binman

Huh?

Sure. But if they lose, port wins and we win we play port at Adelaide oval week one of finals.

Why?

C'mon lions ffs. What a boring, low skill game.

Never cared about the death ride anyway......

That's the thing - they weren't the pinging pies that day. We completely took away their running, transition game by pressing up, creating density and choking their outlet handball. And the Pies looked flat that day too (the flu, loading). So tomo wasn't really ever exposed by fast transition in that game. The pies will be a different proposition in a QF. Have to plan for them to get their the game on their terms at some point in the game. Last week Tomo was exposed at least three times when the Hawks got inside their 50 quickly by a young forward he simply couldn't go with. Why do yo think Goody subbed Tomo (for the second match in a row) and didn't pick him this week?

He's played a game a half. And looked terrific until he broke his jaw in his first game

Speed is my guess. Footy game plans shift and change but in the main follow the template provided by the teams winning premierships. The tigers set the template in 2017 and every flag since, bar one (the eagles in 2018) has been won using the same basic method - contest, defence, pressure and territory. In order to break down that method, particularly the defensive elements, Mcrae introduced a tactical tweak with the ultra fast ball movement from the back half. Adelaide have adopted a similar model (though they don't take as many risks defensively) and the Hawks have taken that model and given it further tweak. What i find interesting is that the Pies model has not won a flag, and it vulnerabilities have already been exposed and exploited (the pies are ridiculously vulnerable to goals on the counter becuase their defenders all participate in that wave running they do, leaving no-one behind the ball) but it is def had an impact on how the best teams play. And that impact is the importance of leg speed. Having enough players who are both quick off the mark and can cover ground at a reasonable clip is now super important - particularly in the back half becuase the faster transition game has also resulted in smaller forward lines, so more medium forwards who are quick and less lumbering talls like BB. I suspect a key reason goody likes Smith in the team is his acceleration from a standing start and his sprint speed. And i suspect why they are having a look at turner for the key position down back is he is quick of the mark and has a good cruising speed. Tomo covers the ground well enough once he gets going, though is still no gazelle, but he is dead slow off the mark. And with the ball coming in quick from fast transition the way it will when we play the Pies that is problem - as we saw a couple of times against the hawks. Not much a defender can do when the ball pings from the other end of the ground, there isn't time to set up a zone and a forward leads into an open leading lane. Their only hope is to have the speed to ensure the forward doesn't get separation. Tomo hasn't got that speed. And that lack of acceleration from a standing start means Tomo really can only play the one on one key defender role, not the hybrid one one one/zone off/intercepting role that petty plays when down back. Disco is pretty good one on one, quick from a standing start, an excellent intercept mark and zones of super well. And has good cruising speed. Good move i reckon.

None? Are you serious? 70% of the premiership team played in front of consecutive sold out finals at the g and in a losing preliminary (at optus oval, where they won the prelim and flag in 2021) in 2018.

This could be on the banner (with the grand final banner having the bar complety full and instead of loading - loaded):

Remind me again how Port, Pies and the Lions went in last year's finals.

I can't agree with this. Professional sport is littered with examples where up and coming contenders are worried about playing individuals and teams that are the real deal and have the record to back it up. This is true of both individual sports and team sports. There are a million examples in individual sports - every Olympic games is littered with them Tennis provides perhaps the best example. Of course Nadal, Federer and Djokovic have dominated the grand slam events world tennis for 15 years because they are just so good. But the aura they carry is widely acknowledged as a massive advantage they bring into every slam. Same is true of Tiger Woods and more recently Scottie Scheffler. There are even more examples in teams sport of teams being overawed by, or too worried, about opponents. The most famous is arguably the Laker's inability to take the Celtic's crown for nearly a decade. We definitely have an advantage coming into this finals series in that space. A massive advantage. We have the collective memory of 2018 to draw on, in addition to the 2021 flag. And last year's disappointment is fuel not an anchor (becuase we know we have what it takes to win a flag). Port have the ghosts of their previous failures in finals as do the Lions. And the Pies have to deal with last failure in finals AND the crushing expectation that has been heaped on their shoulders since last year. They come into the finals knowing that ONLY a grand final will will be considered a success. Which is ridiculous, but there it is. If the Pies face us week one, they will know they are coming up against a team that has been to the top of the mountain and has been building towards a second flag under Goody since 2017. The Pies have no collective memory of success , having lost two of three finals, with their only final win last year a low pressure fizzer against a team that had ran out of gas (i'm making a distinction between the Pies team that lost the flag in 2018 and this team becuase they are for all intents and purposes they are diff teams - diff coach, diff method and big turnover in players). Of course they will make all the right noises - anyone, anytime blah blah blah - but there is no way that sub consciously the Pies players won't be worried about facing us. Ask any Pies fan who they would least prefer to play week one of the finals. The answer will be the dees. The Pies players would never say that publicly, but that's what they will be thinking.

Yep, agree. And i think that's what we'll get. At the risk of patting myself on the back too hard the post bye phase of the season has followed the pattern i thought it would: Struggle immediately post bye (the cats) Incrementally look better and start running out games better (GWS, Saints) Very much running out games better and get back to our early season fast flowing, high scoring football (Lions, Crows, tigers, roos) Start reintroducing tempo footy and a greater emphasis on deefence, taking the sped out of the game and limiting oppo scoring (blues, hawks and i think also swans) I thought that would be the pattern, but hoped is probably more accurate as it is dependent on fitness and ability to run out games. And that is an unknown at the post bye stage - having a group of 40 odd players peak in September is a science, but a very inexact one, with a million variables that can mean it never quite comes together. For example, all season, up til the last few weeks, the Pies were lauded by Sanderson as 'the fittest side in the AFL, by some margin'. And maybe they were - pre bye. But it is increasingly evident that, just like us last year, the Pies are really starting to paddle. And the Pies' game plan is more reliant on a super running power and fitness than any other team. We at least had an elite defensive system to fall back on last year. The most pleasing thing for me, and the thing that fills me with most confidence, is, in stark contrast to last year, we are clearly the fittest team of the contenders atm. We are the only team increasing our pressure rating in the last quarter and the only contender regularly winning our final quarters (i think we have lost three last quarters since the bye). The other contenders are all starting to paddle late in games, like we did last year. And this year the contenders will have played an extra home and away game, which makes things that much more taxing. I can see us going into full on deefence mode on Sunday and completely shutting the game down. Come into the game with the goal of keeping them to 50 points. Create density and don't allow the Swans any space to run into - partic players like Goulden and the lizard man (the size of the SCG will help this). Control the tempo and don't allow it the game to become a fast, ball in motion transition game. Make it look like the sort of game plan (the anti pies method) that everyone hated in the first half of 2022 - suffocate the oppo. And using that method i think we will not only win, it provides the opportunity to use the bench to manage players loads and try and engineer a game that isn't the brutal tackle fest the Swans will want to turn it into (for example by doing what we did late in the 3rd and 4th quarter against the hawks - chip it around and have lots of kick marks). Of our key rivals only Port is likely to have bruise free, low intensity game. The tigers have put the cue in the rack so we can expect bugger all defensive intensity. Or any intensity. No tiger player wants to cop an injury that might ruin their prep for next season. But surely the bombers will want to show something after last weeks embarrassment. It is the very definition of their grand final. At the very least i hope they physically smash the Pies. The saints will go super hard against the Lions, and i actually give them some sort of chance of winning with their strong defensive system. And no matter what happens in the Dogs v cats game, the Giants will look to physically smash the Blues (a team they may well face in week one of the finals).

Two thoughts WCW. The Demon Army should hold of using that quote until we play the Pies - it's from The Fly Using a tagline from a horror film gives me an idea for a future banner WCW (replace jack with Goody): REDRUM

Exactly. That's why RBG had two sons! Excellent planning to mitigate the risk of not having a child who supports the mighty dees.

Not try to lose. Not maximize the chance of winning (eg having maxy on the bench for longer than we would normally). And not having anything to play for (other than pride) might mean we are not as manic as we might otherwise be. That and the Swans have a very big incentive to win - a home final. But i think a bit will depend on our final side ie which four from the extended bench come in (i wouldn't be discounting late outs either) And if Port and Lions both win i think we will be equal favs or even outright as we stay 4th even if we win in that scenario.

Agree on both points. Goody, who simply does not get the credit he deserves for his tactical smarts, has been really clever with the way they have used Tracc. Essentially, Fritter come back in as a forward and Tracc can go back to being a 70-30 mid with very little disruption to the set up. And, to boot, as you say he has been kept out of the fray in the middle (even against the lions and to a lesser extent the blues), so comes into finals relatively fresh, as does Clarry - which is brilliant for two power players. And is in contrast to last season when both looked really banged up at this point in the season.

Well, it is true to say we have never been in the same room together

I think they’ll do what they did in the roos game, which was to use the bench as a way of minimising injury risk and manage load. Tracc, viney and maxy all spent a big chunk of the last quarter on the bench. Sure manage any plsyer really needing a spell, but otherwise use the bench to give your A graders and young blokes a decent chop out.

I'd make it has to be kicked. Anything else is too radical change in the game it if touches the point post and goes thru the goal zone, it's a goal If it hits the point post and goes through for the point zone it's a point (instead of a throw in or out on the full). Pros: Is in the spirit of the game (ie isn't a huge philosophical shift) Free Replicable at every level (which clearly any system using video review isn't) Takes the pressure off goal umpires (again, at every level) Take one grey area away ie it is impossible to dispute if the ball went thru or not Takes human error out of the equation One less opportunity for the sort of drama we have seen since the keays non goal It means less reviews and therefore less delays and periods where the game stops And finally it helps mitigate the inevitable unforeseen problems and unintended consequences that will flow from whatever half arsed solution the AFL lands on. For example one of the solutions floated is going back to the rule where play can' restart until the goal umpire has waved his flags. The rule changes ive noted above would make that unnecessary if the issue was a query on whether it hit the post. Another solution being floated, in part in response to the one above, is to let play continue, review the vision and call it back if a mistake has been made. The potential for such a rule to be stuffed up by the AFL is limitless. And that IS a major change to the way the game has always been played. The rule changes ive noted above would make that unnecessary if the issue was a query on whether it hit the post. Touched would still has to be reviewed, and they simply have to pony up for decent tech. And fine (and suspend for any future infractions) any player, like Mckay who flat out lies, and there is irrefutable evidence they are lying, and screams at the goal umpire they touched it while gesticulating like some having stroke. No different to diving which ids a reportable offence.

Informed by what? 12 home and away games?

The karma bus hit the AFL. Stopped, and backed back over the AFL. The AFL would have had their final round drama if the Keays goal had been awarded. And the reason it wasn't awarded is they've had 14 years to get the goal review system, brought in to prevent exactly such howlers, right. And have still not got it right.

Yep, all good points, particularly about where the games in the first week of finals are played. I def factor that in to my assessment, but that usually doesn't become clear until close to the finals. But def should be a metric. You're right about me being too generous on the lions. I actually did that table a couple of weeks ago, after our loss to the blues, to inform a response to a question on the podcast. And didnt update the odds. At that point the lions had to beat the pies to get a home final. I noted my odds would change if they did. Same for port if they managed to get a home final, but less impact because their home ground advantage is not as big imo. The most probable scenario is the ladder stays as is for the top 4. But there is still a bit to play out. Saints could roll lions, and if they do the lions could slip to 4th if port win. If port and lions both lose and we win we will get to 2nd and play lions at the g. I'd prefer to play the pies to be honest, so it's weird to say but happy to finish 4th. And it is far from impossible that we will come into the swans game knowing a win means we play our first final interstate. I hope not, because that creates a weird energy for the game. But, I think you are spot on about the correct price for the lions. Almost. 5.50 is way too long with the probability they get a final at the gabba in week one (bad news for the saints because the lions have a huge incentive to win). 4.25 for the lions it is! Actually, i'll make them 4.50 because as strong as their form is at the Gabba, their form at the G is terrible. My theory is the g exposes their lack of leg speed, an issue that is greatly exacerbated by losing their quickest mid in Ashcroft. And even though its not a hoodoo ground, given the grand fianls is at the G, it can't help to run out for a GF with the hoodoo in the back of your mind The purpose of such an exercise from a punting perspective is trying to find a value bet ie can the punter secure a price that is better than the true price (as defined by the punter). Winning punting is about finding the value not the winner. The pies are 3.75, so on my market well unders. At 4.50 the lions are over the 4.00 bookies are paying. No joy there. Port are 6.00 and blues 8.00. Forget about it. I have the dees priced at 4.00 and you can get 4.50 with the bookies. So, the only value bet remains the dees, albeit not the great value it was when we got out to a ridiculous 8.00 after our gws loss.

Unintended consequences alert

Good question binman. As a long time punter on the ponies i have key metrics i put great stock in when doing my form and assessing the 'true odds' of each runner in order to determine who i'll back. So for example i put a lot of weight first and second up form (for horses in their first or second race after a break), handicap rating, racing pattern, record at the track, record at the distance and record in the track conditions (ie good, slow, heavy). I take the same approach to my football analysis in terms of predicting the flag winner. The key things i weight highly (my premiership metrics if you like) are, in order of significance: Injury Fitness System List strength Deefence Experience in finals Recent form For this exercise i'm setting a fresh market for the flag (ie no best yet) and therefore the odds of each team winning the flag too. I have given a score for each team out of ten in each category to help illustrate how i have come to my conclusion. These ratings are obviously subjective. Team Best 22 injured Fitness System Defence win GFs Experience in finals List strength Recent form My price Dees 8 Fritter Petty Brown? Tmac? 10 10 10 Averaging only 10 points per loss 10 10 9 4.00 Implied probability is 25% we’ll win the flag Lions 8 Ashcroft Gunston 9 9 8 25.3 points per loss 9 9 8 4.50 Pies 6 Daicos Moore Sidebottom 7 6 7 21.5 points per loss Defensively getting worse in last month 7 8 5 6.00 Port 9 Georgiades Clurey 8 6 4 35.5 points per loss 13th for points against – last team outside of top 5 points against to win the flag Roos mid 90s 9 8 6 7.00 Blues 5 Cerra Silvagni Zac Williams McGovern Kennedy Mackay Walsh (back in this week maybe) 8 10 7 26.5 points per loss (but improved massively) Only the top 4 teams have a realistic at winning the flag. In the last 25 years, only two teams have won a flag from outside top 4 - dogs in 2016 (the first year of the pre final bye) and crows in 2018 3 8 10 9.00