binman

This tweet provides an interesting example of how the footy media often uses data to create a narrative and/or advance a specific argument. Let's say Montagna wanted some data to strengthen his argument that the demons have a 'scoring issue'. He might use this single data point - and the tweet itself - to make his case. He and King use a single data point all the time to do exactly that (ie advance a specific, often narrow, argument). And just as Justin Giuliano does with that tweet, they often use a psychological technique called 'framing'. Framing, which i think has its origins in advertising, is very widely used in advocacy, government, campaigning, polling etc etc. The goal of framing is to influence the recipient's thinking to achieve a specific aim or advance a specific agenda. In the case of advertisers, the aim is to sell stuff. For government, it might be to promote a particular policy position (a classic example, that is often used to demonstrate the framing technique, is the language the Labor and Liberal parties use to dehumanize people seeking asylum in Australia by boat). In his tweet, Giuliano has used framing to influence reader's analysis of the data in the tweet - the dees have 'scoring problems' This is achieved by an explanatory para that primes readers to read the chart through the lens of the dees' supposed 'scoring troubles'. And doubles down on that framing by comparing us with a team in historically poor form - and uses a shocked emoji to not so subtlety ram his point home: 'Another perspective of the Dees' recent scoring troubles is looking at points scored per inside 50. Whilst Dees are 8th overall this season with 1.61 points per I50, they are 17th over the last 5 weeks (4 games), only marginally better than the Eagles (1.13 vs 1.11)😮' What i would like to see is Champion Data and the analysts in the footy media help educate footy fans on how to interpret and understand data, not use it to prime them to prima facie accept an argument they making. Without getting into the discussion about whether we have a 'scoring problem', here are the contextual thoughts and questions i had when reading the chart to help me understand what it was saying and put the data into some sort of context: Unlike the Eagles, we are a forward half team that looks to trap it in our forward line, and if we can't do so, set up a wall to increase the likelihood we will turn it over at half forward and re-enter our 50 That model means the ball is often coming back into a very crowed forward line because almost all players from both teams have pressed up into our forward half Logic suggests that a crowded forward line makes it harder to score, which probably helps explain why we are still only mid table for points scored per inside 50 even when traveling well What then are our re-entry numbers in this period, have they dropped off too? Are our tackles inside 50 stats relevant here? Have all teams dropped off in that stat in the relevant time period (that's to say is this a league wide trend we are tracking with)? Is the drop of consistent and/or correlated and/or explained and/or interconnected with other relevant stats (eg accuracy)? Is there any key personnel differences that should be factored in (eg no genuine second tall in these four games)? Logic suggests young players will be impacted by fatigue more than seasoned players (as evidenced in the drop off in player ratings and pressure points for young players in this phase of the season) How much weight then should be given to the fact that with JVR, Chandler, Kozzie and Chandler we have a very young forward line that is very likely to be struggling with the rigors of an AFL season in this period? If we are comparing the dees to the Eagles, how young is their forward line? The sample size is very small - only four games Who were those four games against (answer: Freo, Blues, Pies and Cats)? How much weight should be given to the quality of the opposition (by way of contrast, in that same period, the Pies played the Roos, Eagles, Dees and the Crows)? How much weight should be given to the fact that 25% of the teams in the sample are one on top of the AFL ladder and have a very strong defensive system? Is it relevant that we had 9 more scoring shots than the Pies? In the four games in the chart, should the conditions be factored into the analysis? As an example of the relevance of the above question, the Blues and Cats' games were played at night in cold, dewy conditions and the cats games was also wet and slippery conditions - logic suggests that it is harder to convert inside 50s into scores in such conditions Given 50% of the games were played at night and 25% of the sample size were played in wet conditions, how much does that skew the results? What were the conditions the Eagles played in - are we comparing like for like? What is AFL average score to inside 50 ratio in wet conditions? How much weight should be given to the fact that 25% of the sample size is at a ground that is different in shape and size to every other AFL ground, is hard to score at and the narrowness of the ground makes for crowded forward lines? How much weight should be given to the fact that 25% of the sample size is against a team (the Cats) that has a massive home ground advantage, plays the ground well, trains on the ground, and has created a defensive system perfectly suited for that venue (not to mention having one of the best key defenders in the AFL in Stewart)? What is the dees historical score to inside 50 ratio at Kardinia park? What are other teams score to inside 50 ratio at Kardinia park? Historically, how important/significant is score to inside 50 ratio in terms of it being a useful indicator of the chances of winning a flag, ie does it actually matter if we are down on that stat? What was the dees score to inside 50 ratio in the corresponding period last year? What was the dees score to inside 50 ratio in 2021 home and away season? What was the dees score to inside 50 ratio from round 16 in 2021 and 2022 (ie should we expect this stat to improve- this would be useful to know, because if the answer is yes, then it might be an issue of concern if it doesn't rebound)? What was the dees score to inside 50 ratio in the 2021 finals series? What was the score to inside 50 ratio for the winners of the last say, 10 flags? Why was this particular time frame (five weeks) chosen - because it suited a particular narrative? Why do he choose, for instance, not to go back another two week and include our loss to Port and the demolition of the hawks - that would give a more representative sample size (ie the last six games versus the 8 previous games)? Do we have a 'scoring problem? Alternatively, we could just accept the author's framing, and simply agree with what we are being primed to think - the dees have 'scoring problems'.

Indeed. And for much the same reason as our current stutters, i would contend.

Ok - i'll cling to he record of the Cats in 2022. Is that ok?

Hopefully they will also be skewed by the final 9 weeks of the season (inclusive of finals) - you know, like they were in 2021.

To be clear, TU, i'm not suggesting this of you, but the idea that anyone is suggesting or assuming that we're just going to "click" and everything's OK is a weird false narrative that seems to pop up on DL at this time of the year. I don't recall reading a single post, this year, or in previous years making that suggestion. And nor for that matter is Hoyne (not suggesting you are saying is he is). Everything has to go right, and not much wrong to win a flag. It's about giving the team the best possible chance of winning the flag. #reject false narratives

There is only two worth listening to in my opinion - Hoyne on Tuesday drive and Sanderson on Thursday Whatley. Both are always available on the SEN website under podcasts

SEN - Hoyne is on the drive show every Tuesday night. I have to say, he's really good in the way he uses multiple data points to illustrate a point he is making, as opposed to taking one piece of data and extrapolating some point from it. A great example of the latter is pundits querying our connection issues and scoring power, and pointing to our raw total scores in the last few weeks as evidence to back that opinion up. BUT completely ignoring the fact the issue isn't connection, it is accuracy, as evidenced by the fact that our shots on goal has remained relatively steady (and certainly on, or above AFL average in this period). Or the fact, that taking out the Pies games against the Roos and Eagles (and really scores of 105 and 120 against those two teams is hardly a ringing endorsement of their connection or fire power), the Pies have have struggled with scoring shots (they played the Roos in the same round as we played Freo - and only had 3 more scoring shots! And we lost!). And after all we only played the pies two games ago and had NINE more scoring shots that them! Yet OUR scoring power and connection is on Montagna's 'watch list'. Go figure. On our accuracy, when were AFL# 1 Hoyne warned that we would revert to the mean at some point, so be careful of reading too much into our scoring power (ironic). He has been proven correct.

I wasnt comparing our forward line with theirs. But for the sake of argument, if you take out their win against the Eagles (120 points) and roos (105 points), they haven't scored more than 100 points since round 9, when we also last did against the hawks. And prior to thst we had easily outscored them. In fact, despite the pies having won 3 more games than us and having now played the easy beats (and all the same teams we have), we have still scored 24 more points than the pies well past the halfway mark of the season. Impossible then to argue their forward line is better. But I'm sure some dees fan will. Because apparently the pies are better at everything. On the thought experiment, what I was driving at is that in no universe is not winning a flag at this stage of their development a failure. The rampant 2018 tigers side, who entered the finals series at 1.80 to win the flag, yes, not winning the flag was a failure. But the 2023 pies are not the 2018 tigers going for back to back flags. Again, they lost 2 of 3 finals last year, having been in the wilderness since losing the 2018 GF. But the expectation on the pies from the media is iver the top And the vibe is not winning the flag this year would be a failure. Surely that heaps massive pressure on the players, none of whom have had any real success. And certainly no experience dealing with the pressure of expectation or being the hunted not the hunters.

100% agree with those issues. On JVR, we have come to rely on him very quickly. That's a worry - he's only 19 after all. Bowey is important, in large part because he is an elite kick, and we need every good kick we have playing. Still too many turnovers - which by the by was a key factor on the loss because the cats out scored us on turnover. And you've hit the nail on the head. Injury is the key determinant. Always was, always will be. Just look at the impact of no Oliver against the cats. Oliver's injury and hospital stay is also a major concern because not only has he missed normal training, he has missed at least 10 days of opportunity to load (which was what the post Pies running was about- load management). The margins are so small, he has lost condition already.i suspect they will have to put him thru a mini preseason to get him right for the back end of the season (one reason why he likely won't play this week, and I predict next week either). Tmac is still 4-6 weeks away, so even if BB comes back in, and is injury free, we are in trouble if jvr got injured. Or God forbid max. Such is nick daicos' importance to the way the pies play, I seriously doubt they could win the flag if he got injured and was out of say the finals.

Yes, that's def one of them. Very much so in fact - and our win against them was excellent evidence of that issue (eg take the corridor away and they are in trouble) Without going into detail (i'll come back to it), the concerns for the Pies, in my opinion, are, in no particular order: They have excellent defenders (i would love Quanor), but their defensive system is a worry (it was interesting that they used a goal keeper this week - i suspect in part becuase of fatigue, but perhaps they are changing their system a bit) As result, teams are always in it against them They rely on too much on Pendles, Sidebottom, Nick Daicos, and to lesser extent Josh Daicos, for their method to work There is an incredible amount of expectation on them for a team that has achieved nothing - they lost 2 of 3 finals last year (both in part due to defensive lapses), and as dees fans know home and away wins count for nothing On the above point - a thought experiment. If the Pies don't win the flag this year is it a failure? This season they have been beaten by 2 of 3 of the other real contenders (us and the Lions) Their mid and ruck stocks are thin Their game plan is even more reliant on optimal fitness than ours (an issue exacerbated by their defensive issues) Their jumper Their forward line

No it wasn't @titan_uranus - all good. I hadn't read your post when i posted it. It was just in my head - sort of. In fact, i had been thinking about the quote, there are none so blind as those who won't see (or whatever it is) the previous night and when i googled it on the bus to work this morning, i landed on the bible quote because apparently that is where it originated from. And I liked the biblical vibe of it. I did however get a bit of a laugh you noting the word foolish, because that made me laugh when i read the quote - a bible sledge! I just read your post .Well reasoned and good points, well made. On the topic of evidence, i think there is heaps of compelling evidence - i just cant be bothered pulling it together (but if you go back to this time last year, and in 2021, there is heaps). In my view, eventually the clubs will stop the silly charade and just start talking about it - Scott, Hardwick and goody and some recently retired footballers in the media (eg Jobe Watson) have been intimating already about it. Personally, i find the post bye results this year pretty compelling evidence. As a footy punter I'm always looking for value. So i am attuned to opportunities for value. A classic example was the round just gone - i had a monster weekend on the back of correctly predicting the Suns and Freo would be completely different teams in their second post bye game (and i also backed the lions, who were well overs because of their average post bye performance against the hawks - when they they had no run in their legs). Chalk and cheese. Take Freo - they were way too short at 1.72. They were only that price because of how woeful they were post bye against the Giants. I watched that game, and you don't need to be sports scientist to see they had no run at all. You could see it. The commentators could too - but just made general comments about their lack of energy. I mean it was clear as day - just as it was in the Lions v Hawks game and the Suns' previous game. The pattern is very clear. It is all about fatigue. But no media people made any comment about that obvious fact. Instead they just bagged the dockers, with no context. And so freo's price against the bombers was soft because many punters don't know to factor in fatigue (why would they if they just listen to the media?). The dockers ran all over the top of the bombers (who were coming off the bye) - exactly as i thought they would. And my bet they would cover their -5 point line was never in doubt. This year has been even better for value. All teams are now implementing faster transition football, which means even the non contenders have to do a heavy block (i think at least 3 weeks, but that's a guess) of training to make sure they have enough run in their legs at the end of the season and not get smashed (West Coast have a lot of problems. One of their biggest is they are nowhere near AFL fit, and so teams are just running rings round them). This year, all teams have been cooked post bye and there is value to be had (but a warning - i don't think there will be as much value this week because of all the talk of the post bye funk - that chat might even create some value on line bets the other way). But just to be clear, as i have noted on any number of occasions, i think, like every team in the AFL (including the Pies - in fact i think they have bigger concerns than us), there are a number of issues of concern. The key concern i have is the second genuine tall forward role. A lot is riding on BB's fitness in my opinion. I had exactly the same concern last year about Tmac - and that was before he got injured. I predicted a loss last week. And i also predicted it would be a dour, scrappy game and we wouldn't play that well. I was right. Lucky? Maybe - but i don't think so. Here's another prediction. We will look a different team on Sunday. And we will absolutely smash the Giants (who are coming off a bye). Lots of punters will mark us down becuase of our performance against the Cats (the pros won't be). That is the perfect recipe for value. The line is currently -19.5. That is way too short. Money for old rope. Go redlegs.

"Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not." Jer. 5:21 (King James version)

The first rule of demonland. Anything football related story represents evidence goody is a rubbish coach.

No, fresh text every time! Which now that i think about it is pretty silly. But the search function on DL is a shocker so it takes ages to find previous post once they are more than a few months old But that it for this season on this topic. I'm done. I'm not sure why i bother to be honest - i'm not gong to convince any naysers who aren't convinced by now. I'm going to take your advice and go back and copy and paste all my recent posts on the topic into the word document. And this time next year copy and paste with some minor edits to make it 2024 simpatico. It will save me a lot of hours!

I accept your apology dazzler. Let's move on But not before i break my own ban on this topic only hours after making it! A central argument i am making is that fatigue from loading is a key factor to consider when assessing any game of footy at this time of year. In terms of our games, i think it is the biggest factor in our middling form since, and inclusive of, the Freo game. And that includes the Pies game (i think both teams were impacted by fatigue in that game - the pies more than us actually, which is one reason I'm not reading too much into that win). But of course, it is far from the only factor. And i fully concede that i might be wrong and that is not the biggest factor. But it is 100% a factor - the only real debate is how big a factor. I don't necessarily agree with all of them, but you make some really good points about the issues that concern you - eg forward connection, team selection, game plan and form of some players. Where we diverge is my belief those issues all intersect with fatigue and the impact of a heavy block of mid season training. And so, i don't agree the issues you highlight have nothing to do with loading Take selection. You suggested the team selection for this game had 'nothing to do with loading'. But i don't think that is true. Goody said at the beginning of the year he would use the sub as a tactical option OR related to load management. My assumption the reason Spargo was selected as a sub this week was for load management reasons (interestingly he was gassed, and subbed off last week for Jordon and they reversed roles this week with Jordon coming of for Spargo. Coincidence? Unlikely). So, if I'm correct, it very much has something to do with loading. Perhaps as a young player, who is absolutely in our best 22, Bowey really struggled with the big block of training and because the goal is for him to be cherry ripe come finals they decided the best course of action was to play him in the lower intensity VFL game. In this scenario, that would be a decision very much informed by loading. Similarly, a factor in the the form slump you mention some players are in might be fatigue. I guess it depends on how long you think Pickett, Langdon, Gawn, Spargo, Chandler, ANB, and May have been in a form slump, but if you mean the last 3-4 weeks, well, that coincides with the loading phase. So it is reasonable to at least consider that as a causal factor - particularly for young players like Koz and Chandler. So again, form of players DOES have something to do with loading (in this period). I 100% agree the way we played against the Dogs and Sydney is how we want to play and that involves playing a fast attacking brand and sling shotting off half back to generate scoring pressure. That will be the game plan we will take into the finals. But ONLY if we are fit enough to execute that game plan - from the start of the game to the last minute. And the only way they can be confident of being fit enough to execute that game plan come finals is to do the loading now (which is the point Scott was making last year about being prepared to miss the 8 because they are going hard to increase their chances of winning the flag) - but as we saw last year, that is still no guarantee of course that, for any number of reasons (eg injury) we will be fit enough when the whips are cracking. You are right to say we've reverted back to the slow ball movement style (but only in the last 3-4 weeks) which gets picked apart. The question is why? The dogs was round one and the swans round three. At no point in the rest of this season will we be fitter and stronger than we were in those two games. Which is critical context because the game plan we saw in those matches involves a crazy level of all team high speed running. If we are not close to optimal fitness (like right now), we cant execute that game plan properly. The Pies method is even more reliant on running power. The all team high speed running and spread required for our preferred game plan is impossible to propery implement when the team is collectively fatigued. Which i think is why Goody has really emphasized defence in the last few weeks. One, to mitigate the impact of fatigue (less ballistic footy is less aerobically taxing). And two, we will struggle to win if we stick with our preferred game plan but don't have the run in the legs to implement it properly (ironically goody was criticised in 2021 and 2022 on DL for being too rigid with the game plan and not trying new things). So, the game plan is very much is related to loading - both in the sense of the loading giving them a shot at being fit enough come finals and as it relates to the impact of the fatigue on our ability to execute/implement our preferred method. The point i'm driving at is, of course loading is not an excuse or the only factor for our performance in our recent matches - but IT IS an important factor to consider, precisely BECAUSE it intersects with, and impacts, all of the many other factors and variables at play. It is that intersection that interests me. I don't feel i can understand the game without considering these intersections. As a thought experiment, try to explain why all teams have lost after the bye thus far WITHOUT factoring in fatigue (surely 10 teams can't all find it hard to mentally get going and switch on after a bye - which is the only explanation i have heard from the footy media so far). I take your point about the Pies kicking five two in the last today. I'm not sure if you watched the game, but they had no run. They were run off their feet in the third and looked nothing like they do at their rampaging best. But if you factor in fatigue then the assessment of the game changes. The key factor in that game was BOTH teams were coming off their bye, and therefore a heavy training block. Both teams struggled in the last. So for the Pies to kick 5.2 in the last under fatigue is super impressive and I mark their performance up for that. Outside say the four best kicks in each team, across the board they have much better kicks than us, with superior technique. Good technique hold up better under pressure and fatigue than poor technique. Our poor technique is being exposed ATM. Saying loading is a factor in our current accuracy issues (or our turnover clangers - ugh) doesn't diminish the fact that our kicking IS an issue of concern. The Cats kicked 6.2 in the last quarter in wet and heavy conditions and ran all over the top of us - because they were clearly not feeling the effects of loading to the same degree as they were the previous week, when coming off their bye. In their Port game they completely ran out of gas in the last quarter. But the Cats v Dees was their second post bye match. And, in a mirror to their performance against Port, they ran over the top of us in the last - exactly like the Suns and Freo (who were both out on their feet last week in their post bye matches) did to the Hawks and bombers this round.

Dazzler, i haven't been true to my word as stayed out of the loading discussion this year. I'm trying though. Why? Because of posts like the one above. To be perfectly honest, i find comments like 'If you think there isn't far more pressing concerns other then your 'loading' fantasy then you're delusional once again. Bit like last year' flat out insulting (as i assume most would). But leaving aside the puerile insults (which by in large i think you would agree i don't stoop to), i'm thoroughly over having my words and opinions on this topic being completely misrepresented. There a million such examples in the last 3 seasons when this discussion comes up - the making excuses and some promise to win the flag being the two most common variants. But this is yet another example (i mean who would think this, for all the reasons you point out - how stupid do yo think i am?) : The fact that you genuinely think that the cats the just clicked their fingers and realised that all those years it was all just due to loading is a [censored] take from your end. What really frustrates me is that i am hesitant to make a point, or post, about the impact of faitgue from loading, and hope to have some sort of nuanced discussion about it, for fear of being ridiculed and howled down by posters for whom the tipic seems to trigger some sort of irrational angst. But that's where we are.

Sorry, dazzler, that is just absolute rubbish - as I have already noted at length in response to a similar comment from you a couple of weeks back. The cats, having run out of gas come the pointy end of the season for about a decade, and knowing they had to change something, won the flag copying our program for pete's sake. And please, do me a favor and stop this bulltish about excuses. No one is making any excuses. No one. Not a single person would disagree with the fact that playing that game at Kardinia Park was a FACTOR in our loss. But that's apparently OK to say. But it so triggering to some to suggest fatigue from loading was a factor. I mean, how else to explain how the Cats, who post bye last week ran out of gas completely in the last q against Port, could out run the team with the best 4th quarter record in the AFL. Or how our pressure rating could drop from a crazy high 214 in the third to 163 in the last quarter (by way of contrast the cats, second game post bye, had a rating of 197 in the 3rd, but had enough in the tank to increase it to 204 in the last). Sheesh.

Very similar to the vaxers v anti vaxers. FWIW I'm on the vaxers side.

Good for making money off but.

He's filling our a bit too. A lot to like.

Of course it isn't a guaranteed win. They're a good team.

All excellent points AF. I'd add one more (and then stay out of it, i mean who can be bothered - if someone is not convinced by the mountain of evidence by now - teams losing after the bye being just one more - then their minds are made up). Our fitness fell away late in the 2022 season. Some argue that is evidence against the fact we did a mid season heavy block of training (which frankly is just assinine). Well, the obvious counter is that whilst it did not work for us - it DID work for the cats, who openly said they copied our approach (and acknowledged that a factor in their perennial failure to win a flag despite finishing top 4 in mutiple seasons was running our of gas late in the season) The cats ran out the season as powerfully as we did in 2021, and like us had a clear fitness edge over all other teams (bar perhaps the pies). It was a massive factor in their dominant run from aprox this point in the 2022 season. Having adopted our mid season heavy block of training, the Cats won the flag. So, the last two flags, at least, have been won by teams who have done a mid season heavy block of training. No doubt it is industry standard now. Not that you'd know that listening to media people scratch their heads trying to explain how freo, coming off a bye and clearly fatigued, could be so, so poor against the giants. And play so well the very next, beating a top 8 team convincingly, looking a completely different side, and magical running over the ground and looking fresh. Same deal for the suns, who fell in a heap last week, and were out of gas and look a completely different team today (against the hawks, who out ran and smashed the post bye lions just a couple of weeks back). Or even amusingly, how they will explain why so far, if the suns go on to win their game against the hawks, the only two teams who have won after the bye have played a team also coming off a bye (saints and pies).

There is no doubt they are an incrediblely fit team.

.

I was being facetious Jaded. That said - why on earth would you be concerned we'll beat the crows? Because we got beaten the by the cats and the umpires at a ground they have a huge advantage at, the week after being far too good for the supposedly unbeatable pies?