Nasher

So? I never said I get it right all the time, in fact I most certainly don’t. I just thought this one was a pretty easy situation to read.

Nah, I did actually laugh when I saw those suggestions and I did think it was ridiculous. His game was imperfect, and he’s an imperfect player, but there was a massive overreaction on here to one or two poor bits of play. He was never going to be dropped.

Looks to me like Vanders or Jordon for Viney, Weideman on standby for TMac. Harmes named on the field just to troll everyone who made the laughable suggestion that he’d be dropped.

Won’t be pressing play on that one ?

I reckon it'll be St. Kilda and Collingwood. Just a hunch.

Nev by a nose.

Forced changes only. Pre-emptive LOL for any posts suggesting differently.

Under what circumstances would you not take a 98 point win?

I thought Demonland would be safe after a 98 point win. Tough crowd! That was as comprehensive a demolition I’ve seen in a long time. Sure it would have been nice to pile on a few more at the end, but it’s splitting hairs. 12 of the 20 behinds were posters or rushed. It’s the absolute dismantling of a bad side we’ve been waiting for all year. Great stuff.

Avoid Demonland, as per personal policy. It's not going to happen though.

Thanks Kiran. I hadn’t listened to your podcast before but I thought I’d have a listen. It’s become a bit of a little secret of mine recently, which I dare not mention on Demonland, that I’m becoming a Kane Cornes fan. It was interesting to hear him talk about going over the top on certain issues in the past - he said the “extra 10%” or the “bit of mayo”. My observation is that in his recent work in the media, he’s cut that aspect out of his work. Since then I think he’s shown that he’s able to analyse the game and give us some insight without the need to make headlines, and that actually makes him more interesting to listen to. I think at the core, he knows what he’s talking about, and as his experience in the media increases, it’s starting to shine. The observation on Gawn getting back to help out the defenders is a great example of the type of things I want smart commentators to point out to me. I watch mostly on TV so I don’t get that view, but even if I watched at the ground, I doubt I’d be observant enough to notice. Great stuff, thanks.

When I was a number loving nerd-child, it would have been my dream job to work for Champion Data and invent new statistics for the AFL. As a number loving nerd-adult I find it just about impossible to gauge how meaningful these complex statistics are when there are so many components of it that are subjective. For example, in some particular situations, "corralling" is really the most effective method pressure available - if you're standing several meters from your opponent who beats you to the ball and you're a bit flat footed but your opponent is mobile, and you try to apply direct physical pressure, you risk over-committing and having your opponent leave you eating their dust. And oft times you see a player lay a tackle, which would amount to "physical" pressure, but the tackle is hopeless and the player gets the ball away easily. And don't even get me started on the fact that DE% is an input in to the calc. I mean I guess the weightings of each type should take these vagaries in to account, but I'd need to see this particular stat get used a lot more before I was comfortable with how well it is calibrated against how high a team's pressure "looks". If I were a coach I'd be pretty skeptical about using it for any sort of analysis until I'd seen it play out a bit. The longer I go on, the more I'm convinced the only statistic that really matters is the W or L in the result column. The simple, counting stats can be used to debunk obviously wrong criticisms of players ("Joe Bloggs just kept getting caught holding the ball. Oh, only one free kick against for the whole game? Guess not.") but I think for the average fan, the complex ones are just gobbledygook that confuse things more than they make them clear.

I was about to ask who the two teams were that we hadn’t played yet. Christ it’s been a long week.

Carn Swans.

Jeez I hope this is a joke.

I’m right there with you Onion. 2021 has been a train wreck in the Nasher household too. Kicked it off with my mother’s passing on 4th Jan and that pretty much set the tone for the rest of the year. Feels weird for the MFC to be a consistent positive in my life when all else has gone to shit, for most of my life it’s been the other way around. I understand this won’t go on forever but I’m totally riding it and feeling the love while it does. It’s personal policy to steer clear of Demonland after a loss though.

Why do I need anyone to describe the play? I’m watching on TV, I can see what’s happening. Give me one footy lover who sounds good and knows all the players names, and one expert who might not be as polished but can add some genuine insight - ideally a recently out of the system coach.

I watched the game with the sound turned off last night and it was the best commentary I’ve heard in years. But I totally hear you binman. Luke Darcy calling Jimmy Jordon “Jordon Jones” multiple times in a game earlier in the season was a low point for me when I didn’t think we could sink any lower. Surely rule #1 is, know the players’ names.

You’re a dead ringer for Christian!

He registered 2 free kicks against (Oliver had 4) so at the absolute most there was two HTBs. He had 7 tackles and was second for pressure acts. You saw what you wanted to see. Harmes is primarily a defensive midfielder. He’s capable of playing games where he really hurts on the offensive, but as long as he’s making it hard for the opposition to win clean ball, he’ll continue to play. Sparrow is behind Harmes and there is absolutely no logic behind bringing him in other than people getting sucked in the “shiny and new” factor.

Lever is from Victoria.

I can’t see them dropping ANB. The mix of smalls has worked pretty consistently all year. I’m not dropping him after one average game just as I wasn’t dropping Pickett after several. Harmes is the only question mark for mine, and it’s just a question of if we want something a bit different in that final midfield spot with Vandenberg or Melksham. I see no point in dropping him for another like player in Sparrow. I’m thinking no change though after that result.

Haven’t been online much this week but I’m assuming this was the result everyone was predicting?

How does that conversation go in match committee? ”I think Kozzie is looking tired, he’s not getting involved as much. Maybe he needs a spell this week.” ”Yeah but unfortunately our hands are tied. Robbo wrote a nice article about him in the HS so we are now honour-bound to keep selecting him.”

Other than “old and busted” vs “new hotness”, what’s the rationale of dropping Harmes before Sparrow?