Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

[jeemak]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Young competed in 53 ruck contests against Port. He won 13. But he prevented his opponents from placing the ball. So our midfielders were able to even the clearances.

centre clearances 9:9

If he can do that again we win.

It will be interesting to see how he goes against an opponent who engineered our loss two weeks ago.

But he also hit it too far away from the contest a couple of times he won, I think DBJ mopped up two of them quite easily.

It wasn't a bad showing from him for a first full game, or thereabouts in the ruck, he can improve upon it for sure.

[Bornadog]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Young competed in 53 ruck contests against Port. He won 13. But he prevented his opponents from placing the ball. So our midfielders were able to even the clearances.

centre clearances 9:9

If he can do that again we win.

It will be interesting to see how he goes against an opponent who engineered our loss two weeks ago.

We lost the game against Essendon not because of the rucks, but rather not taking our opportunities in the forward line with bad kicking. 60 inside 50s to 39 and 20 marks inside 50. Essendon kicked straight, we fluffed it.

[Danjul]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

This is by no means a knock on posters, and posters can post what they want.

However, I think it's much less likely that favouritism (or the opposite of) is the governing philosophy for selection, over measurable performance, continual feedback to players on how to improve perceived deficiencies, and talent. The problem is, we don't know what those metrics are, irrespective of what we can see and the ever improving data available to us. There's just so much we don't know.

It boggles my mind that some can fixate on this stuff in lieu of not knowing what's actually going on - and seriously believe that what they're fixating on is the truth without access to some more information. Or pick one possible cause for what's being seen and just stick with it.

Maybe it comes down to personality types (and this place is a microcosm of different personalities). For instance, we just did DISC personality assessments at work and when going through those assessments I end up biased towards the stability (not mentally, as you'd have figured out) side of things and that's kind of how my views here play out.

So again, this isn't a crack at anyone, more an expression of curiosity and/ or fascination.

we know Hannan competed in 10 ruck contests and lost every one, giving Port some good clearances out of our forward line.. We saw it.

It would be a dereliction of duty not to question the logic behind such a tactic seeing it might have cost us the game. That’s the truth.

I can’t offer any explanation (except that at least it wasn’t Dunkley). So the club should. But never does.

Supporters are shareholders, and as in business deserve some details about what they are buying.

[jeemak]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

we know Hannan competed in 10 ruck contests and lost every one, giving Port some good clearances out of our forward line.. We saw it.

It would be a dereliction of duty not to question the logic behind such a tactic seeing it might have cost us the game. That’s the truth.

I can’t offer any explanation (except that at least it wasn’t Dunkley). So the club should. But never does.

Supporters are shareholders, and as in business deserve some details about what they are buying.

I couldn't think of a worse example than a shareholding in a company to articulate the point, but that's by and by.

So you admit you don't have all of the information, but some key points you feel are enough to make up your mind. In light of that you assume professional bias at best or misconduct/ negligence at worst.

All I'm saying is I find that fascinating.

[Ghost Dog]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

I have no words to express how I feel about him in the ruck ( or Dunkley for that matter ).

It will truly cement his status as whipping boy on these boards.
I may have to order some of his T-shirts because it makes me truly depressed.
Just kidding. Sorry Mitch, well done for doing something for mental health. Stick at it fella….

Am sure Bevo has a reason but seems to defy logic.

[SonofScray]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Hannan plays in the ruck now because Bevo is too scared to send Dunkley back in there, given he (rightfully) sooked up and wanted to quit the club over it. It’s the next best option in his failed ruck strategy.

[azabob]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

This is by no means a knock on posters, and posters can post what they want.

However, I think it's much less likely that favouritism (or the opposite of) is the governing philosophy for selection, over measurable performance, continual feedback to players on how to improve perceived deficiencies, and talent. The problem is, we don't know what those metrics are, irrespective of what we can see and the ever improving data available to us. There's just so much we don't know.

It boggles my mind that some can fixate on this stuff in lieu of not knowing what's actually going on - and seriously believe that what they're fixating on is the truth without access to some more information. Or pick one possible cause for what's being seen and just stick with it.

Maybe it comes down to personality types (and this place is a microcosm of different personalities). For instance, we just did DISC personality assessments at work and when going through those assessments I end up biased towards the stability (not mentally, as you'd have figured out) side of things and that's kind of how my views here play out.

So again, this isn't a crack at anyone, more an expression of curiosity and/ or fascination.

Have you interneted before?

In all seriousness I think it comes down the being on a forum we are all passionate about and perhaps the only doggies discussion some of us get to have - in this depth at least.
Reality is 95% on this forum have no access to inside the club and all we have to do is spit ball theories why x player is or isn't getting played.

[comrade]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Have you interneted before?

In all seriousness I think it comes down the being on a forum we are all passionate about and perhaps the only doggies discussion some of us get to have - in this depth at least.
Reality is 95% on this forum have no access to inside the club and all we have to do is spit ball theories why x player is or isn't getting played.

And who knows what is right and what isn’t? The coaches aren’t perfect, they have blind spots and biases like anyone.

All we can go by are the performances we see on field and if the same players are underperforming/having no influence yet getting picked, well it should be questioned by the fan base rather than just accepted as ‘they know more than us’. If it was Hardwick in 2020 or Clarko in 2015, sure but Bevo and the coaching group’s record doesn’t warrant blind acceptance.

[DOG GOD]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

We lost the game against Essendon not because of the rucks, but rather not taking our opportunities in the forward line with bad kicking. 60 inside 50s to 39 and 20 marks inside 50. Essendon kicked straight, we fluffed it.

Correct..
Essendon kicked 10.1 from set shots
Dogs kicked 4.9

[Danjul]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

We lost the game against Essendon not because of the rucks, but rather not taking our opportunities in the forward line with bad kicking. 60 inside 50s to 39 and 20 marks inside 50. Essendon kicked straight, we fluffed it.

True, we lost it because of the forwards but they won it because of the ruck.

Essendon needed both. Remove either factor and we win easily.

[Danjul]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

I couldn't think of a worse example than a shareholding in a company to articulate the point, but that's by and by.

So you admit you don't have all of the information, but some key points you feel are enough to make up your mind. In light of that you assume professional bias at best or misconduct/ negligence at worst.

All I'm saying is I find that fascinating.

The example I gave says Hannan had 10 failed ruck contests. We saw English walk away. Why? It is important to know because it probably cost us the game, and double chance.

Who thought it would be a good idea and why? In the absence of supporting information it looks like a massive blunder.

It would take 30 words and 2 minutes to put the supporters minds at ease, but I can’t think of one occasion when it has been done. Can anybody?

It seems to be a deliberate policy to make sure nobody understands what is happening.

[Mantis]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

This is by no means a knock on posters, and posters can post what they want.

However, I think it's much less likely that favouritism (or the opposite of) is the governing philosophy for selection, over measurable performance, continual feedback to players on how to improve perceived deficiencies, and talent. The problem is, we don't know what those metrics are, irrespective of what we can see and the ever improving data available to us. There's just so much we don't know.

It boggles my mind that some can fixate on this stuff in lieu of not knowing what's actually going on - and seriously believe that what they're fixating on is the truth without access to some more information. Or pick one possible cause for what's being seen and just stick with it.

Maybe it comes down to personality types (and this place is a microcosm of different personalities). For instance, we just did DISC personality assessments at work and when going through those assessments I end up biased towards the stability (not mentally, as you'd have figured out) side of things and that's kind of how my views here play out.

So again, this isn't a crack at anyone, more an expression of curiosity and/ or fascination.

So lets just shut this place down and stare at the walls all day.. FMD!

Posters are allowed to make informed opinions based on what they see and as long as those opinions have some sort of logical reasoning that supports then go your hardest.

But maybe we all just sing happy songs?

[jeemak]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

So lets just shut this place down and stare at the walls all day.. FMD!

Posters are allowed to make informed opinions based on what they see and as long as those opinions have some sort of logical reasoning that supports then go your hardest.

But maybe we all just sing happy songs?

Where did I say shut the place down? Where did I say we should all sing happy songs?

Posters can post what they like, and other posters can be surprised by what is posted and comment on it.

[Bornadog]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

So lets just shut this place down and stare at the walls all day.. FMD!

Posters are allowed to make informed opinions based on what they see and as long as those opinions have some sort of logical reasoning that supports then go your hardest.

But maybe we all just sing happy songs?

Except in the game day thread of course

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Except in the game day thread of course

If anyone has the calmness to post something logical in the game day thread then they should be idolised as high as Gandhi.