binman

It was actually quite swirly at the g

And it was a tough, close game too - which won't help their cause.

I totally get the don't disrespect the oppo argument as think it is a very valid one. And I would probably not advocate managing plsyers earlier in the season. But playing the roos is a unique opportunity in the sense that for all the any club can win one the day, that does not really apply in this scenario because they are historically bad and the gap between where we at right now and them is huge. We have finals in 5 weeks. Hard to see us cruising, and so f ir helps us in any way in our tilt for a flag then the I think the potential benefits out weigh the risks. We didn't have this opportunity last year. The cats did.

Fair points. I guess that comes down to communication and expectation management.

Personally, i'm in the managing players camp. As Demon Dynasty notes, any best 22 player managed won't be doing any resting. Like Smith doing laps after the Tigers game, they will still have to the ks they would have otherwise done in the match. But the advantage is they don't have to be on and off a plane, or stay overnight in a hotel. And the risk of injury is much, much lower (ie no risk of impact injury). And perhaps even more importantly they don't have to worry about post match recovery (eg from bumps, bruises and soreness) interfering with their prep and program heading into the challenging - and likely super critical (re chances of top 20 - Blues game. They also get a chance to freshen up mentally - which might benefit some players. Get the load without the risk. There is another important element too i reckon - its give the club the opportunity to reward players at Casey for good form and/or give some young player some exposure at AFL level. And given any player coming in will have a specific role in the system, they get chance to practice that role at AFL level, (which might useful in the even we cop some some injuries ahead of finals) and that mitigates some of the downside of new players coming in And potentially a couple of fresh, motivated players who want to impress might actually help us put the Roos to the sword.

Much like life.

Sure, but i think his role has to be factored into any such analysis. Not all turnovers are created equal. Apples and oranges and all that. Nibbler is an endurance player who runs 16-17 kms per game, much of which is at high speed. So he would be gassed much more of the time than power, burst athlete like tracc - which logically has to have an impact on his turnover numbers I don't know what their turover ratio numbers are, but at the dees the only players who run his sort of distances and higjh speed, repeat sprints are Hunter, Langers and to lesser extent Spargo. At other clubs, Toby Bedford would have similar profile (the giants recruited him to play Nibbler's high half forward role). Those players would be better comparisons.

No i got that. I meant which post did you add the possessions data to. And, der, now i realize what you meant - you added to your initial post! Ta. Very relevant

One is worse than the other. And it seems posters often conflate them.

Where old (ie where did you add the possessions data)? Funnily enough, i was just thinking about that. For example, Melksham only had 9 disposals - and 33% were turnovers (the rest, bar two, were goals!). And Tomo had 7 disposals - and more than 50% (4) were turnovers.

Ta. So 4 of nibbler's turnovers did not result 'in a negative result for his side'. And from that list Langdon also had 8 turnovers, Viney 7 and Pickett 5. It's also worth noting that four dees players - Langdon, Gawn, Tomlinson and Melksham - had more clangers (ie turnovers that result 'in a negative result for his side') than Nibbler. Don't recall reading much criticism for their errors this week. Hell, the silky skilled Shai Bolton had more clangers AND turnovers than Nibbler. https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_match_statistics?mid=10918#t2

Source? Where do you get 8 turnovers from? I'm not saying you are incorrect, but he had four clangers for the game, not 8. This is the Champion data definition of a clanger: Clanger: An error made by a player resulting in a negative result for his side. Disposal clangers are any kick or handball that directly turns the ball over to the opposition. Frees and 50-metre penalties against, No Pressure Errors, Dropped Marks and Debits are all included in clangers.

Agree. To be honest, i won't be shocked if Port fall in bit of a heap. A bit depends on their physical conditioning and capacity to get their run back - i have this vibe they have emphasized winning home and away games over being cherry ripe come finals. If the Cats beat them this week, they will have lost four in a row. In that scenario, they will be under massive pressure to beat the Giants next week. Yes that game is at AO, but if the Giants beat the swans this week, which they are favorite to do, they will be shooting for 10 wins on the trot against Port (and 11 of their last 12 games). They are in red hot form. What genuine contender loses 5 on end at this point in the season? They then have to travel to Perth to play Freo, before, as you say finishing the season against the Tigers. Won't happen, but imagine how nuts Port fans would go if they lost their last 7 games of the home and away season! Worth remembering they still haven't resigned Hinkley.

I'm not a Doctor, and a 1,000,00% agree with all of the above. And that's the point. Anyone, and i mean anyone, who watched that collision would have immediately assumed both players were concussed - for precisely the reasons you detail. Watching live, i felt sick seeing that collision. Jones looked out cold by the time he hit the ground. But i was even more concerned for Allir because of those body movements you describe (i feel sick just thinking about it). I felt so uncomfortable i started watching the bombers game because i didn't want to watch the 100 replays i assumed 7 would show. A little while later i started watching the Port game again and i was completely shocked that Allir was playing - in fact at first i was confused. I was watching on kayo and initially thought that perhaps the i had restarted it from earlier in the math. Because i hadn't been watching i had no info on whether there had been a test or not, just assumed there had been and Allir had passed it. Beggars belief. And what the hell was Hinkley talking about in the presser? I mean he says he is no doctor, but then says Allir sounded just fine to him? Just shut up for Christ's sake. Just sounded like amateur hour. Impossible not to at least have the thought, despite Hinkley's denial this would ever happen, the importance of winning trumped protecting players. Now you'd hope that is not true (hope being the operative word becuase the evidence is pretty damning), but that doubt goes exactly to your point about the integrity of the medical profession. This is a big deal.

Who were you sitting with?

I think we need to win all four as Port will be deserved favs to beat gws at home.

Agree with all of that. One thing i find annoying in being labeled an optimist on DL, as it relates to my football analysis and predictions, is that it is often used as a pejorative. And it is also sometimes used in the context of dismissing my perspective - like the use of the word but before going on to make some point - eg i hear what you are saying, but..... Whilst i def skew towards optimism as a general rule, i would describe myself in terms of footy analysis exactly the same as you - a realist with a cautious optimistic edge. As an example, some time back - aprox mid season during our form slump - i posted that if i was framing a betting market i would have us as $5.50 favs and the pies (who i said then, and still maintain, are ridiculously short) and lions as equal second favs at $6.50. At that point we were $8 to win the flag. My prediction could easily have been dismissed as being 'optimistic' (and IIRC was by some). But i'm a hard nosed punter, and in my opinion $5.50 was realistic and reflected the 'true odds' (nb: there are two fundamental skills of punting - being good at assessing the 'true odds' of an event happening and getting the staking right) because i was factoring the fact our drop in form was load related and that we would follow a similar pattern as previous years and see a dramatic improvement in form as we neared finals. In other words, like any decent punter (or analyst for that matter), i used multiple data points to inform my assessment, including form and historical patterns. That is being realistic. My mid season assessment of where we were at relative to the rest of the competition was not shared by the majority of posters (and perhaps dismissed by some as an example of me being blindly optimistic) We are currently $5 to win the flag (which means the market gives us a 25% chance of winning the flag), and as sure as night follows day most pundits (most of whom had us behind the pies, port and the lions) are now saying we are in their top 2 chances. So my assessment, far from being overly optimistic, has proven very realistic. I would argue that many people who think of themselves as realists when it comes to assessing where the dees are in fact anything but. I wonder if their pessimism is perhaps a form of self protection (hard to get disappointed if we don't win flag if you think there is no chance we will).

At one point in the last, after yet another huge cry for ball after one of our players, rivers I think, actually KICKED the ball, I yelled out at the top of my voice (and that is pretty loud - particularly in the perfect acoustics at the top of the Ponsford!): 'WOULD YOU ALL STOP YELLING BALL!!!!!!!!!!! - LEARN THE BLOODY RULE!!!!' Not witty. Not clever. But very cathartic.

I'm going to start a rock band. And call it the Petty Forward Experiment.

I really hope they don't make finals.

I have been thinking about theme song for this thread. Because it needs one. And found one, with both a death riding AND nautical vibe (tricky to find a track with both elements). Then the anchors (deliberate rhyming slang) beat the Cats and scuppered that for this week. Or, so I thought" Thanks to the Suns, i now give you (by the by, a brilliant track from one of the greatest ever AO rock records @whatwhat say what): Death ship I am the captain of a ghostly crew, Sail the seven seas with nothing to do. The girl that I thought was untrue Really loved me Near hidden reefs we appear in the gloom Luring mariners to their doom. As we're condemned, we condemn others too. Who would love me? Who? Would You? I'm asking you. I'm on the Death Ship, I sail the seas alone. Death Ship, I can call no port home. Lost souls cry to Hell in the wind Let us in, let us in, let us in! I need somebody who will die for me To free me of this misery. I need someone who will cry for me Really love me, really.

I'm not sure if you are being disingenuous with this post Jimmy - and in particular the question 'surely you've seen enough of us this year and even the last couple of games to suggest two losses from here is likely'? I say this because if you have read any of my posts in the last two months, or even in this very thread, you would know exactly where I stand on where the dees are at at this stage in the season and relative to the rest of the competition. And i know you know my opinions about how Goody and the high performance team structures our season, with the goal of playing our very best footy in September and timing our preparation and run to maximize the chances of doing so. It's not about winning the battles, it's about winning the war and all that. Hell, no-one has to believe me on that front - you just have to take the word of our senior coach who has made that exact point at least a dozen times in press conferences this season (ie EVERTHING is about peaking in September and giving the team the best possible chance of winning the flag). And you also know that i am very clear we structure our physical preparation for the season with the following pattern - even if it risks losing games we might otherwise win in the middle of the year: After a grueling preseason load, we are at our peak for the first third of the the season (as reflected in our results and game style in 2021, 2022 and yet again this year) We load in the middle of the season (in the words of Yze - a mini preseason) and suffer a resulting significant drop off in performance (as reflected in our results in 2021, 2022 and yet again this year) We close in on optimal fitness and running power in the last handful of home and away rounds with the goal of being at our absolute peak on prelim final day (as occurred in 2021 and didn't occur in 2022 - which of course doesn't mean we didn't follow the same program - it just means, for whatever reason, it didn't work) How do i know you know i believe all of that? Because, IIRC, you were one of several posters who seemed to take inordinate glee in directly calling me out last season when my prediction of us following the same trajectory as 2021 didn't eventuate. To be clear, i am not interested, at all, in relitigating the loading argument. Believe what what you want to believe. I accept some (most?) posters believe loading may have some impact, but nowhere near to the extent i do (and once again to be crystal clear i don't think loading is the only factor in our in annual drop off, or that we don't have genuine weaknesses - our kicking for instance). And i accept that some posters don't think it is factor at all, or if it is a factor, such an insignificant one that it is not really worth considering (and annoying for some that is considered). That's all good. But please accept the fact i am 100% certain our training program has a very significant bearing on how our season plays out and our premiership chances - and i am not going to change that belief. And I'm also prepared to put my neck out and make predictions that buck the safety of echoing the media narrative - unlike some posters who relentlessly bag us and give us little chance of success (not saying you are in this camp). But I'll play a straight bat, assume you are not being disingenuous and respond to your post in good faith by reiterating some of the points i have made many times in the last few months (including multiple times in this very thread): I think the Pies are a very, very good team - BUT are hugely overrated by the media and by most football fans, many of whom blindly follow the lead of the media rather than think independently (again, not saying you are in this camp) The Pies have achieved nothing, and have significant vulnerabilities that will be, and have been, exposed in the heat of finals, or finals like pressure games - as clearly evidenced in their record in such games in the last two seasons (their loss against the blues was the perfect example of how these vulnerabilities are exposed in high pressure games) By the by, on the Pies, i just watched the 'The round so far' and Riley Beveridge made an interesting point - yes, the pies record of coming back in last quarters is incredible, winning 12 from 17 when trailing at 3 quarter time in their last 32 games (and i 100% agree ), but 'should a team as good as the Pies be trailing at 3 quarter time in 17 out of 32 games?' We are the best team in the AFL - and in my opinion, by some margin - with a formidable record over the last three seasons (unlike the Pies whose claim to fame is winning 32 of their last 42 home and away games) If I was framing a betting market I would have us as favorites to win the flag (the Pies current odds of 2.75 are just ridiculous) We have the best defensive system in the AFL (though the Giants, who have clearly modelled their method on ours, are a very close second) - defence win finals Unlike the Pies, we have a method that is built for finals - as evidenced by the fact that much the same method has won 5 of the last 6 flags (the outlier is the 2018 Eagles flag) The above point is evidenced by our recent record against other top 4 sides - like the Pies we are 2-2, but unlike the Pies we have beaten two other top 4 sides (and arguably should have beaten Port) whereas the Pies have only beaten the one top 4 team (Port, who i have never rated as a top 3 team, who they only just beat) and got smashed by the Lions We beat the Pies and were comfortably the better team on the day (such is the rampant Pies myopia, that seems to count for very little; IIRC you gave them the David King pass - every team has an off day i think was your comment) We beat the Lions two weeks back, albeit just (i rate the Lions at least the equal of the Pies - well i did before Ashcroft went down, such is his importance to them) We are not quite there yet, but we are very close to being in our optimal shape And consequently, as i predicted on many occasions we would, we are now playing the sort of expansive offensive football we played in the first third third of the season (because we have the run in the legs to implement the method - which is simply not the case in the middle of the year) - something the media, with their complete inability to see each home and away game as part of a bigger picture, have of course failed to point out I think we will be at our peak for our round 22 game against the blues (who, like you i really rate - they play forward half, contest, high pressure finals footy. In that context it is worth noting we dominated them when we comfortably beat them in round 12) We are experimenting (with roles, strategies, method etc etc) way more than we did in 2021 an 2002 and won't nail down our method or final line up till the eve of the finals I fully expect us to return to the way we played in the first third of the season with a much better balance between defence and offence and a return to controlling tempo when required We will win our final 5 games (i have calculated the odds of doing so as 5-1) We will win the flag By the by, i rate your footy nous and so I am genuinely shocked that you think the following: I'm expecting we lose two though. How can you not?' Fair enough if that is what you think - we all have our opinions. But what that particular opinion tells me is we are miles apart in our assessment of where the dees are at. We'll know who is right in five games time.

Nice reframe. Good prophylactic for MFCSS.

But also the if we beat (insert team) narrative has a logical flaw because each game is not independent of others - that's to say individual matches may influence subsequent matches. For example, let's take the close loss to GWS. Maybe we took some lessons from that loss that helped us knock off the saints in the next match. Or maybe if we had beaten gws we might have gone into the saints game over confident and lost as a result. Losses provide lessons that close wins might not. So perhaps the learnings from the close giants lose fed into some changes to our late game systems that helped us hold off the crows. Who knows what impact close losses might have had on subsequent results? Or for that matter what impact a hypothetical reversal of such losses might have had.

D.H Gawn.