AFL 2021 AFL Round 8

[GROTTO]

NP's Bet of the Week:

Not many occasions this year there has been something jumping out at me, for the most part prop markets have been super tight. But, there is great value in Ben Cunnington this week.
30+ $3.10
35+ $8.50
40+ $31
All on SB

Collingwood midfield is just flat out soft, continuing to give up huge disposal numbers. Recent weeks they have given up 35 to Ellis & 34 to Miller. 42 to Parish & 34 to Merrett, 38 to Gaff & 37 to Redden, 37 to Ward & 34 to Taranto. Just absolutely no midfield accountability whatsoever. Cunnington will run amok. Off the back of 35 against a far superior Melbourne midfield and the last time he played the Pies he collected 37. This is a fill up

Thats really well researched, definitely feels like overs given the data you have provided.

Lets not forget that Pies midfield last time had Treloar.

 

[GROTTO]

I think on fox footy there was some stat that in 66 games since 2000ish cant remember the year out of 66 games that met the criteria based on stats only once did the dominating team not win. That was the Cats on Saturday.

Thanks for that feel vindicated and justified with the comment earlier that the Cats win that game v Sydney 9/10 based on that stat you provided its probably 9.9/10 lol

 

[GROTTO]

Apologies for asking this question again, but if you included the Lions to win in a multi (with other teams to win not a SGM) is the multi voided or just the one leg of the multi.

 

[SM]

From memory twice in same year tiges beat bris by 40+ both times after bris had more disposals, contested, clearances and scoring shots. It's how u burn teams on the turnover.

Yep. There's a reason we were so accurate, it was about where the scoring shots came from. No coincidence all of Bombers, GWS and Cats have come away with awful conversion rates from the SCG.

 

[iluvparis]

Yep. There's a reason we were so accurate, it was about where the scoring shots came from. No coincidence all of Bombers, GWS and Cats have come away with awful conversion rates from the SCG.

Relative accuracy from game to game is almost always pure variance

 

[iluvparis]

Apologies for asking this question again, but if you included the Lions to win in a multi (with other teams to win not a SGM) is the multi voided or just the one leg of the multi.

Just that leg is voided

 

[Kiddbrown]

NP's Bet of the Week:

Not many occasions this year there has been something jumping out at me, for the most part prop markets have been super tight. But, there is great value in Ben Cunnington this week.
30+ $3.10
35+ $8.50
40+ $31
All on SB

Collingwood midfield is just flat out soft, continuing to give up huge disposal numbers. Recent weeks they have given up 35 to Ellis & 34 to Miller. 42 to Parish & 34 to Merrett, 38 to Gaff & 37 to Redden, 37 to Ward & 34 to Taranto. Just absolutely no midfield accountability whatsoever. Cunnington will run amok. Off the back of 35 against a far superior Melbourne midfield and the last time he played the Pies he collected 37. This is a fill up

Really like this
Could also throw jy simpkin in the mix at slightly better odds
Even $1.80 for 25+Sb
$4/$13/$81 for 30/35/40 on tab

 

[Sausage Legs]

NP's Bet of the Week:

Not many occasions this year there has been something jumping out at me, for the most part prop markets have been super tight. But, there is great value in Ben Cunnington this week.
30+ $3.10
35+ $8.50
40+ $31
All on SB

Collingwood midfield is just flat out soft, continuing to give up huge disposal numbers. Recent weeks they have given up 35 to Ellis & 34 to Miller. 42 to Parish & 34 to Merrett, 38 to Gaff & 37 to Redden, 37 to Ward & 34 to Taranto. Just absolutely no midfield accountability whatsoever. Cunnington will run amok. Off the back of 35 against a far superior Melbourne midfield and the last time he played the Pies he collected 37. This is a fill up

Similar boat. Pies give up a heap across half back. Aaron Hall is 3.75 for 30 and 11s for 35 on pointsbet. Take away his concussion and he's getting these digits already.

 

[GROTTO]

Relative accuracy from game to game is almost always pure variance

Under Scott, Cats have won 4/7 at Sydney.

 

[iluvparis]

Under Scott, Cats have won 4/7 at Sydney.

Swans also kicked 11.17 against Essendon there - it was an absurdly homer call from SM as always.

 

[SM]

Swans also kicked 11.17 against Essendon there - it was an absurdly homer call from SM as always.

Wasn't sure how long it would take for the cheap shots to come out.

What does our accuracy have to do with things when my point was about our opponent on the night? Your initial point about the Cats deserving to win centred around how many more scoring shots they had did it not?

This is such a painful discussion started by you asserting the Swans had fallen off some sort of cliff in the last two weeks.

 

[GROTTO]

Swans also kicked 11.17 against Essendon there - it was an absurdly homer call from SM as always.

Its team bias.

 

[SM]

Its team bias.

You say with absolutely zero previous interaction with me. I tipped against us against the Giants and GCS, was that team bias too?

 

[iluvparis]

What does our accuracy have to do with things when my point was about our opponent on the night? Your initial point about the Cats deserving to win centred around how many more scoring shots they had did it not?

Yes

I've just told you game to game accuracy is pure variance

You should be able to find the correct conclusion from there.

 

[iluvparis]

You say with absolutely zero previous interaction with me. I tipped against us against the Giants and GCS, was that team bias too?

Sure you did

 

[SM]

Sure you did

Want me to pull up the posts from the Swans board? The threads are locked so I can't quote them.

 

[GROTTO]

You say with absolutely zero previous interaction with me. I tipped against us against the Giants and GCS, was that team bias too?

This is a discussion.

Im not fighting with you I just believe you have team bias. Im comfortable in sticking to my original assertion that Cats win 9/10 v Swans, couple that wih the Fox Footy data one loss from 66 games winning the stats and Cameron mark and its a reasonable call, from a neutral perspective.

I have admitted myself I suffer at times in the past with the team bias. Youre taking this too personally.

 

[SM]

This is a discussion.

Im not fighting with you I just believe you have team bias. Im comfortable in sticking to my original assertion that Cats win 9/10 v Swans, couple that wih the Fox Footy data one loss from 66 games winning the stats and Cameron mark and its a reasonable call, from a neutral perspective.

I have admitted myself I suffer at times in the past with the team bias. Youre taking this too personally.

My assertion was around value in the Melbourne game, you've claimed I'm approaching it subjectively, how do I take it other than you commenting on my ability to think rationally?

I don't know how this has come back around yet again, we're all set in our positions, there's nothing to be gained here.

 

[GROTTO]

My assertion was around value in the Melbourne game, you've claimed I'm approaching it subjectively, how do I take it other than you commenting on my ability to think rationally?

I don't know how this has come back around yet again, we're all set in our positions, there's nothing to be gained here.

Yes I am commenting on your ability to think rationally, because youre being blind to your team bias and taking umbrage with any negative view of them without carefully reading my posts.

I actually stated "I dont disagree with you that Swans SU is a wild bet, I never said it was. In fact I agreed with one poster on here that the Swans should cover the line."

Youre actually blowing this out of proportion and the bigger issue is that it than makes people not offer their viewpoints on a bet or market without fear of attack.

Also for the record, I made a similar comment to iluvparis about his selection of the Tigers to beat Port. It didnt lead to an argument on here.

 

[Sausage Legs]

I for one think all ur teams are equally garbage

 

[SM]

Yes I am commenting on your ability to think rationally, because youre being blind to your team bias and taking umbrage with any negative view of them without carefully reading my posts.

I actually stated "I dont disagree with you that Swans SU is a wild bet, I never said it was. In fact I agreed with one poster on here that the Swans should cover the line."

Youre actually blowing this out of proportion and the bigger issue is that it than makes people not offer their viewpoints on a bet or market without fear of attack.

Also for the record, I made a similar comment to iluvparis about his selection of the Tigers to beat Port. It didnt lead to an argument on here.

I think you're being a bit ridiculous making the above comments and then being surprised when I take something personally.

If you agree with me then what are we even discussing? Move on.

 

[GROTTO]

I think you're being a bit ridiculous making the above comments and then being surprised when I take something personally.

If you agree with me then what are we even discussing? Move on.

If you recall I said I wish the Dees were playing a better side than the Swans.

That seemed to upset you, Im sorry I hurt your feelings.

 

[Jugada]

If you need to point out who a bloke supports as your argument then your argument is s**t

 

[Sketi]

This is such a painful discussion

So stop then, my dude.

I don't think your points are irrational, but incessantly arguing for the credibility of your own team comes across as subjective on this particular board.

 

[GROTTO]

If you need to point out who a bloke supports as your argument then your argument is sh*t

So what youre saying that home selection bias does not exist? Youre actually talking s**t now yourself, because it does.