Engorged Onion

This could be useful to wrap your head around, whilst debating the probability of whether training loads matter, if you're a dubious type of person, who thinks the performances are disgusting and pathetic and think Goodwin should be sacked, and you'd much prefer the relief of knowing your not going to make the finals as a supporter. It's round 18 - here is a neat little graph - now if you're making finals - it's a pretty good template to run off. There wouldn't be too much variation from club to club, because clubs don't do that. In relation to this content, and through worrying about people knocking my credentials, I'll just say, I'm also coming from a place of knowledge of what happens, because I have it from numerous horses mouths who are fed crunchy digits from their employer(s)...

My take. "There is a vibe though that we are running on the spot. I'd argue it s clearly about training and game day loads, and as suggested, all teams in finals contention will be doing it. The difficulty for us and other Victorian teams is the lack of second tier competition, so where do we get to put those players who still need to have match fitness, but at a reduced level. This dilemma, impacts performance for obvious reasons. But with an eye on 4-5 weeks away - what is a Football department to do. Do you make every post a winner until september, with the eventuality that you haven't given your team the best opportunity FOR september. Or do you mitigate as much as possible, and hope the talents and systems will get you a top 4 slot, so that you're cherry ripe for september, but you may be in a position where you don't have a double chance. The 22 rounds are just the hors d'oeuvre's, and I would prefer my team to be pretty [censored] hungry for the main course in September, when fitness on dry (er) tracks will be at a premium. ps... what @Skuitsaid.

Gus did say back at the G the last time we played in the wet - that 'we' were licking our lips... I hope this is accurate, and they want to get down and dirty. It's no september football by any means, but it helps us.

amplification to the dogs? That is so blunt and just so lovely xo

legitimate unit of measurement?

I'll just stick this opinion piece here.

Mmmm a 25 year old film clip. Probably what a Melbourne fan will be like tomorrow - if we lose tonight

Curious, if we lose tonight, do most posters on here, interpret it that we are not 'legitimate contenders'?

So how many talls reduces a teams ability to effective deal with ground balls in your own forward line?

That appears to be true, be it by the media or Demonlanders. Mind you, not one other top 4 team has brought 'it' as consistently as us either... So I guess it depends if you don't want to look beyond Melbourne FC and include other clubs in that conversation. It's just a lovely little narrative, and I suspect the team would call it Fugazi, whilst still working on remedying it. I concur with Leppitsch. I'd rather be in Melbourne position losing to bottom 4 teams, than losing to top 8 teams.

I always imagine, that is exactly how it would have started... some dude/dudette, with some words, on a guitar...before production.

One of my favourite covers of all time

Mmmmm Pressure vs Delivery. I'm Libran, it's all about the weight of scales.

If you're a Chelsea fan - you'll get the link Actually Bin, I think you are on to something in the use of language of 'defensive'. If there was media commentary around that role and what it entails, then the midfielder (who is operating as a defensive mid) wouldn't be seen as performing as poorly, but performing in line with the specific role. Viney is an excellent defensive mid. Gus was not.

My prediction if we win...

Could go either way. If we lose, don't get sucked into the hype about the Bulldogs or the Dees If we win, don't get sucked into the hype about the Dees or the Bulldogs.

Interesting, I interpret it completely differently. ’It’ll be interesting’ - adds uncertainty I’d love to stay - is also adding uncertainty

None of those exist aside from Hawkins and McKay Perhaps Hawkin's relationship with Shannon Burns in the key in getting him across ?

run out of jokes???

We got away with our poor conversation rate early in the season, we’ve now seen it cost us wins against Adelaide, GWS, and the Hawks. In the current era, average conversion rates are around 51.4% on 22.3 scoring shots per match — that is, teams have scored an average of 11.6 goals per match. For the purposes of this article goal accuracy or conversion rates is defined as Conversion Rate = Goals / (Goals + Behinds). In 2021, we are averaging 1.5% less than the competition norm. Our opponents are 3% above the expected norm. Here is a break down of our percentage conversions per game, against opponents (losses/draw in red) vs their conversion, as well as a difference between the teams on the day, as well as a % difference from the norm (for our opponents)

Yep, 100% I can imagine that for the players, whilst a loss/draw is disappointing - here we are 18 rounds into the season and we sit on top, or at a minimum sit comfortably within the top 4 teams of the comp. The evidence is overwhelming that our system works, and they will know it too. The also know that it's due to hard graft, and they also know not to get complacent (even though some draw the bow that losing to lower sides means just this). I'd imagine Goodwin et al, would be suggesting that the evidence is that due to our system we get the scoring opportunities and that conversion only needs to be marginally better (in 2 losses and a draw, one point becomes one goal and we win). It's such small margins. I also can't imagine that the team isn't doing everything possible to address scoring conversions (aside from the limitations of what the AFLPA put in). I posted a stat here the other day that when a team has 24 scoring shots or less - winning is 50/50. 2 more scoring shots (26) and it only goes up to 60% Scoring Shots by Team (in Modern Era) Data: All games from 2000 to 2017 Topic: Relationship between Scoring Shot production and Winning Rate by Team Points of Interest Only a handful of teams are able to win at a greater than 50% rate over a large number of games having registered only 24 Scoring Shots (Geelong, Hawthorn, North Melbourne, Port Adelaide, St Kilda, and Sydney). Some register winning rates of over 60% with just 26 Scoring Shots (Adelaide, Fremantle, Geelong, Hawthorn, Melbourne, North Melbourne, and Sydney) Carlton's winning rate goes above 50% only when it registers 29 Scoring Shots We back our system to have greater scoring opportunities than the opposition. An on eyeballing our games this year, this looks to be relevant (and also why we play the way we do with kicking to pockets in the F50, to reduce ease of exits). R1 +7 R2 +13 R3 +14 R4 +10 R5 +15 R6 +4 R7 +5 R8 -1 (win against Sydney) R9 +11 R10 +5 (loss to Adelaide) R11 +3 R12 +7 R13 - 7 (loss to Collingwood) R14 +6 R15 -1 (loss to GWS) R16 +11 R17 +5 (draw to Hawthorn) The other point to note is, again there is statistical evidence that essentially during late Autumn to Spring time, scoring drops - from an accuracy perspective. If I look at the first 5 rounds... this bodes very very well for our team.

Probably cause the bloke rarely gets a free kick awarded for being held ?

Why are we here? You mean on top of the ladder? We kick to pockets to have repeat entries - the risk is of course, inaccuracy. It's far better than kicking to the centre of the f50 - where other teams defensive setups are also skilled - and then the ball having multiple ways to exit our F50 if we fail to mark it or keep it in. Do you (we) all remember the wave of 'sling shot' goals over the last few years and how ugly that looked.

What's with this incessant belief that the players/the FD are complacent or 'take it easy' against lower teams? It's does not take into consideration how tight the competition is. We would have won all the matches if we had better conversions, but we didn't. (that is also not a symptom of being complacent). @jnrmac - when you watch other teams, who play against lower teams and lose (too many to mention) - do you also stand by that they lose as they are taking it easy?

Just to add to yours @titan_uranus. This fact is no different to the Dogs, Swans, Port, Brisbane and Geelong, who have all worse records against the top 8, and similar records against those outside the top 8. And there is no evidence that they do it in perpetuity either. So why do we expect our team to operate outside the norms of whats realistic for a team in this competition?