binman

Not sure about the uncontested mark stat I'll check. But we used a very similar tactic against the dogs - ie using uncontested marks to control the tempo, frustrate the dog's ability to get into a rhythm and transition the ball from their back half. In that game we had 141 marks (the second most under goody), in this game we had 117 And i suspect a high % were in the first half, as was the case against the Dogs. I think that is part of a strategy to not let those teams settle into how they want the game to look. There is an interesting parallel between the dogs and cats. Both teams are helmed by coaches that like to tactically mess with their opponents in terms of having specific strategies that disrupt opponents game plans and method. But in both games it was us who disrupted their method and refused to let them settle into their preferred method. Scott reckon his players were off at the start. Whilst he is right, the reason they were off is we never allowed them to settle into a rhythm because goody schooled scott (supposedly a tactical genius) tactically. I hope the media point that out, but I won't hold my breath.

I just texted this to a mate who is a big cats fan: 'Scott, who I had warmed to, lost me with his sour, sore loser, press conference - gave us no credit. I suspect there is no love lost between goody and Scott.'

Sorry, but that's a complete load of bollocks. 5-2 not good enough when 2 of those games were against Port and crows at Adelaide oval, the latter off a five day break? And one was against the swans at the scg, which is worth 2 goals to them given how well they play there (particularly defensively) and in slippery conditions? I mean on the same ground yesterday, in much the same conditions, the much vaunted orange tsunami turned into a wavelet and they got smashed. So 5-2 with 3 difficult interstate games and a horrendous schedule is not good enough? On brererton, I'd love to ask his view on the giants given they have already lost to two contenders - not good enough? Or his views on the blues who were 5-2 before the round - not good enough? And now 5-3 - gone? Port were also 5-2 before the round- not good enough? Now 5 -3 - gone? What about the cats derm? They have only beaten ONE team in the 8 - the blues (who just got beaten by the pies for the same reason the cats beat them - they are suspect defensively this season). The cat's other 6 wins are against teams outside the 8, including the winless roos and hapless hawks. Cats not good enough derm?

Bliss. Just started watching the replay. First derm gem: 5-2 is not good enough. Go redleggers.

100% Tbe best he has kicked the ball in any game I have seen him play. A weapon.

I'm on my home. Ill watch the replay and have a laugh at breteton. It's embarrassing for the sport that bloke is paid to analyse it.

A mate, a big dees fan, watched the game at home just texted me and said good thing I watched live because derm would have broken my brain if I had watch it on the box. They kicked themselves our of the game? We were 12 points up on xscore at half time. And I suspect halfway through the third the xscore would have been minimum plus 25 with Windsor's miss, kozzies miss and nibblas shocker. Those 3 goals get kicked 80% of the time minimum (which is how they arrive at xscore). Thank God we won that game because WE would have been rightly bemoaning gifting them the game. We dominated the first half of the third and should have got out to a match winning lead.

Great call. I have heard 3 media people call Scott the best tactician in the game this week. And many people, including some dees fans, think goody wouldnt know a tactical innovation if it knocked on his door and introduced itself. And what is even more surreal tonight wont change those people's mind. Strange looking game structurally.

Question: Where does fritters goal rank in the great Demon goals?

Repeat after me Jaded. Don't go on the game day thread once the game starts. Don't go on the game day thread once the game starts.

What a funny coincidence. I was literally just scrolling down to post we achieved our 6-2 goal. I'm calling it. Top 4 lock.

Big pump up.

We gave the Cats the old UNO reality check reverse card.

Go you good things.

Continue to fail against contenders in the home and away season? Continue? We have lost to grand total of one game to a contender this season. The swans. Most rate port as a contender. I don't but we beat them on their home deck in one of the performances of the season. You are giving the giants a pass even though they have lost to TWO contenders but not extending the same logic to us? You are making my point that many dees fans apply a different set of rules to us than other teams in terms of assessing our chances of winning the flag.

Sure. Regularly being the key word. The giants have now been beaten by two contenders - the blues and the swans. Is that regularly? They haven't played another contender yet, unless you count the pies in OR. Which most wouldn't. So, really they have beaten noone. Yet they were flag favorites and everyone was gushing over them. Is anyone serious discounting them after being smashed today? But I agree the next two games are important. But not because we have to prove we are contenders. Because both are against teams who we are competing against for a top 4 slot. Classic 8 points game.

@WheeloRatings thanks for the heads up. Much appreciated. I know you couldn't get the post clearance possessions last year. Any chance of being able to get hold of them this year? Its a critical stat that i cant find anywhere. For any posters who have not checked out wheelos site, as molly would say, do yourself a favour. Brilliant site. And really easy and intuitive to use to compare a whole range of data. One of the functions I love is comparing players. It's much better for that than footy wire, a site I really like too, because unlike footy wire you can choose mutiple players and customise your stats fields for specific things of interest. The team list function is great too because you can look at big range of data points about players on a teams overall lists. Like the player ratings for the last 20 matches I used to compare our list with the giants (which by the meant i knew that in wehr the giants were playing their 25th rated player over that period). I use the site on the podcast to check data live when things come up. So easy to find things quickly once you are familiar with it - which doesn't take long. Props and thanks to @WheeloRatings. The site and the data he puts in the stats file thread directly informs how i see and understand the game and how we performance.

Equally people should not be writing teams off based on a loss, or in Carlton's case two in a row (not suggesting you are suggesting that dub). So any posters who are not not writing the blues off, or the giants for getting touched up by the swans, or port for getting smashed by the crows, please consider doing the same for the dees tonight if we lose to the team that us currently unbeaten. Like some did when we got beaten by the swans and lions. Home and away games, particularly in the first half of the season, mean very little in the scheme of things in terms of being a guide to a team's premiership chances. It's all about finishing top 4, then resetting.

Read the exec summary of the royal commission report kev. I'm out

I meant we ALL need education, not just perpetrators. Which is why I linked the rcfv and safe steps. And that it's important knowledge is the foundation of discussion there is the very real risk of dangerous myths, of which there are many, getting perpetrated. A key piece of knowledge is what drives it. And the answer is one that many get wrong. Of course we need to stop perpetrators of violence but they are symptoms nor cause.

By the by, moderation is a bit of a misnomer in terms of dl. Moderation for sensitive topics such as this usually involves posts being checked and then approved (or not) - and somtimes edited. Labor intensive requiring someone always on shift, so to speak. The moderaters on dl respond to reports or obvious issues and deltet3 as required. But because this is a volunteer run site there can often be a lag before sketchy posts can be be actioned.

Can I flag again kev my concerns about the challenges and difficulty of moderating a thread such as this. One person's robust debate is another's trauma. And this thread would be better I think in the general discussion forum, nor the footy one. Fir reasons I've noted. I won't be posting in the thread, but If the thread continues, can I respectively ask people to re read the post though a safety lens (oe could this make someone feel unsafe) before hitting submit. It's great kev that you are passionate about making a difference. Don't forget the education piece.

Pies to win.

I think what Andy has noted above is really important, with the second para of critical importance and raises an issue that i was just thinking of highlighting - the safety of victim survivors, women and children who read DL. On the topic of family violence, i wholeheartedly agree there needs to be discussion in society, particularly amongst men. But i don't believe a football focused thread is the appropriate space for such discussions (and even in the general forum i would have my concerns because of the risks of misinformation and traumatizing victim survivors if not expertly moderated - which is an incredibly difficult thing to do if the topic is family violence). I 1000% support the decision to not have a discussion about family violence on a football thread. I think discussion is important. But i believe that the most important discussions are those by men with their family, particularly their sons, and friends, particularly their male friends. Critical is understanding what family violence is, how many different types of family violence there are (eg financial control, psychological, electronic surveillance, control, emotional abuse, use of technology etc) and what drives it. A great place to start is the -Victoria's Royal Commission into Family Violence. For more general information Victoria's peak body for family and gender-based violence Safe Steps is great. For information about men's use of violence, Victoria's peak for ending male violence, No to Violence is a terrific resource. And if you are man who is concerned about your use of violence, the Men's Referral Service is the national counselling, information and referral service for men who use violence and abuse who want to change their behaviour. It is a confidential, anonymous service available 24/7 that you can call on 1300 766 491.

I agree with the first point, but disagree with the latter. Though line bsll. And I can see the argument for me being wrong.Which goes to my point about it being subjective how people rate individual players. And to my central point that fans tend to over rate oppo lists and that we have an excellent list. Whichever way someone lands on the relative strength of the players outside the best 12, which was the initial discussion, it's hard to argue the giants bottom 12 is clearly better than ours. We could probably all agree that max is the best ruck in the afl. He's certainly the highest rated. Similarly few would argue tracc is not in say the top 3 mids But once you are talking about the 12-24 players subjective assessment of players becomes much more variable. Which is why i chose the giants as a comparison as the consensus seems to be they have the best list. Better than the blues (who leave it to deaver suggested had a better list than us), swans, pies and any other contender. If they'll giants are the benchmark, we meet it. I think we have the best list, but as noted agree it's line ball with the giants. Ipso facto, we have a better list than all other contenders. I'd add that no other contender has a better group of best 25 players (as defined by selection in the ones) 24 years or under, which should be factored into any analysis of the strength of a team's list. What ever way you slice it, objectively we have an excellent list.