AFL Rd. 22.

[ozgamer]

Ah yes, Rnd 22. I will get the ball rolling and slowly add my opinions to each game. I think Freo are the go at +14.5 or better even w/o Pavlich and from a list of 24. Just think the Pies are too short considering how "competitive" Freo have been.

[Ashtee]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. Pretty well summed up oz. Freo are 12-9 for first half wins. I took 2.62 first half at ol' bills and some at the +15.5. Also taking a Freo/Coll HT/FT given Freo's ability to butcher a win - they are 7-9 for that occurance, so why not take the 7.00 available. Not too surprised to see the dogs get the blows - I took 2.06 and they're out to 2.20. Like them a real lot!

[BURNTUA CRISP]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. It's not a very challenging round with the wins looking pretty straight forward and not good for those in tipping competitions and need a couple of upsets to get them over the line. Again there are plenty of dead rubbers and they don't need to be discussed in any depth. Both Freo and Collingwood are ravaged with injuries and whatever way you look at it, it should be a close game. The Dockers seem to score more heavily when Pavlich and Tarrant are not there which makes them unpredictable as far as avenues to goal are concerned. The Pies have lifted since the Shaw/Didak incident and they don't seem to be missing them that much. In saying that, they haven't beaten that much, but all those wins have been solid. I think the Pies look a little more dangereous up forward and will keep their top 4 chances alive for another 18 hours, but their wont be much in it. North Melbourne have their destiny in their own hands and shouldn't have too many problems against Port. North are unbeaten at the MCG in their last six games there whilst it's Port's first visit there since last year's Grand Final. North's midfield pressure will be too much for Port to handle and should be able to kick 18 -20 goals against an undermanned Port defence. AAMI Stadium hosts the match of the round with the Crows playing their most important game of the year so far. They need to win to host a final in week one and they have an imposing record at home against the Bulldogs. Porplyzia is a welcome inclusion even if he is being held together by super glue and will be a major factor in the game. The Bulldogs played some decent footy last week, but weren't spectacular. They certainly have the Hawks in their sights and regardless what they do against Adelaide, they would be fancied to knock off the Hawks. Eade might do some experimentation before the finals and they should give a good account of themselves, but the Crows have too much to lose and should scrape home. The Swans are resting some of their better players before the finals but don't be put off. They did the same against the Hawks in round 22 last year and belted them by 12 goals. Whilst they wont win by that much against the Lions, they look to have the Lions measure in most departments. The Lions haven't beaten the Swans too often in recent years because their midfield is constantly closed down by the Swans. The Lions midfield is the reason they didn't make the finals. This will be a nice tune up for the Swans before next week. In the other games, Geelong will belt the Eagles by triple figures with the only interest being whether the Eagles can kick more than five goals for the match. The Blues vs Hawks will be a great atmosphere with the sharpshooters both going for the ton. It should be a high scoring shootout with the Hawks narrowly getting home. The Tigers should finish the season in the postive by comfortably beating Melbourne whilst the Saints should bury the Bombers. Players missing from best 22's. 2 - Adelaide 3 - North Melbourne, Hawthorn 4 - Western Bulldogs, Carlton, Geelong, Sydney 5 - Port Adelaide 6 - Richmond, St.Kilda 7 - Brisbane 8 - West Coast, Fremantle, Collingwood, Melbourne 11- Essendon Predictor. Fremantle 89 v Collingwood 83 North Melbourne 124 v Port Adelaide 82 Geelong 147 v West Coast 63 Adelaide 98 v Western Bulldogs 83 Carlton 100 v Hawthorn 113 Sydney 88 v Brisbane 84 Melbourne 76 v Richmond 102 Essendon 80 v St.Kilda 114 Best Bets. Fremantle LINE North Melbourne LINE Adelaide WIN Congratulations in advance to the Cats for winning the 2008 premiership easily beating the Bulldogs by 8 goals and to Brent Harvey and Nick Riewoldt for sharing the Brownlow. All the best on the punt this weekend. I'm done.

[Ashtee]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. :lol North could have won that last week IMO BC, if only he'd take the leg ropes off - you could see it just watching on tele. He badly inhibits his players from using their instinctive flare.

[TazaD]

Re: AFL Rd. 22.

:lol North could have won that last week IMO

36-64 I50's! :eek 25-43 clearances...96-118 contested possies...17 shots to 30... ...so mch for that week of being a numbers man. ;) Never a chance! :spank lol @ Bruce then..."I won't argue with you Buck's...except when you're wrong." :lol:

[Ashtee]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. Stats absolutely nothing to do with it Taza. There was much else going on (or not going on) that was so very obvious to me and again backed up Monday talking to some club contacts. That game should/could have at least gone down to the wire but for Laidley's numb-brain tactics.

[TazaD]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. When the ball spends nearly twice as much time in one half, I know which team I'd rather be on... ...as to why it spent so much time there, well, that could well be another story. (Interestingly enough +28 is the biggest difference for Geelong this season!!) ...also interesting that the Cats have only had more than +20 6 times this season. (I would have thought more...)... Melbourne, Port, Ess, Carlton...and Kangaroos twice. :\ As I said, tactics could well be the precurser rather than the product, but you simply can not win games with numbers like that. Hawthorn (1.42) Carlton have really struggled all season with good defensive midifelds, and Hawthorn are the best of the lot. They allow just 42.6 I50's per game(40 in their last 4!)...Geelong 45, beat Carlton by 56...Adelaide 45, beat Carlton by 30 @ MCG...Saints 47, beat Carlton by 31...and Kangaroos held them to 42 two weeks ago and won easily. As a result, th Hawks have only allowed 100+ points this season, all 3 times outside of Victoria. The two teams haven't met this season, but the Hawks won last year at the Dome by 100 points...without Franklin in the team!

[Ashtee]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. Yes, those stats tell a story of what took place. However, I believe you totally don't yet see my point mate. No point at all virtually declaring what I said as nonsense unless you first understand it.

[TazaD]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. Who would have guessed North supporters would ever get as testy as our good 'Pie friends... ;)

[Ashtee]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. Mate, I was supposedly a Geelong supporter last year, which apparently was the only way anyone could defy left brain statistical analysis and back a side like Geelong for the flag and a 301.00 shot for the Brownlow. The year before I was supposedly a Freo supporter and now I'm apparently North :unsure. One thing I've noticed about forums etc. Talk left brain analysis and it's accepted as being in touch. Discover the right side of your brain and no one else believes there is such a region. The right brain tunes into things like quality of rather than quantity of stats - eg. that the scoring shot stats thing is often a load of rubbish - body language (North were actually better UP than Geelong IMO but wasted it) and that certain game plans can seriously inhibit players from producing what they were really capable of on the day. We've been watching and talking about this all season, the way Freo, Richmond, Port and North butcher games. North once again butchered an opportunity, to at least get close. Did you notice that Geelong players showed much more initiative in running to where the ball was going? So often the ball was kicked somewhere that you'd assume would be a contest but only a Geelong player led out to it, so no wonder they had double the stats. Laidley doesn't allow his players to show enough initiative. They played like they were checking their notes each time they got it or it came to their area - very obvious to me watching on TV - and that's exactly what was going on. During the week I think Laidley was saying something about can't really use any great strategy that's effective against Geelong - I should have known better, but an indication that he'd over coach. After the game parents etc were asking why didn't you just run into that space and kick an easy goal?, or why didn't you just kick long to clear it? The answers were that they were not allowed to - like kids who can only do what they're told. Geelong players taking initiative v North players not ... The point is, that North are the best equipped to roll Geelong in finals IMO, if he takes the leg ropes off, and they have been brilliant when that happens. Anyone assessing a final between these two should be aware of all this. Do Let me know if my comments arn't getting through. :wall :ok

[TazaD]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. What I understand is that you've been complaining about the way Laidley coaches all season, yet you continue to hope he turns it around. :\ You go into a game knowing what to expect, yet come out the other end thumping your head on a wall. You're totally right of course...there's always more than one way to look at a game...always more than one reason for a result... ...but the undeniable fact is this: There always is a result! :) I quite happily admit that I don't care so much why things happen (unless it's a physical thing...ie. personel, weather...), but at the end of the day the numbers show exactly what DID happen. Is there any evidence that Laidley will just pat them all on the back and say, 'just go out there, play footy and have fun boys...' in the near future?? None what-so-ever. Did you notice that Geelong players showed much more initiative in running to where the ball was going? So often the ball was kicked somewhere that you'd assume would be a contest but only a Geelong player led out to it, so no wonder they had double the stats. Laidley doesn't allow his players to show enough initiative. Ever thought that Geelong are simply a far superior side?... ...given they've had a crap load more 'stats' than every other team in the comp for the last 36 games or so!! Also...(pretty interesting things numbers some times ;) )...Geelong score every 1.81 entries on the season...Kangaroos allow a shot every 1.90... ...yet in the 2 games v. the Cats they've gone at 2.16 and 2.13. So...could (just maybe...) the flip side be true??...Could (just maybe...) the Kangaroos' 'careful' style be actually keeping them in the game, rather than getting them blown out in a more free-flowing affair?? ;) Hey, I've got no problem at all with the whole psychology in sport thing...did a bit of Psych at Uni myself...bloody interesting (and totally legitimate!) stuff... ...but I know I can't read it, so I don't bother trying. Simple. ...what I would be worried about tho, is that if the 'Roos were "up" for this one and still got pumped, it's gunna make it awfully tough next time if Geelong come out steaming! :lol [Any lingering thoughts of me still not understanding, please re-refer to sentence 1 :ok ] ...oh, and I just assumed the North connection, given the 'club contacts' comment. btw, nice job getting someone from inside the Club to admit their coach is the problem! :D

[Henry Jr]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. Can't agree with you about North Ash. Reckon the Cats will be licking their lips come the Round 1 Finals matchup against them. Can't see Hale kicking 8 goals again...... Anyhoo, thought I would turn my attention to Buddy Kicking the Ton. When Will Lance Franklin Kicks His 100th Goal For The H&A Season ? 1st Quarter 2.30 2nd Quarter 2.40 3rd Quarter 7.00 4th Quarter 13.00 Franklin Doesnt Kick 100 Goals In H&A Season 11.00 Will He or Won't He? Lance Franklin Kicks His 100th Goal In H&A Season 1.03 Lance Franklin Doesnt Kick a 100 Goals In H&A Season 11.00 http://www.sportingbet.com.au/uipub/...=5&l2id=966769 Now, the most interesting part about this is that Franklin DIDN'T train on Tuesday (perhaps the Perth trip taking its toll) and DIDN'T train on Thursday. He did struggle out on Friday's light session but was seen grimmacing at a few stages. So, 11 bucks for him not to get the Ton this week due to him not playing isn't the worst bet going around and would save me the 6k fine for invading the Dome......

[ozgamer]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. Ok, my thoughts on Nth vs Port is that Nth should win comfortably though not sure that they'll cover the line. I think the 198.5 game total is rather high for an MCG game. This won't be a shootout and I don't think this will be a high scoring affair either. Geel vs WCE. -70.5 is very high and risky to bet on. Think the Cats will clear it to make a statement tho I wouldn't put money on it.

[ozgamer]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. Interesting weekend so far. Ade vs WB. WB at $2.20 a price probably not seen since the game vs Geelong. However, Adelaide have only been beaten by the top 2 teams (Derbys exclusive) this yr. Think i'l stay out. Carl vs Haw. Hawks prob more suited to MCG but they've won last 8 /10 at TD and both losses were to the Saints. Maybe Blues a chance at +18.5 pts but they are way up in class this week so no. Syd vs Bris. Sydney have had the wood over Brisbane in recent years so I would expect them to get up even w/o Goodes (I think) but both teams have been playing poorly so who knows.

[Ashtee]

Re: AFL Rd. 22.

What I understand is that you've been complaining about the way Laidley coaches all season' date=' yet you continue to [i']hope he turns it around. :\

Oh yes, another indication of right brain analysis is thinking in terms of might, could, chance, posibilities etc rather than 'they are' punters who seem to think winners. I base bets purely on odds versus those considered possibilities (incase I need to again explain that). Who the better performed team is in various areas has absolutely nothing to do with who to back and just had a look at my season bets on North matches which shows a healthy profit. This is the real important point isn't it? I'll back a Laidley, Wallace, etc coached team in every game of their coaching careers if the odds dictate. What on earth has 'complaining' got to do with that? It's my opinion of what's taking place, if that's OK in a discussion forum? Henry, I think a lot of sides won't mind playing North, as dodgy as I've just explained they are. What I was saying is that they are capable of better than what on average they produce - the 'they are v could be consideration'. 'Left brain v right brain analysis'.

[TazaD]

Re: AFL Rd. 22.

That game should/could have at least gone down to the wire but for Laidley's numb-brain tactics.

Mate, you said it, not me. You thought they were value...rightly or wrongly...as you say, it's all down to a personal opinion isn't it... ...I'll assume you took into consideration Laidley's propensity to butcher games... ...they lost. Oh well... :\ I happen to be 6-0 when betting on North myself...2 ML's (as 'dogs), 3 h'caps and a total... ...oh well... :\ For a right brained thinker you don't seem very open minded to other people's ways and methods all of a sudden. :unsure Let's just move on can we... EDIT: I can understand that it may have looked like I was simply talking with hindsite and 'laughing' at those who took the Kangaroos...that just isn't the case at all. You guys know I've been talking up North for the last couple of months myself, and I originally thought they would be a chance v. Geelong... ...but a quick look back at the details of last meeting...although they got within 13 points, they had 21 less I50's, and a host of other worrying (for me) signs in that game. Nothing I had seen personel wise or indeed in their game style indicated to me that things would be ay different this time around. Still not sure what the high horse is all about tho mate...no-one ever called your methods into question. :\

[Ashtee]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. As a matter of fact I'm well open to and aware of peoples methods. I read what you and others write each week without ripping apart their opinions purely out of just that level of respect. I can still recall my earlier days at this forum, which was very frustrating indeed. For that reason I think I went to lengths last year explaining why backing bad teams isn't a bad thing and that people just don't 'get it' and never ever will. As I've tried to point out, my theory on North v Geelong is not about what did happen and as a reader your duty should be to correctly interpret the sense the author means it - your response was clearly about highlighting what did happen which shows you missed my point. A bit of "oh that's interesting Ash, why did you think that? What do you mean?" surely would be the more open minded approach rather than bulldozing in with your almighty closed case stats principles. I know you believe in your stats, which is fine by me, but I believe players and teams are capable of being various - motivating factors, etc. I'm merely making a case that North actually did not give it their best - the they were more UP bit is merely what made it more glaringly obvious to me on the day. I don't need all the "Could (just maybe...) the Kangaroos' 'careful' style be actually keeping them in the game", because I've considered that and watched the games they've played in that manner compared to when they haven't - interestingly my bets on North games at SP account for half my profits, so just maybe I do have a grip ;). I don't need the "Ever thought that Geelong are simply a far superior side?" because I already think that - I can see them dominating, without the stats.

[TazaD]

Re: AFL Rd. 22.

your response was clearly about highlighting what did happen which shows you missed my point.

I kinda knew that's where it all stemmed from...and I do apologise. As I said last post I now see how it could have been interpretted...but honestly, I was merely being jovial! Maybe I should have put a laughy face instead of a spanking arse! :lol Maybe what you need is a beer ;) [Yes, I know it's 8.45 am on a Sunday... :spank ]

[Crouch Potato]

Re: AFL Rd. 22.

As a matter of fact I'm well open to and aware of peoples methods. I read what you and others write each week without ripping apart their opinions purely out of just that level of respect. I can still recall my earlier days at this forum, which was very frustrating indeed. For that reason I think I went to lengths last year explaining why backing bad teams isn't a bad thing and that people just don't 'get it' and never ever will. As I've tried to point out, my theory on North v Geelong is not about what did happen and as a reader your duty should be to correctly interpret the sense the author means it - your response was clearly about highlighting what did happen which shows you missed my point. A bit of "oh that's interesting Ash, why did you think that? What do you mean?" surely would be the more open minded approach rather than bulldozing in with your almighty closed case stats principles. I know you believe in your stats, which is fine by me, but I believe players and teams are capable of being various - motivating factors, etc. I'm merely making a case that North actually did not give it their best - the they were more UP bit is merely what made it more glaringly obvious to me on the day. I don't need all the "Could (just maybe...) the Kangaroos' 'careful' style be actually keeping them in the game", because I've considered that and watched the games they've played in that manner compared to when they haven't - interestingly my bets on North games at SP account for half my profits, so just maybe I do have a grip ;). I don't need the "Ever thought that Geelong are simply a far superior side?" because I already think that - I can see them dominating, without the stats.

Absolutely nothing wrong with your philisophy Ash :ok I haven't come across any other punter on the forum whose methods I've agreed with more. IMO too many people around here (not directed at anyone in the AFL forum) don't understand that the War is what you have to win, not the battle.

[DeMMa]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. Hrmmm.. Think Bombers & Demons both could upset... thoughts?

[TazaD]

Re: AFL Rd. 22. At the risk of...well, just risk...:D... ...DeMMa, never a chance! ;)