binman

Really good points. For me it comes down to whether they do in fact have another gear they can go to, as they were by far the most impressive opponent we have played this year, the cats included. That said everything that could go right, did go right for them. And we still nearly won. But if they are anywhere near their physical peak atm in terms of preparation sustaining that ballistic style of football will be extraordinarily difficult. In that sense they really remind me of us in 2018. The super high tempo, players rushing off the half bank flank, high press model we employed in the back half of that season was always gong to be hard to sustain - and we hit a massive wall on prelim day (and were outclassed by the eventual premier). The other similarity was that like the pies this year, we rode a wave of momentum and fan support into the finals. That first final against the cast was insane. The closest thing to that experience for me was last Friday's game. Unfortunately this time the wave was black and white.

No there is not. There is however something wrong with willfully misrepresenting people's comments and opinions. For example suggesting i, or anyone else for that matter, has suggested we lost against the pies because of the differences in our loading/tapering Let's leave it there shall we.

Absolutely. If the pies have another gear they are going to be tough to beat.

Please. That's enough. It is getting ridiculously tiresome. I could not have been clearer- I'm not blaming the loss on the loading program. In case you missed it, i'll say it again - to be crystal clear loading is not an excuse for the loss. Please stop misrepresenting my comments. It is so very frustrating. I never said the loading program guaranteed we would win the flag (for clarity, and to avoid the need for a rebuttal, not saying you said i did). I did say i thought we would go unbeaten after the dogs game and win the flag. I was obviously wrong about that, but that doesn't mean i was wrong about the loading program. Was the loading a factor in the pies loss? What do you think? Who ran out the game better? Was running out games an issue for us in the finals last year? It was for the dogs in the gf - which is completely unsurprising because their no doubt carefully calibrated physical preparation program (because you know, they a professional sporting organisation playing in the highest level of a fully professional sport) was thrown into chaos when they fell out of the top 4. As it will for us if we don't finish top 4. I actually think the crowd was a bigger factor in the loss than our physical readiness or any loading program. No one is revising any theory to match the results. It is equally frustrating to be accused of doing so. To be frank, suggesting this is the case indicates you don't actually get it. In fact, there is no need to 'revise' the theory. Quite the contrary. The pies game is evidence the 'theory' is CORRECT. You are confusing performance with winning. The fact we lost doesn't disprove anything. Our performance indicated we are on a clear upward trajectory. Our performance was better than that in the freo game. The fact we lost doesn't change that. We just happened to play a team who was better than us on the day. Our performance against the pies was way, way, way more impressive than our corresponding game last year against a much weaker Eagles team. We were level pegging for much of that match, had 10 mins of dominant football in the third and then slowed to a walk (for whatever reason) and nearly got run down in the last. So you could argue we are tracking better from a physical readiness perspective than last year. Anyway, that is it for me on this topic. I've had enough. Believe what you want to believe.

Yep, I was just picking a number as an illustrative tool. It wasn't meant to be exact. It could be 90%. The point being the pies are probably close to their peak readiness. And we are getting closer, but still seven weeks away from ours. The analogy I used is an Olympic swimmer who has a gold medal race in 7 weeks. She is swimming brilliantly, the best times she has since prior to commencing her big training block she finished two weeks back to maximise her chances of winning gold. Every day she feels better, and her times reflect that. On these times she'll beat almost every other swimmer in the world. Her current time isn't matching her own PB, is not close to a WR, and she knows won't win her gold in 7 weeks. However, she is confident she is on the right track and is confident of winning gold. As she did at the last Olympics. But she knows there are no guarantees. She has the fastest PB of any of her likely competitors, but is experienced enough to know someone else might have gone to another level, or might pull out the swim of their life in the final. Or maybe she'll blow her start like she did at the nationals. Maybe that upstart swimmer from abbotsford, whose times have been dropping at an alarming rate, has another gear and will pull something crazy good out come show time, like she did at the nationals. Or maybe her new conditioning team hasn't quite got the training program right. Maybe the little niggles and distractions she didn't have last time might have an impact. Maybe she will have some bad luck. No guarantees. She is raging even money favourite, but even at $2, if the race is swum 10 times, she loses 5 of them So, as i said on the show, if you think the pies are legitimate flag contenders, then by extension logic says so are we. Hard to argue we should have won that game. Should have doesn't pay the bills, and they fully deserved the victory. We had no excuses. But on expected scores we scored 13 more points than them. For the first time this year, goody was noticeablely furious. And that no doubt was because we should have won. If you accept we are not at peak physical readiness yet (even if we are at 90%), then it is only logical that we have another gear to go to. That, after all, is the whole point of a periodisation training program. Swimming your best time, even a world record, seven weeks out from the Olympic final means nothing if you don't win gold. No one cares about your scintillating performance at the nationals. I'm hoping tbe pies don't have another gear to go to, but even if they do I'd be confident if we played like we did last week we'd beat them.

Invested pretty heavily already at 3.75. So 4s not that attractive. Even a super impressive win against the blues won't move it under $4 I suspect.

If we don't make top 4 might go out after only one set. The thought just made my head spin!

The goal of their training program is to peak on preliminary final day or grand final day. That is still seven weeks away ans it would not be possible to maintain peak physical readiness for that long.

This.

Ambivalent about thread.

It's a silent h

It would seem lobb is heading their way too. I assume they have a third tall, second ruck role in mind for him. But if naughton stays they will have a surfeit of talss many tall forwards - Darcy (though played back in his first game) naughton, Lobb, Bruce and JUH. They need a gun defender. Perhaps naughton is worried they'll send him back.

Thank your mother for the rabbits.

He had his worst game for some time I thought.

Yep, all good pints CD.

Two of whom were commentating the game and loved it. Darcy couldn't stop banging on about how it turned the match. He was lauding cripps.

I hope they do. And I hope they get it down to one week. Purely because I want them ti beat the pies in round 23 as we might end up needing them to. That, and it would infuriate pies fans.

I get that. Feel the same way. As noted above, noone is going to be proven right or wrong. It's not binary. I think most accept AFL teams use peridiodisation training, with goal of peaking at a particular point in time. Loading is just part of tbat program. For realistic premiership contenders, that peak is preliminary final day, or perhaps gf day. We are 7 weeks away from that. We ran out of steam a bit near tbe end, but that's no great knock - it was the closest home and away game to a final like intensity I can remember. We are trending the right way. If we aged the pies three weeks ago and they brought thst incredible level of sustained pressure they would have beaten us by 5 goals. As it was we really should have won that match. Which is why I am so gutted we didnt. There's no guarantees Selwyn Griffiths and his team has got it right. It is a science. But I am assuming from what coach has said that getting it right for an AFL team with 44 people on the list is way more complex than say individual program for Olympic athletes or elite cyclists. There are just so many variables - injuries, covid, each game is different in rhythm, motivation, impact of travel, unforeseen events etc etc. If we don't run our games in the finals that is evidence they have got the program wrong, not that we didn't load fir two months.

Ah cheers might also have to miss our game. Not sure how it works, but it is a mandatory 12 day break posy concussion. Day 12 is tge Friday we play them.

Ugh. I had forgotten about that. In fact thatt was the tale of the day. We screwed up a all but certain goal in the second and ot went straight up the other end and tbey scored a goal. Because of course they did.

I too have avoided all media since the game - the first time all season, such is my frustration. But it's crazy - bb marks on the wing with about 2 mins to go, we control the ball and probably win. And in that parallel universe, I lap up every second of media I can. Ugh. By the by, spoiler alert, the short version of why we lost is tbe same as yours. Bad kicking is bad football.

Exactly. And we already have a non traditional KPF, third tall or an oversized flanker in JVR. I totally get the knock on McStay. He's no world beater, but he competes hard in the air and would complement BB and/or TMac pretty well. Personally, I'd love to see a two tall set up, with JVR as a super dangerous high half forward, who can occasionally play as a defensive forward if required. So a forward line with Tmac, BB, JVR, Fritter, Kossie, Spargo and Nibbler (the latter two rotating through there)

Ouch. The bears don't seem to be great at stopping teams pile on quick goals!

But what is the metric? Which pressure related stat are you referring to? There are a number of pressure stats, including the secret champion data one that gets bandied about.

That's it lord nev, I'm putting you on ignore. You can join a very small number of posters, like Dr D and stuie (a poster who loved nothing more than to bait other posters) in that exlusive club. I'm well up for debate, as you well know. And I'll put my hand up when I've got it wrong. But you seem only want to get into some sort of puerile gotcha discussions with your selective use of quotes. And this time you've taken that childishness to another level and completely made stuff up. It is way past being disingenuous. It's aggressive, and frankly flat out rude to to make things up and post that I have said things I have NEVER said. You put your made up comments in quotation marks despite the fact they are not actually quotes. You made the comments up. You can quote this - I have lost respect for you deliberately making things up to score some silly point. And you can shove any comment like you were paraphrasing, interpreting, taking poetic liscence blah, blah, blah. So for all posters who have read Lord Nev's post I have quoted above - as he well knows, I have never said, or even implied (cue selective quoting from Lord nev) that: 'Well we lost to the Pies because we're still 7 weeks away from optimal performance' In fact, to be clear, despite the fact lord nev uses quotation marks, I never said his first quote either.