Counter Point: We played well vs Gold Coast.

[mjp]

Geez, that match day thread is a blood path isn't it.

We played incredibly WELL against the Gold Coast. The ball LIVED inside our forward 50m area - and a few leaked goals ended up proving the difference. Allowing the goals to Lukocious (2nd q) and Humphry (last one of the game) where they were able to get goal-side of 'everyone' and 'just tap it in' was not ideal...we had our chances to score in similar ways but simply couldn't do it.

Credit to the GC - they busted their butts defensively and repeatedly threw the ball on their boot to clear the area...somehow those rushed kicks seemed to find a GC team-mate more often than not...our pressure was GOOD. We forced a hard-out...it just didn't work out. Yep - I know Naughton battled. Ballard has been the #1 interceptor in the game so far this season though so if you didn't foresee a situation where he was going to be a problem then you probably haven't been paying attention.

I don't know what all the angst is about. We had basically won 8 in a row going in (only one quarter vs Port costing us the sweep) and we did play in Ballarat one week then Darwin the next...we've hardly played a home game truth be told. Witts is a TERRIBLE match up for English (particularly in slippery conditions where he can't really mark it) and he 100% played the game on his terms not Tim's....

Was the game fun to watch? Not really. Did we play well? We sure did. Are there some people completely over-reacting and saying we have somehow lost the ability to play when the footy must have been like a cake of soap for most of the match? Yeah...don't listen to them.

We lost a close one to a desperate team away from home. It's gonna be alright. Bring on the Catters.

[Mofra]

Let's not forget it took an all-time dominant game from Rowell to get them even close, and we missed a lot of gettable shots.

Geelong have been decimated by injuries to the midfield and don't have Witts monstering rucks at the ruck contests so although they are a boogey side for us, we actually line up better against them than we did the Suns.

It's still a tough game though - Hawkins is out of form but Jeeza Cameron is playing amazing football and Gryan Miers is playing like peak Dahlhaus except a little bit better at everything. Stewart normally causes us issues too and SavRat has been a revelation in defence

[GVGjr]

I certainly wasn't angry but felt we didn't take our chances which was disappointing. Bounce back and play well against Geelong and the game against the Suns will be just about forgotten about.

[Sedat]

Let's not forget it took an all-time dominant game from Rowell to get them even close, and we missed a lot of gettable shots.

Geelong have been decimated by injuries to the midfield and don't have Witts monstering rucks at the ruck contests so although they are a boogey side for us, we actually line up better against them than we did the Suns.

It's still a though game though - Hawkins is out of form but Jeeza Cameron is playing amazing football and Gryan Miers is playing like peak Dahlhaus except a little bit better at everything. Stewart normally causes us issues too and SavRat has been a revelation in defence
We just don't beat Geelong. They've had a massive psychological hold on us for the entire Chris Scott tenure - no wonder he doesn't rate us. He has been so effective in robbing our strengths and getting games against us totally on his terms, no matter the personnel on the park. And they get Danger back this week, who is quite fond of tearing us a new one whenever he plays us.

If we can get a positive result this weekend, it bodes well for our chances in 2023. Like the Carlton game (I know they aren't much chop, but they regularly troubled us when they were even worse), it would show a maturity and a defensive steel that has been largely lacking from our team since 2017.

[Grantysghost]

Not every loss means we are at fault either.

Sometimes the opposition plays better than you do.

[Pedro Sanchez]

Geez, that match day thread is a blood path isn't it.

We played incredibly WELL against the Gold Coast. The ball LIVED inside our forward 50m area - and a few leaked goals ended up proving the difference. Allowing the goals to Lukocious (2nd q) and Humphry (last one of the game) where they were able to get goal-side of 'everyone' and 'just tap it in' was not ideal...we had our chances to score in similar ways but simply couldn't do it.

Credit to the GC - they busted their butts defensively and repeatedly threw the ball on their boot to clear the area...somehow those rushed kicks seemed to find a GC team-mate more often than not...our pressure was GOOD. We forced a hard-out...it just didn't work out. Yep - I know Naughton battled. Ballard has been the #1 interceptor in the game so far this season though so if you didn't foresee a situation where he was going to be a problem then you probably haven't been paying attention.

I don't know what all the angst is about. We had basically won 8 in a row going in (only one quarter vs Port costing us the sweep) and we did play in Ballarat one week then Darwin the next...we've hardly played a home game truth be told. Witts is a TERRIBLE match up for English (particularly in slippery conditions where he can't really mark it) and he 100% played the game on his terms not Tim's....

Was the game fun to watch? Not really. Did we play well? We sure did. Are there some people completely over-reacting and saying we have somehow lost the ability to play when the footy must have been like a cake of soap for most of the match? Yeah...don't listen to them.

We lost a close one to a desperate team away from home. It's gonna be alright. Bring on the Catters.

Great thoughts - completely agree. We won in all key aspects of the game except the scoreboard. And i realise that's where it counts. However who wants to be peaking in late may? We have the second half of the season to refine our form and come in hot to the finals. Great foundation set, still room to improve, lets roll...

[Sedat]

Great thoughts - completely agree. We won in all key aspects of the game except the scoreboard. And i realise that's where it counts. However who wants to be peaking in late may? We have the second half of the season to refine our form and come in hot to the finals. Great foundation set, still room to improve, lets roll...
Agree with the above and the OP, but the opportunity to bank the 4 points would have gotten us 3 games clear of the chasing pack - down the track it would have afforded us the opportunity to rest key players in July/Aug in the lead-up to finals, so they are fresh for the business end.

[mjp]

...the opportunity to bank the 4 points would have gotten us 3 games clear of the chasing pack...

Yeah but you know that 'stuff' is all 'stuff' you simply can't control. Hell, at least Melbourne and Brisbane lost (and both were favorites)...I think I read somewhere that the underdog with the bookies has won every Friday night game this year....or something.

My whole post last week was about 'outcomes' - as in, danger game, danger game, don't do all this work and blow it against the Suns but even so. You just can't control what the outcomes are - all you can do is bring effort and hope for a bit of luck and I thought we did the former and missed out on the latter!

[Grantysghost]

Great thoughts - completely agree. We won in all key aspects of the game except the scoreboard. And i realise that's where it counts. However who wants to be peaking in late may? We have the second half of the season to refine our form and come in hot to the finals. Great foundation set, still room to improve, lets roll...

-17 contested ball. Pretty crucial stat.

Mjp is having a lend of us. Says we can't possibly lose in one thread then says we did ok by losing in another.
Must be bored ;)

[mjp]

Mjp is having a lend of us. Says we can't possibly lose in one thread then says we did ok by losing in another.


To be fair, I said we "Couldn't be DUMB ENOUGH to lose to Gold Coast"...and my post was really about an effort based loss.

I keep reading the contested ball numbers and somehow -17 is supposed to be a massive number. It's 4/quarter. A couple of % points in disposal efficiency evens that out...everyone talks about stats like they have meaning - and they can - but in the macro, not the micro. One game is too small a sample size to measure contested ball. If you're down 17 in a single quarter, sound the alarm bells...but one extra to GC every 6 minutes as the difference in the game? Give me a spell.

Coaches might use that numbers with players but only as a trigger when they think effort is down. Effort was fine.

[angelopetraglia]

I don't know what all the angst is about. We had basically won 8 in a row going in (only one quarter vs Port costing us the sweep) and we did play in Ballarat one week then Darwin the next...we've hardly played a home game truth be told. Witts is a TERRIBLE match up for English (particularly in slippery conditions where he can't really mark it) and he 100% played the game on his terms not Tim's....

We play the next five games at Marvel. We play 8 of the last 12 at Marvel (Six home, two away against Kangas and Bombers).

Our only games away from Marvel are:

Sydney at the SCG
Giants at Ballarat
Hawks in Tasmania
Cats at Kardinia Park

[Grantysghost]

It's an indicator of effort that I look for.

I think it's a critical stat, think most experts have it as an important one.

Not the only one of course.

To your question can we be silly enough to the Gold Coast?

The answer is yes :)

Stats are stats. I only look at a few.

[bornadog]

We just don't beat Geelong. They've had a massive psychological hold on us for the entire Chris Scott tenure - no wonder he doesn't rate us. He has been so effective in robbing our strengths and getting games against us totally on his terms, no matter the personnel on the park. And they get Danger back this week, who is quite fond of tearing us a new one whenever he plays us.

If we can get a positive result this weekend, it bodes well for our chances in 2023. Like the Carlton game (I know they aren't much chop, but they regularly troubled us when they were even worse), it would show a maturity and a defensive steel that has been largely lacking from our team since 2017.

Last 10 games v Geelong, we have only played 4 at Marvel and the record is 2 all.

[Grantysghost]

It's an indicator of effort that I look for.

I think it's a critical stat, think most experts have it as an important one.

Not the only one of course.

To your question can we be silly enough to the Gold Coast?

The answer is yes :)

Stats are stats. I only look at a few.

We were -14 tackles too.

We over handballed in the conditions. Almost double the Suns.
150 to 85.

So tackles and contested were well down. Could be effort based ;)

Holman had 10, B. SMITH 0.

[mjp]

We were -14 tackles too.

We over handballed in the conditions. Almost double the Suns.
150 to 85.

So tackles and contested were well down. Could be effort based ;)

Holman had 10, B. SMITH 0.

You don't need to tackle if you've got the ball.

Again - Tackles are a point in time stat. Minus 10 in a 5-minute period? That's effort. -14 for the game? That's -3.5/q. Or -1 every 10 minutes...it just isn't statistically relevant.

Plus - tackles ain't tackles. Look up what it ACTUALLY means to have a tackle...it's a bit tenuous...

[Grantysghost]

You don't need to tackle if you've got the ball.

Again - Tackles are a point in time stat. Minus 10 in a 5-minute period? That's effort. -14 for the game? That's -3.5/q. Or -1 every 10 minutes...it just isn't statistically relevant.

Plus - tackles ain't tackles. Look up what it ACTUALLY means to have a tackle...it's a bit tenuous...

I'm loving this.

I think we did bring ok effort mainly, however I'm trying to reconcile that with a.) Rowell doing what he wanted in the midfield second half b.) Smith not registering a tackle and 3.) our defence (Jones intercept game was sublime granted) appearing to be really down.

The tackle stats in defence are pretty grim reading.

Richards 1, Duryea 1, O'donnell 1, Jones 0, Gardner 0.
Tbf they seemed to get out the back a bit, playing that counter attack game and defenders don't have massive tackle numbers; in comparison Andrew has equaled that quintet with 3.

I haven't the time to break it down further, and yes stats are stats. Your point re over the course of the game it's not a lot is a good one, however I can't completely discount them and I think there was some effort based elements to the defeat.

All in all it appears after the start we got Dew went to a deeper zone and played on the counter or they just started winning at the source hard to tell which.

It was a 45 point turnaround at one point by the end of the 3rd. The period between the 10 minute mark of the first and the 28 min mark of the third we were - 8 goals. That start maybe is making the scoreline seem more palatable.


Inside 50s (also a stat) don't mean a lot if a team is setup to counter.

They generated the same amount of shots inside 50 which is far more relevant. (22 from 48 v 26 from 66)

Their deep zoning and midfield pressure didn't give us much space and clean looks inside 50, on the contrary they had paddocks of space in behind.

Back to Smith - how rare is it for a mid not to register a tackle and how do we interpret that?

[mjp]

Well...it isn't about tackles as such - you want your players to HUNT tackles when the oppo has it but that doesn't always reflect in a tackle on the stat sheet. Does that mean the stat is no good? Well, of course not but you have to watch with your eyes and let the stats fill in the blanks not the other way around.

Jones (L version) I thought played very well. He had no tackles - but he 'brought pressure' and showed intent. I didn't notice Andrew really but apparently he had a couple of tackles...Jones didn't - I'm not sure that means much. Outside of the high number of inside 50's in the 'Dogs forward half, the ball 'lived' there for extended periods of time...meaning more numbers, more contests, more opportunities to tackle. You could suggest that we would have been better served by dropping numbers out (WELL OUT) of our F50 to both create room for the forwards + support the backs who were pretty much all one-v-one in space meaning when the GC did go forward they went forward and SCORED but:

1/. We have a territory style and we press, press, press.
2/. There is a downside to conceding possession in f50 and the oppo might very well be able to chain it out by hands if the numbers get too much in there favour AND they have smart players around the ball who recognise it. What number differential allows you to maintain enough pressure to still force a dump kick BUT have sufficient numbers back to ensure any one-v-ones can be quickly/easily turrned to 2v1s? +2? +3?? +4?? Probably depends who you're playing against.

Tackles in themselves are not really that useful a stat but they can be used to confirm 'stuff' and the so-called pressure index used on the tv commentary could probably be reproduced in a simple form by a simple 'oppo possessions / our tackles' and give you a reasonable enough estimate of where it's at...Smith getting zero tackles is unusual for a mid but remember, that doesn't mean he didn't lay any tackles - merely he didn't lay anything that comply with the CD definition (retard/grab your opponent and that opponent does not have an effective disposal)...so a half tackle followed by a simple skill error is a tackle...a great tackle with the ball flung on the boot and landing in your team-mates arms fortuitously is NOT a tackle...

I don't even really know what I'm saying anymore (I'm just typing really) but like most stats they only tell half the story (at best) and - like history - that story is always told on behalf of the winners.

[Grantysghost]

Yeah makes sense.

Great discussion.

The eyes first and then the stats is perfect.

[Mofra]

Yeah makes sense.

Great discussion.

The eyes first and then the stats is perfect.
A few ex-players are pretty open about tackle stats - if an opponent has the ball and your teammates tackles them, if you join the tackle just before the ump blows the whistle for a ball-up you get credited with a tackle as well. Was it Robbie Grey who was pretty open about it? HF's trick to bump up numbers.

Scouting notes for opposition mids sometime instruct players not to tackle, and just corrale them to get the to release quickly (Gaz jnr a famous example). Especially guys who can slip tackles and kick forward

[MrMahatma]

Good thread. Love the positivity.

Bit of a media pile on the Cats this week. We’ll need to be on our game!

[mjp]

...if an opponent has the ball and your teammates tackles them, if you join the tackle just before the ump blows the whistle for a ball-up you get credited with a tackle as well.

That is 100% what happens.

Q: What if there is more than one player applying a tackle?

A: After a tackle has been applied, if a second player or a third player (and so on) from the same team arrive and also apply a tackle and they have an impact on the ball carrier, then they’ll get awarded with a tackle too. If they don’t impact the ball carrier, then they won’t get paid a tackle.

https://www.championdata.com/faqs/afl/

(There's a video of this on the link)

[jeemak]

So what we're saying is that GG is wrong, right?

[Grantysghost]

So what we're saying is that GG is wrong, right?

I think so. You guys suck ;)

I do enjoy taking a tenuous position and willing it uphill.

Think if you take your ego out of discussions you generally get to the right answer.

Which is MJP is taking the mick floating both sides! HA!

[GVGjr]

So what we're saying is that GG is wrong, right?

That's typically a good rule of thumb :)

[Grantysghost]

That's typically a good rule of thumb :)

I'm hurt G.

https://media.giphy.com/media/KUVbkDTXX8sGuwYfYQ/giphy-downsized-large.gif

[Scraggers]

Geez, that match day thread is a blood path isn't it.

We played incredibly WELL against the Gold Coast. The ball LIVED inside our forward 50m area - and a few leaked goals ended up proving the difference. Allowing the goals to Lukocious (2nd q) and Humphry (last one of the game) where they were able to get goal-side of 'everyone' and 'just tap it in' was not ideal...we had our chances to score in similar ways but simply couldn't do it.

Credit to the GC - they busted their butts defensively and repeatedly threw the ball on their boot to clear the area...somehow those rushed kicks seemed to find a GC team-mate more often than not...our pressure was GOOD. We forced a hard-out...it just didn't work out. Yep - I know Naughton battled. Ballard has been the #1 interceptor in the game so far this season though so if you didn't foresee a situation where he was going to be a problem then you probably haven't been paying attention.

I don't know what all the angst is about. We had basically won 8 in a row going in (only one quarter vs Port costing us the sweep) and we did play in Ballarat one week then Darwin the next...we've hardly played a home game truth be told. Witts is a TERRIBLE match up for English (particularly in slippery conditions where he can't really mark it) and he 100% played the game on his terms not Tim's....

Was the game fun to watch? Not really. Did we play well? We sure did. Are there some people completely over-reacting and saying we have somehow lost the ability to play when the footy must have been like a cake of soap for most of the match? Yeah...don't listen to them.

We lost a close one to a desperate team away from home. It's gonna be alright. Bring on the Catters.

I still hold you solely responsible for the loss Mike ... you cursed the team with your "We wouldn't be stupid enough thread". Stop putting the Moz on us before the game :p

[Grantysghost]

I still hold you solely responsible for the loss Mike ... you cursed the team with your "We wouldn't be stupid enough thread". Stop putting the Moz on us before the game :p

Finally someone said it ;)

[1eyedog]

I still think we played dumb football. We just tried to connect way too much in adverse conditions through over use when we didn't need to. There were so many dumb last in the chain handballs, especially deep in our F50 that were not to our advantage and were quickly turned over. Did we think we were at Marvel?

Gold Coast often treated the game like a wet weather game and moved the ball forward often via dump kicks into space. It was only a matter of time before they won a few one on one contests in their forward half of the ground. Without Jones we lose by 4-5 goals and that's a real worry. No Miller either. I think Gardner showed there is nothing behind Jones if he goes down.

Reckon Bevo was done up stairs it was a great scalp for the Suns and injects a bit of life in their season.

I'm generally ok with the loss and looking forward to seeing how we go this week off the back of a pretty gruelling interstate trip.

[Grantysghost]

I still think we played dumb football. We just tried to connect way too much in adverse conditions through over use when we didn't need to. There were so many dumb last in the chain handballs, especially deep in our F50 that were not to our advantage and were quickly turned over. Did we think we were at Marvel?

Gold Coast often treated the game like a wet weather game and moved the ball forward often via dump kicks into space. It was only a matter of time before they won a few one on one contests in their forward half of the ground. Without Jones we lose by 4-5 goals and that's a real worry. No Miller either. I think Gardner showed there is nothing behind Jones if he goes down.

Reckon Bevo was done up stairs it was a great scalp for the Suns and injects a bit of life in their season.

I'm generally ok with the loss and looking forward to seeing how we go this week off the back of a pretty gruelling interstate trip.

The handball stat was insane. Nearly double.

[1eyedog]

The handball stat was insane. Nearly double.

Given the expected dewy conditions (which happened halfway through the 2QT), I thought we may have adapted and kicked the ball more. I understand that marking was also made more difficult but I just felt even though the stats tell us we were the better team, GC played the territory game much better than we did.

This was a game that reminded me of the 2020 season. 100% effort and 10% reward.

[azabob]

I still hold you solely responsible for the loss Mike ... you cursed the team with your "We wouldn't be stupid enough thread". Stop putting the Moz on us before the game :p

With that logic I assume you gave mjp credit for us winning the Carlton game?

[Scraggers]

With that logic I assume you gave mjp credit for us winning the Carlton game?

100% ;)

[Danjul]

I still think we played dumb football. We just tried to connect way too much in adverse conditions through over use when we didn't need to. There were so many dumb last in the chain handballs, especially deep in our F50 that were not to our advantage and were quickly turned over. Did we think we were at Marvel?

Gold Coast often treated the game like a wet weather game and moved the ball forward often via dump kicks into space. It was only a matter of time before they won a few one on one contests in their forward half of the ground. Without Jones we lose by 4-5 goals and that's a real worry. No Miller either. I think Gardner showed there is nothing behind Jones if he goes down.

Reckon Bevo was done up stairs it was a great scalp for the Suns and injects a bit of life in their season.

I'm generally ok with the loss and looking forward to seeing how we go this week off the back of a pretty gruelling interstate trip.
You can only be ok with a loss if it revealed the mechanism behind it and there is a willingness to fix the problem.

At the moment the response is? it is OK, it was wet, slippery, a good team, Witts fault. All will be fine in future?.

No it won?t.

We have had some good luck recently and that has blinded us to the need for accurate reviews that give a better future. When we fell over the line against GWS did anyone suggest that we were lucky. Toby Greene didn?t play- what is he worth? Success is blinding, Cannot see the cracks.

It is professional football. Players are paid big bucks to deliver.

An interesting exercise was to look at the performance of the forwards in the games leading up to Darwin. Delete the best goal kicking result for each forward. In all the other combined games the forwards have delivered nothing. One good outcome hides mediocrity. Naughton is the only one who is giving a good consistent return.

So what should we have expected on Saturday? Exactly what was supplied, enough for a loss. Only surprise was JUH.

We were a massive failure. 4 valuable points thrown away. Repercussions to be expected down the track.

Analyse what went wrong and then fix it. At the moment it is simply propaganda to prevent someone getting their arse kicked.

[1eyedog]

I guess I'm saying it was a game plan issue and we were beaten at the selection table (Gardner, Jones, TOB and JOD one too heavy) and coaches box but I ain't going back over that old chestnut.

Also, refer to signature below.

[bornadog]

I guess I'm saying it was a game plan issue and we were beaten at the selection table (Gardner, Jones, TOB and JOD one too heavy) and coaches box but I ain't going back over that old chestnut.

Also, refer to signature below.

not sure why we needed JOD, but then again it was a 7 point game that was a winnable lost opportunity

[1eyedog]

I like his attack on the ball but have seen enough to know he needs to spend the remainder of the season in the VFL.

I wasn't saying playing a West type player instead of him against GC and tagging Rowell would have won us the game but it would have won us the game.

[Mantis]

I'll counter this by saying that I didn't see much of the 1/2 half as I was out for dinner and only switched on when Lukosius kicked his ''volley'' goal but the things I found most alarming when watching were:

- Our kick to handball ratio compared to GC's. (1.4 to 2.8)... we were trying to play a dry weather game around the contest which didn't work. Bailey Smith and Arthur Jones having 11 kicks & 25 handballs combines isn't what we need from these 2.
- The space given to Rowell at clearances
- The space given to GC's forwards.
- The lack of ground ball game in defence... we had 4 talls on the ground at the same time which was ludicrous given the conditions.

It was a game we really should've won and it places a bit more importance on our next 2 than perhaps needed.