binman

With all sincerity, I love it cranky. I really value consistency.

Picket, to be honest you are coming off as not having a great grasp on what might drive selection in modern footy. I think it is reasonable to assume goody selection is largely driven by picking a team he thinks gives us the best possible chance of winning that game (I say largely because a factor sometimes might be an eye to getting a player ready for finals - so, an eye to winning future games). If goody is picking petts at this point in the season, in a critical 8 point game, it is reasonable to assume he did so because he believed it would help us win. Petty is clearly playing a role, and doing what is asked of him. He is a work horse who gets to contests and provides a down the line marking option. In case you haven't noticed goody has ALWAYS had a player playing such a role in his teams. BBB and Tmac are two such examples. It is a critical part of his structure and method - not least because it gives maxy a chop out from being smashed in such aeriel pack contests all game. And have a listen to goody's answer to another inane question about our forward line. Asked about the forward line mix working in the last 2-3 weeks, implying something radical had changed, he, politely, pointed out that the only change to that mix has been melk and that petts, jvr and disco have played together for most of the season. Cohesion is critical in sport he pointed out. And that takes time he also pointed out. It takes continuity. That's exactly what they have been doing - continuity in selection and building cohesion. And we are seeing the fruits of that approach. Dropping petty does not contribute to continuity or cohesion. And brining in another kid like Jefferson does nothing to help us win, or for cohesion - or the kid's development for that matter. And seriously, do you really think Fullarton would have helped us win last night? Bloke is barely passing muster as a ruck at VFL level Despite the frankly ridiculous hand wringing on here about selection, we won the raw clearance count - which by the by is not a particularly useful stat these days as it's not a measure of impact. What is a measure of impact is scores from stoppages, which critically we won by 14 points. In fact it was arguably the deciding factor in our win given they scored 3 more points from turnover. That doesn't happen without petty. Goody deserves credit and praise not brickbats. Which is why, when responding to a question about who we might play in the ruck against freo goody visibly bristled, before noting the option he ran with this week clearly JUST WORKED, implying the obvious- why would we change something that literally just proved successful?

We did. But equally if weren't so accurate we would have list more percentage- and might well have lost the game. The bombers were pretty impressive I thought. The scoreline flattered us a bit, as evidenced by the x score - 71.3 dees to 75.5 bombres

My point about salary is needn't cost that much more than it currently does. For example have 3 umpires per game. Ironically, apparently a factor in having 4 is as you suggest it's less taxing - and that means their best umpires can do more games.

Clearly not. Welcome back.

I'll never believe umpires are actually corrupt or would umpires to help even up the contest. But I suspect there's often some sub conscious stuff at play The obvious one is the whole noise of affirmation phenomenon. No doubt that's real. This scenario is similar. Game done and dusted, one team way down. How often they suddenly start giving soft free kicks? This game then had the opposite scenario - game tightens up and they 'Put the whistle away'. Infuriating. It's one or the key reasons why umpires should be full time pros. Just like footballers use sports psychologist and drills to improve decidion making under pressure, di the same for umpires (which no doubt they do now to some extent but as I understand it they only train once per week). Coach them to do the job better, incentivise getting it right in the form of bonus payments and selection for marquee games and finals, drop them if not performing, allow some media scrutiny. And they don't need to be paid much more than the current semi pro mob - who apparently get paid pretty well. Plenty of young people who love sport but won't make it to elite levels would see umpiring as a genuine career pathway even if say the average, base starting salary was something like 125k. Hell, that would be double the starting salary in the community sector - a sector where salaries even for CEOS tops out at aprox 175k.

I'm going to debut the binman Unleashed segment- a blatant rip off cornes' volcano. Just got to decide what makes me most angry. There's more than a few options. Go redleggers.

Caddy was the youngest player tonight. And apparently we had the next 7 youngest. The bombers are still in rebuild mode. The Kids are alright

Heart and soul. His critical defensive effort inside the bombers' 50 late in the first that started a scoring chain, ending with koz's goal was so important.

Credit to McKay. They would have been list without him. A thought experiment. Imagine taking draper and Merrett out of the bombers team tonight (the equivalent of gawn and tracc).

He was just brilliant. Gave Skinner a complete bath.

Thoughts on the non selection of a ruck?

Indeed. I expected we would win. So certainly not against the odds from where I sit.

That was bizarre umpiring in the last 5 minutes. For example the bombers throwing the ball all night and they pluck one out of nowhere against rivers.

Go redleggers!

Good game of footy

And what about those swannies? Lose a couple and people are wondering if they have come back to the pack....

Go doggies. The 13 point line was my best bet of the round. A long way to go yet (it's 3 quarter time), but they look the better, and fresher, team atm.

It's so weird that the dees and the giants also had tragic downfalls at the same stage of the season as the cats, and also appear to be turning things around. Just a crazy coincidence I guess.

Snap.

What will your reply be if we win and break even in the ruck? Admit you were wrong and give goody credit?

It's funny you should say that. I've been really crook with a cold for the last couple of days and been stuck on the couch. In between reading a crime novel and watching dees games I've been scrolling news a aggregator sites etc on my phone. Its insane how many 'articles' are clearly AI generated. They have a weird, distinctive style with clunky phrases. They read like a first year high school essay. It's funny how an author's name is always included.

No, there is a disconnect here. And it relates to how a team's total metres gained is calculated. My understanding it is simply all the team's players metres gained added up to arrive at a total. Tbe differential between the two teams is the difference between those two totals Metres gained, or lost, are not added or subtracted from the opposition. They are completely independent of each other. So let's say a player only has two possessions for the match. The first he wins a ground ball, runs 10 metres and kicks it 40 metres toward out goal he is credited with 50 metres gained. The second he wins a ground ball, runs 10 metres towards the opponents goal and kicks it 30 metres towards the opponents goal. He is credited with minus 40 metres. His total metres gained for match is 10 metres. And let's say hypothetically all 23 players do exactly the same ie 1 possession goes forward 50 metres and one goes backwards 40 metres. That team's total metres gained for the match is 23 x 10 = 230 metres gained. And let's say the opponents 23 players also have two possessions, but the metres gained and lost are reversed. That team's total metres gained for the match is 23 x-10 = -230 metres gained. Therefore the differential for the fitst team is +460. Perhaps the confusion is I am talking about total, or net metres gained, not effective metres gained, which factor in turnover. That's because net metres gained is what wheelo includes in his stats summary of each game. And far as I'm.aware effective metres gained are not publicly available

I'm happy to be proven wrong, but i don't think that is correct, My understanding is as follows: Each time a player gets the ball anwhere on the ground they can: - get tackled and not move the ball anywhere: zero metres gained. - run and carry toward their goal: metres gained = how far they run in a straight line towards their goal - kick the ball toward their goal. metres gained = length of the kick - handball the ball toward their goal. metres gained = length of the kick - run and carry and kick or handball the ball towards their goal: metres gained combined measure BUT they also have metres lost if any of those actions go towards their opponents goal, ie backwards. Which is why you sometimes see a player with negative metres gained. Players kick, run, and handball backwards all the time, and some teams do so more often than others. For example the pies love to feed handballs backwards into space. My understanding is a team's total metres gained is simply each players' metres gained aggregated. (I'm sure @WheeloRatings can clarfy). If that's the case, and im not having a brain fade, then it's got nothing to do with goals or points kicked (other than the scenario where one team kicks way more points than their opponent because by defintion each kick has to go forward). And your hypothetical scenario doesn't hold. Again, if my understanding of how the team total is calculated is correct, it is a arguably more useful stat than individual players metres gained as it helps in understanding a team's method. For example, in 2020 to 2023 we were a forward half territory team that prioritised going forward with each possession. Consequently we always had high metres gained. Whereas the Eagles 2018 team kicked the ball backwards all the time to keep possession and control the ball, and consequently were low low metres gained team. Ditto for the cats under Scott until the last 3 seasons. And it's also my understanding that winning metres gained differential strongly correlates with the likelihood of winning. Which is why the territory game hardwick developed has become the template for footy.

Strange hill to die on - a young player at another club is improving I tells ya.