old55

I don't believe that it's correct that we lose momentum when Grundy is in the ruck. In R12 vs Carlton Max and Brodie each attended exactly 50% of CBs: https://dailyfantasyrankings.com.au/resources/afl/cba.php We didn't lose momentum at any time in this match: https://www.afl.com.au/afl/matches/4884#timeline In fact from R6 - R13 inclusive when Max and Brodie shared the ruck almost exactly 50:50 we went 6-2. I challenge you to produce evidence that we lose momentum when Grundy rucks.

Like Fanatique you mean?

Grundy rucks most of the first half, plays a bit forward and Max plays mostly forward, a bit of ruck. Grundy is subbed at or after half-time for Hibberd, Smith goes forward, Max rucks the entire rest of the match fresh. We can afford to do this because we're playing one more mid than we have in the past so our run won't be compromised.

I don't hate Toby, I like him.

Please stop making sense - it's discombobulating here.

Has he had you loading pre-finals by recording those excessively long posts into the dictaphone? You know "that's where they expect it least"

FIFY

Not necessarily. The range of the square of all real numbers is real numbers greater than or equal to zero. The existence of a positive square does not imply the existence of a negative square.

They've got Billy Frampton - no idea why they'd take a risk with Murphy.

There's no guarantee he gets to MFC if he tells WC he won't go there though. WC could trade pick 1 to North for pick 2 and the McKay compensation and then he'll end up at North and WC can take Curtain.

Reid would be mad not to go there. He'd be King of Perth soon enough and WC will be back strongly.

The latter is correct. Anyone using the former "would of" been incorrect. And while I'm down there, it's "24x7" which equals all 168 hours in the week. Not "24/7" which is 3hrs and 26mins - not much of a commitment at all

I think there's 3 broad alternatives this week, in addition to Oliver for JJ or Harmes which applies in all 3: In: Grundy Out: Petty Positives: Retains the extra mid we have and allows us to sub Grundy (Hibberd as sub) Negatives: Relies on Max/Grundy forward In: Tomlinson or Hibberd Out: Petty Positives: Retains the extra mid we have (Tomlinson or Hibberd as sub) Negatives: Relies on Smith forward (which may be better than Gawn/Grundy). Means JVR has to ruck significant minutes - he did 37% vs North. In: Tomlinson/Hibberd and Grundy Out: Petty, JJ/Harmes (so both of them are out, one for Oliver and one for Grundy) Positives: Gives us Gawn/Grundy and Smith forward Negatives: We lose the extra mid (but would have JJ or Harmes as sub)

I think we should win vs Carlton. They play a similar brand to us, but we've been doing it for longer, have better overall personnel and have fewer injuries. It won't be easy, but I'm more confident in these like-for-like battles than against teams like Adelaide and Collingwood who play a more attacking style.

Concern about Oliver's interview is completely overblown. That's just the way he is. There is absolutely nothing wrong there.

#10 skip your notice fr_ap? He's been pretty handy.

Competing with Liberatore no doubt

Thanks, I think it used to be in the Telstra Tracker

@WheeloRatings - is there a source for player distance covered per game please?

Harmes second in pressure, I thought he was good despite some turnovers. JVR 38% of ruck contests - that's very high.

Yes the base-line is form, then punters bet based on form and the algorithm adjusts the odds accordingly. Logarithm was how your slide-rule worked when you were are young bookie.

Have I missed talk of Match Review for the Blanck hit on N.Daicos? Late, front-on no eyes for the ball, caused serious injury - must get weeks IMHO.

Based on form.

"Nothing" is ridiculous hyperbole. Yes odds will be adjusted when punters place bets, who usually do so based on form anyway.