Melbourne watch

[Saintmatt]

Just to add that extra layer of complexity...

It’s a 52pt differential between our % and Melbourne's.

So if we lose by 20, they need to win by 33

This is the important post - well done Skeptic

Anyone who watched Essendon this arvo knows they’ve already checked out. They weren’t much better than North today. I can see Melbourne getting them by 7 goals +

It’s pretty simple - we need to beat GWS and if we have to settle for a loss ... it’ll get very squeaky if it’s by more than a goal

[johnearljames]

I worked out that if GWS beat us by 12 points then Melbourne need to win by a minimum 36 points to overtake us.

[The_Dud]

Good game of footy, both those teams looked a lot better than we have in a long time, will be tough next week.

Though the equation for us is still the same as it was before this game, we need to beat GWS.

If we lose but somehow still manage to fall into 8th spot, that means playing a full strength West Coast in Perth/Adelaide, with us coming off winning 1 of our last 5.

I would rather miss the 8 tbh, I think that kind of flogging could be the type that sets a young club back a few years, like it did to Melbourne when they went to Perth a few years ago.

And the Bulldogs haven’t been the same team since they had to go to Perth and play the Eagles in the 2016 finals.

If you think there’s any comparison between us currently and the 2016 Dogs, I’m afraid you’ve got the rosiest of rose coloured glasses on.

[Enrico_Misso]

Dogs ought to win the last 2
Dees by my calc can’t beat bombers by more than 30
We can’t afford to lose by more than 15
We scrape into 8 to be slaughtered by Eagles a week later but hey.......made finals first time in 9 years ill pas the season off that .....even though we fell in....

Agree that is the most likely scenario.

But if we can scrape a win we most likely get a home final against the Dogs.
So huge incentive to win next week and avoid that Perth nightmare trip (Melb did that a couple of years ago and have never recovered!).

[ace]

Going to go down to the wire it looks...

Hurts to see Petracca be the player we always needed

Bains guilty
Trout guilty
Richardson guilty

Have no qualms sinking the boots into Richo, but I don’t think he really had a part in that. Don’t even know that it was a Trout thing. Bains really liked him though

“If we go for the best player and we think Petracca is in front, we’re going to have to pay a million plus to get the forward we need,” former coach Alan Richardson said before the draft.

“The market is saying that. So let’s get one in now and get him to fall in love with our footy club.”


But there was another off-field factor contributing to the bold draft call.

In 2014 the Saints hired former AFL Players’ Association wellbeing services manager Matti Clements.

The AFL had recently banned clubs from issuing written psychology tests, however this was loosely policed and many continued to do so.

But it was not a breach of the rule to conduct verbal tests, which Clements did for the Saints.

McCartin passed in flying colours. Petracca didn’t.

“(McCartin’s) personality and the way his teammates talk about him reminds me a lot of Luke Hodge,” Richardson said.

“He’s probably not as blunt as Luke, but he comes across to me as someone who’s honest in what he says and does.”

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/ ... 6a2ebf2c97

Hang draw and quarter all 3.

[kosifantutti]

For GWS it’s 102 points they’d need to beat us by to overtake us on points. Seems unlikely.

Looks to me like by Melbourne beating GWS, it’s essentially become St.K, WB, and Melbourne competing for 2 spots

GWS would need to beat us by 51 points.

[bakes]

Making the finals and losing is better than not making the finals at all. We just need to bank the experience into these kids and making the finals in 2020 will fast track us

[Jacks Back]

For GWS it’s 102 points they’d need to beat us by to overtake us on points. Seems unlikely.

Looks to me like by Melbourne beating GWS, it’s essentially become St.K, WB, and Melbourne competing for 2 spots

St.K, WB, Melbourne AND GWS competing for 2 spots

[Russman]

I’m hoping that gifted goal at the end of the Westcoast game doesn’t cost us.
But if we go down by a few goals against GWS, we don’t deserve to be there anyway.

[Russman]

I’m hoping that gifted goal at the end of the Westcoast game doesn’t cost us.
But if we go down by a few goals against GWS, we don’t deserve to be there anyway.

[kosifantutti]

Good game of footy, both those teams looked a lot better than we have in a long time, will be tough next week.

Though the equation for us is still the same as it was before this game, we need to beat GWS.

If we lose but somehow still manage to fall into 8th spot, that means playing a full strength West Coast in Perth/Adelaide, with us coming off winning 1 of our last 5.

I would rather miss the 8 tbh, I think that kind of flogging could be the type that sets a young club back a few years, like it did to Melbourne when they went to Perth a few years ago.

And the Bulldogs haven’t been the same team since they had to go to Perth and play the Eagles in the 2016 finals.

If you think there’s any comparison between us currently and the 2016 Dogs, I’m afraid you’ve got the rosiest of rose coloured glasses on.

So you’re saying the Demons should not have beaten Geelong and Hawthorn in the 2018 finals, because they set themselves for failure in the Prelim?

Makes sense.

[Teflon]

Mumford has to be an out for that swinging arm

[The_Dud]

Good game of footy, both those teams looked a lot better than we have in a long time, will be tough next week.

Though the equation for us is still the same as it was before this game, we need to beat GWS.

If we lose but somehow still manage to fall into 8th spot, that means playing a full strength West Coast in Perth/Adelaide, with us coming off winning 1 of our last 5.

I would rather miss the 8 tbh, I think that kind of flogging could be the type that sets a young club back a few years, like it did to Melbourne when they went to Perth a few years ago.

And the Bulldogs haven’t been the same team since they had to go to Perth and play the Eagles in the 2016 finals.

If you think there’s any comparison between us currently and the 2016 Dogs, I’m afraid you’ve got the rosiest of rose coloured glasses on.

So you’re saying the Demons should not have beaten Geelong and Hawthorn in the 2018 finals, because they set themselves for failure in the Prelim?

Makes sense.

I’m saying a young developing side getting a flogging in finals can be detrimental. How have the Dees been since then?

I’d much rather recapture some early season form and beat GWS, then have a real chance of winning the first final, than all this ‘mathematical chance’ crap.

[kosifantutti]

Good game of footy, both those teams looked a lot better than we have in a long time, will be tough next week.

Though the equation for us is still the same as it was before this game, we need to beat GWS.

If we lose but somehow still manage to fall into 8th spot, that means playing a full strength West Coast in Perth/Adelaide, with us coming off winning 1 of our last 5.

I would rather miss the 8 tbh, I think that kind of flogging could be the type that sets a young club back a few years, like it did to Melbourne when they went to Perth a few years ago.

And the Bulldogs haven’t been the same team since they had to go to Perth and play the Eagles in the 2016 finals.

If you think there’s any comparison between us currently and the 2016 Dogs, I’m afraid you’ve got the rosiest of rose coloured glasses on.

So you’re saying the Demons should not have beaten Geelong and Hawthorn in the 2018 finals, because they set themselves for failure in the Prelim?

Makes sense.

I’m saying a young developing side getting a flogging in finals can be detrimental. How have the Dees been since then?

I’d much rather recapture some early season form and beat GWS, then have a real chance of winning the first final, than all this ‘mathematical chance’ crap.

You do know they won 2 finals against Geelong and Hawthorn before playing WCE in a Prelim. Do you really think they should have thrown the semi against Hawthorn?

[skeptic]

For GWS it’s 102 points they’d need to beat us by to overtake us on points. Seems unlikely.

Looks to me like by Melbourne beating GWS, it’s essentially become St.K, WB, and Melbourne competing for 2 spots

GWS would need to beat us by 51 points.

Really?

Help me understand my failing grasp of maths... doesn’t percentage essentially boil down to the differential between points scored for and against.

So 100% essentially = even.

Note this on the live ladder
GWS - 977 for, 971 against, differential = +6, percentage = 100.6
Melbourne - 995 for, 937 against = +58, % = 106.2

St.Kilda - 1077 for, 967 against = +110, %= 111.4

Does it not ultimately boil down to the differential between the two

[The_Dud]

Good game of footy, both those teams looked a lot better than we have in a long time, will be tough next week.

Though the equation for us is still the same as it was before this game, we need to beat GWS.

If we lose but somehow still manage to fall into 8th spot, that means playing a full strength West Coast in Perth/Adelaide, with us coming off winning 1 of our last 5.

I would rather miss the 8 tbh, I think that kind of flogging could be the type that sets a young club back a few years, like it did to Melbourne when they went to Perth a few years ago.

And the Bulldogs haven’t been the same team since they had to go to Perth and play the Eagles in the 2016 finals.

If you think there’s any comparison between us currently and the 2016 Dogs, I’m afraid you’ve got the rosiest of rose coloured glasses on.

So you’re saying the Demons should not have beaten Geelong and Hawthorn in the 2018 finals, because they set themselves for failure in the Prelim?

Makes sense.

I’m saying a young developing side getting a flogging in finals can be detrimental. How have the Dees been since then?

I’d much rather recapture some early season form and beat GWS, then have a real chance of winning the first final, than all this ‘mathematical chance’ crap.

You do know they won 2 finals against Geelong and Hawthorn before playing WCE in a Prelim. Do you really think they should have thrown the semi against Hawthorn?

I think you’ve missed my point.

[kosifantutti]

For GWS it’s 102 points they’d need to beat us by to overtake us on points. Seems unlikely.

Looks to me like by Melbourne beating GWS, it’s essentially become St.K, WB, and Melbourne competing for 2 spots

GWS would need to beat us by 51 points.

Really?

Help me understand my failing grasp of maths... doesn’t percentage essentially boil down to the differential between points scored for and against.

So 100% essentially = even.

Note this on the live ladder
GWS - 977 for, 971 against, differential = +6, percentage = 100.6
Melbourne - 995 for, 937 against = +58, % = 106.2

St.Kilda - 1077 for, 967 against = +110, %= 111.4

Does it not ultimately boil down to the differential between the two

It’s not as simple as that, but if GWS wins by 50 points, what do you think it does to our percentage?

[Jacks Back]

For GWS it’s 102 points they’d need to beat us by to overtake us on points. Seems unlikely.

Looks to me like by Melbourne beating GWS, it’s essentially become St.K, WB, and Melbourne competing for 2 spots

GWS would need to beat us by 51 points.

Really?

Help me understand my failing grasp of maths... doesn’t percentage essentially boil down to the differential between points scored for and against.

So 100% essentially = even.

Note this on the live ladder
GWS - 977 for, 971 against, differential = +6, percentage = 100.6
Melbourne - 995 for, 937 against = +58, % = 106.2

St.Kilda - 1077 for, 967 against = +110, %= 111.4

Does it not ultimately boil down to the differential between the two

You divide the for score by the against score. i.e. for score 1077 divided by against score 967 x 100 (for the percent) = 111.37%

[kosifantutti]

I think you’ve missed my point.

No, I got it.

You’d rather we finished 9th than 8th.

[skeptic]

For GWS it’s 102 points they’d need to beat us by to overtake us on points. Seems unlikely.

Looks to me like by Melbourne beating GWS, it’s essentially become St.K, WB, and Melbourne competing for 2 spots

GWS would need to beat us by 51 points.

Really?

Help me understand my failing grasp of maths... doesn’t percentage essentially boil down to the differential between points scored for and against.

So 100% essentially = even.

Note this on the live ladder
GWS - 977 for, 971 against, differential = +6, percentage = 100.6
Melbourne - 995 for, 937 against = +58, % = 106.2

St.Kilda - 1077 for, 967 against = +110, %= 111.4

Does it not ultimately boil down to the differential between the two

It’s not as simple as that, but if GWS wins by 50 points, what do you think it does to our percentage?

I see...
Obviously I’m wrong, as it essentially halves our positive to say around 105.5% and brings them up to about the same. Dammit, there’s a division here I’ve missed

Thank you sir

[The_Dud]

I think you’ve missed my point.

No, I got it.

You’d rather we finished 9th than 8th.

Yep, I’d rather just miss than go to Perth and get done by 10+ goals in our first final in 8 years.

[ace]

Now St Kilda beats GWS, St Kilda plays finals

St Kilda loses to GWS, if Melbourne does NOT gain 8 goals by win against Essendon and our loss then St Kilda stays ahead of Melbourne.
St Kilda loses to GWS, Bulldogs only win one game of two (Hawthorn, Fremantle) and don't improve percentage by 17 goals then St Kilda stays ahead of Bulldogs.
St Kilda loses to GWS, Collingwood loses both (Gold Coast, Port Adelaide) then St Kilda stays ahead of Collingwood.
St Kilda must finish ahead of two to play finals.

[skeptic]

For GWS it’s 102 points they’d need to beat us by to overtake us on points. Seems unlikely.

Looks to me like by Melbourne beating GWS, it’s essentially become St.K, WB, and Melbourne competing for 2 spots

GWS would need to beat us by 51 points.

Really?

Help me understand my failing grasp of maths... doesn’t percentage essentially boil down to the differential between points scored for and against.

So 100% essentially = even.

Note this on the live ladder
GWS - 977 for, 971 against, differential = +6, percentage = 100.6
Melbourne - 995 for, 937 against = +58, % = 106.2

St.Kilda - 1077 for, 967 against = +110, %= 111.4

Does it not ultimately boil down to the differential between the two

You divide the for score by the against score. i.e. for score 1077 divided by against score 967 x 100 (for the percent) = 111.37%

Cheers, I knew that. I always just thought that it ultimately reflected the differential which is obviously incorrect.

Well consider me more concerned

[fugazi]

If we get in is there any chance we just "Bradbury " it.
With close to no injuries, we doing Doggies 2016 run from 7th?

[skeptic]

If we get in is there any chance we just "Bradbury " it.
With close to no injuries, we doing Doggies 2016 run from 7th?

The gap 8th to 1st isn’t as high as other years.

We’ve beaten Port and Richmond
Lost to Brisbane and Melbourne by a kick, WCE by 3 goals
We beat the Doggies

Collingwood pantsed us but aren’t in the form they were...
Geelong is the only really scary team for us but have been shown up by others, maybe someone else can do the dirty work for us

If we get back close to what we’re capable of and make some semi reasonable decisions, we could give it a shake