7 Western Australians in the ODI squad for India . . No bias there . . ??!! Bring in the bots already!

Somehow those driverless cars are getting about though aren’t they .

On Cummings You use other factors – for example how every other bowler in the history of the game has gone the first time they played in England . . Everyone had a first some time . . What can we reasonably expect of a bowler in that circumstance, what does that mean for the bowlers we put around Cummings.

Thanks James and agree with your points – always has to be a combination and in the early years of AI we have seen a few terrible cases of bias. In a more competitive cricket world we just have to look to the next frontier to again be world leaders . . Cricket Academy no longer going to cut it . .

AI is a lot more than metrics . . its the reason we don’t have stockbrokers, and soon won’t drive cars . . . It’s not because someone has a stats sheet.

Question – if we always come back to the Top 6 bats why do we continually flirt with all-rounders . . when and how do all-rounders get used, is it better to use an all rounder, or rest a fast bowler, a robot will answer this question better than any human.

No innovation in Test Cricket huh? What game are you watching, scoring rates, the role of the wicket keeper, defensive bowling from earlier in an innings, have all changes a lot and that is just in the last 20 years . .

Sorry JRR I am backing a robot over that team . .

You are going to have the same issue Maurice – everyone brings their biases , Langer has them, Warney, Punter the same . . they are not objective, read every article on selection on this site, they are all based off their history and biases, a robot can objectively recall all required information that is going to maximise our performance.

Cheers for taking the time to read the article Paul.

Few points:

(1) there would always have to be a balance between AI and human input.

(2) you have to make the distinction between live ‘in-play’ scenarios and set piece or play. AI more suited to the former, and will beat human every time in the long run.

(3) On some of your specific questions there are certainly situations where AI will be well in advance of humans –

(i) How does AI decide how much a pitch has changed over the course of a 5 day Test – by automatically assessing the history of every first class match on the pitch, understanding the make up of batting & bowling sides in those matches – left handed bowlers, and there relative strength, weather inputs, etc, etc, a lot better than the old gut and feel – The same way a driver less car adjusts to changed driving conditions.

(ii) Finally, how do algorithms tell a captain when a bowler is “on”, or whether, in a certain circumstance, the batting order should be changed – both examples where again perfect objective recall will beat a captain in the long run. Needless to say we won’t go into the ‘hot hand’ is a myth debate but again historical performance of bowlers post wicket being taken, batsmen next in – current form, history s bowler, performance in different match situations, ground, weather, humidity, mode of that innings previous dismal, most common dismal type of batting line up, bowling performance against left or rig hetc, etc, all variable better computed by AI.

(iii) Batting order to be changed – again this requires the weighting of lots and lots of variables and more suited to robot than human, to name a few – overs to go, target to chase/set, current form of batsmen, pitch today, pitch history, bowling line up, mode of that innings previous dismal, most common dismal type of batting line up, bowling performance against left or right, versus batsmen with high / low strike rate, versus batsmen with high 4/6 ratios, batsmen with high 1/2 run ratios, bowling most common dismissal type, batsmen preference for leg side, off-side, straight, ground size, wind direction and speed . . . etc, etc, i

If I have to be my house on it I don’t want Aaron Finch making those calls. . . how about you?

I thought his low point came a few weeks prior with his proposal to bring back state of origin.

Tired and unoriginal . .

Previously, I had looked forward to his view point.

Right on que another 6 ‘underdogs’ beat the line this week.

Thanks for getting involved in the discussion Philthy. Potentially harder to use the stay and sacrifice argument on JJ though when TB is on such big coin and not producing as much on field as JJ at this point in time?

As all existing players would have built in adjustments for new CBA, so it won’t be as if TBs wage will be relatively less or a smaller percentage of the overall pot.

Think every good player manager has had that clause on file since Scottie Pippen got screwed over by Jerry Krause and the Bulls . . .

Totally agree Simon. Only the most one eyed of supporters would think that a move towards a more unbalanced competition is a good thing.

And yes clubs can transition from being a small club to a big club or vica versa (their have been plenty of examples of that – Hawks being a club ready to merge in 96, Pies being a financial basket case before Eddie took the helm, Blues being a powerhouse before fading the last 15 years before current resurgence).

But I would say the Bulldogs were on the way to achieving this by excelling at the draft table and player development. Their list is full of talent picked out from all levels of the draft, their record over past 5-7 years the equal of any club.

Their drafting of Boyd was less of a Hawthorn esq move to put a missing piece in place but more of a gamble given the unproved record of Boyd and the price they had to pay to get him.

But if you believe Boyd was the difference you can’t say that gamble hasn’t paid off!

Regardless of whether one think’s the Boyd deal or his impact on the club I think all agreed that a massive premium was paid to lure away a unproven, although talented junior away from his club.

Why did the Bulldogs have to pay such a premium?

I would argue that it was because they have historically not been strong in the 3 categories I raised in my article. In the same situation would have Collingwood or Hawthorn has to pay such a price?

It is this premium that the Dogs, and other clubs like them. have to pay to lure talent that puts them at a distinct disadvantage, and what I believe makes chasing these trades a long term losing strategy.

One of the downsides of this type of trade I raised was list inflexibility, and I believe that is already playing out at the Western Bulldogs. Jason Johannisen has now put a price on his head, one which the Dogs are struggling to match, and its pretty hard for them to put the argument to him now, stay and sacrifice and stay as a group, when someone he is outperforming on the filed regularly is getting paid more.

The Dogs got a premiership but I believe this is the exception that will prove the rule.

Compare this situation to Geelong, and the way they have handled list negotiations and they power of the ‘non-financial’ factors they can bring to bare.

If the small clubs try to behave like the big clubs off the filed, they will lose to them on the field.

Thanks for your comments, I enjoyed your point of view on the different and unique problems faced by Sydney (and/or sides from non AFL states). The Bondi Beach reference wasn’t a crack at the Swans, just part of the Sydney package. I am sure most players in the AFL would choose recovery sessions at Bondi Icebergs over just about pretty much anyone else, but yes, I agree the Bloods culture is the number one selling point.

Not North bashing.

Let me ask a different question:

Why were Geelong able to secure Patrick Dangerfield, at most likely less less than what he could have received if every club in the league had put in a bid?

Thanks Cam.

Regardless of anyone’s view on the Boyd deal, I think the premise of the article, that in the new more flexible AFL player market, if small clubs try to go with the same game plan as the big clubs they will fail more often than not.

This is in sharp contrast to the previous eras, or at least the utopia the AFL has tried to create. Any previous in balance was created by the AFL and this could be retracted by the AFL, this one can’t and the nature of these type of negotiations is they won’t (just ask Dave Warner and his mates when they try to take away a % of revenues from them)

On the Boyd deal, my take on in it was formed through the following::

(1) They didn’t plan on it but had it forced on them (they may very well got the best out of the situation but they didn’t enter October with that deal in mind)
(2) What Gordon said on the issue on ‘Open Mike’ and how effectively it was a ‘Captain’s Call’ and the idea that he wanted to make a statement that the Dogs were no longer going to be pushed around

I have no issues with North but what attracts a top line free agent their?

Agree that was a topical call and it’s not the be all and end all of the article. But I just saw the Dogs of 2016 as a team of role players, and if he wasn’t there someone else would have filled that role? Would he have even played if they had a full list?

The bigger point is that it was an incredibly risky trade, they type that will more often than not paint the team into a corner in terms of inflexibility of list and future trade options.

The Dogs, it would seem from an outsider looking in, had to pay a huge premium to get Boyd to commit, awesome they won the flag but I wouldn’t bet on that trade as I think it will fail more times than not. Other clubs shouldn’t follow that model.

Thanks for your comments.

The ‘go home’ factor to visit Primary School friends perhaps not as strong ?? . . And yes the Northern reference was included specifically to address and encapsulate White.

The current Lions list is also made up of a disproportionately high number of Queenslandners – Apsley must be one hell of a junior club – so really nothing new there either.

A lot of clubs are clearly already down this path, North Melbourne a clear standout in chasing big name free agents, in writing this article I wondered are they really stupid or really smart?

As one might say that by publicly stating their desire to recruit these big name players they are driving up the the prices for them, potentially knowing they they can never really get them to Arden street, but in doing do making these clubs eat up precious salary cap room and getting some advantage back?

I would imagine the physiological impacts of multiple knee injuries to Clay Smith, Daniel Menzel, Jon Patton, Andy Ottens, would be quite high too but none of them have missed a beat since returning from injury.

Andy Otten missed 2 full seasons (2015 & 2016), spent in rehab, not backpacking returns to average best numbers. Similar tale for the others named above.

I totally get your point, and that having a few players in that boat (albeit not recovering from injury but having a holiday)and it would seem it makes sense at first and is commonly accepted, but it is not grounded in fact.

Why is it different for if one player missed versus many players missed a season? It sounds like it should but why? If there is no historical evidence that a year off impacts one player then it follows that it wouldn’t impact a group (1 x 0 impact = 0 total impact, 10 x 0 impact = 0 total impact).

Just somehow become an accepted myth this season at Essendon.

Adelaide had multiple players who played little to no footy in 2016 who are now regular players in this years 22, no impact there.

No more excuses at Bomber land the time is now.

All good challenges Billy (expect perhaps #3 but will get to that):

1. I would say the central theme of the article is that ruckman don’t contribute significantly in the areas that more directly translate to winning matches. As such, I put forward the position that you are better to go with a part time ruckmen that adds to you significantly in other areas as even though you might lose out in some areas you will more than compensate in others areas, One might say Paddy Ryder was/is a part-timer, because at Essendon he was more often than not he was used as a forward. When he was recruited to Port it was reported in the media that he would be back up to Lobbe second forward option (whether internally that was actually the case or not is another matter). Your club quickly saw the light and Lobbe was off to the SANFL. I bet someone in the front office regrets that 4 year contract.

2. Of the list I put forward you would imagine Jacobs, Sandi and Mumford are in the top 10. I would see Mumford with a fit and full list at GWS as the most in danger of maintaining his spot but believe Adelaide could drop Jacobs and not miss a beat but will get to that later . For the Giants there is already so much talk that a forward line of Patton / Cameron / Lobb is too tall. Do they really lose that much if Mummy goes out especially, if say, that meant a fit and firing Deledio came in and Lobb was first ruck? Just because the Channel 7 commentators like him because they like to use phrases like the ‘big mummy’, and BT gets riled up every time he lays a tackle it doesn’t mean he adds value in that areas that leads to winning matches.

3. Hahaha Billy you lose me here, the ‘staff writers’ at afl.com as a supporting reference, I would rather use Leigh Matthews as a supporting reference – and he has been saying the same things for quite some time (google ‘leigh matthews aaron sandilands’). Plus as I pointed out in other comments most clubs are already there in this thinking, Mumford was traded out of the Swans as they were happy to rely on Mike Pyke, people will use terms like squeezed out but if they really wanted him they would have worked it out.

I think AFL journo’s do a great job, we all have opinions and is great to talk about the game we love but paid journo’s can make mistakes too, or be very unoriginal. Check out my first article from this year, I pointed out that at the start of the season that 17 of the 17 AFL staff at the Herald-Sun in Victoria had put forward some top 8 combinations that would have required a turn of events that had never been seen before in the history of the AFL top 8 system. I called it then, 2 weeks after my piece the senior AFL journalist from The Age in Melbourne penned an article with remarkable similarities to some of the points I raised, given he has been writing for well over 20 years and had never raised these points prior I found it interesting (not suggesting plagiarism in the slightest but you don’t have to be a journo to come up with innovative thought and perhaps it hinders you) . . I don’t come with in a bulls roar of any of them as a writer but happily put my ability to analyse a problem up against them.

If I was going to have to challenge, the collective minds of the staff writers at the afl.com here would some of my thoughts on just their first team:

Adelaide: If Jacobs doesn’t play, you start Ottens or Jenkins in the ruck and then rotate with the other. You bring in another outsider runner, or give an extended go to someone like Menzel, who yes hasn’t show much at Adelaide yet but was a promising young player at the Blues.

I would ask you this Billy at what point would you change your tip from backing Adelaide to backing their opponent if Jacobs was out and the combination of players I talked about was in? Would you even change your tip at all?

Roar Pro, Ryan Buckland, or one of his types, would use a fancy word like elasticity to describe that situation, but I bet all the money in my pockets versus all the money in your pockets, that you would be changing your tip a lot sooner if it was a Sloane who was missing, or the unnamed Betts (how is he the best small forward in the game not in top 3) or Talia.

4. I would tend to look at Pedersen v Wiits when both have been used as front line ruckmen, and the impact on their teams. Pedersen numbers here added with his ability to win games of footy with goals too much.

My final comment on this piece is that AFL is a great game, it is a unique game, but the sport doesn’t act in a vacuum. Zones, flooding, scrums have all come from other sports and changed 100’s of years of prior thinking . . in the world of team sports there has been a move towards all the players to be of the very similar shape and size – basketball, rugby codes etc, AFL is unique in many ways but what makes our game think this trend will not hit us?

Over and out and onto the next piece.

Essendon of 2017 will be a fascinating case study for many years to come and as usual RB you have done a great job of analysing the central themes.

In each of their losses you can find a very reasonable excuse

The Blues at a very wet MCG are a tough match up for any side
The Crows in Adelaide was just a good side at the top of their game
The Dees after 5 days rest is understandable they were in front at the half and fell over in the second half
The Dockers in Perth on a 30 degree day when again they lead at halftime and wilted in the heat.

Where to from hear will be very interesting to watch – that older list suggests there time is now . .

I had also been very sceptical of those too willing to give an excuse to the returning Bombers – ‘they will come good late’ or ‘they will burn out early limp home the second half of the year’. I can’t find any hard statistical evidence to suggest players suffer, in terms of output levels, from a year out of football – that is not within the usual range of output for what we would expect for a player of their age, experience, position and previous form . Perhaps in the old days, when medical science wasn’t where it was at today you would see players struggle when returning from a knee injury, but even that has appeared to be the exception now – Bob Murphy the latest example that springs to mind.

The other examples that were cited pre-season as evidence of expected lower performance levels after suspension, were Carey and Cousins , but they were players in the final years of career who were already experiencing declining output levels prior to suspension, albeit from super star levels.

In terms of what they need to do in the ruck, I think I have already started too much trouble this week with my opinion on ruckman so I won’t touch that one . .

I don’t see Sandilands as valueless, and he does help them be a better clearance side and contested possesion side BUT the rise of Fremantle as an elite midfield and great clearance side is more closely related to the arrival of Fyfe as a top line AFL player. Yes Sandi helps and the Freo mids are gifted
an armchair ride on a few occasrions (probably more than most sides) BUT what is the opportunity cost of having Sandilands eat up so much salary cap – too high for what he brings as what he brings doesn’t directly win you enough games.

And Mike Pike rucked the majority of the day and Mumford was promptly traded out 2 weeks later as Sydney saw that their money could be better spent elsewhere.

The biggest challenge to my article is originality as this is what the most successful clubs of the past 10 years are already doing – Bulldogs, Hawks, Swans and Cats have all never spent considerable amounts of money on their rucks and all had players capable of player duel roles.

Zed are you a basketball fan?

In that world game, at a jump ball (probably the closet comparable set play in sports to an AFL ball up) the notion that a clear break away from a jump ball would be credited to the creativity of the jump ball contestant would be laughed out of town. A clear score off the jump ball would be seen as a failure of the defensive team unit or player guarding that player leading the break away. Yes in the AFL there is more movement at the contest, but we in our local game credit this to the skill of the ruckman as opposed to the defensive responsibility of the break away players opponent.

Why is that?