Autopsy Geelong lose to WC by 9 points at Optus

[God Mode]

Based on ... what has changed your mind?

Our form against the top sides for mine. The fact we took it upto West Coast despite a number of factors stacked against us, on the back of a tough slog against Freo. Just lost to the Pies despite being 2 down and missing a host of players. Being on the brink of getting smashed by Brisbane to completely eclipse them and win, again with 2 down. Doing all this without the usual suspects of Danger, Selwood and Ablett having to dominate. All away from our skinny home ground. There is some reason for optimism.

 

[Seeds]

His TOG back then was always limited.
Blake played the 09 GF, so presumably found enough form to replace the Big Mummy.

Blake did well enough to be a backup to ottens. Mumfords fitness waned at the end. It was his first season and because blake couldnt handle first ruck mumford was forced to be sole ruck. It ran him into the ground. Thats the only reason mumford lost his position and it was a very questionable decision. History has verified that.

blake had his opportunities as main ruck with lots of game time. His hitouts didnt rise by much. West also had more hit outs per game as ottens understudy then when blake was his understudy. Blake and west were similar players in regards to hit outs.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

blake had his opportunities as main ruck with lots of game time. His hitouts didnt rise by much. West also had more hit outs per game as ottens understudy then when blake was his understudy. Blake and west were similar players in regards to hit outs.

Is that hitouts to advantage though? From what I remember Blake* was a pretty bloody good tap ruckman who generally got it down to your Abletts and your Bartels and your Selwoods pretty regularly. A 'general' hitout stat might not reflect that.

EDIT: Blake, not Black! D'oh!

 

[Seeds]

Is that hitouts to advantage though? From what I remember Black was a pretty bloody good tap ruckman who generally got it down to your Abletts and your Bartels and your Selwoods pretty regularly. A 'general' hitout stat might not reflect that.

History reveals there isnt a great deal of difference in hit outs vs hit outs to advantage ratios. There relationship is pretty constant. If you win more hit outs you win more hit outs to advantage. Sure it can differ from game to game but over time it doesnt differ much.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

History reveals there isnt a great deal of difference in hit outs vs hit outs to advantage ratios. There relationship is pretty constant. If you win more hit outs you win more hit outs to advantage. Sure it can differ from game to game but over time it doesnt differ much.

What do you base that on? I'd be interested in taking a look at the data, if you have a link.

 

[hoopla]

I just watched the Guthrie mark and play on. I think it was a little harsh / unlucky. You could tell he wanted to play on but really didn’t take a step apart from a momentum step from landing. Then he was tackled just before the umpire calls play on. He possibly should have been called back to take his kick. Or is that too one-eyed?

 

[Mr Meow]

Then disprove it.

Show exactly where or when Rohan has ever been a consistent performer, a big game performer, or has produced any kind of impressive output. Ever.

Yeah I have to say you're guilty of the straw man argument/old man yelling at cloud behaviour. Kind of throwing these umbrella opinions onto the masses here, that only a couple of die hards actually believe. Usually you're just espousing the common sense most of us agree with on some level, but following it with a snide take down of these supposed idiots who believe differently to yourself. Mostly, they don't actually exist! At least on the type of majority level you claim.

 

[My Tilly]

Gary Rohan in all of his finals played so far.

2011 Finals Series:
7 touches, 0 goals
6 touches, 1 goal

2013 Finals Series:
3 touches, 1 goal
6 touches 2 goals

2014 Finals Series:
13 touches, 0 goals
23 touches, 0 goals
7 touches, 0 goals

2015 Finals Series:
8 touches, 0 goals
11 touches 0 goals

2016 Finals Series:
12 touches, 0 goals
6 touches, 1 goal
18 touches, 2 goals
5 touches, 1 goal

2017 Finals Series:
7 touches, 2 goals
7 touches, 0 goals

2019 Finals Series:
3 touches, 1 goal

 

[Partridge]

Yeah I have to say you're guilty of the straw man argument/old man yelling at cloud behaviour. Kind of throwing these umbrella opinions onto the masses here, that only a couple of die hards actually believe. Usually you're just espousing the common sense most of us agree with on some level, but following it with a snide take down of these supposed idiots who believe differently to yourself. Mostly, they don't actually exist! At least on the type of majority level you claim.

It doesn't need to be many. When people have a crack at me about something I'm absolutely going to have a crack back.

Hey if people believe Rohan has been a success for us fine; I don't. I might be the only one. That's fine too.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I think Dahlhaus is criminally underrated around here. His clean hands and quality handball asking with his defensive and contested game makes him an extremely good half forward. There's a reason he finished so high in the B&F and was a critical part of the dogs premiership team.

Close looks a talent but I haven't watched his work off the ball at all. But he's clean and tough which is a nice combo and it looks like he has a bit of creativity with his kicking which we could use some more of (Ablett, Miers and Hawkins are our best). With Close, Fogarty, Simpson and Cockatoo competing for a small forward spot I wouldn't be surprised to see Atkins struggle to reclaim his place.

Agreed on all that.

 

[Vdubs]

Blake did well enough to be a backup to ottens. Mumfords fitness waned at the end. It was his first season and because blake couldnt handle first ruck mumford was forced to be sole ruck. It ran him into the ground. Thats the only reason mumford lost his position and it was a very questionable decision. History has verified that.

blake had his opportunities as main ruck with lots of game time. His hitouts didnt rise by much. West also had more hit outs per game as ottens understudy then when blake was his understudy. Blake and west were similar players in regards to hit outs.

Is that hitouts to advantage though? From what I remember Black was a pretty bloody good tap ruckman who generally got it down to your Abletts and your Bartels and your Selwoods pretty regularly. A 'general' hitout stat might not reflect that.

Have been to a sponsors club function and spoken to players on our table about that, and it was generally accepted that Blake would give the mids an arm-chair ride quite often. May not have been prolific around the ground, but no need to discredit his known achievements. 99 games and a flag does not just happen. It was after he'd left and ruck work was being discussed.

 

[Vdubs]

History reveals there isnt a great deal of difference in hit outs vs hit outs to advantage ratios. There relationship is pretty constant. If you win more hit outs you win more hit outs to advantage. Sure it can differ from game to game but over time it doesnt differ much.

Watching NN on Saturday makes that statement questionable. His hitouts were perfectly placed, like set plays, and resulted directly in significant goals. Just hitting the ball out does not compare.

 

[Obeanie1]

Rather give it to Qld than WA, your state won’t even allow scratch matches and have put harder restrictions on the team .

QLD have done far more for the game than the meth heads in WA

Ok......if you say so.

Sounds like you are totally across it all mate!

 

[Mr Meow]

It doesn't need to be many. When people have a crack at me about something I'm absolutely going to have a crack back.

Hey if people believe Rohan has been a success for us fine; I don't. I might be the only one. That's fine too.

Fair enough. People got excited during that good run he had early last season. Since then it's been predictable but still somewhat disappointing. He tries hard and on occasion can be a brilliant tackler, great mark and reliable set shot for goal - but we never see these elements together for long and he simply doesn't find enough of the ball to be anything but a bit part player. I think that's the type of opinion most would have of him. He fits in well at Geelong with finals under-performance though, so I'd be loathe to criticise too strongly based on that alone. Or else it's an endless cycle of pot shotting the whole team. However we needed him to become closer to a 2 goal a game, 10+ possession type of player to be called a success. He hasn't hit that except for the aforementioned period.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

The better, stronger, and more durable sides win out in the end.

Not really. After a gruelling six months, half the competition goes into a short four-week carnival called 'the finals'. The venue, injury list, and who happens to be hot in that small window of time decides which side wins. It's a bit like awarding the English Premier League Championship to the FA cup winner.

If you want the 'better, stronger, more durable side to win' then the flag would go to the team on top of the ladder at the end of the H and A season.

 

[xtatik222k]

Define stuck with the team over the years?? We have hardly missed finals for 14 years and generally predominantly been a top four side with 3 flags.

Your definition of stuck with them over the years i feel would make a melbourne or st kilda supporter look at you like the rich uptown london snob complaining with his top hat and cane stick that his watercrest sandwich is not cut properly triangularly.

Well, I witnessed quite a bit of heartbreak in the decades before 2007. That was worse than post-2011.

 

[My Tilly]

Define stuck with the team over the years?? We have hardly missed finals for 14 years and generally predominantly been a top four side with 3 flags.

We won three flags between the period of 2007-2011.
Long time ago now.
Almost witnessed Selwood's entire career since then.

We have finished top four on five separate occasions between 2012-2019. That's very good isn't it. Kind of makes you wonder why they have not managed at least one grand final berth with all those top four finishes. Keep in mind, we have recruited a plethora of ready made players so it's not as though it's been a slow tedious journey to the top like that of West Coast, Richmond, Western Bulldogs or GWS who have got there through years of developing their own younger brigade.
We have replicated the Hawthorn model of success and tried plugging the gaps.

 

[catman2006]

Gary Rohan in all of his finals played so far.

2011 Finals Series:
7 touches, 0 goals
6 touches, 1 goal

2013 Finals Series:
3 touches, 1 goal
6 touches 2 goals

2014 Finals Series:
13 touches, 0 goals
23 touches, 0 goals
7 touches, 0 goals

2015 Finals Series:
8 touches, 0 goals
11 touches 0 goals

2016 Finals Series:
12 touches, 0 goals
6 touches, 1 goal
18 touches, 2 goals
5 touches, 1 goal

2017 Finals Series:
7 touches, 2 goals
7 touches, 0 goals

2019 Finals Series:
3 touches, 1 goal

You do wonder how long the club will persist with rohan dalhaus steven Jenkins, im not even sure how long their contracts are anymore

 

[Seeds]

Watching NN on Saturday makes that statement questionable. His hitouts were perfectly placed, like set plays, and resulted directly in significant goals. Just hitting the ball out does not compare.

Thats a one off game. If nic nat had hit out to advantage stats like that whenever he gets 30 hit outs a game he would of won a couple of brownlows by now. But he hasnt.

 

[Partridge]

Not really. After a gruelling six months, half the competition goes into a short four-week carnival called 'the finals'. The venue, injury list, and who happens to be hot in that small window of time decides which side wins. It's a bit like awarding the English Premier League Championship to the FA cup winner.

If you want the 'better, stronger, more durable side to win' then the flag would go to the team on top of the ladder at the end of the H and A season.

No it doesn’t. The best teams almost always get to the Grand Final and the premier almost always comes from within the top four. The Dogs in 2016 were the one team who was “hot in that small window of time”. One occurrence in a couple of decades. And even then, they had to travel interstate twice to do it.

 

[Seeds]

No it doesn’t. The best teams almost always get to the Grand Final and the premier almost always comes from within the top four. The Dogs in 2016 were the one team who was “hot in that small window of time”. One occurrence in a couple of decades. And even then, they had to travel interstate twice to do it.

What do you base that on? Do you have any evidence to validate that theory?

I can think of plenty of teams i would of regarded as the best that didnt make the grand final. Essendon 99, Geelong 93, richmond 2018, geelong 2013, port 2003. And far more grand finals when the best team didnt win. But this is just my subjective view. I have no proof. No one does.

your surety in the best team winning is more a function of the peak end fallacy. We tend to remember the end of an event far more then the rest and therefore overstate its value. Since we remember how finals end we overrank their representatiom of the season.

no better example then the end of 2010. Goddard starred in those finals so numerous footy supporters and commentators started arguing that brendan goddard was now the best player in the comp. it was ridculous peak end fallacy at work. a whole summer where in peoples minds he wss the new star of the compettition that was the equivalent of ablett and franklin.

 

[Ricketz]

If you like you can increase his averages an additional 20% then. Even go 20% above his career averages.

His numbers are still crap.

That's not what you said though. If you are going to attack myth creators you should make a minimum effort not to be one yourself.

 

[Ricketz]

People are deluded if they think he will make it. Compare him to a bloke like Ben King. Sav is so far off the mark it's not funny

Ok...?

Definitely rather Sav at the same age.

 

[Partridge]

What do you base that on? Do you have any evidence to validate that theory?

I can think of plenty of teams i would of regarded as the best that didnt make the grand final. Essendon 99, Geelong 93, richmond 2018, geelong 2013, port 2003. And far more grand finals when the best team didnt win. But this is just my subjective view. I have no proof. No one does.

your surety in the best team winning is more a function of the peak end fallacy. We tend to remember the end of an event far more then the rest and therefore overstate its value. Since we remember how finals end we overrank their representatiom of the season.

no better example then the end of 2010. Goddard starred in those finals so numerous footy supporters and commentators started arguing that brendan goddard was now the best player in the comp. it was ridculous peak end fallacy at work. a whole summer where in peoples minds he wss the new star of the compettition that was the equivalent of ablett and franklin.

That wasn't what I said. I didn't say best team. I said best teams. My point is that if the finals series was such a lottery (and to me it isn't) you would see more upsets like with the Dogs in 2016. But you don't. The sides that finish top 4 after home and away end up making the Prelims an awful lot. I forget the exact stats but it's a very high percentage. The sides that have proven themselves to be tough, durable and skillful enough to last the home and away season last the additional four weeks as well. It's not luck.

I never at any point said the best team wins the flag. As you listed above obviously at times they don't.

 

[Partridge]

Blake did well enough to be a backup to ottens. Mumfords fitness waned at the end. It was his first season and because blake couldnt handle first ruck mumford was forced to be sole ruck. It ran him into the ground. Thats the only reason mumford lost his position and it was a very questionable decision. History has verified that.

blake had his opportunities as main ruck with lots of game time. His hitouts didnt rise by much. West also had more hit outs per game as ottens understudy then when blake was his understudy. Blake and west were similar players in regards to hit outs.

Not in September 2009 it wasn't. It was completely correct. Mumford had (understandably) hit the wall and Blake was the better option. We won the flag. It was completely correct.