Demon Dynasty

Casey getting dominated in the center square hit outs (at least it appears that way without looking at the stats) but doing well to scrap and hunt the ball (ball carrier) down and not let their opponents make too much of first use.

Strauss best of the smalls so far IMO. Tappy's getting more of it and Magnet getting to many more contests. Nice tackle by Jetta on a much larger unit there in Bell to lock the ball in. I like Nicholls' bal use and ability to find space when he gets it

I think it was this one from the Australian Crime Commission's website which states (look particularly at the last line):

AOD-9604 is a variant of growth hormone which has fat burning properties and may be used by athletes to increase power to weight ratios by better utilisation of fat stores.

AOD-9604 is about to enter phase three clinical trials.¹² During phase two clinical trials it was also found to have an anabolic effect on cartilage tissue and may promote cartilage creation and repair and have a capacity to enhance muscle formation.¹³

AOD-9604 is not currently a WADA prohibited substance.

The above is from one part of the report only and is the one being selectively used by some journos and football commentators in support of the Bombers potentially having a case for an out.

They are overlooking the appendix to that report which is more specific as to AOD 9604's classification status....

AOD 9604

AOD9604 is not currently prohibited under category S2 of the WADA Prohibited List. (<<< Correct. This is a statement of fact but does not mean that AOD9604 is approved either, as the quote below re human use clearly states)

AOD9604 works by mimicking the way natural GH regulates the metabolism of fat by

stimulating lipolysis (the breakdown or destruction of fat) and inhibits lipogenesis (the

transformation of non-fat food materials into body fat). Reports by Caldaza Ltd have

shown that AOD9604 had positive (anabolic) effects on cartilage tissue formation as well

as enhancements in the differential of muscle progenitor cells (cells that create muscle

cells) to muscle cells. Other purported benefits of AOD9604 include increasing muscle

mass and IGF-1 levels.

AOD-9604 is NOT APPROVED for human use. (<<< Also correct, although for some reason, possibly just oversight, the ACC fail to quote the relevant WADA S0 [catch all] category like they did above)

thanks for the link

i think a lot of confusion come from the term "prohibited list"

there is an explicit prohibited list which actually names performance drugs in a list

and then there is an implicit prohibited list (called code S0) which is a blanket cover for all new drugs not approved for human list

the quoted article is true as far as the explicit prohibited list, but fails to mention anything about the drugs status under the implicit list S0

clear as mud right?

of course the ACC is not the deciding body here, but such statements from a law authority are only going to aid essendon's defence

Because SOME in the press are selectively choosing the first part of the related ACC report (as per Dee-vina's extract) and ignoring/overlooking the appendix (see above).

Yes exactly. AOD was not specifically prohibited but as i understand it was banned under the category of not being cleared for use by humans. Also the quotes are from the ACC not WADA or ASADA. The ACC are not really relevant in terms of defining whether a drug is prohibited.

Correct. However the press, and possibly the Bombers/AFL might well be viewing the ACC (and selective statements from its report) as relevant, and might be looking to use this to form a significant part of a potential defence should it come to that. I suspect however, that a deal will be nutted out between the AFL/Bombers and ASADA that goes someway towards settling the issue through certain limited (and possibly watered down/selective) bans/fines. Jobe Watson (and effectively Essendon) may well have played a very brave/honorable card on Monday night, with Jobe possibly deciding to out himself in order to become the main target/fall guy for ASADA, and protect the bulk of the rest of the team from a more broad brushed set of severe sanctions. Only speculation on my part though. Time will tell.

I spent a bit of time watching Rodes and his direct opponent last week at most stoppages, was not pretty.

Most of our inside mid work from most players isnt pretty atm in general, as we're being dominated with first use etc going the way of our opponents. Apart from Jones, there's very few rotating inside mids atm who are capable. Rodan isn't outstanding I agree but he's more capable than our other alternatives at this point with the exception of Jones. II'd recommend you review the match against the Hawks. Obviously much better quality than the Saints. Had a fairly productive day both offensively and defensively.

I would suggest it would be fairly difficult to perform week to week given where our stocks are at. Remember Jamar was missing last week as well whereas he wasn't against the Hawks. Having our most experienced ruckman in the middle also helps.

I hear you though and certainly not saying he's anything spectacular compared to the rest of the comp. Just not one of OUR worst atm thru the middle as many here seem to believe.

Edit: Spelling & the odd missing word (from phone lol)

Magner has a defensive side, Rodan..... not that I have seen.

Looks can be deceiving. Might wish to double check this.

In the match against this year's likely grand finalist (Hawks) Rodan layed the most "effective" tackles in the team with 8. He also had 3 "effective defensive acts" which include smothers/spoils etc. He does play off his opponent a little too far IMO but then so do many within our mid field and they also tend to be lost in general play by their opponents far too easy, especially Trengove. One thing Rodan does have is pace though, and what he lacks in close checking often allows him to provide run and spread from a stoppage when we do get first use. At the same time he also contests and goes when he has to. His burst speed does allows him to close down on an opponent fairly quickly at times and pressure the ball carrier at the last minute. Sometimes it's effective and other times not so as he's given his opponent too much of a head start. And this is what fans tend to notice when we (or he) don't get first use of the ball.

Although in the 2 matches he's played, Magner has averaged 6 tackles (not necessarily all effective) vs Rodan's 4.5 average. Almost on a par here although Magner's only played 2 matches, so not much to go on this year.

Different roles man. Magner goes in hard and falls over, constantly. Whereas Nicholson and Rodan have the ability to run faster than Jeff Kennett swimming through peanut butter.

Nicholson is not within a bull's roar of Rodan or Magner at this point. Yes, when he's given the ball on a platter he runs harder and faster.....and then, more often than not, delivers the ball on a platter to our opponents at a higher percentage than the former 2. Magner gets the ball himself and works hard both ways. He averages more uncontesteds, contesteds, effective disposals, inside 50's and tackles than Nicho so far this year. Why you would want someone so rubbery as Nicho in the team to try and run off HB when you already have Garland, Terlich and Blease is beyond me. Neeld and Craig have been way off the mark on this one all year.

Give me more rotational grunt through the mid field anyday at this point and use those 3 off HB. More than enough run. And if Blease and Terlich can tidy their disposal up a little more .....oops, hang on, i almost forgot. How silly of me. Blease is woeful in this area, in fact worse than Nicho. I think he's running at a tad over 52% disposal efficiency at this point with approx 5 effective disposals per match. Nicho 63.5% with approx 9 effective disposals per match. Out Blease, in Nicho lol (or another running HB from Casey???) Neither are good enough at this point!

And if we're supposedly replacing people, we still haven't replaced the loss of a very sub par inside mid in McKenzie yet. Magner is the only choice for that replacement atm until Viney returns.

I dunno guys......the thought of us playing some home games in Tassie and the bulk of them here does have its merits.

Afterall, they say two heads are better than one!

(No offense intended Nash!)

Finally some possession football.

We played keepings off for most if the second qtr and were able to string together successive possessions without a turnover.

This to me is a massive difference and will only improve the club.

We also played the ball through the middle a lot more. The players seemed lost on the centre pitch as they haven't been there for the last year and a half.

I haven't watched the entire game yet but not the first time we've done this. Obviously the last quarter against GWS (which most would argue doesn't count), but we also controlled most of the 3rd quarter by foot and hand against the Hawks.

The 2nd part to your post sounds very promising. The natural instinct (probably under instruction from Neeld) was to roll and look outside as the main option when transitioning from half back or even from stoppages on the wing. Lets hope Craig is already turning this part around. Will make a huge difference once the boys start looking and rolling inside more often instinctively. However, after watching the first quarter i still saw too many players continually looking laterally and in many cases behind them as first instinct from half back for the easy give off. In some cases this is necessary in order to work the switch but i just feel we take these options far too often as the easy way out instead of taking risks and the opponents on with attacking flair. Hopefully with more confidence in disposal skills this will begin to change.

But are you insinuating if he didn't get the coaching gig, he would be up for taking on the HOF responsibility, Rusty? If so, I disagree. I don't think he has any interest in it. Of course, a paycheck would be a paycheck. Who knows, he might make a great HOF.

I'm not suggesting that AF.

As Craig said himself, you don't take the chair on lightly. It's a tough gig. It has to be the right move for everyone concerned. He'll no doubt also be watching how the players respond to his coaching/training demands in the next few weeks as well. I think he'll want to see some fire from the bulk of them and will sound them out as to who's up for the fight. He also doesn't know who's likely to stay on next year which makes his decision even more difficult.

Regardless of what goes down with the coaching search i think we have a very good man at the helm in the interim.

Definitely a keeper. Wouldn't say no to him as HOF but obviously this would need to work depending on who the coach is (assuming it's not Craig) and whether he thinks he's up for it and wants it and PJ etc believing the same. Outside of Roos i think he's almost on a par with Choco. Has a better regular season winning % than Choco and all other realistic candidates, other than Roos. Choco has been to the top though which is likely to give him a slight edge at this point IMO.

Craig categorically ruled himself out of the HOF job during the week. Still, James Hird said he wouldn't coach Essendon and there he was three months later.

Reading between the lines in that presser, it seemed to me he was sounding out the Coaches chair for the remainder of the season, or at least a good part of it, to see whether the coach's job was a good fit as well as testing his ability to make sure he's still got it. If all's well he might decide to throw his hat in the ring, assuming it's still open.

You have to be joking ? The man turns the ball over worse than any one in the side. Every time he should kick it he will hand ball it to someone about to be tackled.

He did today dl4. McDonald not far behind. But no surprises there.

Doesn't always do so though. He's a very raw player at this level under a stack of pressure given how much ball comes in. Needs more time to develop his decision making etc.

In the game against the Hawks he was pretty good and they're a darn sight better than the Saints.

Against the Hawks he had 7 effective defensive acts (eg., spoils/smothers) 9 effective kicks, 5 effective handballs. 1 clanger by foot and 1 by hand. He had 1 effective kick in but 2 "lack of awareness acts".

Compared to Garland (who has 80 more matches under his belt) in the same match: 11 defensive acts, 8 effective kicks (no effective handballs), 2 clangers by foot, 7 effective kick ins and 1 turnover from a kick in.

Lots of Garland love again from me. What a game. Back to the wall the entire game, but I'd love to know how many spoils he effected. He took the game on as well. There were good and bad signs from both Watts and Toumpas too.

In the game against the Hawks he had the most effective defensive acts, which includes spoils/smothers etc. In total he had 11 for that match. The next best were Terlich with 7 and Pederson with 6.

Oh, one of the major negatives today was our tackle count.

47 versus our usual average of 59. Then again both team's tackle count was way down on their usual average.

Effective disposals, IMHO one of the KEY stats was a major improvement on our usual average. 275 vs our usual 220 average. That's 55 effective disposal improvement over the course of the match or nearly 14 per quarter.

Although countering this is the fact that our opponents also had 50 more than their usual average. So this may well have been a neutral outcome given the quality of the sides on the field. Best not to get overly excited at this point, especially after only 1 match.

These stats good or bad?

Have put our average differential in for the year so far (in brackets) just for you Jumbo to assist. But generally i would say the disposal side in terms of contested (reasonable improvement), uncontested (major improvement) and effective disposals (major improvement) are very statistically significant improvements. So yes, some pretty big positives. A few marginal negatives versus the average in games prior to this in areas such as Clangers, Contested Marks, Clearances but nothing to warrant any major concern, not after one match anyway.......

Contested: -17 (-27.5)

Uncontested: -20 (-76.2)

Effective Disposals: -24 (-87.8)

Effective Disposal %: Even at 74% a piece

Clangers: +3 (1.1)

Contested Marks -3 (-2.4)

Goal Assists: -3 (-7.1)

Marks i50: -5 (-9.6)

Clearances: -11 (-8.2)

Rebound 50: -7 (8.8)

1 Percenters: +6 (2.7)

Tackles: 47 a piece (-3.8)

Individual Stats - Top 3 (By Category)

Contested Possessions

1. Rodan

2. Garland/Sylvia/N Jones

3. Terlich

Uncontested Possessions

1. Garland

2. Sylvia/Terlich/Clisby

3. M Jones

Effective Disposals

1. Garland

2. N Jones

3. Clisby

Effective Disposal %

1. Dawes

2. N Jones

3. Spencer

Tackles

1. Sylvia

2. Rodan

3. Garland/Terlich/N Jones/Davey/Byrnes/Trengove

Clangers

1. Terlich

2. McDonald

3. Davey/Toumpas/Byrnes

Contested Marks

1. McDonald/Watts (2 each)

2. Terlich/Pederson/Sylvia/N Jones/Garland (1 each)

3. Nip/Nada/Nil

Marks i50

1. Fitzpatrick

2. Watts

3. N Jones/Byrnes/Howe/Nicholson

Clearances

1. N Jones

2. Rodan/Sylvia

3. Spencer

Rebound 50s

1. McDonald

2. Pederson

3. Sylvia/Garland/Dunn

Key Team Stats (Differentials)

Contested: -17

Uncontested: -20

Effective Disposals: -24

Effective Disposal %: Even at 74% a piece

Clangers: +3

Contested Marks -3

Goal Assists: -3

Marks i50: -5

Clearances: -11

Rebound 50: -7

1 Percenters: +6

Tackles: 47 a piece

Stats: Courtesy of Footywire

Only 36 down on the total Disposal count so far. That's a major turnaround on most matches this year

Can Byrnes have an impact!?..... NOOOOOOOO!!!!

Shhh! Stuie-pid will go all gif on you.

Carrot you copped a Collateral Stuie-pid !!!

Casn Fitzy do SOMETHING Finally!? YEEEEESSSSS!!

Another Quality Scalp to one of our Key Defenders, Garland over The Roo

Frawley over Buddy 2 matches ago

Major Stats Update to 3/4 time

Differentials

Contested -12

Uncontested -11

Clangers +3

Contested Marks -2

Marks i50 -5

Hitouts +17

Rebound 50 -4

Tackles +4

1 Percenters +8

Inside 50 -1

Effective Disposal % Demons 73.2% Saints 75.8%

Terlich is just butchering the ball.

Has had a fairly good year though. Young in terms of games played. One of our best disposers by foot normally.

Against the Hawks (arguably the best atm) he had 9 effective disposals by foot and 5 by hand with only 1 clanger by foot and 1 by hand.

Turnovers turnovers turnovers.

On both sides Bing

Clangers only +2 against us at half time. Not sure about this quarter yet