Altona-demon

Legitimately came here for some good news! Lol. When are we going to get that announcement from Perty?

Echo the thoughts that this is an absolute danger game for the club. Now let's see if this group has matured and can get the job done! No excuses, really want to see a ruthless thrashing out there this weekend.

Thanks for the kudos @Engorged Onion - appreciate it. I agree with you - the takeaway I get from the review of the fixture list is as you say 10 - 12 wins at an optimistic level, which is edge of 8, and to be honest probably reflective of our trajectory as a club at the moment. Had we pulled a double header against for example North as opposed to Bulldogs - this could have had a significant impact on us making finals. But it still doesn't change the fact that the discussion is about making finals not about winning flags. The conclusion : based on previous performance, this group is not capable of winning the flag this year, and will be in the scrap for finals. I know not exactly rocket science there! I like your observation on the Adelaide game at the "G" you are right, based on the past 4 years it certainly has tones of a banana skin for us, I can remember many of those games in the previous 3 years - I guess time will tell. I'll revisit this post over time to keep it updated.

What do we reckon 13 wins for finals? Good to have one knocked off and 12 to go if that is the case. Looking at our draw - and the performance of Adelaide last weekend doesn't fill with me a high amount of confidence about banking those two wins. So that leaves me with the following split at this very early stage: Probables North in Tas - Round 7 Essendon - MCG - Round 15 GC - Metricon - Round 19 Possibles St Kilda Round 2 Hawks Round 5 GWS - ACT - Round 3 Swans MCG - Round 8 Adelaide - SA - Round 10 Collingwood - Round 13 Giants - Round 16 Hawks - Round 18 Adelaide - Round 22 Unlikely Richmond Round 6 Geelong - Round 4 Carlton - MCG - Round 9 Doggies - Round 11 Brisbane - Round 12 Port Adelaide - Round 17 Doggies - Round 20 West Coast - Round 21 Geelong - Round 23 Based on the above, i've applied a 50% win rate to the Possibles, and a 25% win rate for the Unlikely section. This leaves our potential win count at: 3 probables, 4 possibles (rounding down), and 2 unlikely wins (again round down). That leaves us with 9 wins - or typically around 10th in a 23 round season. I've highlighted in ORANGE the possibles I think are most likely to be the 4 wins, and then in RED the possibles which shape as big swing games (ie getting our win rate above the 50% and potentially into the 8). Notably this week's St Kilda game shapes as one of those in my opinion. I've also highlighted in PURPLE in the probables the game I think is the biggest banana skin for the club thats the North Melbourne game in Tasmania. In the Unlikely Section - i've highlighted in ORANGE the two games I think we could get unlikely wins in - and in RED again a game we might be able to win to get us into the 8. You'll see I quite like the look of the NT fixture with Brisbane - and we have had Carlton's measure last few years - but gee they looked better than us against a much better opposition. I think we could steal one of the Geelong fixtures - probably not the GMHBA fixture in round 23, because, well we know how this team performs under finals pressure at the end of the season. Round 4 with Danger still out looms as a big game for the MFC. So, long story short, I don't think we've got the wins to get there this year. But, if we can beat Geelong in Rd 4, and St Kilda next round, we may give ourselves a fighting chance.

binman has argued in other threads a change of strategy at the centre bounce, I'll keep an eye on it this weekend against St Kilda. I;m not sure if other DL posters agree, but watching the Carlton/Richmond game, and then the Dogs/Pies game the skill disparity between those games and our game was noticeable. I think we could be on a hiding to nothing if these stats play out and the game is more flowing and open - with less stoppages etc.

This is a fantastic point - I think the thing that makes Clayton so divisive among the fans is the fact that he is a "statistically heavy" player. On paper he looks very, very good. But there seems to be something which irks certain fans who seem to watch his involvements and don't believe his +/- score would be that great.

I like the effort you have put into this post, but to suggest such a strong correlation (positive or negative) between winning flags and clearances is, in my view at least, misleading. There are a number of other factors which I would contend were more important for each of those teams in winning flags. The most notable being forward driven defensive pressure - the real hallmark of Richmond's game. People don't watch Richmond and say - they are defined by losing clearances and Vlaustuin/Houli rebounding off halfback (although I agree this could be a strategic face of their game). They note the second efforts and shut down pressure of their small forward brigade. This isn't to say I don't agree with your analysis that "clearances aren't as significant KPI as people may think". Tend to agree on that measure, in fact i'm not sure we get much from such a dominant aerial ruckman either.

I think that this is basically what is going on - he's a great bloke and a bit of a larrikin, but like you say let's see him fire up and throw that weight around. Especially now he's getting a chop out from Dogga up forward.

Binman - interesting perspective. I enjoyed having a think about whether we were deliberately conceding clearances in order to create opportunities to "intercept mark" a very risk strategy indeed you'd have to think. Fortunately for us, Fremantle was incredibly wasteful with their posessions going inside our defensive 50. If we adopt a similar strategy I don't think we will be so lucky - let's not forget who our defenders were defending against. This was a relatively good match up for us - as soon as the weather comes on and intercept marking becomes harder and we play against a small forward line - i'm not so sure that this strategy will "stack up". In particular, I am not sure Jake Lever will look as good when the ball is at his feet more and more often. It was noticeable however, and commented on regularly by Browny, that the set up of Melbourne was great behind the ball. Which is a good positive. Let's see some different looks at stoppage from our midfield group - a bit of variety.

The template for beating Melbourne - and it is a well known one now is: 1. Rough up Max Gawn. It never gets called, and it always has the affect that longusffering referred to above, Max goes off the boil and either (a) plays worse, or (b) alienates the umpires. This template was provided by Port Adelaide in 2019 - when they just deliberately played hard on Gawn. 2. Maintain the outside shoulder of the Melbourne midfielders - either waiting for the opportune shark, or the tackle to create another stoppage. This is effective against Melbourne for two reasons. Holding the outside, puts midfielders in a box seat to receive outside half-baked handballs which Clayton Oliver will inevitably provide. Secondly, Melbourne midfielders show week in week out that they are like seagulls to the chip - Harmes is particularly poor at this, there is no need to throw three men at a contested possession with a likely outcome of a 50/50 disposal. So other teams throw 1 in - and either (a) concede the contested possession and receive the half baked handball on the outside (because they have the number) or (b) just make the tackle on the Melbourne player and allow the other Melbourne players to lock the ball in. I'm not sure how many games I've watched with this pattern plays out week after week, and tbh it was better against Fremantle with Petracca, Brayshaw and Jordon through the middle, least they can sometimes provide a bit of stoppage spread. It gets demonstrably worse with Viney and Harmes in the same midfield as Oliver. If people are interested, I'd be happy to pull together some footage from the weekend and show the examples of how we lose clearances in this predictable manner week after week. As an earlier poster said - can we not just adjust our stoppage set up and have Maxy really exploit his first tap advantage by pushing beyond the immediate area. Just doesn't seem to be much variety in our stoppage play?

I know that sometimes there can be something of an echo chamber of negative sentiment on DL - but I do think that there were some concerning aspects of the game which other posters have talked about. It's concerning for me that: 1. A debutant made our other midfielders look lazy. 2. Our disposal inaccuracy was so inaccurate - and I want to emphasise that these poor disposals were often a result of not a great deal of pressure from the Freo defence. 3. I continue to believe that Max Gawn's impact at stoppage is more than nullified by the inablity to connect ruck to midfield. I say more than nullified, because it is actually becoming a disadvantage given just how easily midfielders seem able to read and shark Max. Early in the first quarter we were losing the clearance count something like 7- 0. Against Fremantle.

Couldn't agree more - you could see this even in the scratch match against Richmond, we don't defend fast small forwards very well. tbh i'm not sure? Jetta - Rivers?

Is it time enough now to reflect on why we resigned Jack and didn't do the hard thing and move him on at peak value. We now have a broken player in a position where we have enough depth to cover him taking salary cap we may want to use on one of Salem, Oliver or Trac. Just not sure that we did the right thing signing Jack long term...even if it felt like the emotionally right thing by the club.

One other minor thing I forgot to mention in my post above - did anyone else feel like Richmond started quarters strongly but fell away in the last quarter of the quarter? Not sure if this is a reflection on conditioning of our team - I know that much was made of it last year - but would it have carried over? Was also impressed by the amount of run in the last part of the last quarter. We seemed to be able to go up a gear in intensity - and this was against fresh legs that Richmond had pulled on - v. impressive.

Yeah I couldn't put my finger on it - but I think you are bang on. The times when he got exposed in defensive 50 was when he was kinda out of position. But that dash of halfback (loved when he ran around Lynch...d**khead) really helped us transition so well.

Played four smalls forward basically - TMac and Jacko as the talls. The mix was OK. Spargo in particular was able to lay a good tackle to force a goal, and ANB was there and thereabouts. Still probably a fair assessment that none of our small forwards looks dangerous in the same way as some of the oppo forwards can. TMac and Jacko took the odd contested mark, but Jacko in particular was muscled under the ball on a few occassions. TMac was able to get some separation on a couple of occassions and as some on the thread have noted even clunked a few. Agreed that he looked a bit better. I think its probly a fair comment to say that the forward line sort of "held up" - and will actually be much much more threatening with the addition of Milkshake, BB, and Weid.

I suppose we should be thankful AFL commentary still hasn't approached the old mates club that is cricket commentary. Why can't we have people that are passionate about the game, know the players and aren't ex-players in the box? Agree was refreshing even to have none of the over the top commentary you are forced to sit through these days.

Positives for me: 1. Hunt able to execute the clear game plan to use his speed off half back - looked good. HOWEVER, his lack of tackling ability was clearly exposed on a number of occasions - and I am not sure whether we should be carrying him in that way. 2. Tom McDonald - took a number of contested marks, and managed to create space on the lead twice (once leading to a goal). Was a good performance from TMac. 3. The speed of transition play and general play was a noticeable step up from last year. I'm not sure why - but we looked quicker and cleaner. Still some sloppy disposals - ones that I can remember from Nathan Jones - back into the corridor. 4. Petracca picked up where he left off. 5. Agree Chandler, and Jordon both look likely. I also think that Jackson looked OK today. 6. Jake Lever had a very strong game - and along with May that combination is starting to look very good. I got nervous the way May was throwing his body around, but I understand that that is the way he plays the game. He did a good job on Lynch for me. Negatives 1. Oscar Baker experiment was OK - I counted two goals which were directly linked to defensive mishaps from him - he's not a strong defender - and also didn't see much to justify the "he has pace to play that position". 2. Trent Rivers - seemed a bit quiet, but I guess not everyone can be dynamic. 3. Forward line lacked something - can't put my finger on it. But wouldn't be against Mitch Brown coming in - Jackson didn't really threaten...

Agree re Farmer. Freeman been good at the back. Gee this forward line looks rough.

Who is 44 - he is very good in the guts and looks very strong Laurie and Bowey both look very good. Rosman - looks laconic - not a good sign. Not enough effort for me. Clear gap between the twos and threes in this squad.

I feel like you get more from rotating Petracca in and out of the forward / midfield line. His fitness now warrants it as well. I think LJ may surprise some this year with his agility as a key forward - especially through his ability to create a second contest after bringing the ball down, or to even rove under another tall. Big unknown for me is his set shot. Fritsch has it all - apart from a set shot - fix that and he could be a 50 goal fwd - but we all know that. Mitch Brown, looked good when he played - although many DL'ers don't rate him. He's tough and has an engine. Tick there as well. For me I think they will play TMac forward again - maybe rotating him through the wing forward role. I still think TMac's fitness and running is very hard to defend if he continues leading up the ground creating space for the other forwards. Even when he was playing poorly over the last two years, I still felt like he was just a couple of clunks away and he just looked half a yard off. Hopefully as the training reports suggest he's addressed this fitness niggle time will tell. Spargo - another perenially underrated player on DL - had a good season last year, and though not a fan favourite looks more than able of filling Kozzy's space. He also provides a number of goal assists and linking play. The key for him is providing lockdown small defense - which he has not been consistent at (same for Fritsch). I agree with the posts above, there is still some dynamic talent in this forward line even with Weed and BB out. How the coach pulls that together will be great to watch.

OMG....ANOTHER small? Wtf?

Just adding my two cents - Jack tackles all day - put him in the forward line and let him loose on defenders. Amazing contender for a midfield convert to forward. Love the idea!

Great to have Spargo-pants signed for another year. Great football IQ, Kozzie could learn from him on how to position for the fall of the ball from contested possessions in forward 50. Tackling pressure needs to increase, but thats nothing new for our forward line.

Fellow DLanders - watching the way Richmond played in the Grand Final got me to thinking about the strategic role that shepherding plays in the modern game. Why? It's clear that Richmond apply a high degree of "tackle pressure" especially inside their forward 50 through their small forward brigade. To diffuse the pressure the defending exiting team has got a few options: 1. Hand pass (requires players within an immediate vicnity - and naturally contracts the space in the defensive forward 50 leading to a higher chance of locking the ball into stoppage). 2. Kick short (potentially a higher risk version of 1). 3. Kick long (low chance of retention of possession, but clearing the "immediate" goal scoring threat - however, creating high risk of re-entry into goal kicking positions). 4. Run the ball out - risk holding the ball or poor disposal version of 1,2, or 3. In addition to these options, it seems to me that the natural way to reduce the pressure on the ball player in the defensive 50 is to lay some HEAVY shepherds on small forwards - who by the nature of being small, should not be strong enough to ride through the shepherd. The question I have is around the officiating of the shepherd. If for example the shepherd causes the small forward to fall over and be taken out of the play - but the arm is extended and minor contact with the hip is made - is that likely to result in a free kick against the defensive team? I just wonder if the shepherd could be used more strategically to diffuse this small forward pressure, especially where it could be used to physically intimidate smaller players through strategic, planned and DELIBERATE use of shepherding. Has it been done before?