titan_uranus

Both roads from outside the top 4 are tough. If we lose and Collingwood loses (assuming Fremantle and Sydney both win), our first final will be against Carlton, not Richmond. That's a win for us IMO. Also, our semi opponent will either be Geelong or Fremantle. Yes, Geelong is the best side in it, but if we're playing them in a semi they'll have just lost yet another first up final, with all that doubt sinking back in, and I would relish the chance to get them on the MCG in those circumstances with Jeremy Cameron possibly not yet back, or not at full fitness. Alternatively we get Fremantle. Yes, that's travel, but we travel well, we like Optus Stadium, and we're just two weeks removed from thumping them. If Collingwood wins, we'll get Richmond first up, and then would have to back that up with a trip to Sydney or Brisbane for the semi. The pre-finals bye is back, so I'm not sure two interstate trips hurts us too much, and there is also the risk that as we saw before last year, the sides who win the first final and get the week off get disjointed preparation into their prelims, with only one game in a month. Who knows, maybe that will put the Sydney/Brisbane winner at a disadvantage for that prelim.

Yes, it is unbalanced. What you're (fairly) arguing here is that it's not ridiculous that we ended up here. The Dogs were last year's runner up and Port were a prelim finalist. It makes perfect sense that Geelong would be given those sides twice. However, as the season as transpired, Geelong's five return games have been significantly easier than ours. That's unbalanced. It's wholly understandable given the way the fixture is drawn based on the previous season's ladder positions, but it's unbalanced.

It seems so. It's cut off from the broadcast but when play resumes at the bounce after Pickett's goal there isn't a wing on the Langdon side. When they get the ball and kick it forward you can see Fritsch running into the backline. You also see Langdon running up from half forward. I wasn't at the game so someone else may be able to confirm but it looks like we would have started Fritsch at the back of the square at the bounce and sent Langdon to his spot in the forward line, so that we could push Fritsch back as a spare marking defender.

It's not just money that makes the 17 and then 6 model impossible. Too much uncertainty (we know fans don't like it), too much risk of unfairness, potential to tank to get 6th instead of 5th or 13th instead of 12th to improve your run home.

Because it creates different problems. The football world reacted very, very strongly against the floating fixture this year. Under this model the final six weeks aren't just "floating", we literally do not know what games there will be, or where, let alone when. The lack of knowledge of those final six games throws interstate trips up in the air. What if a Victorian club lands in a group of six with five interstate clubs? Huge amount of travel all backloaded into the last six weeks. Then there's the motivation for a club to "mini-tank" and try to finish 6th come Round 17 instead of 5th. Get to avoid the entire top 6 and bank wins against inferior sides whilst the side sitting just one spot above you gets the complete opposite.

I've posted on this a few times in other places today. Everyone plays everyone else once, so the focus is the five return matches. We've had 3 against current top 8 sides, which will become 4 if the Dogs replace Carlton. Currently Geelong and Sydney have had 0 return games against current top 8 sides, which will become 1 each if the Dogs replace Carlton. And currently Richmond's had 1 return game against current top 8 sides, which will become 0 if the Dogs replace Carlton. So the full story is similar to the half story - our fixture has had more difficult games in it than many of our competitors.

If we win, we're near-certain to play Sydney, with only percentage deciding whether it's at the MCG or SCG. In the unlikely event Sydney loses to St Kilda, we will host: Collingwood, if they beat Carlton Fremantle, if Collingwood loses and Fremantle wins Sydney, if both Collingwood and Fremantle lose and Sydney maintains its percentage buffer over Brisbane Brisbane, if both Collingwood and Fremantle lose and somehow Sydney sheds so much percentage that they drop past Brisbane (who will have also lost to us) If we lose, we can still finish top 4 but would need two of these things to happen: Collingwood loses to Carlton Fremantle loses to GWS Sydney loses to St Kilda and sheds enough percentage to drop behind us Those are in order of likelihood. The last one isn't happening, because St Kilda stink. So if you want an insurance policy, get around GWS.

I've said this on Demonland before, but it's also easier to be pessimistic. For one, you are more likely to be "right" than "wrong" - you can set the bar at winning a flag and have a 17/18 chance of being right about us not being good enough. For another, you don't expose yourself to disappointment. Being optimistic opens you up to being disappointed if we don't get it done. Being pessimistic all the time lets you tell yourself it isn't going to happen.

The other key question is, if TMac gets fit, who loses their spot for him? The spot is currently occupied by Melksham, who probably has done enough now to see himself through to whenever our season finishes.

I thought May was pretty good actually. Was named in the best in the afl.com.au match report and second-best on ground by Matthew Lloyd on radio. Which I accept mean nothing really, but I'll be keen to see the coaches' votes later today.

On this, here is each top 8 side's five return match opponents: Melbourne: Brisbane, Collingwood, Fremantle, Bulldogs, Port Adelaide (3 or 4 top 8 sides) Brisbane: Melbourne, St Kilda, Gold Coast, GWS, Essendon (1 top 8 side) Geelong: Bulldogs, St Kilda, Port Adelaide, West Coast, North Melbourne (0 or 1) Sydney: Bulldogs, St Kilda, GWS, Essendon, St Kilda (0 or 1) Fremantle: Melbourne, Carlton, St Kilda, GWS, West Coast (1 or 2) Collingwood: Melbourne, Carlton, Gold Coast, Adelaide, Essendon (1 or 2) Richmond: Carlton, Port Adelaide, Hawthorn, Essendon, West Coast (0 or 1) Carlton: Collingwood, Fremantle, Richmond, Adelaide, GWS (3) Bulldogs: Geelong, Melbourne, Sydney, Hawthorn, GWS (3) Our true competitors (i.e. not including Carlton/the Dogs, one of whom isn't going to make finals anyway) have had significantly easier return matches in their fixtures than us. If the Dogs make it, Richmond won't have had a single return match against any finalist. Meanwhile if the Dogs don't make it, both Geelong and Sydney will have had zero return matches against finalists. It's not 100% coincidence, but I think it's a contributing factor that three sides who are right now being labelled "in form", "premiership contenders" or "you wouldn't want to get them in a final" are Geelong, Sydney and Richmond.

End-to-end goals are the least common and least important way to score goals. We correctly prioritise goals from stoppages and turnover, as does every single other club in the competition. Of course there is. The way that we've been playing has seen us go 3-3 against finalists since the bye. Obviously not 6-0, which means we're not a certainty to win a final, but also not 0-6, which means unlike this post we're not a certainty to lose any/all finals we play.

Since the byes finished in Round 14, here is the top 8's record against the current top 8 (i.e. Carlton in, Dogs out): Geelong - 3-0 Melbourne - 3-2 Sydney - 2-0 Collingwood - 1-1 Richmond - 1-1-1 Carlton - 1-3 Fremantle - 0-1-3 Brisbane - 0-2 5 of our 8 games since Round 15 have been against the current top 8 (which might remain the final top 8 if Carlton wins or the Dogs lose this week). Brisbane, Sydney and Collingwood have, combined, played 6 games against the top 8 in the same period.

I know many hate it, but again ANB had our second-most pressure acts with 34. Double Sparrow's 17, and well in front of Pickett's 16 and Spargo's 14. We can't win the flag without forward half pressure. No matter how much leg speed or goal-kicking nous we have up there which someone else might bring in ANB's place, we can't win the flag without forward half pressure. So ANB will stay, as he has done all season, because Goodwin will value that effort. Questioning Fritsch is also pointless. That's not to say he can't improve, but he laid 8 tackles, 5 of which were inside 50, the week after our forward half pressure was not good enough. And though it shouldn't need to be said, he's the only player in the competition to have kicked a goal in all 21 matches so far. There is significant merit to bringing Harmes in to tag Neale. If we do that, Sparrow is IMO the most at risk as he provides the closest positional spot for Harmes to take. I remain of the view we need another tall forward but we haven't gone that way for months and I can't imagine we're going to do it now, not unless TMac was fit and ready to go.

If we beat Brisbane on Friday we'll end the season with 16 wins, one fewer than last year. That will be despite: a brutal fixture - assuming the Dogs pass Carlton, of our five return matches four will have been finalists. Compare that to Brisbane, whose five return matches feature just one finalist (us). Or Geelong - the Dogs will be their only return game against a finalist, plus they've had North and West Coast twice each. And that's without touching on travel, six straight weeks of different venues, and repeated instances of having a shorter break than our opponent. the competition focusing on us and analysing our gameplan within an inch of its life. a comparatively worse run with injuries than 2021 (not saying we've had as bad a run as other sides, just that it's been worse this year than it was last year).

For 11 weeks Collingwood was applauded for their skill in winning close games, including here on Demonland, and including in response to our loss last week. We win a close one and we "lucked in" because an opposition player made a mistake. FFS.

It seems I view this game and its result differently to many on Demonland. Which doesn't necessarily surprise me given the way Demonland has reacted to our 2022 season. We won an extremely close game in front of a loud, rabid crowd in a finals-like atmosphere. When was the last time we did that? We beat Geelong in Round 23 last year but there was no crowd. This year we lost to Collingwood and the Dogs, last year we lost to Adelaide. So perhaps the GWS win in the second-last game of 2020? Otherwise maybe we're going back to the 2018 finals. Maybe I'm wrong, but I reckon a game like that, with that result, will spark something in our players. A reminder of the thrill of playing these big games, when they don't end in disappointment like they did the previous week. Maybe they'll spark a change in ball movement, or a change in how we defend, but at the least a change in belief. It's true that Carlton's midfield was weakened, but as we all cry out for when we're down in numbers, they brought elite effort which doesn't depend on talent. Like almost every game we've played this year, our opponent has lifted when playing us. It's true that we still didn't really maximise our inside 50 chances, but one area we did improve on significantly was forward half pressure. 8 tackles inside 50 last week to 20 this week; Fritsch laying 5 of his own. I still think too many are expecting us to be blowing everyone, even top 8 sides, out of the water. We weren't doing that last year and we shouldn't be expecting it this year. I rate this win, and I rate our chances to knock Brisbane off again this Friday and confirm our top 4 spot.

Here's another fixturing quirk. We haven't played Carlton since Round 9 last year. Since we last played Carlton, we've played the Bulldogs 5 times.

St Kilda stink, but one thing to bear in mind is that Brisbane are on a 5-day break going into tomorrow night's game after playing in 20+ degree conditions in Brisbane. St Kilda have the extra day off. It shouldn't matter, as Brisbane have no business losing to St Kilda at this point of the season, but if you want an upset, there's at least something to work with here. Not only this, but Carlton this week was the first top 8 side they'd beaten since Round 7, and only the third top 8 side they've beaten all year (Collingwood in Round 5 and Sydney Round 7 the other two). Lost to Geelong, Fremantle, us and Richmond. Their double up games this season are us, St Kilda, GC, GWS and Essendon. That has to be up there with the softest set of double up games for any side this year.

Joel Smith has been Demonland’s answer to almost every question since 2018. I agree with you. Maybe if he trains as a forward over the pre-season it’s an option for 2023, although he finally showed strong defensive form at the start of this year so I feel like that would just be wasting his development as a defender. But not after he spent all year injured and then played 1-2 games for Casey as a forward.

Funny, I feel like people underrate our 2021 by arguing it was a fluke or came off the back of 2-4 incredible performances. Our entire 2021 season was phenomenal. If anything, people forget how good we were pre-bye because they focus on the finals.

Can’t see how this works because of the contract. Which is Collingwood’s problem, not ours. As a concept, I don’t know if a Gawn-Grundy pairing on field would work but I see how it could in theory. But I’m not close to interested if we’re paying stacks of that contract.

Common thought says that if we lose a game in the run home we'll slip out of the top 4. If that happens, it will be the first time we've been out of the top 4 since 2020. Which would really stink, wouldn't it - we may sit inside the top 4 for 45 out of 46 weeks but only end up with one top 4 finish across these two seasons. Indeed, this week we're 3rd, which is the first time we've been out of the top 2 since Round 2, and only the fourth time since Round 3 last year.

It is a skill. But Collingwood isn't so good as it as to be repeating 15.6 all the time. Think of it this way. Against us, they were +9 goals compared to behinds. They average 12.11, so they average +1. Think of it another way. Their score of 96 points was their highest since Round 7. But in the games since Round 7, they've had more scoring shots than the 21 they had against us 8 times (and a further 2 times they had the same number of shots). 15.6 is an outlier that can't be explained by them being amazingly good set shots, because they don't do it every week.

This is the correct call. He has time to assess what he's doing and then does it crudely. it's not as egregious as an off the ball bump or an intentional strike, which is why 2 weeks feels totally fine. But it's the right call.