weeks. For him to get three weeks, it has to be intentional, high and high, but I don't think the MRO can give it high impact given Smith appears to have walked away unscathed.

Not really. Rioli argued he was contesting the ball. Pickett can’t argue that. In the matrix it should be careless, low, high contact, which is a fine, but the Guidelines allow the MRO to lift the impact rating up where there is potential for harm and I expect that to occur here to raise it to medium, meaning a 1 week suspension. But in the current climate I won’t be surprised if he gets high impact and/or intentional, to jack the suspension up further.

What?!

The average crowd between us and them is 22,700-odd. Tonight was the second-biggest H&A crowd between us since the 1960s. It was also 37 degrees which doesn’t lend itself to some people commuting in. Plus the majority were our supporters, meaning the Dogs’ fans were the ones who didn’t really turn up.

Interesting TOG stats. Lever, Petty and Tomlinson all 100%. Next was Langdon on 89%. Which means everyone other than our three key defenders got at least 11% time on the bench. IIRC we often had Langdon and other runners in the 90s for TOG last year. I’m hoping we learnt some lessons about resting players.

Should (maybe) be 1 week. Careless, medium, high. I think the reason Smith gets up is that it was shoulder to shoulder, so the impact actually was low, but MRO will upgrade it to medium given the potential for harm. But yes, generally players from clubs like us get made examples of (eg Chandler’s tackle last year).

You’d imagine Brisbane will be fired up after their Round 1 shocker. Big game. Pickett will miss. He has to. Maybe Melksham takes his spot?

6 - Lever 5 - Pickett 4 - Petracca 3 - Gawn 2 - Oliver 1 - Spargo

That was a fantastic win. The Dogs are good, I’m a firm believer of that. So to perform like that against quality opposition is huge. What stood out to me the most at the ground was the way we set up forward of the ball. Far more often than last year, we had forwards deep. Couple that with our desire to go through the corridor and we looked scary good at times. I reckon we’ve found one in McVee. Looked a natural. Hunter is an incredible addition and whilst I thought Grundy lacked strength at times, his touch came back as the game went on and he is structurally critical to helping Gawn dominate. The thing is, there were areas to improve on too. Obviously we have four stars to bring back in, but we were well beaten in CPs and clearances. It’s a big thing to win by 7 goals when we lose those stats. Like last year, Brown looks fit and mobile and it makes him a much better player. Let’s see if he can maintain it. I thought Lever was immense in holding us together early, whilst Tomlinson was really good too. Also loved Chandler, who absolutely stood up, and Spargo. The obvious sour note is Pickett, who is sure to be suspended. He has to be. We always say we have to focus on the action and not the outcome and that action has to be stamped out of the game. Hopefully it’s only graded medium impact and he only misses one week. Because he is irreplaceable and looks primed to star in 2023.

Not sure if this is for Melbourne? BOM says only a 5% chance of rain tonight.

Probably both. As they always do, they will be aiming to be peak fitness post-bye.

Edit: wrong thread