Live: R4 V Bombers @SCG Thursday 8/4/2021

[Sandridge]

I am just listening to sports radio in Melbourne and all of t he Bombers supporters are calling in to say they were robbed by the umpires last night!

That only increases my enjoyment of our win!

Go the mighty Bloods!

[mcs]

I am just listening to sports radio in Melbourne and all of t he Bombers supporters are calling in to say they were robbed by the umpires last night!

All whining incessantly about that Hickey non-free kick with about 30 seconds to go (which really should have been ball). Shame it was on their defensive 50 and zero guarantee at all it would of got anywhere near their forward line had a free kick been awarded..... Always love to beat those bleating whingers.

[mcs]

That aged me about 30 years

Scrappy win but we wont get it right every time. Bank the 4 points and move on.

Damn about Heeney. We've had a flawless run with injuries so far so it was bound to come to an end , but its a shame. He was in AA form.

Not surprisingly Jmac, Gulden and the Chad were exceptional. Jmac's work rate off the ball is awesome and Gulden runs and runs. The Chad is just about ready to take the keys to the midfield. He and Mills , sensational duo we could see dominate for the next ten years ! Shades of Judd and Cousins in those two

I rest my case on Blakey. How many of these types of efforts from him do we have to see before we give someone else a try ?? Get Stephens in !

Next weeks changes Heeney (inj), Blakey out
Stephens, Bell in

Lol we know that RB in another life pissed on your grave or something worse, but I can't see how Bell (unless we have another one hanging around somewhere) will hold his spot (unless you are assuming RB isn't fit - but knowing your ongoing agenda to deride RB, I doubt it). I like Bell and want to see him succeed, but I just don't see him being anywhere near AFL standard. He gets in good positions, tries to tackle, but his influence on the contest is minimal at best.

[HeeneyIsAGun]

Yes I am always a biased optimist, but I think everyone is giving a little too much credit to Essendon. I thought they were just ok, and benefitted from a number of lucky smothers and bounces early in the game. To me it seemed their game was about pressure more than anything else, and the free kick count shows that we were always first to the ball in any case.

Compounding that was the unusual misses by a number of our players, and going 2.5 in the first quarter then falling behind by 25pts took a lot of wind out of the sails.

Then the group fought back well, and it was really only the wayward kicking in that first quarter, and again in the last that made it a close game. We nail just half of the misses we would normally expect to get and its a comfortable 5 goal victory and we score 110+ yet again.

I agree it looked like they put us off our corridor style for the first part of the game, but we just showed we can change plan mid-game and fight back if we need to.

A nice 9 day break is exactly what we need to freshen everyone up. All five of our least experienced players seemed tired after last week, with all of them making poor decisions, kicking much less efficiently than previously (the whole team was about 20% less efficient last night in the stats) and generally having quiet games as a result. A great reminder of how tough the game really is, and yet without losing 4pts in the process! I reckon the senior players feel this was a more valuable victory + lesson than the first three games combined for that new group coming though.

So it was a good test and we passed it.

[dejavoodoo44]

Stressful! Like every game in the mid-late 2000s. Guess we've been spoilt by the rampaging wins.

If they'd lost I'd be saying it was down to inaccuracy and poor skills at key moments. Since they won I can say they did what was required when it mattered to get the win - and I think that's true. Florent's wonderful tap near the boundary to keep the ball at the right end in the last minute or so, for example.

Feels like there could be changes (aside from Heeney) next week, even with the long break. One or two youngsters might need a break and I imagine Rowbottom may be back if fit.

Daring to dream! Some very winnable games coming up, could go 6-0.

Yes, one thing that came out of the game, is how much our expectations have changed since the start of the season. We went 4-0 and most of us are bit disappointed by the style of the victory. Whereas, looking at the draw prior to the season, most of us would have thought, that if we could get to 2-2, then maybe we could start to gather a bit of momentum and perhaps later challenge for a finals spot.

And it was bit of a strange game. I thought we were the better side for most of the match, but never really put Essendon under scoreboard pressure. If we managed to get 3 or 4 goals in front, then I suspect that our confidence levels, and our flair, would have risen and Essendon would have dropped off. But of course, that's a big if, and we'll never know.

I also thought that we were probably effected by the five day break, after the intense effort against Richmond. So I'm now looking forward to the nine day break, before we take on GWS. If they lose to Collingwood, then we will have a chance to condemn them to 0-5. Which would not only mean that there's little chance of them making the finals, but it would also make Cameron's tenure very insecure.

[dejavoodoo44]

All whining incessantly about that Hickey non-free kick with about 30 seconds to go (which really should have been ball). Shame it was on their defensive 50 and zero guarantee at all it would of got anywhere near their forward line had a free kick been awarded..... Always love to beat those bleating whingers.

While we probably had the better of the umpiring, we also were on the wrong end of a few mystifying non-decisions. AMT tackling Dawson around the ankles. Gulden copping a forearm across the jaw, twenty metres in front of goal. Wicks chasing down Essendon defenders, five and ten metres in front of goal.

[mcs]

Yes, one thing that came out of the game, is how much our expectations have changed since the start of the season. We went 4-0 and most of us are bit disappointed by the style of the victory. Whereas, looking at the draw prior to the season, most of us would have thought, that if we could get to 2-2, then maybe we could start to gather a bit of momentum and perhaps later challenge for a finals spot.

And it was bit of a strange game. I thought we were the better side for most of the match, but never really put Essendon under scoreboard pressure. If we managed to get 3 or 4 goals in front, then I suspect that our confidence levels, and our flair, would have risen and Essendon would have dropped off. But of course, that's a big if, and we'll never know.

I also thought that we were probably effected by the five day break, after the intense effort against Richmond. So I'm now looking forward to the nine day break, before we take on GWS. If they lose to Collingwood, then we will have a chance to condemn them to 0-5. Which would not only mean that there's little chance of them making the finals, but it would also make Cameron's tenure very insecure.

I definitely think the 5 day break hurt us more then it hurt the bombers - we played out in the sun on a hot day, while they played in temperature controlled Docklands against a set of witches hats. I was actually impressed last night how well our energy levels held on in the last - I feared we might drop off as we had a bit in the first 3 weeks and they would run over the top of us - so for mine that was a hugely promising sign for the season.

But looking back on the first month - bloody outstanding is all that needs to be said!

I would of told you to go and have a good lie down and remember to take your meds tomorrow if anyone had dare suggest we would be a genuine chance of getting to 6 and zip (not that either GWS or Gold Coast will be pushovers - but neither are faring well on the injury from). From here, anything less than finals would be disappointing - but even being in with a chance to play finals I would of said before the season would be a great overall outcome.

The exciting part of it all - these are likely just snippets of our capability. This isn't a side anywhere near the peak of its powers, just learning how to begin to flex its muscles. The signs suggest, with the usual caveats around injuries, good drafting and trading to fill the gaps, that this team is going to be scarily good in a season or two. That doesn't mean we can't do some serious damage in the mean time.

Whatever will be, I just wait to find out!

[Aaron]

I still don't get these rankings. They show Warner had a poor game? Also if they bring in things like pressure acts and tackles etc, how does Wicks end up lower down when he led the swans for tackles and pressure acts. I thought Justin Mc was awesome but I don't get how he could be so high given he is an outside winger?.

AFL put lots of money and resources on Champion Data. They may have supplied more details to coaches but not enough for us fans.
The following may have some answers : see Player ratings: frequently asked questions.

Essentially,"Players accrue or lose points every time they are involved in a passage of play, and the score awarded to them each time they are in the play is determined by a complex algorithm formulated and refined over a number of years by Champion Data. Whether players accrue or lose points is based around whether they have a positive or negative impact on the passage of play.....

Every time a player is involved in a passage of play he will have the chance to accrue points. But rather than his score being a simple tally of his possessions, marks, tackles, hit-outs, free-kicks and scores, his performance will be measured using a system called Equity Ratings. The system determines where and how a player influences a contest and whether the player's effort then results in a positive result for his team. Equity Ratings includes what coaches love to describe as "pressure acts". As a result, players are rewarded for interrupting opposition passages of play as well as setting up scores for their own team."

Fans in front of TV or even sitting in SCG can't keep tab on every player and every act but Champion Data have enough staff, camera angles and resources to cover more.

[mcs]

While we probably had the better of the umpiring, we also were on the wrong end of a few mystifying non-decisions. AMT tackling Dawson around the ankles. Gulden copping a forearm across the jaw, twenty metres in front of goal. Wicks chasing down Essendon defenders, five and ten metres in front of goal.

That AMT tackle on Dawson non-free will surely make the headlines for umpire 'blooper' of the year...... shocking.

[Legs Akimbo]

That AMT tackle on Dawson non-free will surely make the headlines for umpire 'blooper' of the year...... shocking.

The umpiring was not biased but just bad. There were a lot of non-decisions and then bursts of over adjudicating. A agree that they missed a free on Hickey HTB - was a shocker. On the other side, the fact that Gulden wasn't over the shoulder in front of goals was just as perplexing. The just totally swallowed the whistle on holding the ball, but then occasionally regurgitated the whistle to keep everyone guessing.

[dejavoodoo44]

That AMT tackle on Dawson non-free will surely make the headlines for umpire 'blooper' of the year...... shocking.

Maybe it should be saved for day one at umpire school?

"Okay, class; we'll start with a few simple ones. Now, can anyone see something wrong with this tackle?"

[barry]

Yes I am always a biased optimist, but I think everyone is giving a little too much credit to Essendon. .

I totally agree. Had we kicked straight, that's a comfortable 30 point win.

Easendon are 1 win from 4 and played 3 teams from last year's bottom 5, and a mid-table-lucky-to-make-finals st Kilda. That's a poor start to the season.

[Blue Sun]

I think the number of scoring shots was most telling. The Swannies clearly had more of the football, hell, we scored less goals than Essendon but still won by 3 points. I think that says a lot.

[mcs]

AFL put lots of money and resources on Champion Data. They may have supplied more details to coaches but not enough for us fans.
The following may have some answers : see Player ratings: frequently asked questions.

Essentially,"Players accrue or lose points every time they are involved in a passage of play, and the score awarded to them each time they are in the play is determined by a complex algorithm formulated and refined over a number of years by Champion Data. Whether players accrue or lose points is based around whether they have a positive or negative impact on the passage of play.....

Every time a player is involved in a passage of play he will have the chance to accrue points. But rather than his score being a simple tally of his possessions, marks, tackles, hit-outs, free-kicks and scores, his performance will be measured using a system called Equity Ratings. The system determines where and how a player influences a contest and whether the player's effort then results in a positive result for his team. Equity Ratings includes what coaches love to describe as "pressure acts". As a result, players are rewarded for interrupting opposition passages of play as well as setting up scores for their own team."

Fans in front of TV or even sitting in SCG can't keep tab on every player and every act but Champion Data have enough staff, camera angles and resources to cover more.

I had started typing out a long response to your interesting post then my computer crashed lol.

Champion Data's approach will always produce some interesting results for players with relatively small sample sets, with high levels of potential variability as a result.

In terms of the Chad, its likely that his 'negative' impacts are amplified under their methodology, because of how and where they occur. For example, I assume Champion Data's model marks down pretty heavily disposals that lead to turnovers. One element of Warner's game that will improve over time, but can see 'errors' made currently is when he quickly clears out of traffic by foot - they can lead to turnovers (upfield however). Point here is I'm not criticising Chad, but noting despite often fantastic work to achieve the chance to clear congestion/tight spaces by foot (i.e. lots of good upfront work) and the benefit we receive from that, the Champion Data analysis probably focuses more on the negative consequence that follows (even if subsequent to that, the opposition player gaining the turnover is then under pressure, which is often the case).

It is interesting analysis however, especially the quarter by quarter parts. What last night shows is that even when players are having relatively quiet nights, they can make a substantial difference at particular points - Lloyd for example overall didn't play well by their metrics, but had a fantastic contribution towards our 2nd term fightback. But that fact also highlights the weakness in some of their analysis - I doubt anyone can make a strongly supported case that Reid wasn't massively influential in that last quarter. Yet look at his quarter rating - good but not that high.

[TheBloods]

Lol we know that RB in another life pissed on your grave or something worse, but I can't see how Bell (unless we have another one hanging around somewhere) will hold his spot (unless you are assuming RB isn't fit - but knowing your ongoing agenda to deride RB, I doubt it). I like Bell and want to see him succeed, but I just don't see him being anywhere near AFL standard. He gets in good positions, tries to tackle, but his influence on the contest is minimal at best.

You are the one obsessed with RB. What does he have to do with this

I dont see the point in bringing Bell on for a half. Wtf were people expecting ? Give him a full game and see how he goes