Autopsy AFL 2024 Second Qualifying Final - Port v Cats Thurs Sept 5th 7:40pm EST/7:10pm CST (AO) - Teams up

[The Mares Leg]

'Including you'?

Who are you? You've been on BigFooty for 5 minutes.

Unless...

You’ll work it out - after you work out you have zero credibility now.

 

[The Mares Leg]

In
Response
To
A
Post
That
Referenced
100
Years

Context is important.

Nope…no context in that post…just a clear statement of FICTION.

Anyhow, I’m ignoring you now - you’re opinion is not worth ‘Fudge’

 

[Fadge]

You’ll work it out - after you work out you have zero credibility now.

What number account is this?

30?

 

[Fadge]

Anyhow, I’m ignoring you now - you’re opinion is not worth ‘Fudge’

Oh no.

How will I COPE?

 

[Burtonsgottago]

How are Port so consistently disappointing in finals despite finishing top 2? They finish top 4 very often but you can immediately discount them as contenders.

I think Hinkley's time is up for real now.

The AFL fixture is flawed. Port typically get easy draws, ie they tend to play less games against the top teams. This inflates their position at the end of the typical season and exposes them against the best teams in the finals.

 

[Cdog71]

And I’m sure at various points during that run we might have been ‘expected’ to win and you got us but also plenty of times when you were better than us generally as well.

1980 was probably even money: we were minor premiers but we split our regular season games and finished half a win in front of you and your percentage was 10 better than ours. I’d say you ‘stepped up’ in that one. You led us by 8 at the last change and beat us by four goals or so. You had a great side at the end of a bit of an empire, we were trying to push our way into the mix and weren’t good enough. Remember, you had a team stacked with finals champions: we had a side who had played a couple of finals across two campaigns.

1969 again you finished only half a game behind us but unquestionably you just demoralised us: 118 point thrashing.

1967 GF you finished two games clear of us and had already beaten us both times we played you that season.

1934 you were minor premiers albeit half a game ahead of us, we beat you earlier that season.

1933 you beat us 3 times, and finished 3 wins ahead of us.

1931 we actually finished tied for wins, we won the MP on percentage, and got you both times in the home and away season before you beat us in the first final and then we reversed the result in the grand final.


More recently in 1995 we were all just chasing Carlton anyway: we were clearly the stronger side, I don’t know off the top of my head what the ladder said but you were never going to beat us, and we flogged you.


In 2017 we finished 2nd(?) behind Adelaide and though we were only 2 points ahead of you I would say that, bland as our team was, we had every right to be nominal favourites for that game. Richmond unquestionably stepped up and that was probably the night you started to genuinely as a team believe that you could win the comp: not because it was ‘big bad Geelong’ or anything - we were clearly a bit past it by then, but because Richmond were, after a rusty first half, pretty clinical and got the job done.

In 2019 we finished above you narrowly but I would suggest in that prelim you probably deserved to be favourites as a recent flag team and the ‘best’ team of 2018. And you were the nominal best side of 2020 as well.

I don’t doubt that next time the two sides meet in a final, there will be tigers staff reminding the players that no matter where the two sides sit on the ladder, the ledger sits the way it does. They would be silly not to. But you have to apply context to every single record that has numbers involved. Not to sound patronising but tigers fans who flog themselves over just ‘owning Geelong in finals’ probably sell their recent team short: you didn’t win because you have ownership of us in finals, you won because you were a f**king great side

Great post

 

[Mr Meow]

You are what you are

Hey fruit loop, hope you enjoyed the game after giving Geelong no chance. I'm sure the humble pie tasted delicious. Fraud supporter.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

The rejects:

Evans, Ratugolea and Narkle:

194% combined game time.

10 kicks, 6 handballs, 5 marks, 0 goals, 323m gained.

Holmes:

76% game time

17 kicks, 11 handballs, 8 marks, 0 goals, 668m gained.

Humphries:

80% game time.

13 kicks, 7 handballs, 4 marks, 0 goals, 486m gained.

Mannagh:

91% game time.

18 kicks, 5 handballs, 3 marks, 3 goals, 528m gained.

So what we have is the player we drafted with a selection in the Ratugolea trade (Humphries), a player who was just drafted and playing the same role as what we tried Evans in (Mannagh) and Holmes whose emergence in 21/22 seasons left no spot in the side for Narkle and saw him leave.

Definition of chalk and cheese between those 3 and our 3.
Playing 3 blokes who wouldn't get a game with us is where Port are at unfortunately.

 

[windyhill]

They’ll bounce back next week.