speed demon

Gawn is not rucking solo for four weeks and TMac is not playing as the only tall forward so Grundy comes in. When Grundy is in the forward line, what about cutting our loses and having him tag Weitering? At least Grundy will get led to the ball and he should be effective at neutralising the aerial contest. May give our other forwards better opportunity to score.

Interesting selections by both clubs. I suspect the loser may rue their decisions. Looking forward to the following headline: "Pies lose due to impotent wet Cox"

Always enjoy seeing this gif while eating breakfast...

Nathan Jones almost teared up referring to Melksham as one of his best friends (twice, during the Dees v Lions broadcast). Hard to top that for a character reference.

Well the “Goodwin is too conservative at selection” club haven’t had much to bond over lately.

@binman, I like your system and enjoy reading your assessments. I'm not much of a punter - the last bet I placed prior to backing the Dees for the flag at $7 after the Saints win was Michael Shelley to win the Gold Coast marathon at the Commonwealth Games in 2018 at $35 - but I do like probability. I have two critiques to offer. First, this is a great system for assessing a teams probability of winning the flag isolation. I think it is particularly useful mid-season when there is a reasonable sample of exposed form. However, a limitation of this system is the lack of consideration for a team's key flag rivals (e.g. how they match up, home ground advantage) and for a team's likely path through the finals. At this time of year, this a particularly important factor to consider. For example, if Collingwood finish first and we finish fourth, as seems likely, we are set up for an excellent run through the finals. I would say we are favourites. In contrast, if Brisbane finish first and we finish fourth, we have a harder assignment and I would argue our probability of winning the flag decreases and Brisbane's increases. As an aside, If Brisbane finish top two, I would say they have the greatest probability of making the grand final (given their two home finals). Second, you are offering generous odds! The sum of the the implied probability for Melbourne, Brisbane, Collingwood, Port Adelaide and Carlton equals ~85%. This would imply that there is a 15% probability of St Kilda, Sydney, GWS or Bulldogs winning, which I think is too high. I would have Brisbane at $4.25 instead of $5.50 (implied probability of 23.5% cf 18%). Though if you're offering $5.50 for Brisbane, I would be happy to layoff... Thanks for your post!

So, for the following teams to be guaranteed a home qualifying final: Brisbane: need to win Port: need to win AND Brisbane lose Melbourne: need to...lose We got this (yes, yes, I know other possibilities exist)

I didn’t love Tomo’s game - gave his opponent too much space - but I did love Lever’s. Tomo’s presence facilitated Lever’s performance. I’d stick with him.

Ugottobekidding He's our leading goal kicker with 33

I see the Gawndry experiment as a partial success. It's clearly not a complete success as neither Gawn nor Grundy adequately performed as forwards. Likewise, it's not a complete failure as Grundy was available for selection every week, played 17 AFL games (solo ruck for 4), rucked very well and all this has delivered Gawn to the finals fit and in form. I have no issue with the club being bold and attempting the Gawndry experiment, especially when Goodwin has shown the courage to act when it's not working. $650K/pa for an AA ruck is good value. Sure, it's a luxury for a back up ruck. However, a second rate ruck/forward would probably cost $450K/pa (if we could acquired one), so it's not a big difference. Moreover, Grundy salary has been a better return on investment than the ~$500K/pa for Harmes, TMac and BBB this year. I would like to keep Grundy (especially if there is the possibility of changing to 5 on the bench). Play him off the bench in the ruck to keep Gawn fresh, for specific match ups and as insurance in case of injury (I also like quarantining him from premiership rivals). Droppable for big matches / finals. However, I doubt Grundy would be keen on this. He might have had the humility to accept being co-ruck but I doubt he has such lack of ambition to accept playing VFL come finals. If he wants a trade, I would grant it. Would be bad for morale to keep Grundy against his wishes. It's one thing if the player is being given every opportunity to excel, another if they are intended to be under-utilised. If we win the premiership this year - even with Grundy sitting in the grandstand - he will have played a role and I'll be grateful.

I thought whether we played JJ, Harmes, Spargo or Woewodin was a moot point. Shame JJ has not seized his opportunities in the second half of this season. Excited for Laurie and adds further interest to the game. Good luck to him.

I also love that he's NOT in anyone else's team. All our premiership rivals would be better with Grundy.

Finishing 2nd opens up our preferred run through the finals: home qualifying final against interstate team (likely win), home preliminary final possibly against another interstate team (another likely win) and GF against Collingwood (who’ve shown no signs they can best out game plan from KB). If we win our next two, there’s a reasonable chance of Brisbane & Port each dropping a game and we better their %. Thus, while I’ve been all for ‘experimenting with personnel’, ‘squad mentality’, ‘horses for courses’ and ‘resting/managing players’, the time has come for best 23. Gawn can go solo for 5 games in 7 weeks. Play Tomlinson for the season. Accept his flaws in the interest of supporting his confidence and boosting defensive cohesion. Play Smith forward and keep him at least in the 23 when Fritsch returns.

That’s it @binman you’re going on ignore. I’m so frustrated by posters who are frustrated at posters for being frustrated at posters for being frustrated…er…hang on…

Thinking probabilistically is so useful for prediction but does not come naturally. It’s a skill that needs to be learnt and practised. Critically, we need to become aware of our cognitive biases that lead to poor intuitive assessments of probability. Daniel Kahneman’s “Thinking: Fast and Slow” is a superb book on this topic. @binman’s post is a really good example of how intuitively most people would over estimate the probability of a likely event (eg stronger team beats weaker team) occurring multiple times. Of course it’s easy to understand when we do the calculation but the point is we tend not to do this and take a mental short cut leading to an overestimation. It’s one reason betting agencies push multis as punters think the odds are more attractive than they are (which helps conceal the compounding effect of the betting agency’s take on the difference between the agency’s odds and the “true” odds).

I really like the idea of Grundy in with a plan to sub out in the 2nd half. Give Grundy and Gawn a half each to be the dominant ruckman. Plays to their strengths. Also gives us a look at a few different set ups (i.e. Smith back vs forward, Hibberd as 3rd tall defender) against good opposition.

We'll never reach a consensus on how to rate Goodwin and he's never more than one loss away from angry Demonlanders picking up their metaphorical pitch forks (not causing you of this @Roost it far). However, I think most can agree that in the past month the following were bold decisions that have paid handsome dividends: * Selecting Melksham despite modest VFL form * Moving Petracca forward despite Oliver's absence * Omitting Grundy and playing Gawn solo * Revisiting the Petty forward experiment

Yeah, I agree. I think Harmes will play again and he and JJ will be competing to hold their spot from Oliver next week.

Three weeks ago, I expected Grundy to return at some stage. Now, I'm not so sure. Gawn's form has been astonishing. Moreover, his fitness is incredible; three consecutive weeks he's played 100% TOG in the 4th quarter and dominated his opponent. Maybe he can go solo for another four weeks until the pre-finals week off. I'm sure he and the club will have a good idea of what he's capable of. Also, cannot imagine Gawn being rested or managed. So, the only way to reduce his workload is to bring in Grundy. Petty and JVR are not getting omitted - and I wouldn't want to lose a running player - so I can't see how Grundy comes in without weakening the team. I like that Goodwin is talking about doing whatever's best for the MFC in terms of selection. While Grundy should be treated with respect, we shouldn't be distracted by sentimentality or media narratives. We're at the business end of the season with an excellent shot at the premiership. That's where the focus needs to be.

I think it needs to be 8 points to properly disincentivise this behaviour. Let's say a key player is concussed. The team conclude they can only win if the player plays on. The team wins and gains 4 points. Perhaps they are caught and lose 4 points. Thus, the team has broken even and are in the same position as if they had subbed the player out and lost the game. However, there is the chance that the team might both win AND avoid being caught thus gaining 4 points (and the player's availability for the following week). So, from an amoral probabilistic perspective, there is an incentive to cheat. The threat of losing 8 points would be a serious disincentive for a home and away game but I am unconvinced this is sufficient for a final (if it were to apply to the subsequent season). Forfeiting the game seem's drastic; imagine the grand final being over 5 minutes into the first quarter when a team return a concussed player to the field! The TV executives would be apoplectic! As other's have said, moving towards independent doctor's, like in the NRL, seems inevitable.

As a doctor, I think the management of this situation was disgraceful. The footage, which the club doctor reviewed at the time of the incident, clearly shows both players: * Clash heads at high speed * Lose muscle tone * Lack normal protective posturing while falling * Momentarily motionless on the ground * Appear confused and disoriented The clear interpretation is both players have been concussed and severely enough to have briefly lost consciousness. Both players should have been removed from the field, subjected to SCAT5 testing and - irrespective of the result - taken out of the game. Doctors prioritising an individual’s welfare ahead of their (or their employer’s) interests is essential for good healthcare and the integrity of the medical profession.

Some thoughts on our team heading into finals: Solo Gawn = Gawndry (though it's unsustainable) Gawn, Grundy, BBB and JVR will not play in the same team Grundy will return but - depending on match ups - may not be best 22. Difficult decisions ahead. BBB is our best tall forward but can't be trusted to run out a game let alone the season JVR will be our best tall forward - conceivably by September as he rises and others fall - and a respectable 2nd ruck Smith may not be best 22 but he is best 23. Kudos to Smith and the club for finally nailing his role Melksham hard to dislodge from best 22, especially with uncertainty around Fritsch. Stood up twice in two seasons to win important games (Blues '22 and Lions '23), is versatile and composed. Could be a player to win a final. Chandler's early season form was not an errant memory. Played Spargo's role better than Spargo. Best 22 Oliver to replace JJ Petracca to stay forward Petracca, Pickett and Rivers to continue rotating through the midfield to provide explosiveness and unpredictability

Agree with @rjay and @Redleg’s caution. Every second year someone is described as a generational talent. Are we talking about rabbits? However, if those like JT actually believe this, then I’m all for going all in. Winning the premiership AND getting the #1 draft pick would be a sublime conclusion to 2023. #powermove

It's actually more complicated than it seems. The injury is a fracture of the scaphoid bone. The scaphoid is one of eight small bones called 'carpal bones' in the hand. There is actually variation in how the anatomical "wrist" is defined; the wrist could be considered part of the hand (i.e. the carpal bones) or the junction of the hand (including the carpal bones) and the bones of the forearm (radius and ulna). So, in Howes' case, both hand and wrist are correct. As an aside, the scaphoid bone is somewhat of a design flaw, as the scaphoid receives it's blood supply from distal (further away) to proximal (closer). This creates issues with healing leading to complications such as non-union and avascular necrosis. I suspect Howes has unfortunately developed such complications given the club doctor's comments that the fracture "had probably been there for some time". Scaphoid fractures can be difficult to identify initially on routine imaging and thus a delayed diagnosis of a scaphoid fracture (when complications are present) is not uncommon. The issue for the club's comms is that, in translating from precise medical language to language the average punter understands, accuracy can be lost and ambiguity introduced. Without an understanding of the specific diagnosis, we should be cautious about making inferences from generic descriptions (e.g. "hamstring" 😬).

2023 pick #4?