binman

Sure. To work, our offence relies on our all team defence to be in good shape. Our all team defence relies on an incredible amount of running from all players and manic pressure all over the ground. If our players don't run the distances they need to, or apply the necessary level of pressure, our method will not work optimally. I contend they are unable to run the distances they need to, or apply the necessary level of pressure atm, because they are fatigued. And the numbers (the symptoms) point to the problem; just as did last Thursday night. We were smashed in clearances, we couldn't get it out of their front half, Maxy did no take a single mark (yes, yes i know he as coming back from an injury), and they had TWENTY more inside 50s (including 11 straight from the 14 min mark to the 28 min mark - crazy). And its not as if we weren't trying. We had 11 more contested possessions than them (our total of 145 was almost exactly the same as our season average of 144.9) - which is the the fundamental KPI for all clubs. With the exception of the contested possession, those numbers are all completely un Melbourne like. Regardless of whether you think they relate to fatigue, there is no way any forward line can function optimally with those sort of numbers. Take just one stat - the inside 50 count. We had 46 inside 50s. Our season average is 57. Pretty hard for the forward line to kick a winning score when the ball isn't coming inside 50. We go inside 50 another 11 times (ie to match our season average) and score at the same rate, we have aprox 23 scoring shots instead of 18. The problem in the cats game was clearly not the forward line. Our inability to put a winning score on the board is a symptom of our drop off in our all team defense. Fix that and you fix the forward line problems (except not having TMac of course - that IS a big problem)

1. I agree. 2. Good question. The answer depends on who you ask. My feeling is Goody's answer to the question would be the same as Scotts answer after their eagles game - ie (paraphrasing heavily), if we miss the finals (read top 4, coz there is no universe where they are not going to make finals this year) because of the extra work we are doing now, then so be it. That is a pretty big shift for Scott, who has been rightly applauded for his ability to keep the Cats up there as top 4 contenders. The conventional wisdom is that if a team continues to knock on the door it will inevitable open. But as the Cats, and more recently the lions, have discovered being a top 4 team doesn't help when you come against an opponent who grinds your team into the ground because they are much fitter and stronger when the whips are cracking. So, for Goody, i suspect being cherry ripe on prelim day is the the absolute priority, even if that risks missing top 4.

Fair call

A great thing about Demonland is the thread and posting history is saved. It is well worth reflecting on the matches at the same stage last year when trying to work out what might be going on this year and to help contextualize and understand our performance (yes, yes, i know its different year and that just because we went on to the win the flag last year doesn't mean we will do so again etc, etc). Our round 18 game last year was our draw against the hawks. A quick flick through the post game thread is interesting in terms of the issues and problems (the symptoms) with our game that the majority of posters (but thankfully not all - these are the ones being lambasted for being 'delusional') are super focused on are almost exactly the same as those being highlighted right now (eg we are too predictable, we don't get value from Max, Goody has been worked out, we are too one dimensional, we are not premiership winning team, our forward line is hopeless, not enough pressure, our small forwards have disappeared, the young players have drooped off, Goody doesn't respond tactically, Goody out coached, sick of all the excuses, etc etc). Our round 19 game against the Dogs was a loss. Again, largely all the same sort of comments. Reading the post match thread, you'd think that not only were we a million miles from being a premiership winner, we were all but certain to drop out of the top 4. This comment from @KLVin that thread caught my attention as i skipped though it: 'We’re tired. We’re not chasing, tackling, and gut running like we were' Sound familiar? Spoiler alert. The dees came out looking an entirely different team the following week - fresher, didn't look the least bit tired or fatigued, energized and well and truly up an about. And flogged the suns in round 20. And the dees maintained that energy right to the very last second of the Grand Final, destroying every team in it path between that round 20 game and Tmac's post siren kick. We were clearly fitter than every team we played from round 20 (just as were from round 1-10). Opposition team simply could not go with us. We ran them into the ground. And that can only happen with superior physical preparation. Will that happen again this year? Who knows. We have injury issues this year we didn't have to contend with last year, when everything that could go right for us did go right. Maybe Selwyn has got the timing wrong or players are not working as hard (though, by all accounts they are working even harder). But logic suggests that the club is likely to replicate the processes that got us to a flag this year. Regardless of where you stand on loading, what can't be argued is that in terms of win, losses and performances, the pattern of this season is almost identical to last year. Our ladder position, win loss ratio, percentages and the period we have had our losses in is almost exactly the same this year as it was last year. And the media commentary is almost the same too (variation on the majority of the content in the two threads referenced above). It was dead wrong last year, and will likely be wrong again this year. But just as we do on Demonland, all the doomsayers will get a free pass for their inaccurate analysis and incorrect predictions. And next year, when the dees struggle in June and July, rather than looking back and taking history and previous patterns into consideration, they will instead repeat all their inaccurate analysis and incorrect predictions.

I totally agree. Though, i suspect not for the same reasons.

I was just saying to a friend that I'd be thrilled if we win the next two, but surprised, not surprised if we won just the one and not shocked if we lose both. But I think we will win the next four after the dogs game and go on to remain undefeated and win the flag. If we follow last year's pattern, we will be running on top of the ground and back to our rampaging best in our round 20 game against freo in Perth.

Great win by the suns. I love it. Great for the club. I hope they go on to make finals.

Fair dinkum, that is Donald Trump level projection right there.

You continue to push this narrative Put up or shut up. Show some evidence of a single poster using loading as an excuse for every loss. And please don't bother using posters who have said it is factor in our losses, or even posters like myself who belive it is the key factor (but not the only one). And please don't conflate a reason to help examine performance with making an exuse when choosing your evidence.

Bloody cats fans were booing that free for kicking in danger. And afterwards booed clarry!

I have always had a grudging respect for Scott, even more so tgis season as as you say he has retooled his whole approach to beat us. Deserves kudos for that as it is no small thing

Goody kept his tactical powder dry last year during the home and away season. I can't recall a single occasion where he experimented tactically against contenders, even when they did so against us - for example in the round 19 game against the dogs when he refused to respond to Bevos tactical tricks (two extras to the stoppages, trying to tag lever). We could have won that game if he he responded (eg match the extras), but i believe him when he says it is all about winning a premiership. And come the grand final he showed some of his tactical tricks (eg jacko's longer stint in the ruck, the center clearance set up), the difference being Bevo never had the benefit of seeing them. Which is not to say he didn't try and keep the other contenders guessing during the home and away. For most of the year he allowed the conversation to swirl about our 'best' forward line set up, when in reality he almost certainly had the three tall set up locked in as the optimal model from the get go. He is repeating this panto this year. And he is clearly experimenting with our use of long handballs into space he introduced in the lions game. That is a pretty significant tactical experiment to introduce mid season.

I was channeling my inner Kiwi

In all sincerity WW, i have no idea what you are trying to say here or what point you are trying to make I had assumed you were providing evidence of your assertion that McVee is developing quite nicely and Deakin Smith has done enough to stay on the list, and countering the critique of those players from other posters. But your post i've quoted above seems to suggest my assumption was wrong? And to be honest, the actual data does too - i mean they are ok numbers in isolation, but hardly earth shattering evidence these boys have earned another contract. What would you like us to glean from the the 'data' you posted? What would you like people to do with the 'data' you posted? Analyze it?

Jeez, it makes you wonder what Jason Taylor saw in him. We'll soon know if the club concurs with your assessment. Well, to be more accurate if they disagree with it. That's to say if they offer him a rookie spot or list spot, they clearly disagree with your assessment.

I have watched most of Casey's games. I think rosman had a really good first 6 or 7 games, particularly given he was playing in a new position. Has struggled a bit after his hammy injury. Like Sydee, I think his footy iq is fine. Reads the ball well coming inside 50 and gets to the right spots. He has some teal x factor, though tbat has been less evident down back. I wonder whether his slightly awkward kicking style impacts on people's view of how natural a footballer he is. Unlike Smith, he played a fair bit of junior footy. He is a bit tweener size wise, which makes it hard to know what his ideal position is. He was speculative pick, a project and I reckon they will renew his contract and keep developing him.

That's not analysis. That’s cut and paste. And to be honest don't really back up your assertion that McVee is developing quite nicely or Deakin Smith has done enough to stay on the list.

They should drop him. He burnt trac against the lions and then in thst same match did alnos5 ecxstly the same thing as he did tonight. Three strikes and you are out.

Not me. I was right behind him. Tbe fact he didn't look inboard makes it worse. I was, and remain ropeable with him. And bloody hell, why a dribble kick?

That was God awful. Paid $90 for a crap seat in a glorified shelter shed, and the dees serve that up. They smashed us.

It not binary. I'm not saying we can't improve up forward. Just that that its not really a big issue. It wouldn't even be discussed if players like trac and nibbler were not such poor shots at goal. My big worry about the forward line is not the method, it no Tmac.

One answer to that question, as it relates to the dees is, that our kpi is the number of entries, not goals per entry. We are all about getting it inside 50, if we don't score trap it inside 50 and if the opposition do get it out, setting up a wall so it bounces straight back in (often of course into a relatively small area that might have as many as 30-36 players crowded into it). Chaos ball. By definition, this method will result in a lower goal to inside 50 ratio, then say the lions who are less about territory, and more about maximising the goal to inside 50 ratio. And as we know it also means lots of points. On the goal to inside 50 ratio, the lions are number one in the AFL. Super efficient. It is a method that works really well against most teams. But not us, or freo for that matter, because against us they simply don't get enough inside 50s. The last three times they have played us they have been pretty efficient in terms of goals to inside 50 ratio. But they haven’t got within a bulls roar of us because they have not gone inside 50 enough, and the dees, whilst not as efficient, have smashed them in inside 50 differential. Without wanting to sound smart, the goal is to kick more goals than the opposition and our method has proven to be brutally effective, as demonstrated by our crazy good win loss ratio since round one 2021. I just think the whole debate around the forward line's effectiveness, a debate thst also raged most of last season, feels like a solution searching for a problem - as evidenced by or win loss ratio and percentage this year.

No, lets not.

Childish gotcha rubbish nev. But, if you are going to bother using quotes from two different posts of mine to make some sort of point, at least quote me correctly. I did not say he is not in form. In the very quote you picked, I said he was not in GREAT form. Please don't bother rebutting, but they are two different things. So, I could say something like Brown is in form, but not great form. The point I making is his form is at a level that his coach deems acceptable. You don't think he us performing at the required level, which is fine. No disrespect intended, but I'll go with the premiership coach on this one.

Spot on. He does that sort of work mutiple times a game. Goody doesn't mind which player scores, just that one does. They are a collective. In that example it is trac, but it doesn't happen without Brown's involvement. Didn't get a stat for it, but Brown played his role and because he did we scored. Role execution and selflessness (for instance no Hollywood attempt at a screamer). The key point is he continues to be selected. That is sufficient evidence for me that he is executing his role to goody's satisfaction. Tonight's game is a legitimate blockbuster. We are primed and will be desperate to make a statement. If his performance was as poor as some are suggestingd, does anyone seriously think goody would select him for this game? When he had two fit forwards in weed and m brown (who both played alright in tbe previous match) he could select instead? Surely goody has earned a bit more credit than that to suggest he is willing to play an under performing player in the hope he will suddenly perform well or he could play him back into form. If goody is ok with bb's performance, im ok with his performance.