binman

Yes he had his fair share of poor disposals, which unfortunately is part of his game, but his pressure was fantastic. And in a game where our pressure was down, and the hawks out tackled us, Jack had 11 of the team's 70 tackles , by far our most and I think topped the pressure acts. Jack got 2 coaches votes last week. So, it appears one or both coaches rated his game pretty highly

More fool them. Lever prefers summer rolls

And our weakness down back is covering mid size and small forwards

Interesting call given it is likely to be a wet night

Very true. However, a flag would go a long way towards ameliorating the financial impact. In that context it is amazing we have achieved a record number of memberships

Nah, you'll be kicking still. But you might have to change your posting name to really old dee And maybe splash out on an avatar picture

Noted

Breaking your own rule their Kent. Not understanding why it is so critical we are in lock down now is not a football related comment. But to answer your question in a football context, if we were not in lock down 'till at least next week or this current lock down does not work, then you and i will not be attending nay games of football in Victoria this year, including the grand final.

The secret ingredient for every premiership winner is luck. And (touch wood) we have our fair share of it thus far. As you say we have had a great run with injuries. Good management plays a big part in that obviously, but you still need some luck. Other than the financial hit from no crowds, thus far we have avoided any real major impact from covid related fixturing reshuffles. Losing the Alice game actually helped from an on field perspective as we played that game in Sydney instead, so less time flying etc. And having to play the Pies in Sydney was not too disruptive. Haven't had to hub or do any disruptive quarantining palaver like the Cats and Dogs had to in Perth, or Pies and cats to play in Adelaide. For our Port and Crows games it was normally procedures, which really helped for the Port game (eg flying in the previous day, getting to stay overnight in a hotel, having all day to prepare etc ). And whilst flipping the dogs and gc game might impacts our preparation for the dogs game, they will alos have been impacted. And it means that the players didn't have to travel this week, giving them a couple of weeks at home. And crucially it is almost certain we will avoid having to play GC in Darwin. A game at Metricon will be much less physically taxing given the humidity in Darwin, involve much less air time and be less logistically complex. And we play well at Metricon, and have fans in Qld who can hopefully go, so that helps too. And then if they fly direct to Perth they can hunker down there and prepare for the Eagles game. In Pert, they will quarantine in a resort complex in Perth, but continue to train. Might be very helpful to be away from Victoria, be all together in one spot for a week and be able to focus on things like going through, try some new tactical ploys, work on structures etc etc. If we fly in for the GC game, say on the Saturday and then fly to Perth on the Saturday night, we can do the 7 day quarantine, play Eagles on the Sunday and then fly out again that night. So back home late Sunday night. Meaning all up they are away for only 8 days. Manageable and possibly really good timing in terms of bonding and getting reset and focused for the final push to the summit.

Luckily it has. They were last years stats. Helps explain missing the finals last year.

Really good points. Like the tigers, we are exposed when we are not pressuring maniacally. All sorts of weaknesses are compounded, including not taking advantage of Gawns dominance. On the weekend an issue that that jumped out was our drop in pressure meant we could not win enough of the outnumbered stoppage contests or post clearance possessions/contests. Despite us winning the clearances they beat us in both, such was their intensity and our lack of it. When we di when clearances we forced into scrubby kicks forward. I agree that a really big issue that is exposed when our pressure is not where it needs to be is our midfield, which as you say does not run deep and is not a patch on the dog's midfield. I am hoping vanders can go up level and address that issue a bit.

Fair points. My feeling is that it is really common for the top teams to drop down a gear or two against the bottom teams. For example the dogs versus the suns last week But usually the best teams have the skill to make sure they take their chances and don't turn the ball over too much. With better kicking skills we ay poorly in our three losses - but win because we kick regulation shots at goal. And we don't give it back as often. And that issue is one that is a concern in any game we play.

You can't trust the Tigers. Coz they are so mentally weak. I know that to be true coz good teams don't get beaten by lower ranked teams as much as we do. Doesn't happen

Is Brisbane a good team? Currently 5th on the ladder and three weeks ago were premiership favorites. So by most measures the answer would be yes. They have just lost two games in a row against lower ranked teams. One more and they will also have 3 losses against lower ranked teams. Just. Like. Us. How about the Swans. Are they a good team? Currently 6th on the ladder, but only a game and percentage outside the top 4. So by most measures the answer would be yes. A very similar age profile to the dees. But hold on a minute. This year they have also lost 3 games against lower ranked teams, including a 38 point touch up on their own deck by the hawks. I'm getting confused. I may not like it, but the evidence does not support the proposition good teams don't lose as much as we do to lower ranked teams.

2017. The tigers win their first of three flags. By any measure a really good team. They lost seven games for the season. Three were against lower ranked teams - Dogs (finished 10th), Freo (14th) and the Saints (11th). The saints flogged the tigers in round 16, 138 to 71. 2019. Flag number two. They lost six games for the season. Three were against lower ranked teams - Dogs (8th), Crows (11th) and Roos (12th) 2020. Flag number 3. In a season they only played 17 home and away games, won 12 and lost 4. Half of those losses were against lower ranked teams - the hawks (15th) and GWS (10th)

That's right. And a big reason is, no matter how good your ruckman it is extremely hard at center bounces to execute the perfect tap to a mid who is moving at speed and can get out the front of the stoppage and kick cleanly inside 50. But that is exactly what max is trying to achieve when he does win a hit to advantage. A clean hit to a mid who, coming from 10-15 metres, hits it at pace and gives it off to another mid out the front of the contest, who kicks deep into our forward 50, or if possible to a leading forward. There were two perfect examples of this against the hawks that resulted in Viney kicking the ball deep inside 50 (unfortunately both to a hawks defender). Another great example was the goal we got in the Port game where Nibbler got a clean possession out the front of the centre bounce and drilled it to Tmac. If he can't execute this set play (becuase the bounce is not straight, the mids are blocked, he doesn't time his leap, can't get a clean tap etc etc) he more often than not hits to the defensive side of the contest and/or drops it close to the contest. Either way it rarely goes to advantage becuase Oliver and Trac, when in the centre, stand well away from the bounce. This doesn't mean it goes to an opposition player - it is often just a scrap. If it does go to an opposition player, or we lose the scrap, the resulting disposal is under pressure and that's where our defensive intercepts come in to play. I'm sure the club could could increase max's hit out to advantage stats should they wish to. For one thing Oliver and tracc could set up much closer to the contest. In 2018 Max was number one in the AFL in hit outs to advantage. And on the back of that we were the dominant centre clearance team. But those hit outs to advantage were often to a Viney or Oliver right next to him and their kick inside 50 was under pressure and often swallowed up by the opposition defenders. Which was a big factor in why we lost some games where we dominated centre clearances and had way more inside 50s than the opposition. By the by, i'm assuming that hit out to advantage stat is for centre bounces? If it is also for around the ground stoppages, then there is an another obvious reason for max's ranking in the hit outs to advantage stats - as everyone now knows we are at a numerical disadvantage at every around the ground stoppages because we send an extra back. And more often than not opposition team send an extra to the contest. Makes sense then that it is harder to hit to advantage. Max is good but he is not a magician. Again, if we simply wanted max to win more hit outs to advantage we could achieve that by bringing our extra to the contest, as King has advocated (which i think we did against the bombers after half time). But as Montagna said in response, that's not our game. Looking at stats like hit out to advantage in isolation can be misleading. Same goes for centre clearances. As Hardwick has pointed out, what is important is what happens after winning the clearance. I might be wrong as i don't have the stat at hand, but i recall reading or hearing a couple of weeks back that we are in the top 3 for scores from clearances that we win. If so my assumption is that clean hit outs to advantage of the type Nibbler set up Tmac from are a big reason why.

Interestingly they also had a higher, albeit only slightly, pressure rating than us in that game. Something like 170 to 167. I was surprises after the game when i saw that stat on fox as watching it live it felt like we we were applying far more pressure. Perhaps we just handled it better. to win this game it is important we: stop their fast transtion game from half back make sure their forwards have no clear lanes to lead into (which they wont if we make it hard for them to move the ball quickly) minimise their scoring chances from center clearances Other teams have been doing these things pretty well in the last 6 weeks and they have struggled. The key though of course is applying max pressure. I reckon their game plan is suspect under intense pressure becuase it relies so much on lots of quick handballs and precise kicks. In the games against sides that have really applied crazy pressure and intensity - the tigers, the dees and the Swans they have struggled to kick a competitive score and duly lost. In those games they could only score 55, 59 and 60 points respectively.

What a load of tripe

Yep, fully vaccinated people can transmit covid, so all the same safety measures would still need to apply. But the likelihood of anyone who does get it getting really crook or being hospitalized is very low. But speaking from a personal point of view i'd prefer to sit in stand where i knew everyone was fully vaccinated. I could just chillvax, kick vac, and enjoy the game.

Just great. Have been looking forward to this game since we played them in an empty stadium in round whatever. Games in front of no crowd are awful, even on TV. Was also going to the President's lunch for this game. A zoom event does not have quite the same appeal.

Why would having an area put aside for people who had been vaccinated, or giving them free tickets, punish you (or anyone who, for whatever reason, is not vaccinated)?

Sure. But i'm not proposing that ONLY people who are fully vaccinated can get a ticket. Just that they (we) can sit in their own stand, should they want to. As i would if the option was available. That said anyone over 18 get an AZ shot if they want to.

One relatively easy option would be to have one stand for fully vaccinated people only. Of course there are some technical issues (and maybe some ethical ones), but lets say at the G to get a ticket in the Ponsford you have provide your vaccine digital certificate identifier. You would still need to have all the systems in place (eg masks etc), but that group of people would be at very low risk of catching it or transmitting it to each other. Not no risk, but acceptably low. And if they did get it they are unlikely to get crook. Lets say there were 5, 000 people in the Posnford, all vaccinated. This is 5, 000 people less people crowding into other areas. And that group of people could relax in the knowledge that everyone around them is fully vaccinated. Id love the AFL to offer those tickets for free. Maybe in the finals. Create some incentives for people who are wavering about getting vaccinated. 350, 000 people attended the three days of the British F1 just gone, including 140k cheek to jowl poms going crazy for Lewis Hamilton for the race itself. To purchase a ticket you needed to have been fully vaccinated (ie two shots) and pass a PCR in the days prior to the event (not sure how many days). This is the way:

[censored]