binman

That's one part of the equation i reckon. The other is that going into control mode from say half way through the 3rd when havw a 3-4 goal buffer actually increases our chance of winning. The only way realistic way an opposition team can peg back a 3 plus goal deficit latish in a game is for there to be speed on the game. If we get aggressive and look to bury opponents then we are giving them what they need - a fast flowing game. And if we try to pile on the goals we inevitably will take risks. Risk create turnover opportunities and therefore opposition goals. If an opponent gets a couple of quick goals they can get some momentum. And maybe get back into the game and sneak a win Playing slow to protect a winning margin is a key strategy in the NBA and in assuming the EPL and other eite soccer leagues. The reward of going for a big win is percentage - which is not much reward for a team that us likely to win 18 plus games. The risk is losing a game we would otherwise win.

Only 5? After that pathetic free to king against petty 20 metres out fro goal, I said to mate that if that was the threshold for a free, and it was consistently applied, Max would get 15 frees a game. It's a bloody joke what oppo players get away with in terms of belting Max. Apparently the head is sacrosanct. Unless your name is Gawn.

Going on Goody's presser, your eye test got a big tick of approval. Goody made a point of noting our forward pressure was better, implying it wasn't where it needed to be. On a related note, I am loving Goody's post match pressers this season He is really honest, happy to be himself and often gives real insight into tactical and other related elements of our game.

MFCSS is like herpes. Stays in the body waiting for the chance to flare.

No he wasn't. The stat he used was pressure, ie all ground pressure - not forward pressure. He didn't even mention inside 50 pressure. You might be right about our forward half pressure, but then again you may not be. The eye test is not always that accurate For example we are 16th in total tackles. But we are basically equal third in average tackles inside 50 (Giants are top with an average of 12.3 per game, blues second on 12 per game, Freo on 11. 4 and us and the Swans on 11.3 per game). That's pretty good pressure inside 50. My stats are from this excellent site: https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_stats_team.html

Weed out is an interesting one. If we were playing a prelim on Sunday i'd pick Tmac becuase, head to head with Weed, he is a better footballer at this point in time. Impacts more contests, creates more goals, works harder, is stronger, blocks more and offers positional flexibility as he can go back (though do like Weed in the ruck) So I'm in camp Tmac. But i acknowledge he seems to have lost a yard of pace this season, and he wasn't fast to begin with. And i also acknowledge that there is not a huge difference stats wise between the two this season. So, i would have been tempted to stick with Weed for the next few weeks as he will develop more in the ones i reckon, and get Tmac to work on his pace somehow back in the twos (perhaps on the back of a BBB style mid season preseason). My logic is that might be the best way to ensure both are in the best possible form come finals. All that said happy or Tmac to be in the side. It certainly suggest the coaches don't think Tmac was selfish last week. I'm guessing they also didn't mind him kicking that goal after the sire in the GF!

By the by, I'm not saying the numbers are not concerning. Just that in the absence of context and proper analysis it would be folly to assume they are.

All good points EO. I really like montagna's analysis as a rule - he, daisy, Sanderson and Bartel are my favourite footy analysts. I read those stats on here but hadn't watched the segment, so did so last night. It was weird because he didn't provide any real analysis, context for the numbers or possible factors tha might help explain them. Could the fact that Salem hasn't played this season (bar half a game) be a factor in both numbers (for example Gus seems to be playing deeper than salo does). Or Brown missing three games, a player who now provides great pressure, being replaced by weed who is low pressure. Surely the fact we have yet to have our best back seven play together is a factor in both stats - both in terms of the impacts of elite pressure players like petty, Lever and Salo missing games AND the impact of those players missing on our all ground defensive system (which is is the key factor in disrupting oppo ball movement) . How does he reconcile the drop in those numbers with the fact that we remain one or two on scores conceded inside 50? Or the fact that we are number one in marks conceded inside 50, in spite of the fact Petty and Lever having both missed multiple games. He also didn't explain the numbers. For example is there much statistical difference between number one and mid table in pressure acts or defending ball movement? It was doubly weird because the premise of the segment (made clear by a graphic and pumped up by wheatley at the top of the show) was 'are Melbourne gettable'. Montagna found two isolated stats out of a sea of stats he has at his disposal to make a case we are 'gettable'. Those two stats were the best he could find to make that case? Agree on your comments on context and the fact Montagna provided precious little of it To your comments id add he didn't break down where the pressure had dropped (inside our 50?, defensive zone? mids?) or perhaps that some individual players had dropped off (eg are tmac's pressure acts down?) But more importantly he didn't compare the numbers to those at the comparative point last season. I assume the 2021 rankings he used were at the end of the home and season (or even post gf), but that includes the last third of our season when we really ramped things up. Given we were also 7 zip last season it would have been interesting to see the comparison to that point in time. The analysis would have been completely different if say the rankings were similar ('dees still building') after round 7 last year.

Weed should pay me to predict tmac will be selected. Coz when I do he isn't.

That's super weird. Coz Dr D (aka deedubs or some such) is back!

Health and safety protocols is a good name for a pub. Would do good business too given people are always entering it.

I have a source who was involved in the contract negotiations and they told me that Goody would have got an extra two years but for the fact he didn't review the 2018 prelim.

No a bad Stiff Arm

That was a really bad mistake by me. Even though he has a become a right wing nut job, I loved his work with the Smiths.

You seriously think he should not have taken that kick? What would you have had him do instead - kick into the stands, just drop the ball at his feet, bomb it up the ground? A professional footballer does not refuse to take a shot after the siren in any circumstances. What did it achieve? For one thing it was yet another example of our discipline and playing to the final siren. And an example of tom's professionalism and respect for the game. The same discipline underpinned why goody never fudged the rules to get Jordon on the ground, something he could easily have done (after all Steve may had a tear in his hammy). When asked why he didn't goody (paraphrasing) said no one was injured so he couldn't do it. Discipline.

Your MFCSS is so acute you are worried Bruce will kick a bag against us this weekend, coz he 'always does'.. And that is in spite of the fact you know he is currently out injured and he no longer plays for the saints.

Which is one reason why criticism of tmac for being 'selfish' when he chose to shoot for goal not pass to a teammate(s) is unwarranted. Bad decision? Maybe- though I'm not convinced it was in the circumstances. Selfish? Nup.

Last week kozzie completely burnt fritter AND by doing so almost certainly cost us an easy walk in goal. Not a hanging offence, but zero doubt that was a selfish act. Didn't cop much grief or accusations of being selfishon here as far as I can recall. Tmac marks on the line (didn't cost us a goal) and made a decision to shoot for goal instead of an almost equally difficult pass to teamate (who knows if that cost us a goal) and gets accused of selfishness. Pretty harsh if you ask me.- particularly for a fella with plenty of credit in the selflessness bank.

Totally agree. Particularly given the fact that he didn't cost us a goal.

We are 7 zip.

What on earth are you talking about? They kicked ONE goal in the first 3 minutes - at 2.07. They kicked their next goal at 3.39. WE kicked the next goal at 12.02. And they didn't get their third until nearly the 20 minute mark. Sheesh.

We got away with it? We won the bloody flag!

Right at the top? It must be in tbe mcc part of it. Def closed on this side of the great divide.

Fake news. Top of the Ponsford closed unfortunately.

That's a yes?