binman

The forecast is for 8 degrees tommorow. Low of 5, top of 8. What the? Forget Alice Springs locals, that would turn off a lot of Melbourne residents. I can't ever recall going to the footy for a day game that cold. Maybe one game at tge g when we came back from a huge 3/4 time deficit to win in one of our bleak years ' maybe 15 years ago. RGRS, how well does traeger Park drain? Forecast is for 5-15mm there today and 0-5mm tommorow morning. Hopefully it's not cold AND wet.

The Adventures of Bitters, Queen of the Desert.

Double header in the TV room Sunday arvo. The magoos as a curtain raiser for the on3s. Old school (except for the watching a huge flat screen from the couch bit)

100% agree.

Great result for the dees all round. Makes it harder for cats to surge. But two points to both swans and cats might keep them ahead of freo.

I'm glad I took the +2 point swans line, rather than the win, which was my first thought.

Nor do I. I think we'll win 8 of our last 9 games.

Not sure how long you have been following the dees, but we have a very different definition of what could be considered a disappointing team. I have been following the dees for aprox 45 years but started going to games regularly in 1978 (by myself back then - no one i knew barracked for the dees). That year we won the wooden spoon. Fun times. We had a stellar year in 1979 and really started our march up the ladder, ending the season in 11th. Not bad until you consider there were only 12 teams. And that time Fitzroy thrashed us by a still record margin was such a gas. But boy o boy, was 1980 awesome. We were marching up the ladder! Jumped up to 9th (in a 12-team competition)! Oh, oh - 1981 wasn't much fun. Yet another wooden spoon. So bad were we that we came within a bees whisker of merging with the Hawks and the oldest sporting club in the world almost ceasing to exist. 186. The Neeld years. Et cetera; et cetera; et cetera. Hopefully, you get my drift. In all seriousness, we are currently 4th on the ladder with an ok injury list and a soft run home. We are currently equal third favorite to win the flag (but will enter the finals as favorite IMHO). We are $1.40 to make the top 4 (by way of contrast the Cats are next best at $6 to make the top 4 and the Saints, who are only four points behind us, are $7 to make the top 4). For context, we are 1.40 to win Sunday and Winx ran around at that price. A serious question - do you rate the Pies? Well, a reminder, we beat them, the favorites for the flag, just two games ago! Can't have your cake and eat it too - if we are a disappointing side, the Pies must be pretenders not contenders. But really, in what universe could this current dees team, premiers in 2021 and finished second on the ladder at the end of the 2022 H&A season (and yes, we went out in straight sets in the finals), be considered a disappointing team? Not in my universe i can assure you.

Agree. Of the teams around the 8 bubble, i rate the Crows, Suns and Giants (in that order) as the teams on the rise. All have chance of making the 8 this season i reckon - though the Cats will make it hard for all three to do so. The Giants and Crows have both adopted the Pies fast ball movement, but i think the Giants have a better defensive system (to be clear - not a better defence) than the Pies and Crows. And all three teams are strong in the contest and have a good mix of grunt and silk. And the Crows, Giants and Suns all have very strong lists, loaded with first round draft picks. Stronger lists than the teams around them at similar stage of their development - Saints, Bombers and Freo. And at the end of the day, teams don't win a flag without a quality list. On the Suns, i really hope they stick fat with Dew and resist any temptation to be seduced by having a premiership coach in Hardwick swan a=in and take over. Dew has done the hard yards and his players have bought in - as evidence by resigning some key players. Stay the course.

Noooooooooo!!!!!!! Don't mention the switch!!!!!!!!! Way, way too triggering for some. By the by, here's how I see the next few games - which will involve intermittent switch flicking before the switch gets permanently flicked. Nine day break into the giants game (and travel, so essentially forced rest) - attacking footy and run all over the giants (who are coming off their bye). Look a different team than the dour, gassed unit in the 4th quarter against the cats. Win. Six day break and travel into the saints game - much to the chagrin and consternation of many DL posters, another dour, defence first match with little fast transition from the back. Fortunately the saints, with their dour, deliberate ball movement and defence first game plan can't exploit our lack of run - particularly at marvel with its lack of space. Win. Six day break into a Friday night game at the g v lions - dour, but not as dour as the saints game. Some fascinating variables: the lions are also coming off a six day break, but unlike us have to travel; 8 point game (could well determine if lions get a gabba final week one - potentially against us); lions are slow and so won't be able to exploit any lack of run we have the way, say the dogs would; the G factor. 50 50 game. Round 19 - 24 - hello moto; starting with a 9 day break into the crows game, we have a great run home with only one short break - six days between the roos and blues games. Two travelss - tassie and Sydney. But the Sydney game is followed by the pre finals bye, so no post game impact. Unleash the beast and a return to the offensive power of rounds 1-5 (and round 16). Wow. David King says we changed our approach. DL posters say the same. No mention of 'scoring problems'. Win. Win. Win. Win. Win. Win. Happy days.

Demonland hypocrisy alert #472 On selection, they are clearly taking a squad mentality atm. I reckon any posters who stridently criticised goody last season for not rolling fresh players through the side at this time of year, being 'stubborn', too rigid, too boring, not managing players, nt doing what the Cats were doing etc etc should refrain from criticising him this season for doing exactly what said posters wanted him to do.

On Smith, i know they can always pull a swifty, but I've always understood when they name a squad, anyone named in the on field 18 (ie not interchange), they are a definite in.

Squads in. JJ omitted and hibbo injured. 8 man interchange is very interesting - jvr, spargs, koz, melksham, Brown, tomo, petty and bowser. Four and a sub come in.

100% agree (assuming we don't get hit with injuries to multiple key best say top 10 players). In fact, i think an argument could be made, that not making the GF would be a fail (with the same caveat).

This tweet provides an interesting example of how the footy media often uses data to create a narrative and/or advance a specific argument. Let's say Montagna wanted some data to strengthen his argument that the demons have a 'scoring issue'. He might use this single data point - and the tweet itself - to make his case. He and King use a single data point all the time to do exactly that (ie advance a specific, often narrow, argument). And just as Justin Giuliano does with that tweet, they often use a psychological technique called 'framing'. Framing, which i think has its origins in advertising, is very widely used in advocacy, government, campaigning, polling etc etc. The goal of framing is to influence the recipient's thinking to achieve a specific aim or advance a specific agenda. In the case of advertisers, the aim is to sell stuff. For government, it might be to promote a particular policy position (a classic example, that is often used to demonstrate the framing technique, is the language the Labor and Liberal parties use to dehumanize people seeking asylum in Australia by boat). In his tweet, Giuliano has used framing to influence reader's analysis of the data in the tweet - the dees have 'scoring problems' This is achieved by an explanatory para that primes readers to read the chart through the lens of the dees' supposed 'scoring troubles'. And doubles down on that framing by comparing us with a team in historically poor form - and uses a shocked emoji to not so subtlety ram his point home: 'Another perspective of the Dees' recent scoring troubles is looking at points scored per inside 50. Whilst Dees are 8th overall this season with 1.61 points per I50, they are 17th over the last 5 weeks (4 games), only marginally better than the Eagles (1.13 vs 1.11)😮' What i would like to see is Champion Data and the analysts in the footy media help educate footy fans on how to interpret and understand data, not use it to prime them to prima facie accept an argument they making. Without getting into the discussion about whether we have a 'scoring problem', here are the contextual thoughts and questions i had when reading the chart to help me understand what it was saying and put the data into some sort of context: Unlike the Eagles, we are a forward half team that looks to trap it in our forward line, and if we can't do so, set up a wall to increase the likelihood we will turn it over at half forward and re-enter our 50 That model means the ball is often coming back into a very crowed forward line because almost all players from both teams have pressed up into our forward half Logic suggests that a crowded forward line makes it harder to score, which probably helps explain why we are still only mid table for points scored per inside 50 even when traveling well What then are our re-entry numbers in this period, have they dropped off too? Are our tackles inside 50 stats relevant here? Have all teams dropped off in that stat in the relevant time period (that's to say is this a league wide trend we are tracking with)? Is the drop of consistent and/or correlated and/or explained and/or interconnected with other relevant stats (eg accuracy)? Is there any key personnel differences that should be factored in (eg no genuine second tall in these four games)? Logic suggests young players will be impacted by fatigue more than seasoned players (as evidenced in the drop off in player ratings and pressure points for young players in this phase of the season) How much weight then should be given to the fact that with JVR, Chandler, Kozzie and Chandler we have a very young forward line that is very likely to be struggling with the rigors of an AFL season in this period? If we are comparing the dees to the Eagles, how young is their forward line? The sample size is very small - only four games Who were those four games against (answer: Freo, Blues, Pies and Cats)? How much weight should be given to the quality of the opposition (by way of contrast, in that same period, the Pies played the Roos, Eagles, Dees and the Crows)? How much weight should be given to the fact that 25% of the teams in the sample are one on top of the AFL ladder and have a very strong defensive system? Is it relevant that we had 9 more scoring shots than the Pies? In the four games in the chart, should the conditions be factored into the analysis? As an example of the relevance of the above question, the Blues and Cats' games were played at night in cold, dewy conditions and the cats games was also wet and slippery conditions - logic suggests that it is harder to convert inside 50s into scores in such conditions Given 50% of the games were played at night and 25% of the sample size were played in wet conditions, how much does that skew the results? What were the conditions the Eagles played in - are we comparing like for like? What is AFL average score to inside 50 ratio in wet conditions? How much weight should be given to the fact that 25% of the sample size is at a ground that is different in shape and size to every other AFL ground, is hard to score at and the narrowness of the ground makes for crowded forward lines? How much weight should be given to the fact that 25% of the sample size is against a team (the Cats) that has a massive home ground advantage, plays the ground well, trains on the ground, and has created a defensive system perfectly suited for that venue (not to mention having one of the best key defenders in the AFL in Stewart)? What is the dees historical score to inside 50 ratio at Kardinia park? What are other teams score to inside 50 ratio at Kardinia park? Historically, how important/significant is score to inside 50 ratio in terms of it being a useful indicator of the chances of winning a flag, ie does it actually matter if we are down on that stat? What was the dees score to inside 50 ratio in the corresponding period last year? What was the dees score to inside 50 ratio in 2021 home and away season? What was the dees score to inside 50 ratio from round 16 in 2021 and 2022 (ie should we expect this stat to improve- this would be useful to know, because if the answer is yes, then it might be an issue of concern if it doesn't rebound)? What was the dees score to inside 50 ratio in the 2021 finals series? What was the score to inside 50 ratio for the winners of the last say, 10 flags? Why was this particular time frame (five weeks) chosen - because it suited a particular narrative? Why do he choose, for instance, not to go back another two week and include our loss to Port and the demolition of the hawks - that would give a more representative sample size (ie the last six games versus the 8 previous games)? Do we have a 'scoring problem? Alternatively, we could just accept the author's framing, and simply agree with what we are being primed to think - the dees have 'scoring problems'.

Indeed. And for much the same reason as our current stutters, i would contend.

Ok - i'll cling to he record of the Cats in 2022. Is that ok?

Hopefully they will also be skewed by the final 9 weeks of the season (inclusive of finals) - you know, like they were in 2021.

To be clear, TU, i'm not suggesting this of you, but the idea that anyone is suggesting or assuming that we're just going to "click" and everything's OK is a weird false narrative that seems to pop up on DL at this time of the year. I don't recall reading a single post, this year, or in previous years making that suggestion. And nor for that matter is Hoyne (not suggesting you are saying is he is). Everything has to go right, and not much wrong to win a flag. It's about giving the team the best possible chance of winning the flag. #reject false narratives

There is only two worth listening to in my opinion - Hoyne on Tuesday drive and Sanderson on Thursday Whatley. Both are always available on the SEN website under podcasts

SEN - Hoyne is on the drive show every Tuesday night. I have to say, he's really good in the way he uses multiple data points to illustrate a point he is making, as opposed to taking one piece of data and extrapolating some point from it. A great example of the latter is pundits querying our connection issues and scoring power, and pointing to our raw total scores in the last few weeks as evidence to back that opinion up. BUT completely ignoring the fact the issue isn't connection, it is accuracy, as evidenced by the fact that our shots on goal has remained relatively steady (and certainly on, or above AFL average in this period). Or the fact, that taking out the Pies games against the Roos and Eagles (and really scores of 105 and 120 against those two teams is hardly a ringing endorsement of their connection or fire power), the Pies have have struggled with scoring shots (they played the Roos in the same round as we played Freo - and only had 3 more scoring shots! And we lost!). And after all we only played the pies two games ago and had NINE more scoring shots that them! Yet OUR scoring power and connection is on Montagna's 'watch list'. Go figure. On our accuracy, when were AFL# 1 Hoyne warned that we would revert to the mean at some point, so be careful of reading too much into our scoring power (ironic). He has been proven correct.

I wasnt comparing our forward line with theirs. But for the sake of argument, if you take out their win against the Eagles (120 points) and roos (105 points), they haven't scored more than 100 points since round 9, when we also last did against the hawks. And prior to thst we had easily outscored them. In fact, despite the pies having won 3 more games than us and having now played the easy beats (and all the same teams we have), we have still scored 24 more points than the pies well past the halfway mark of the season. Impossible then to argue their forward line is better. But I'm sure some dees fan will. Because apparently the pies are better at everything. On the thought experiment, what I was driving at is that in no universe is not winning a flag at this stage of their development a failure. The rampant 2018 tigers side, who entered the finals series at 1.80 to win the flag, yes, not winning the flag was a failure. But the 2023 pies are not the 2018 tigers going for back to back flags. Again, they lost 2 of 3 finals last year, having been in the wilderness since losing the 2018 GF. But the expectation on the pies from the media is iver the top And the vibe is not winning the flag this year would be a failure. Surely that heaps massive pressure on the players, none of whom have had any real success. And certainly no experience dealing with the pressure of expectation or being the hunted not the hunters.

100% agree with those issues. On JVR, we have come to rely on him very quickly. That's a worry - he's only 19 after all. Bowey is important, in large part because he is an elite kick, and we need every good kick we have playing. Still too many turnovers - which by the by was a key factor on the loss because the cats out scored us on turnover. And you've hit the nail on the head. Injury is the key determinant. Always was, always will be. Just look at the impact of no Oliver against the cats. Oliver's injury and hospital stay is also a major concern because not only has he missed normal training, he has missed at least 10 days of opportunity to load (which was what the post Pies running was about- load management). The margins are so small, he has lost condition already.i suspect they will have to put him thru a mini preseason to get him right for the back end of the season (one reason why he likely won't play this week, and I predict next week either). Tmac is still 4-6 weeks away, so even if BB comes back in, and is injury free, we are in trouble if jvr got injured. Or God forbid max. Such is nick daicos' importance to the way the pies play, I seriously doubt they could win the flag if he got injured and was out of say the finals.

Yes, that's def one of them. Very much so in fact - and our win against them was excellent evidence of that issue (eg take the corridor away and they are in trouble) Without going into detail (i'll come back to it), the concerns for the Pies, in my opinion, are, in no particular order: They have excellent defenders (i would love Quanor), but their defensive system is a worry (it was interesting that they used a goal keeper this week - i suspect in part becuase of fatigue, but perhaps they are changing their system a bit) As result, teams are always in it against them They rely on too much on Pendles, Sidebottom, Nick Daicos, and to lesser extent Josh Daicos, for their method to work There is an incredible amount of expectation on them for a team that has achieved nothing - they lost 2 of 3 finals last year (both in part due to defensive lapses), and as dees fans know home and away wins count for nothing On the above point - a thought experiment. If the Pies don't win the flag this year is it a failure? This season they have been beaten by 2 of 3 of the other real contenders (us and the Lions) Their mid and ruck stocks are thin Their game plan is even more reliant on optimal fitness than ours (an issue exacerbated by their defensive issues) Their jumper Their forward line

No it wasn't @titan_uranus - all good. I hadn't read your post when i posted it. It was just in my head - sort of. In fact, i had been thinking about the quote, there are none so blind as those who won't see (or whatever it is) the previous night and when i googled it on the bus to work this morning, i landed on the bible quote because apparently that is where it originated from. And I liked the biblical vibe of it. I did however get a bit of a laugh you noting the word foolish, because that made me laugh when i read the quote - a bible sledge! I just read your post .Well reasoned and good points, well made. On the topic of evidence, i think there is heaps of compelling evidence - i just cant be bothered pulling it together (but if you go back to this time last year, and in 2021, there is heaps). In my view, eventually the clubs will stop the silly charade and just start talking about it - Scott, Hardwick and goody and some recently retired footballers in the media (eg Jobe Watson) have been intimating already about it. Personally, i find the post bye results this year pretty compelling evidence. As a footy punter I'm always looking for value. So i am attuned to opportunities for value. A classic example was the round just gone - i had a monster weekend on the back of correctly predicting the Suns and Freo would be completely different teams in their second post bye game (and i also backed the lions, who were well overs because of their average post bye performance against the hawks - when they they had no run in their legs). Chalk and cheese. Take Freo - they were way too short at 1.72. They were only that price because of how woeful they were post bye against the Giants. I watched that game, and you don't need to be sports scientist to see they had no run at all. You could see it. The commentators could too - but just made general comments about their lack of energy. I mean it was clear as day - just as it was in the Lions v Hawks game and the Suns' previous game. The pattern is very clear. It is all about fatigue. But no media people made any comment about that obvious fact. Instead they just bagged the dockers, with no context. And so freo's price against the bombers was soft because many punters don't know to factor in fatigue (why would they if they just listen to the media?). The dockers ran all over the top of the bombers (who were coming off the bye) - exactly as i thought they would. And my bet they would cover their -5 point line was never in doubt. This year has been even better for value. All teams are now implementing faster transition football, which means even the non contenders have to do a heavy block (i think at least 3 weeks, but that's a guess) of training to make sure they have enough run in their legs at the end of the season and not get smashed (West Coast have a lot of problems. One of their biggest is they are nowhere near AFL fit, and so teams are just running rings round them). This year, all teams have been cooked post bye and there is value to be had (but a warning - i don't think there will be as much value this week because of all the talk of the post bye funk - that chat might even create some value on line bets the other way). But just to be clear, as i have noted on any number of occasions, i think, like every team in the AFL (including the Pies - in fact i think they have bigger concerns than us), there are a number of issues of concern. The key concern i have is the second genuine tall forward role. A lot is riding on BB's fitness in my opinion. I had exactly the same concern last year about Tmac - and that was before he got injured. I predicted a loss last week. And i also predicted it would be a dour, scrappy game and we wouldn't play that well. I was right. Lucky? Maybe - but i don't think so. Here's another prediction. We will look a different team on Sunday. And we will absolutely smash the Giants (who are coming off a bye). Lots of punters will mark us down becuase of our performance against the Cats (the pros won't be). That is the perfect recipe for value. The line is currently -19.5. That is way too short. Money for old rope. Go redlegs.