titan_uranus

Of course Cripps should get weeks. But Cotchin should have been suspended for his sling tackle on Saturday night. Got nothing. Be prepared for the MRO to say it wasn't a reportable offence. (PS: I don't like the way we generally, whether overtly or not, whether subconsciously or not, hope that our opponents' best players may miss due to injury/suspension. Whether or not Cripps plays this week, we need to assume Carlton bring their best, which is capable of beating us).

I really, really dislike Howe. He's stuck the boot in more than once since leaving us.

There isn't one. I'm certainly not suggesting our fixture = our losses. I'm merely pointing out that over the last few months, we've had a difficult part of our fixture whereas Collingwood hasn't. I've addressed the sold home game earlier - three other clubs sell home games and none of them were given five consecutive games away from the MCG. That's an outlier which hurts us and comes in a year we're reigning premier to boot.

Just because you've given up doesn't mean the rest of us have.

If you want us to finish top 4, you want the Dogs to win. A Dogs win means we just need to beat Carlton to finish above Fremantle. If you're worried about us slipping out of the top 4 and meeting the Dogs in a final, you want Fremantle to win. Makes the Dogs' path to September very hard.

I posted about our fixture earlier. Looking at fixtures further, Collingwood's first of their 11 wins was against Fremantle in Perth in Round 10. Since then, they have played 8 of their other 10 games at the MCG, they've only had two games against top 8 sides (us twice) and they've played five games against the bottom 6. In the same period we've played 5 games at the G (including none for five straight weeks) have played 7 games against top 8 sides (will be 8 if the Dogs end up making it) and just one game against the bottom 6.

There is merit to this. It's very cop-out-y, but how many sides have turned it on for their game against us despite being out of form? Fremantle had lost two straight before beating us. Sydney beat us in the middle of a streak of 4-5. If they lose tonight, the Dogs will have beaten us in a stretch of 2-4, with the only other win a horribly out of form St Kilda. Adelaide fired right up against us, as did North, as did Hawthorn earlier in the year.

Correction to this post - only two of the these things have to happen for us to hold onto top 4 by beating Carlton but losing to Brisbane. In other words, we need two of these sides to win less than 15 games, or get to 15 wins but trail us on percentage. Fremantle currently leading the Dogs by 4 goals is close to ruling the Fremantle option out - they only have to lose one game but will they lose to either of those two bottom 4 sides? However, puts a huge dent in the Dogs making finals. If we finish 5th and the Dogs miss out, we might get Carlton or even St Kilda in 8th instead.

For someone whose heart supposedly beats true for the red and the blue, he sure does love to pot us when he gets the chance.

I'm not sure about this. Isn't Optus Stadium a very similar field size to the MCG? IMO our best football has always been with two tall forwards, but that's usually been when TMac is one of them, as he is able to push up the ground, work his defender over, and create separation for our other tall forward. I'm not sure moving Petty forward is the right call. He won't have trained with the forwards all year. It's far too much to ask someone who last played as a leading forward three years ago, to be thrown into the forward line with the pressure of finals coming up. Particularly when, last night aside, he has been incredibly important alongside May and Lever to our defensive structure, and has performed at a much higher level than Tomlinson. Perhaps if we don't get it done this year (or even if we do), we can train Petty as a forward over the pre-season, with cover for his defensive post available in Tomlinson, Turner and Smith (although we've just flipped Smith back to a forward, which IMO is the wrong call).

Sure, he has issues, but however pressure acts are calculated, he's getting more of them than the other smalls. ANB 22, Pickett 18, Melksham 10, Spargo 9, Sparrow 9. We need pressure at ground level in our forward half. The best way to measure pressure is pressure acts. ANB is doing this more than our other smalls. The question for the FD is whether we're better served by replacing him with someone who may provide less pressure, but better offensive drive. I understand the argument, but we've backed in his pressure for years now, and we won't win the flag without forward half pressure. This has to be up there for worst take of the year, doesn't it? Being undefeated at VFL is now the wrong strategy? It's OK to be disappointed in the side, but some of what you post is just utter nonsense.

Get this. We have played 20 matches this year. We have built a 20+ point lead in 19 of them (Geelong the only one we didn't). With that sort of platform, 2021 Melbourne would be 19-1 right now. I maintain that 2022 Melbourne's best football is good enough to win the flag, but 2022 Melbourne doesn't produce it long enough within games.

Not true. We sell one home game. But the AFL sandwiched it between four straight away games, not a single one of which was at the MCG. Hawthorn sell four home games. The most consecutive games away from the MCG they've had this year is four, but the bye was in the middle of that run, and two of those games were at Marvel. North sell four home games. The most consecutive games away from Marvel they've had this year is three. St Kilda sell one home game, like us. The most consecutive games away from Marvel they've had this year is three. Bear in mind, too, that we won the [censored] flag last year, whilst these three sides won a combined 21 games. Yet we're the ones who cop an unheard of run of away games, at a pivotal time of year, and including a five-day break, and then back-to-back six-day breaks. Our Brisbane-Collingwood fixture run was incredibly difficult. I am not at all suggesting "she'll be right, it was just the fixture", but it has to be acknowledged.

No, but we are likely to have more inside 50s. We average 8.5 more than our opponent across the year. It's precisely how we want to play, and because we're still a good side despite the losses, more often than not that is what happens. Collingwood meanwhile average 12.11 this year. So they're less likely to go 15.6 the next time than we are to double their inside 50s.

At this stage I reckon likely outcomes look like this: If we beat both Carlton and Brisbane, we'll finish 3rd and play the winner of Sydney v Collingwood in the first final, unless Collingwood wins that but then loses to Carlton, in which case we'll finish 2nd and host Sydney If we beat Carlton and lose to Brisbane, we'll finish 4th if Collingwood drops both of its games from here and get Geelong at the G, or 5th if Collingwood wins a game and we'll get whoever finishes 8th (Dogs most likely). Assumes Brisbane and Sydney win enough to stay above us. If we lose both, we'll finish probably 6th and play probably Richmond or Carlton

The forward line laid 8 tackles from 65 inside 50s (compared to their 18 from 41). Too many inside 50s rebounded. The forward line has problems, but perhaps not the ones being discussed here. But yes, as a general concept I agree with you that things are wrong if we're conceding 96 points (albeit this week that was contributed to in part by their good accuracy of 15.6).

Didn't we all say that after Queen's Birthday? They're setting records for smallest margins across 4, 5, 6, 7 consecutive wins. Their percentage is 106%. They are living on a knife's edge. Games decided by less than two goals are not determined solely by skill, they necessarily involve luck. Couldn't agree more on this. Prior to tonight we'd played six consecutive games at different venues, in four different States/Territories. It's an unbelievably ridiculous fixture, for a reigning premier to boot. No side should spend five straight weeks without a (genuine) home game. (PS: not suggesting this is why we lost, given they were on consecutive six-day breaks and we had the extra day's break going into this game).

ANB 22 pressure acts, our third-most behind Oliver and Viney. I reckon that's going to keep him in the side. However, ANB, Pickett, Spargo and Sparrow combined for 0 tackles inside forward 50. Bearing in mind Fritsch and Brown also laid 0 tackles inside 50, that's not going to win us games of football. Lever only played 85% TOG. Would not at all be surprised if he's carrying an injury. Meanwhile just as Hibberd and Hunt both regress back into the form that made us all suspect neither was best 22 this year, we've flipped Joel Smith back yet again to a forward at Casey.

But that's the point - the idea of the loading theory was that we were losing those mid-season games to peak our fitness now. If other sides are doing better fitness-wise than us, including the side which has won 11 straight and therefore clearly didn't need to load up mid-season like us, it's hard to accept loading is why we dropped those mid-season games. If it was, the loading certainly didn't pay off tonight.

Goody was asked about this before the game and joked about being surprised by it. He was joking, but IMO that shows he cared. If he didn't care about it he'd have given some sort of deadpan "who cares" response. I hate pre-match trash talk. Hate it. Did it fire us up to insult them? No. Did it fire them up? Possibly - they certainly have said so. Why give them something to motivate them? It makes us come across as arrogant AF, and then backfires like this. I'm fully aware I'm saying all this after the loss with the benefit of hindsight, but trust me, if I'd had the time to log on here pre-match I'd have said the same thing.

I've never bought the loading theory as being any significant reason for us going from 10-0 to 13-5 prior to last week. I also don't think that loss = no loading and win = loading, either. But the way tonight played out doesn't sit well with the notion that we've set our season up to be at our fittest right now: First half we had +22 more CPs. Second half only +2 First half we laid +8 more tackles, despite having +47 more disposals. Second half we were outackled -20 despite the disposal gap staying roughly the same (+46) They laid 26 tackles in the tight fourth quarter, double our 13 We dominated territory in the first half with +23 inside 50s. Second half just +1.

Tonight's loss is devastating, a classic 8-point game against us. A win would have borderline guaranteed top 4. Beating Carlton is now non-negotiable, but still might not be enough to make top 4 if we then lose to Brisbane. To make top 4 by beating Carlton but losing to Brisbane, we'd need three of the following to happen: Collingwood loses to both Sydney and Carlton Sydney loses to one of North, Collingwood and St Kilda and we hold our 2% gap over them, or they lose twice or more Brisbane loses to one of Carlton and St Kilda and we hold our 5% gap over them, or they lose twice or more Fremantle loses to at least of the Dogs, West Coast and GWS Remember, three of those have to happen for us to hold onto top 4 with a loss to Brisbane. So if you think we'll beat Carlton but lose to Brisbane, you are barracking for the Dogs and Carlton tomorrow (also North...but that's not happening). If Brisbane wins tomorrow, you're then turning your focus to St Kilda beating Brisbane at Marvel. And whoever loses out of Sydney v Collingwood, get around their opponent in Round 23 (either Carlton to beat Collingwood or St Kilda to beat Sydney).

It's all going to come crashing down for them. The only question is whether that happens before the flag is won this year, or after. There's nothing sustainable about what they're doing, it's all crazy high confidence and emotion. The game was on our terms in the first half. Much of the reason we weren't further in front by half time was our own doing, not theirs. That opens the door for a confident team riding on a huge crowd and feeding off all that emotion to get a head of steam, all of which is credit to them, but if we had had a lead at half time which reflected our first half dominance (17 points did not reflect it), they would have had a much harder task ahead of them. Fully expect them to regress significantly in 2023 as history tells us the odds of them getting this sort of run of luck is 0% (look at Port, great record in close games last year, can't buy a win in them this year). But it won't matter if they ride this out for six more weeks and get the flag in the process.

Only 85% TOG for Lever? Is he injured/unfit? That's very low for him.

@binman - not sure the loading plan involved us, in Round 21, having an extra day break against a side on back-to-back six day breaks and then being steamrolled in the second half...