binman

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?

When?

The Pies scoring issue is a real concern. Imagine only just beating that mob? Twice.

It must be a contractual obligation - do not point out when nick daicos turns the ball over.

Pies - 14 shots at goal from 36 inside 50s @ 39% . They can stop back half transition from the pies. Their all team defence is sub par. Has the pies bubble burst? I mean, on the g, against a team just in the 8 and who can't win away from home, surely the pies go on to win this game. If they don't they are not real contenders.

Perfect day for football. Four and a bit minutes from 3 quarter times. And the pies only have 14 shots from 33 inside 50s @ 42%. Im really starting to worry about their scoring and connection issues issues.

Amazing how different look when they don't have run in their legs. I'm reallt worried abour their difficulty scoring and their connection issues.

Of course it isn't a coincidence. And the pies get yet another leg up being the only contender who, coming off a bye, get to play another team coming off a bye (added bounus, Burgess is their fitness coach, so we know the crows have been smashed on the track in their bye period)

Rivers has taken his game to another level this season. I'm loving his intercept marking.

My second best bet of the round (lions to cover their line was #1) - Freo to cover their minus 5.5 line. The only reason i'm not more bullish is the predicted rain creates some variables

Damn, forgot this game was on tonight. Tried to get to the replay without seeing the score - to no avail.

No you're right, all are good value because of the post bye factor. But what I'm saying is many punters will have marked the lions down because they were poor against the hawks. But got the symptoms right, but the diagnosis of the problem wrong - the key factor in their loss was fatgue. Same for freo. A good recipie for value.

That's not my theory behind backing the lions. I knew the lions would be running over the ground in their third game after their bye. The lions are a much better side than the sainsts (who, by the by, had their bye three weeks ago so should also not be fatgued). And the docklands doesn't expose their lack of pace like the G. The lions should have been shorter odds in my opinion - and the main reason they weren't is their post bye performance against the hawks I rarely back the win, almost always the line, and my assessment was minus five points line @ 1.90 represented excellent value. Similarly, the minus five points line @ 1.90 for freo tommorow night against the bombers also represents excellent value - because they were so poor against the giants due to fatigue. In fact it is probably even better value than the lions bet - freo are playing their second post match ground (and like the lions will be running on top of the ground) and the bombers are coming off their bye.

Oh, wow. Color me shocked. Lions look so much more energised this week. So much more run. It's like they are a completely different team to the listless lions that limped to loss against the hawks. Just an off game last week I guess. Glad I backed them

I'm going to avoid DL for a few days, and footy media too, because it will just irritate me as there will be little, if any consideration of the single most important factor in the loss - fatigue as result of a heavy block of training. If the fatigue from loading is not factored in, any related analysis is of little value to be honest. I said ahead of the game that a win would be a bonus. Predicted a loss actually. And the game played out exactly as i expected it would. I haven't listened to Goody's presser yet, but if he said the effort was good, i'd agree. The effort was really good in the last q too. Why? Because the players were so obviously completely out of gas. Look at the drop off in any relevant stat to see evidence of that - CPs, inside 50, time in forward half, kms run etc etc. But perhaps the most compelling indicator of the impact of fatigue is the pressure ratings, and our incredible drop off in the last quarter (180 is considered AFL average, and 200 elite): Team pressure Quarter For Against 1 183 206 2 224 175 3 214 197 4 163 204 Match 196 196 To only lose by 15 in the end was a really gutsy performance. Compare it to the capitulation by Lions (v Hawks) in their post-match bye when fatigue was also clearly the most critical factor or Freo's shellacking by Giants last week, when fatigue was again the key factor, as it was in their post bye loss to the tigers). Or perhaps a more direct example. Like us last night, the Cats were coming of their bye last week against Port. Meaning, the Cats (who acknowledged last year they copied our approach to loading) had just completed a block of heavy training and were fatigued as a result. Halfway through the second q the Cats had a 20-point lead and were playing a tough, physical brand of football. They started to fade after that point but got to half time with a 7-point lead. In the second half the Cats completely ran out of gas. After half time Port: outscored the Cats by 45 points (11.6.72 to 4.3.27) smashed the Cats at stoppages 26 to 9 scored 6.1.37 to 1.0.6 from stoppages (31 points more from stoppages in a half of footy is nuts - it is only 7 points less than the final margin). Ultimately, after leading at half time, the Cats, who unsurprisingly ran out the game better than us last night, capitulated and ended up losing by six plus goals (38 points). Like the Cats, Lions and Freo, we had zero run in the legs and so could not spread or run in waves to create separation, options up or properly cover the Cats' spread. But unlike the Cats, Lions and Freo we kept grinding and fought hard for every contest. What do people think Scott meant when he said ahead of the game that this was a 'good time' to play the dees? Perhaps some might say he was referencing the bye (because surprise, surprise, every team has lost after the bye, bar the Saints, who beat the Swans - who were coming off a bye. I mean really, what do people think is the cause of teams not being competitive after their bye? Coincidence? A statistical anomaly? Please). Well, yes, he may well have meant that. But not because the bye has some magical, mystical losing quality. But because he knows the dees had gone hard on the track to get their foundation down for September. Which, speaking of Scott, is exactly what he was talking about this time last year when talking about the training program, ours, they had adopted. Scott said if their training program meant they lost games they otherwise might have won, and didn't make the 8 as a result, then so be it - it was a risk worth taking because going hard now is the only way to have a realistic chance of winning the flag. Those comments apply to us - and all other contenders for that matter. Some might push back and say, well you can't win the flag if you don't finish top 4. And that is true (save an outlier result). But it is a calculated gamble. We are no risk of not making the 8, but we could drop out of the top 4. But like Scott's calculation, it is about the best chance of winning a flag not finishing top 4 (by the by, @Stu made an interesting point in the podcast chat room wondering if Hinkley has eschewed loading to the extent other clubs have to maximise their chance of winning individual games and shore up his position). And when assessing the risk, they will have looked at the ladder and our fixture and landed on it being very likely we finish the home and away season top 4. In fact, I'm tipping we won't drop out of the top 4 at point for the rest of the season (we can't go drop out this week thanks to our percentage).

Yes - and i have zero doubt it is because of fatigue (accumulative and increased load).

That is so brilliant wheelo. I love the layout. I will def have think if there is anything that could be added, but it looks super comprehensive. I was actually going to ask if you could include some of the stats under the key stats header because for the podcast i have been taking the numbers you have post in this tread, and toggle across to your home page to create a list that includes CPs, meters gained and inside 50s (i didn't ask coz i figured you spent enough time helping me out!). So massive thanks. The three key stat for mine in terms of understanding this game is scores from turnover, time in forward half and most of all the remarkable drop off in our pressure ratings in the last q - we were totally cooked. And we did brilliantly to avoid a blowout.

Time for a double shot latte. And game time. See you on the other side Demonlanders. Go redlegs.

I wouldn't characterise it as flip flopping. It has changed a bit, but that is par for the course with betting markets, but had remained close to even money - we were slight favs and now they are. Personally I think the current odds (cats 1.88 dees 1.92) are pretty close to th3 true odds. The late support for the cats might perhaps a late out for the dees (that the sort of inside info that can result in the pros jumping in)

My theory is Petty will play forward, Gus back and they run with only two talls down back. But i concede the more likely scenario is that Petts will play back (and if so it makes the dropping Tomo les an issue as few would argue Pety is the better option in defence, even with Tomo's form last week). If i'm right, Tomo comes back in next week as a defender and Petts remains a forward. Not sure where that leaves Smith. If i'm wrong, and Petts plays back tonight, he goes forward nect week and Tomo comes back in to play down back. Again, not sure where that leaves Smith. On Smith, i have a feeling that they might try to engineer a scenario where he remains in the side, even with Petty (or Tmac, or Brown) as a third tall. Maybe a hybrid tall medium.

Geelong and Surf Coast area Cloudy. Very high chance of showers, most likely late this afternoon and evening. Light winds becoming northeasterly 15 to 25 km/h in the morning. 25% chance of at least 7mm