binman

Only if smith is a late out.

I think we are talking at cross purposes then od. And I wasted a whole bunch of time because I misunderstood your point. I don't think Chandler plays the high half forward role at all (though as I said he has been playing a bit of a hybrid high half forward/small forward role of late). Woey played spargos's role imo. Chandler plays a different role - small pressure forward who stays closer to goal (as would be evidenced by their heatmsap) Maybe you are right, and Chandler has the required athleticism for the high half forward role, and is a better athlete than spargo. If Chandler did play the high half forward role, we would then need another player to come in and play the pressure small forward role, imo (or keep the set up as is and Chandler plays a hybrid role) But's let's agree to disagree. It is a moot point anyway if spargo isn't selected in the same team as Chandler. And I'm not trying to make w case spargo is better than Chandler, or he will replace Chandler (i don't think he will). I'm predicting what I think goody will do selection wise (as opposed to the team I would pick).

Old i know you disagree, and i don't want to get into a back and forth on it. Happy for you to disagree, and rebut too of course but i'll post this response and leave it here if that is ok. I'm trying to get better at not feeling like i have to prove i'm right all the time (on DL and elsewhere)! The high half forward role is a thing. It is an increasingly critical role because all team defence depends on having multiple players who can cover huge ground, at pace, and gut run all game to track the ball from deep into the oppo defence and half forward flank (inside 50 sometimes too of course, but not like the traditional small forwards). They are critical roles because without them all team defence doesn't work as holes open up everywhere that the oppo use to tic tac the ball to free players on transition. And on offence they provide an outlet, tic tac offensive transition option. Forever and a day the game has been about getting the pill - and players are judged on the ability to do so (good players juts know how to get the pill, good players get to where the ball is etc etc). (By the by, this started to shift at club land because when Craig was at the Crows he paid someone to time how often Ricciuto, who was regularly getting 35 plus possessions a game, actually had the ball in his hand during a game. I can't recall the exact number, but over the course of a 2 hour game they realized that Roo, their most prolific ball winner, only had the ball in his hands on the ball something like 3.5 minutes per game. Arguably this changed footy because it shifted the thinking about the contribution of players when they don't have the ball in hand - something that has always been a big part of say basketball). A challenge for the role is that involves a huge amount of unrewarded running and often low possession numbers because they often gut run to spots that result in the ball actually not going near them. For example they gut run to cover a clear switch. If they make it, the ball doesn't get switched, and instead might get kicked down the line 70 metres away from them. Or they sprint to the open space to provide a switch option. The ball is not kicked to them but it drags their opponent with them (gassing that player in the process) to create a hole for a teammate to run into and provide the tic tac option and support transition. The impact is measurable in scores from turnover - just about the most critical stat in footy now (eg stopping the oppo scoring on transition, for example gut running to spoil or running to cover space and forcing a kick down the line to a contest. And scoring on transition when after creating turnover or winning it in the back half of the ground). Or put another way - being involved in scoring chains AND stopping oppo scoring chains (another 'unrewarded' act in terms of accruing a stat - well at least by the media and fans, but not by clubs and teammates). If they do their job they don't get a disposal. Hard to appreciate something that has not occurred, ie everyone can see when a player who gets kick. Every player has to gut run at times and all have to contribute to all team defence. The difference is the unique combination of attributes the high half forward role requires - football skill, football iq, discipline (for instance to not chase the pill to fatten their stats sheet when fans are calling for them to be dropped), elite endurance and elite athletic skills - most notably a high cruising speed akin to a 400 metre runner. Teams need several such players. Langers and Hunter have a similar function - and athletic attributes to Nibbla and Spargo. With no Spargo, another players has to play role (eg Woey) and/or other players have to cover the clicks at speed we miss when Spargo is not in the team (eg chandler playing a hybrid role). I really like Chandler, but he is does not have the athletic attributes required for the role. And i would argue he has been playing a hybrid role, and we saw the issue with that against the blues. He was ineffective as a small forward, in part i would argue because he spent too much time outside 50 and of course was also more gassed than he would have bene if he stayed inside 50 more of the time. And i would argue, as evidenced by the fact they were well ahead on scores from turnover (which almost NEVER happens to us) until late in the third, we also struggled with our all team defence because Chandler cant play that high half forward role to the level Spargo can (and that is not a criticism, just diff types of athletes). And in any case we want Chandler close to goal, as fresh as possible (eg not gassed because he has to sprint from the half back to the forward pocket), applying pressure inside 50, crumbing packs and kicking goals. On Gryan Miers, i thought i made clear that i was comparing roles not performance. I did after all note that Myers averages almost twice as many possessions and that he was chance of AA selection. I chose Myers as a comparison because he is a forward and the conversation is how can a forward get into he AA team having only kicked six goals. Stengel made AA becuase he kicked goals, for instance. Sure, people will say that he in the frame for AA selection because of his goal assists, but although he is miles ahead of every other player (trac is second), he still only provides 1.9 goal assists per game. Curiously though, Spargs, despite being playing 8 fewer games, has kicked almost twice as many goals as Myers (11) and whilst behind on score involvements, not as much as might be imagined (Myers averages 7 per game, Charlie 3.9). As for evidence for the different roles Spargo and Chandler play, it's hard to find specific evidence. The heat maps of both players when both in the team would provide a visual of their diff roles, but i couldn't' find them online. And the other good evidence is total kms covered in a game, defensive kms covered (which is when the oppo have the ball), and ks covered at speed. Again i cant find that data online, but it is on telstra tracker during games and i always look at it at quarter breaks. Nibbla, Langers and Hunter are always at the top of the above measures for us. As for evidence about the high half forward role existence and importance, Daniel Hoyne from Champion data explains it really well here: Go to this link: https://www.sen.com.au/programs/sportsday/ Scroll down to the 'Round 20 Full On Footy Analysis with Daniel Hoyne in the studio - Tuesday August 01 file And listen from 6 mins 24 secs to the 8 mins 34 second mark Summary: The transition game is the most important part of football now (something he has talked about all season) He defines the high half forward role Talks about the importance of the role Argues that bringing players in to play that role, eg Cunningham and Cotteral, is the key reason for the blues revival because it has allowed them them to sort out their transition game He also goes on to argue that without such players, teams can not win a flag and that is why he thinks the dogs are going nowhere (because they lack such players) It is not in this clip, but on another night Hoyne mentioned the Giants recruited Toby Bedford to play the high half forward role, which was an important factor in their improvement too There is also a podcast Tmac did pre season that talks about the high half forward role. There is a thread on DL about it with with the link, and i have written about it somewhere too. I had quick search and can't find either. But in short, Tmac argues the high half forward role Nibbla and Spargo play (so making a clear distinction between that and other roles, eg small forward) is 'the hardest role in football, by far'. He also talks about why that is the case - for example the gut running and 'high striding speed' required for the role and the need, all game, to push deep into defence and get behind the ball, and then on turnover, sprint to get ahead of the ball to provide a transition option. And like i have heard so many ex players say, like Jonesy about Nibbla a few weeks back, Tmac also said that whilst fans may not appreciate players who play the high half forward role, everyone within footy clubs do because they know what is involved and how critical it is to a teams' fortunes.

They must have seriously cut back on funding for comms. We have two players playing huge milestone games in two days, including our skipper, and one of the greatest dees of all time playing his 200th, and unless i can't see them on the MFC website, there are no videos celebrating Nibblas or maxy's career and milestones. Maybe they will come out today, but really it's not good enough. Both deserve more. As do fans. And whilst of course members buymemberships to support the club, part of the value proposition is decent content, not to mention some level of clarrrity about injuries and the like.

To be honest, I don't really think it is a 'take', in the same way that calling maxy a ruck is not a take. But leaving that aside, personally I put a lot of stock in the team they select in the first round of the season in terms of a guide to what their preferred method and best 22 looks like (obviously this can change - Laurie was in the round one team for instance, as was grundy) Full list to choose from and all players are at optimal fitness so can play their assigned role in the way it needs to be played. Round one against the dogs, Koz , Spargo (who had 15 disposals, 2 goals and 8 score involvements), ANB and Chandler all played - kicking 8 goals between them. So, no reason to think it can't work again.

I might have been unclear. I don't think the inside 50s tackle diff was where we lost the game per se, more that it was the only key stat with a meaningful difference and it helped the blues win (maybe that's the same thing). Their ability to keep it trapped inside their 50 and get second chance scoring opportunities was def a factor - particularly in the first half when they applied more pressure. You make a good point that our low number of tackles inside 50 might be related to structure and the small forwards pushing higher. On Chandler, agree we want him closer to goal - and kozzie too for that matter. We need them inside putting pressure on, tackling and kicking crumbing goals. Hard to do so from the wing.

He didn't play in the midfield. It might of looked like it because he ran up and down the ground all day, spent a lot of time in the defensive 50 and often was where the ball was at, so to speak. First half, he was on the wing. Second half he played his normal high half high forward role. Did a power of work all game. In terms of role, a good comparison is Gryan Miers for the cats. High half forward (ie not a crumbing small forward like chandler), get back and help out in defence, provide an outlet option on transition and spot up forwards with good kicks inside 50. Like miers (who is a chance of being an AA forward despite having only kicked 6 goals this season) offensively his kpis are goal assists and score involvements not goals. I suspect spargs comes in tgis week and plays that role. By the by, miers is averaging almost twice as many possessions as spargs. I suspect spargs has been in the twos to get his tank up so he can get to more contests.

Having listened to goody's presser i'm not surprised Brodie might not be playing. Not much joy there for for Brodie in his response to what was a leading question - paraphrasing, the question was something like so we can assume Brodie will remain in the team (because Brown and Tmac were not ready, goody's response to the previous question)

There are, i'm quite confident, other websites better suited to to scratch that particular itch. Unless of course it's a very niche fetish - anger induced by appalling umpiring decisions. Pity you are a life member, otherwise you would have stated getting helpful examples pop upon DL.

Um, just spit balling here, but the name of the thread might provide a clue?

Best not to open this thread daisy

Yep. And who knows what might have transpired if it had bene given a goal. Lets say they score a goal from the next center clearance, just as they did at the start of the last quarter. Maybe they are even more pumped and we are even more deflated. Perhaps the anger of being robbed will take us to anew level and the sub conscious knowledge they lost that game means we have the wood on them if we play them again, say in the prelim The season plays out differently now because of that horrendous mistake. May be it ends up heling us becuase we play a wounded [censored] outfit week one of the finals instead of the Lions at the gabba? At least that is what i'm trying to convince myself of. Sunday cant come quick enough!

It is literally not like that at all. The probability of every coin toss coming up heads or tails is 50 50 because each coin toss is a completely independent event with NO other variables, factors or historical precedents that need to be factored in. El Diablo is 100% right to look for correlations and factors that might help explain the statistical anomaly of the team finishing 4th after a full season of home and away football (ie the 4th best team in the comp) not having won grand final. It could just be statistical anomaly, though the sample size would suggest that is unlikely. There any number of potential variable's and correlations that might be a factor to help explain this seemingly anomalous stat. And for what it's worth having to play interstate week one is the one that came to my mind too. And old55's point about having to play the 5tht best team (who perhaps, like the blues might be on a late season roll and be in top form) the week after losing week one makes a lot of sense. But i agree, it shouldn't be overplayed. Coming into the 2021 GF only a very small number of teams that finished top of the ladder went on to win the flag. An even more anomalous stat i would have thought (ie the finishing top is nominally the best team in the comp). As we know we finished top in 2021 - and won the flag. An the Cats finished top in 2022 - and won the flag. Not so anomalous now.

Agree. I worry we will struggle a bit to run out the game given how brutal last week's game was. So I think the first quarter will be critical. I hope they come out hard, put huge pressure on, smash them in tbe contest and create scores from turnover. And be aggressive. Don't give them a sniff and set up a match winning lead early. Then maintain it.

The pies forward line is pretty uninspiring i reckon. Much more important is that we have the best defence.

I calmed down too, and then I watched a replay of Monday nights 360 and robbo said the umpire heard a clip, 'just like cricket when you hear nick'. Heard something? 70k people going ballistic, the Demon army screaming 2 metres behind him, players colliding at speed? And he heard the sound of a football brushing a players wrist(because if I did hit his right wrist, it could have only brushed it because even those who say it did acknowledge there was no deviation)???????? In cricket, with a quieter crowd 100 metres away, there is frequently confusion from players and umpires as to whether there is a nick, hence the frequent debate about whether to use up a review.

I went to the game and watched him closely. No chance he plays. Miles off being fit enough and as you say basically couldn't leave the ground. Cant see him playing again this season TBH

And on expected score, forget the bulltish you might hear that the blues should have been 5 goals up at the end of the first quarter, on expected score they were only 4 points up - only one more than the actual margin.

Sure. We will struggle to come after that brutal game -as will the blues (just as the Pies and Port did in the week after their brutal epic - both lost as short priced favs) I wont be backing against the dees, but the hawks and the suns to make their line are both good value bets. But the only way we don't finish top 4 is we lose our last two games and the blues win both of theirs (and of course that is the only way the blues can make top 4) Regardless of how you rate the blues or the dees, that is statistically a very unlikely scenario. So, as i wrote, in all likelihood we will have a double chance and the blues wont. So therefore we are a better chance of winning the flag.

You think there is a greater likelihood the blues will have a double chance than us?

Agree with all of the above. If they don't finish top 4 history is against them, but as you say they have the game. As do we. The same one in fact Contest, intense pressure, forward half football has been the template for winning the flag ever since Hardwick's tiger's won the flag in 2017. And one of the truisms of all sport, also holds true in footy - defence wins Grand Finals. And the dees and the blues have the best defensive systems by some margin The game on Saturday night showed how close and how well matched we are. The Blues were brilliant, and deserved the win. But we had the better of the second half and looked fitter and stronger at the end. We were denied the four points by an officiating error, but even leaving that aside the game could have gone either way. As Luke Ball said, the best game of the season - two top teams going head to head and being separated by under a goal. It is only logical that anyone that rates the blues as a good chance of winning the flag rate also rate us a good chance of doing so. In fact if someone thinks the blues are a good chance of winning the flag, the logical extension is we have a greater chance of doing so. Yes they won that game, but I think we are the better team. But that is by the by - the fact remains, in all likelihood, we will have a double chance and they will not. So therefore we have a better chance of winning the flag.

Agree on giving the ARC the soft call, but not with asking the goal umpire any clarifying questions The latter just adds another variable and process that would have to be followed. Just one example - how would the ARC speak to the goal umpire? Do the goal umpires currently wear a mic? If no, that is just more tech issues and costs - and the AFL are already woeful in that space. If they do have mic, then how are they 'questioned? What's appropriate to ask? What if it the ARC reviewer asks a leading questions? But most of all, for every second that passes from the incident the umpires memory of the incident morph and changes - it is human nature. The brain is constantly reinterpreting what has occurred in the past. Much easier - and more importantly much more black and white - would be for there to be blanket rule. No soft call. The goal umpire just tells the truth - i don't know if it was touched or not (which is no different to 'i think it was touched' or "i think it's a goal'). It is then up to the ARC reviewer to review the video and make the call. If they cant tell if it has been touched or not becuase the video is not clear, than it is a variation on the old cricket umpiring rule - the batter gets the benefit of the doubt - the kicker get the benefit of the doubt and it is given a goal. It could also be given point but that makes less sense to me. Either way it is a clear rule that everyone understands and is uniformly applied. Simple. The thing that does my head in is this scenario was just so utterly predictable and preventable. In fact there was a similar scenario last year with Lynch, with the lions being being the beneficiary. Which is why i cant get away from the thought the AFL are deliberately not addressing obvious issues like this. And why i could see them bringing in a ham fisted response that just created further dramas, and unintended consequences, like Whatley's idea re the ARC conferring with the goal umpire. They conflate controversy with it being good for the game becuase it dominates sport air time. It's been their strategy for 20 years - crowd out every other sport for media attention. Grow footy by starving other sports and codes of attention. It's a joke - and so mid numbingly short sighted and harmful to the sport.

True dat.

What the? I had to go back and make sure i didn't quote the wrong post. But i didn't. You wrote the dees, and i quote, 'were garbage for the first quarter and a half' I barely referenced the umpires. My post (that you have quoted) was all about rebutting your opinion the dees 'were garbage for the first quarter and a half' In all seriousness, how on earth do you arrive at 'I have no idea what your post has to do with mine'?

I could not agree more rjay. It's on the AFL, pure and simple.