binman

Indeed. Manned up Toby Greene for a while in the first quarter- welcome to AFL football!

To be honest, I reckon that's [censored] poor and personally I just don't get it. (Well, i do if your brother in law is more a theatre going type fan than a passionate supporter of the dees - which is OK, each to their own). One, no matter what the weather unlike lots of sports (eg tennis, golf, car racing, cricket) footy is so much better to watch live than on TV. Two, we get what a dozen or so opportunities to get to the G each season to watch the mighty dees? I get there's all sorts of reasons why it's not always possible to get to games, the cost being a key one. But not wanting to go coz the weather is inclement and you'd prefer tge comfort of your couch, particularly if you don't have to travel far, ain't a reason I can get behind. Not if you are a supporter as opposed to a semi engaged fan. Three, i have no doubt crowds cam influence results, particularly in games where the crowd predominately supports one team. You could feel the crowds influence and energy when we got those quick goals in the third quarter. And again in the last. And I have no doubt crowds influence umpiring decisions. If maybe 2k couch sittters turn up we win that game, not to mention the extra coin we xould use to improve our chances of being successful in the future.

I was furious watching live

Ever since I first started going to the footy regularly (11 year old, mostly by myself coz no one was into footy in my family and no one I knew barracked for the dees) I've really hated it when fans (dees and opponents) slag off players in their own team at games (and I'm no fan of slagging of of oppo players either). Still hate it - particularly at games but also in other contexts., like on footy forums or social media.

I was sure i deleted that footage of my last jog - do things stay on the internet once posted?

Indeed. And it's hardly surprising we fatigued given we had two kids (xl and Langford) and two mature age rookies (aj and hendo) coming of their first AFL preseason (and not even full ones, ie draftees commence after the preseason starts and AJ and hendo only started well into the preseason) and one kid coming of their second preseason (windsor). That's five players who have just started their AFL career. And we had two others coming of only third preseason (vr and jeffo). Given all that we actually ran the game outright pretty bloody well - By way of comparison, the only recent equivalent number of newbies and inexperienced players is the franchise clubs and they got obliterated. Great signs given senior players like Steve May, Spargo, Koz and Melksham, not to mention Turner and mcvee (not senior but both very fit) to come back into the side.

Go watch his vision available on YouTube - there's hours of it. Kid is very tough - super hard it and never shirks a contest. No doubt a reason he was skipper of Gippsland power (and I think vc for Vic country). Played as a mid as often as hb or winger. We saw a glimpse of his toughness on Sunday when he battled with their most experienced player, Callan Ward (a bloke who has played more than 300 games of AFL football) one on one in a marking contest and when the ball hit the ground tackled him and won a holding the ball free.

It's all @WheeloRatings RBG. Brilliant resource, the very best in my opinion: https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_index.html

Team pressure Quarter For Agn Diff 1 180 184 -4 2 193 177 +16 3 192 201 -9 4 191 203 -12 Match 189 190 -1 Source: Herald Sun Most Pressure Points Note: pressure points are the weighed sum of pressure acts. Physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing acts are 1.5 points and corralling are 1.2. ( https://www.championdata.com/glossary/afl/ ) Player Pressure Acts Pressure Points Season Average Clayton Oliver 27 60 60.0 Tom Sparrow 21 51 51.0 Kade Chandler 16 43 43.0 Aidan Johnson 17 43 43.0 Xavier Lindsay 14 43 43.0 Ed Langdon 19 43 43.0 Jack Viney 20 38 38.0 Jake Bowey 15 35 35.0 Jack Henderson 13 31 31.0 Jacob van Rooyen 14 30 30.0 Bayley Fritsch 13 29 29.0 Christian Petracca 10 29 29.0 Matthew Jefferson 10 27 27.0 Christian Salem 10 25 25.0 Jake Lever 10 25 25.0 Harry Sharp 12 22 22.0 Trent Rivers 11 20 20.0 Max Gawn 8 20 20.0 Harrison Petty 7 17 17.0 Caleb Windsor 6 10 10.0 Blake Howes 7 9 9.0 Tom McDonald 4 8 8.0 Harvey Langford 3 5 5.0

Here is an update of the pre-/post-clearance numbers. Attn @binman Key Team Stats Stats highlighted purple were won by Melbourne. Stat For Against Diff Disposal Efficiency Disposal Efficiency 69.7 70.0 -0.2 Kicking Efficiency 59.9 59.6 +0.3 Territory/Attack Inside 50s 56 52 +4 Shots At Goal 29 24 +5 Shots Per Inside 50 51.8 46.2 +5.6 Marks Inside 50 5 7 -2 Contest Contested Possessions 149 133 +16 Ground Ball Gets 96 97 -1 Post Clearance Contested Possessions 92 82 +10 Post Clearance Ground Ball Gets 61 65 -4 Centre Clearances 12 12 +0 Stoppage Clearances 24 36 -12 Contested Marks 7 5 +2 Defense Intercepts 77 72 +5 Intercept Marks 17 10 +7 Tackles 60 71 -11 Tackles Inside 50 9 8 +1 Def One On One Loss % 22.2 16.7 +5.6 Ruck Hitouts 51 26 +25 Hitouts To Advantage 16 7 +9 Contested Possessions For Against Diff Melbourne's Defensive 50 Hard Ball Get 6 4 +2 Loose Ball Get 11 16 -5 Contested Mark 1 2 -1 Ruck Hard Ball Get 0 1 -1 Gather From Hitout 3 2 +1 Contested Knock On 4 0 +4 Free For 3 1 +2 Total 28 26 +2 Melbourne's Forward 50 Hard Ball Get 4 4 0 Loose Ball Get 18 19 -1 Contested Mark 2 0 +2 Contested Knock On 1 4 -3 Free For 2 1 +1 Total 27 28 -1 Post clearance Hard Ball Get 14 9 +5 Loose Ball Get 47 56 -9 Contested Mark 7 5 +2 Contested Knock On 9 5 +4 Free For 15 7 +8 Total 92 82 +10 Pre clearance Hard Ball Get 8 6 +2 Loose Ball Get 27 26 +1 Ruck Hard Ball Get 3 1 +2 Gather From Hitout 12 7 +5 Contested Knock On 2 3 -1 Free For 5 8 -3 Total 57 51 +6

Melbourne v Greater Western Sydney (Round 1, 2025) https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_match_stats.html?ID=20250108 Key Team Stats Stats highlighted purple were won by Melbourne. Stat For Against Diff Disposal Efficiency Disposal Efficiency 69.7 70.0 -0.2 Kicking Efficiency 59.9 59.6 +0.3 Territory/Attack Inside 50s 56 52 +4 Shots At Goal 29 24 +5 Shots Per Inside 50 51.8 46.2 +5.6 Marks Inside 50 5 7 -2 Contest Contested Possessions 149 133 +16 Ground Ball Gets 96 97 -1 Post Clearance Contested Possessions 59 55 +4 Post Clearance Ground Ball Gets 37 45 -8 Centre Clearances 12 12 +0 Stoppage Clearances 24 36 -12 Contested Marks 7 5 +2 Defense Intercepts 77 72 +5 Intercept Marks 17 10 +7 Tackles 60 71 -11 Tackles Inside 50 9 8 +1 Def One On One Loss % 22.2 16.7 +5.6 Ruck Hitouts 51 26 +25 Hitouts To Advantage 16 7 +9 Player Ratings Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Match Max Gawn 4.7 6.2 6.9 1.4 19.2 Christian Petracca 3.3 9.8 2.1 1.5 16.8 Tom McDonald 5.6 2.4 3.7 4.7 16.4 Tom Sparrow 0.3 1.9 9.0 3.1 14.3 Jake Lever 3.6 2.5 5.6 1.5 13.1 Harrison Petty 3.1 6.1 2.0 1.7 12.9 Kade Chandler 0.5 6.7 2.5 2.5 12.2 Jake Bowey 2.3 2.7 4.3 2.5 11.8 Xavier Lindsay 1.9 3.4 1.5 4.2 11.0 Caleb Windsor 0.9 1.9 5.6 1.8 10.2 Jack Henderson 3.9 3.1 1.6 1.4 10.1 Ed Langdon 5.5 0.3 1.5 2.4 9.7 Christian Salem 4.9 −0.1 2.4 2.2 9.4 Clayton Oliver 2.2 0.8 4.4 1.4 8.9 Aidan Johnson 1.0 −0.5 8.6 −0.5 8.6 Jacob van Rooyen 0.8 1.1 3.4 2.8 8.1 Matthew Jefferson 2.6 0.0 0.4 3.3 6.4 Jack Viney 5.5 3.1 0.5 −2.8 6.2 Trent Rivers 2.5 1.1 0.8 1.1 5.5 Bayley Fritsch 0.8 −1.8 3.5 1.9 4.4 Harry Sharp 0.7 2.5 −0.4 1.6 4.4 Blake Howes 2.6 −1.1 2.1 0.0 3.6 Harvey Langford 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 3.2 Contested Possessions For Against Diff Melbourne's Defensive 50 Hard Ball Get 6 4 +2 Loose Ball Get 11 16 -5 Contested Mark 1 2 -1 Ruck Hard Ball Get 0 1 -1 Gather From Hitout 3 2 +1 Contested Knock On 4 0 +4 Free For 3 1 +2 Total 28 26 +2 Melbourne's Forward 50 Hard Ball Get 4 4 0 Loose Ball Get 18 19 -1 Contested Mark 2 0 +2 Contested Knock On 1 4 -3 Free For 2 1 +1 Total 27 28 -1 Post clearance Hard Ball Get 8 5 +3 Loose Ball Get 29 40 -11 Contested Mark 3 2 +1 Contested Knock On 4 3 +1 Free For 15 5 +10 Total 59 55 +4 Pre clearance Hard Ball Get 14 10 +4 Loose Ball Get 45 42 +3 Contested Mark 4 3 +1 Ruck Hard Ball Get 3 1 +2 Gather From Hitout 12 7 +5 Contested Knock On 7 5 +2 Free For 5 10 -5 Total 90 78 +12 Official data on pre- and post-clearance contested possessions are not available. These have been estimated by Wheelo Ratings and should be indicative. Ground ball gets are inclusive of hard ball gets and loose ball gets. 'Free For' does not include free kicks to advantage or free kicks while in possession of the ball as these are not counted as contested possessions. Expected scores xScore Score xWin % xMargin Margin Swing Melbourne 81.8 74 67% +7.9 Greater Western Sydney 73.9 77 33% +3 +10.9 Shots Score Accuracy xScore +/- xSc. / Shot Shot Rating Overall Melbourne 29 11.6 72 37.9% 81.8 −9.8 2.82 −0.34 Greater Western Sydney 24 11.8 74 45.8% 72.9 +1.1 3.04 +0.04 General Play Melbourne 18 10.2 62 55.6% 54.1 +7.9 3.00 +0.44 Greater Western Sydney 15 6.5 41 40.0% 40.4 +0.6 2.70 +0.04 Set Position Melbourne 11 1.4 10 9.1% 27.8 −17.8 2.52 −1.61 Greater Western Sydney 9 5.3 33 55.6% 32.5 +0.5 3.61 +0.06 xWin %: win probability based on expected scores. Swing: difference between expected margin and actual margin. xScore: total expected score from all shots taken. +/-: total score above or below expected score. xSc. / Shot: average expected score per shot. This represents the average shot difficulty. Shot Rating: average score above or below expected score per shot at goal. Notes: Expected scores are calculated by Wheelo Ratings. Each shot at goal is assigned an expected score based on the distance from goal, shot angle, and type of shot (e.g. set shot, general play following contested possession, general play following uncontested possession, ground kick, etc) as a proxy for pressure. The model does not take into account factors like the player, whether the ball was kicked with their preferred or non-preferred foot, and pressure on the player when taking the shot. Rushed behinds are excluded from actual and expected scores. Territory (time in zones) Region Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Match Season Half Forward 53% 48% 61% 42% 51% 51% Defensive 47% 52% 39% 58% 49% 49% Region Forward 50 22% 18% 32% 22% 23% 23% Attacking Midfield 31% 30% 30% 21% 28% 28% Defensive Midfield 25% 24% 19% 28% 24% 24% Defensive 50 22% 28% 19% 30% 25% 25% Source: Calculated by Wheelo Ratings. Score Sources Summary Score Source Score Against Diff Kick-in 0.0 0 1.0 6 -6 Centre Bounce 4.2 26 1.1 7 +19 Stoppage (Other) 3.1 19 3.2 20 -1 Turnover 4.5 29 6.8 44 -15 Score Source For Against Match Season Match Season * Kick-in 0 0.0 6 6.0 Centre Bounce 26 26.0 7 7.0 Stoppage (Other) 19 19.0 20 20.0 Turnover 29 29.0 44 44.0 * Against season average represents average points conceded by Melbourne across the season, not average points scored by Greater Western Sydney. Chain start region Note: region is from the scoring team's perspective. Score Source Region For Against Match Season Match Season * Centre Bounce Centre 26 26.0 7 7.0 Kick-in D50 0 0.0 6 6.0 Stoppage (Other) Wing 18 18.0 13 13.0 Stoppage (Other) F50 1 1.0 7 7.0 Turnover D50 1 1.0 7 7.0 Turnover Centre 0 0.0 7 7.0 Turnover Wing 21 21.0 22 22.0 Turnover F50 7 7.0 8 8.0 Region For Against Match Season Match Season * D50 1 1.0 13 13.0 Centre 26 26.0 14 14.0 Wing 39 39.0 35 35.0 F50 8 8.0 15 15.0 Region For Against Match Season Match Season * Defensive 50 1 1.0 13 13.0 Defensive midfield 6 6.0 13 13.0 Centre bounce 26 26.0 7 7.0 Attacking midfield 33 33.0 29 29.0 Forward 50 8 8.0 15 15.0 * Against season average represents average points conceded by Melbourne across the season, not average points scored by Greater Western Sydney. Points from defensive half For Against Match Season Match Season * 7 7.0 26 26.0 * Against season average represents average points conceded by Melbourne across the season, not average points scored by Greater Western Sydney. Centre Bounce Attendances CBAs CBA % 2025 % 2024 % Max Gawn 24 92% 92.3% 85.0% Christian Petracca 21 81% 80.8% 55.8% Clayton Oliver 19 73% 73.1% 70.7% Jack Viney 18 69% 69.2% 69.1% Tom Sparrow 9 35% 34.6% 37.7% Trent Rivers 8 31% 30.8% 29.9% Aidan Johnson 2 8% 7.7% Harvey Langford 2 8% 7.7% Ed Langdon 1 4% 3.8% 0.7% Christian Salem 0 0% 0.0% 12.3% Harrison Petty 0 0% 0.0% 7.5% Jacob van Rooyen 0 0% 0.0% 17.8% Ruck Contests and Hitouts Ruck Contests Ruck Contests RC % 2025 % 2024 % Max Gawn 77 75% 75.5% 81.1% Aidan Johnson 25 25% 24.5% Harrison Petty 0 0% 0.0% 7.9% Jacob van Rooyen 0 0% 0.0% 17.6% Hitouts Ruck Contests Hitouts To Adv. To Adv. % (2025) To Adv. % (2024) Max Gawn 77 46 15 32.6% 27.9% Aidan Johnson 25 5 1 20.0% Harrison Petty 0 0 0 24.4% Jacob van Rooyen 0 0 0 24.7% Opposition hitouts Ruck Contests Hitouts To Adv. Lachlan Keeffe 75 14 4 Callum M. Brown 27 12 3

A thread for all things stats in 2025

100% Agree. Good long kick and get depths of one step which is super helpful. But as you suggest he is very hit and miss on the basic 20 to 30 metre dart kicks that have become so critical in footy. Hit them and scorig chains remain unbrokenb. Miss them and they get turned over and the oppo has a potential scoring chain. By basic, i mean the sort of kick most AFL player should hit 85% of the time. The kicks that really create gilt edged scoring opportunities are the higher risk kicks into the corridor or over the top of zones that open up the oppostions. Ofdten those kiks ahve to be on the nagle and i suspect we only have a handful of players who have the green ligh tot go for them as if they miss, partic the corridor kicks, they almosta laways result in a scoring opportunity for the opposition. And Rivers aint one of those players. I reckon Lindsay is though based on some of his kick yesterday. Love how he can can kick on an angle, a skill that Koz has too and probably Salo too. I reckon the players with the green light to take the high risk kicks on are Mcvee, Koz, Lindsay, Melk, Salo and perhaps Bowser.

Yep, that's a fair call. I knew I'd forgotten someone and I'd def have fritter in my top 10, probably top 5. I'll drop kolt. And maybe tmac further down the list as I agree with your assessment of his kicking.

100% agree stu. Our improvements are in the margins, not some wholesale changes. The best teams play to their strengths. Ours is winning contests and pressure. Which doesn't mean not being good at the transition game, just that we don't have to be the best at it. We will always turn the ball over - my frustration this year wll be listening to fans complaining about us doing so whilst simultaneously bemoaning us nor being an elite transition side. You can't bake a cake without cracking some eggs. For me the key is reducing, even marginally, the number of times we give the ball back to the opposition. And for that we need our best kicks playing most games - we aren't at skilled at some of the best teams (but few are as good at winning rhe contest as us) so can't afford to lose any of our elite kicks. On that front I reckon our 10 best kicks, in order, are: Mcvee Koz LIndsay Melksham Tmac Bowey Spargo Salem JVR Kolt (With apologies to Billings and Laurie)

Indeed - Raw clearance numbers are important in the sense that teams get territory winning clearances. As goody noted (in his post match presser or vid from kitchen) that was a key factor in the last quarter as giants dominated territory. But the key clearance related stat, particularly for us, is scores from clearances. We won it overall by 18, but goody won't be thrilled we were -1 from clearances from around the ground stoppages (including 2 in the last quarter I think). Summary Score Source Score Against Diff Kick-in 0.0 0 1.0 6 -6 Centre Bounce 4.2 26 1.1 7 +19 Stoppage (Other) 3.1 19 3.2 20 -1 Turnover 4.5 29 6.8 44 -15

When the crowd number came up on the scoreboard, i said to my mate that 23k is pretty bloody good considering we were playing gws, the f1 and the horrible weather. As he noted the AFL hasn't done us much favors giving us giants and suns for our first two home games.

Agree, Damo - to an extent. I'm a huge Fritter fan, but he was poor last year and very poor again yesterday. We desperately needed him to step up yesterday and deliver - and he didn't. If he had we probably win. In my opinion Champion data's player ratings is by far the best tool to assess a players performance in a particular game. Yes it has it limitations and weaknesses (eg it assesses the scoreboard impact of each direct action but not indirect action meaning it disadvantages key position and role players), and in of itself its not the be all and end all. But it provides a consistent way of measuring and analysing performance levels that mitigates confirmation bias and the eye test/vibe based approach so many pundits seem enamored with. It's also partic useful when comparing players playing similar role. So, for example this is Fritter's ratings for the match compared to our other half forwards: Player Q1 Q2 Q2 Q4 Total Bayley Fritsch 0.8 −1.8 3.5 1.9 4.4 Tom Sparrow 0.3 1.9 9.0 3.1 14.3 Kade Chandler 0.5 6.7 2.5 2.5 12.2 Jack Henderson 3.9 3.1 1.6 1.4 10.1 Harry Sharp 0.7 2.5 −0.4 1.6 4.4

In what sense? Do you mean dong so in the future?

This post highlights a really curious phenomenon I reckon chook, one that is rife on demonland - downplaying the significance of a game we played really well in, but lost, in terms of assessing where we are at (ie as if only wins count in that regard). The overwhelming consensus pre game was the giants were the real deal, a lock for top 4 and one of the premiership favourites. And I agree with that assessment, which means logically the evidence (albeit only one game) suggests we are tracking well and likely be competitive with the very best teams. I'm really, really frustrated we lost. We should have won the match. Trigger alert, we had a higher expected score. Yes they had key players out too, particularly Briggs. But I'd contend that our major weakness is we are short two genuine gun small forwards and at least one quality small/medium defender (which is why AMW going down was such a blow). So, nor having Koz and Mcvee had an outsize impact (whereas the weather mitigated the impact of losing Briggs and Hogan) I wrote this in my match preview: "The weather also really favours the giants in terms of their fleet of small to medium forwards. Unfortunately a weakness of ours is covering such players, exacerbated today by no Mcveee. And we also lack such players in our forward line - and no koz makes that a huge problem for us. Together those factors present a huge challenge for us. Our ability to meet that challenge will, in my view, decide our fortunes." I'd argue that proved to be correct (not that it took a nostradamus to predict) as we could only manage 3 goals by smalls or mediums (Henderson, Sharp and Bowey). Whereas for the giants 7 of their 11 goals came from small or mediums (cogniglio × 3, Greene × 3 and Werhe). You could argue one of Greene's goal was as midfielder, making it 6 goals to 3 for small medium forwards (and that's counting Bowey's goal - who had pressed up as defender). And I actually think we defended their small medium forwards really well given the conditions- Bowser had his best game for some time. But if koz and mcvee both play we likely score more crumbing goals and defend Greene better (surely mcvee would have stood him). And probably won. And we also would have done a much better job trapping the ball inside our 50. (Note: I know koz would have predominantly played as a mid, but he would have rested forward and Viney and Sparrow would have had more forward minutes) In my preview I also highlighted the key stats I thought we had to win to win the game, one of which was scores from turnover: "Scores from turnover - killed us last year. We simply can't afford to lose that stat." Unfortunately that proved to be correct conceding 44 points on turnover, 15 more than they conceded. I highlight that not to be smart after the fact (again, hardly an earth shattering prediction), but to reinforce the point that, again, whilst they had important outs none hurt them to the same extent in terms of exposing a weakness. Koz and mcvee are our two best field kicks (though xl says hi) - they play and we almost certainly have fewer turnovers - not to mention more scoring chains. In a 3 point game the results are in the margins. Less turnovers means less scores from turnover and more scoring opportunities. Koz and mcvee play we likely win. By the by, we also lost our best key defender before the game - arguably the best in the AFL. Sure tmac admirialy filled May's role (though he'd love to have that non spoil on cadman back). But that makes my point about the relative impact of losing players in areas of weakness. The Giants lack a bit of defensively in terms of key defenders. If like us they lost their best key defender - Taylor - that game changes completely and our chances of winning go up significantly.

Totally agree jnr. I was actually thinking before the sub was made that I'd bench Friitter such was my frustration with his performance, but jeffo probably would have been the go. I wonder whether part of the calculation was Rivers was poor in the middle and they decided to put him at hb at Howes' expense. Risky to change up defence structures i reckon.

I was ropeable with those two goals. Both times he was unmarked. Three goals to cognilio. That's the game right there.

He should have gone for goal. He had to pick out roo with a tricky kick - open goal square 40 metres our have a ping and let it slide thru.

Told ya tmac was a lock.