Skuit

Remember that time when Freo were really [censored] and then some feng shooi expert said it's the jumper, stupid. And so they got a better jumper and are still [censored].

By my calculations, the Blues haven't had a clean win over us since 2016.

Trainwrecking: Wednesday 8th May 2024.

His name has popped up on here before, but Redlegs ruckman Harry Boyd is currently leading the SANFL for clearances by some margin, clocking up 48 after five matches - with the next closest player on 38. He's also smashing the hit-out count, with 208 compared to 166 for second place. Top 10 for i50 and averaging nearly 5 tackles per game. A bit on the short side at 198 (weight . . . similar to Kieren Briggs), but came through as a defender and can take a grab. He's now won a couple Norwood best & fairests under Jade Rawlings. Has an off-field manner that reminds me a bit of May - comes across as a good egg. Age 26. Seems our type of ruck, but not fitting with our list approach perhaps.

Like I said, you're welcome to care and post about whatever you want, and if you want to be up in arms about something inconsequential after a win, go for it. I'm also within my rights to find that approach odd and express such without directly belittling anyone.

I guess the second part relates to your first part. I get that people need a place to vent etc. but my personal preference is to come here for constructive information and celebration/commiseration. Like yourself, I turn to Demonland as an alternative option to the media for discussion, and preferably some humour. So I don't think it ironic/hypocritical to point out and encourage people to let go of their media angst. We just knocked off the top team, but the site has been full of complaints and nasty expressions born of personal vendettas (e.g. eat [censored] Geelong). Brings down the joyous mood somewhat. To me, complaining about the media is the same as complaining about the government or some other such institution. Take the [censored] as a given. I also understand that I grew up and live in a different environment than most of the posters on this site, not being from Melbourne and spending most of my adult life overseas. There's obviously deeply psychological aspects at play, but I just can't fathom why anyone would care about jibes etc. as to the football team you support. We didn't choose to follow Melbourne as some sort of logical selection, as if we failed somehow, and most of us have no say or control over any aspect of how the club operates or performs. That we continue to support the Dees despite long periods of mediocrity and ineptitude should be the ultimate badge of honour.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand. From memory, the almost inexplicable run of inaccuracy on Saturday from both teams coincided with an unusually long period of very few stoppages. Is this correct? Would love to see the relationship between measures of fatigue and accuracy and how rotations etc. might impact expected score.

Single stats in isolation don't define a game. Nobody says they do. And data doesn't explain things, it just provides the opportunity to search for observable patterns and interpret that information. Outright dismissing the 'expected score' stat is like saying that 'disposals' are meaningless, although everybody already knows some disposals are more damaging than others. I get the sense that the hostility toward 'expected score' comes back to the AFL fan aversion to 'excuses'.

One of the most amusing aspects of media narrative: had Cameron kicked straight, we'd reading articles about another Scott coaching masterclass. He didn't, so instead we get articles about Jason Taylor's drafting nous. So silly.

People can post or care about what they want of course, but I find it odd that most post-winning game threads are usually uppity about how the media reports on the win or their perceptions about our team. Seriously, who cares if Dermott isn't on board, or downplays the win? Fritsch kicked a goal that will be remembered 50 years from now. What does it matter if some forgotten random didn't rate it? Chris Scott has one job: (clue) it isn't to hand out plaudits to the opposition, but to win flags, whatever approach he thinks is best. Goodwin has the same job, but takes a different approach. Enjoy the win. Look at the stats. Do the old fashioned eye-ball test. None of what the media and other footy forums say has anything to do with our chances of winning a flag. Not intended as a condesceing question, but would people be happier if the media bowed down and said we are unbeatable and clear flag favourites?

I'll take a deeper dive later, but curious to know if the data reveals anything that stands out as to opposition misses/the MFC nailing tougher shots, and if this again suggests anything re. our game plan?

According to AFLxScore on Twitter MELB 58 from expected 58.1 BL 82 from expected 82.6

I'm guessing we drop the one match to Port on expected score? A 24-point percentage dive though?

I have a feeling this won't win goal of the year due to the perception of it being a bit arsey (see Clarry at Adelaide Oval). Yet, I attended a high school next to Footy Park in the (ahem) mid-90s. Remember riding home from school one day and stopping to watch the Crows forwards practicing the dribble-turn kick from the pocket for at least half an hour. A genuine AFL skill.

Downing a vodka and shouting huzzah! every time Oliver Henry misses a shot . . .

It's also not a one-way street. I've noticed in the past that the MFC is one organisation to have acquired my data from a third party.

Fair comment. I base my contentions on very little other than being Adelaide-born and sticking with the Demons when the Crows came in (like many friends, at a very ripe age for poaching - but I also attended every Adelaide game and was a Footy Park member). I also have mad Rioli-connected Hawks family in Darwin, but know they would switch teams in an instant, especially if the team was indig-focussed. Having also lived up north, I would expect many locals to jump on board, and every footy-starved 'Mexican' to declare official second-team status.

For those questioning my ongoing support of and the viability of an NT team, here are my solid contentions; An Indigenous-led team will be underwitten by the fed and state governments, as a social mechanism. It will still attract massive sponsorship $$$, in a CSR respect (sorry Santos and INPEX). The locals will be more likely to switch allegiances or support the NT as a second team compared to Tas. Most of Australia will take up the dynamic (cliche) NT as a second team, inc. dinky memberships. Anyone who has ever watched footy up north will know it's not just a cliche. [censored] is exciting. A local team will unearth local hidden talent, adding to the AFL pool. See Jurrah x 10. The conditions are challenging, but it's not a big deal in winter. Just a bit slippery. Seriously. A new 25,000 seat stadium in the city will fill out every second week the team play at home. The same stadium can host other stuff and bring in people from SEAsia. Benefit NT. .................................. I'm a Norwood supporter, but would back an NT team before a third SA or WA team. An NT team would outperform GWS and GC on almost every metric in their first season, on and off field. Canberra? pfft. Darwin leans AFL but is fairly split with NRL. Start a team up there and watch the fans and kids gravitate. I have first-hand anecdotal evidence: my kid brother is 6ft.7 and build like the proverbial. He should be an AFL ruck already but is still [censored] around playing rugby.

You mean like other non-profit organisations? Also, it's the league which is non-profit. Commie alert: the bigger clubs help pay the way for the smaller ones. And I don't think the AFL is at any immediate risk of going broke. The commission are caretakers of the sport in Australia. It should be on them to manage the balance between the commercial aspects while growing the competition, with a focus on the latter including greater grassroots investment. Sustainability as to the competitive strength of the individual teams is another matter, but largely subjective. I'd wager most on here lament some supposed 90s glory days. Spectacle in one thing, but objectively the sport is played at a way higher level than in the 80s and 90s with far more professionalism. Many have already commented on the 'there but for the grace of God' nature of sending North to the bin, considering what we dished up for a long period.

Leave North alone (add Britney meme): they have a proud and boring history. Add Tas and then NT. Build a truly national sport and they will come.

I'm impressed the US has 32 teams, even though I expected they would have a few more around. Seems like a big country. What is this sustainability you talk about? The AFL is a non-profit sport: the biggest in the country.

I get your point. But I'm in full demonstone mode trying to work out where you plucked your example numbers from?

In the history of the MFC, we've won between 80 and 90 games against seven current teams. We have the opportunity to push Geelong off that list by the end of the year.

Just quietly: a player like Pickett you can't measure on available stats, but he's on the way to another 40-plus season (Cyril achieved that twice in his career). Fritta will also likely be in the top six or so for the Coleman by the end of the round. And Petracca is on track to once again claim the goal assists title.

Today I learned that Ralph Smith from Richmond doesn't get the Bobby Hill full-name treatment but is actually a bloke named Hugo. I'm still not sure about the umpire Mattstevic though.