Did injuries rob us of a flag?

[The Old Dark Navy's]

How many of you truly believe that the injuries we suffered in 2000 and 2001 robbed us of at least one premiership?

Strangely enough, despite our consistent form in 2000 and the 2nd placing after the H & A season, I feel that 2001 was our better opportunity but for Ratten's injury and Kouta's when the game was still there to be taken against the Tigers. Talk about wasted opportunities, the loss to the Demons, the first loss to the Pies, the after the siren loss to the Hawks, it all robbed us of a good position going in to the finals and the injuries finished us off. I just had the thought that we weren't afraid of any of the big guns and had their measure if only we could overcome the finals bit players.

Definitely one that got away.

[JUBJUB]

Originally posted by The Old Dark Navy's
How many of you truly believe that the injuries we suffered in 2000 and 2001 robbed us of at least one premiership?



ODN,your sounding like Kevin Sheedy. :o

[blues^rock]

well... i couldn't say it robbed us of the premiership, but it certainly didn't help!
definately in both years we would've had a good chance if we didn't have the injuries but u just couldn
't say we defintely would've won if we were injury free, cause you just don't know!

[Carl]

Not finishing top 4 pretty much finished our season last year.People are already writing us off this year but i think they may be suprised.

[Blues2001]

Of course they didn't rob us of a certain premiership, but they robbed us pretty much of any chance. In 2000, at our hottest we were just as hot as Essendon, but then when Kouta went down with Braddles in that game against Essendon we never properly regained our form. We ran them close that night anyway, imagine what would've happened if we hadn't had an empty bench in that last quarter. The bombers went on injury free through the season and we couldn't take a trick. In the prelim, Essendon had a full side whilst we were missing Kouta and SOS (among others). If you put the boot on the other foot, and give us Kouta and SOS, then take out two Essendon equivalents (at that stage, Fletcher and Hird) and things would have been different. Very different.

Perhaps you are right about 2001 being the one that really got away though. Essendon were clearly not as good as the year before, and we always seem to have Brisbane's measure, so we may have been a chance. That Sydney game stuffed us up big time. We were running hot going into that game, but Silvagni's withdrawal and Whitnall's knee injury cost us the game, and pretty much our season. We never recovered properly.

[The Old Dark Navy's]

You are right Blues2001, a flag is never a certainty as the Bombers found out twice in the last 3 seasons but I certainly had a great feeling about the capabilities of the 2001 team because the opposition wasn't as strong. Our 2000 team was better but the Bombers 2000 team was unbeatable so we were always going to run at least 2nd.

I'm just sensationalising a little by using the word robbed. It does get the attention. ;)

[Dan26]

If you think injuries robbed you of a flag in 2000, then perhaps you'd better take another look at that season.

Blues2001, at your hottest you may have been very, very good, but you can say that about a lot of teams when they are at their best over several weeks. Could you maintain a percentage of 160 over 25 weeks? No. To think that you would even contemplate upsetting Essendon in 2000, even if you were at full strength is laughable. Essendon would have to have played well below their best for that to happen.

In 2001, you had injuries, but then again, so did a lot of other teams, including...you guseed it....Essendon. I do think that if you were at full strength, you could have won it all in 2001 (provided the injuries for the other teams stayed as they are) but in 2000, you are pushing sh*t uphill if you think you could have beaten Essendon.

In the Preliminary Final we won by 45 points after dropping off. We led by over 10 goals at one stage, before Sheedy rested Hird, and Lloyd in the last quarter. Kouta is a great player, but he ain't worth 10 goals, I can tell you. We were also missing Dean Rioli for the finals in 2000.

To be honest, I think you beat yourselves in 2001. You lost matches you should have won, thereby missing the double chances, and robbing you any chance of the flag.

Yes, you got my attention. ;) I'll be going now, before I am acused of being arrogant! :D

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Dan, you are dead right about Carlton beating themselves in 2001 by not securing a top four position. Injuries leading into the finals merely made it harder still. But Blues2001 did NOT say that we were robbed in 2000 at all. He said we were running hot and if we had not had the injuries we did (Kouta and SOS) and if Essendon instead had two comparable players out, anything might have happened. I think you need to re-read his post.

[The Old Dark Navy's]

oh and by the way ..... you are arrogant! ;)

[Dan26]

Originally posted by The Old Dark Navy's
Dan, you are dead right about Carlton beating themselves in 2001 by not securing a top four position. Injuries leading into the finals merely made it harder still. But Blues2001 did NOT say that we were robbed in 2000 at all. He said we were running hot and if we had not had the injuries we did (Kouta and SOS) and if Essendon instead had two comparable players out, anything might have happened. I think you need to re-read his post.

I still think that if we had two players out (and Dean Rioli was arguably as good as SOS, remembering that SOS was at the tail end of his career), I don't thinkit would have made a difference in the result. Maybe 3-4 goals, but that still would have meant a realtively easy win to the Dons.

I could claim that injuries robbed us of a flag in 2001. Essendon and Carlton both had comparable injury problems through the year and in the finals, yet the Bombers still finished 4 postions higher. But I digress....back to 2000.....

Carlton shouldn't have even been playing Essendon in the Preliminary Final. You had the Demons down for the count in the Qualifying Final. Now, whilst Kouta wasn't playing, it shouldn't have mattered, because you had them down and out. They were GONE. The first three quarters of that match were all Carlton. You missed too many easy shots in that match, one in particular from Brett ratten in the third quarter.

So, I would summise that you only had yourselves to blame in 2000. Even with your injuries, you should have beaten the Demons, and at least MADE the Grand Final. it is interesting to note, that in the 2000 Peliminary Final, Hird was quiet. He did nothing, really. So, if he didn't play in that match, it wouldn't have made much of a difference in my view because when he DID play he contributed next to nothing to the result, anyway!

Same with the Round 20 match. Lloyd and Hird, who are our two best players were kept quiet. Both didn't contribute. Yet, we still won by 26 points. Now I understand it's good play by the Carlton defence to limit Essendon's two best players and hats off to them, but even with our two best players doing nothing in Round 20, we still ran out comforatable winners. So, unless the Bombers were SEVERELY striken with injury I doubt very much whether any team could have gotten close to them.

[The Old Dark Navy's]

It's still only speculation Dan and nobody is claiming we were robbed by it all. We know Kouta would have made a difference against Melbourne and Essendon and you certainly can not compare Rioli to SOS (I mean ... really?). Tail end of his career you say? Well he had a pretty good 2001 and it was only injury that forced him to retire. That's a big call and an inaccurate one. This thread is meant to gauge the feelings of Blues fans on a wasted two years where we might have done better. Once again we are dealing in gut instinct and there is no way to accurately forecast what might have happened if certain things had gone our way.

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Originally posted by Dan26

Same with the Round 20 match. Lloyd and Hird, who are our two best players were kept quiet. Both didn't contribute. Yet, we still won by 26 points. Now I understand it's good play by the Carlton defence to limit Essendon's two best players and hats off to them, but even with our two best players doing nothing in Round 20, we still ran out comforatable winners. So, unless the Bombers were SEVERELY striken with injury I doubt very much whether any team could have gotten close to them.
Lloyd and Hird quiet and you still won by 26 points? Don't you think with Bradley and Kouta on the field to compliment the good work of the defence that night, we might have got a little closer? Add to that the pressure on the other players with a depleted bench meaning they had to stay on the field all night and it seems like anything might have happened. I hasten to add that this is part and parcel of football and I am not bleating about the injuries. Still doesn't mean that my heart doesn't bleed for what might have been both years. I am an eternal optimist after all.

[Fat Red]

Originally posted by Dan26


No. To think that you would even contemplate upsetting Essendon in 2000, even if you were at full strength is laughable. Essendon would have to have played well below their best for that to happen.

The gap between Essendon and Carlton was much bigger in 1999, but we still beat you:) I don't think it would have appened but it could have.

[Blues2001]

Originally posted by Dan26
If you think injuries robbed you of a flag in 2000, then perhaps you'd better take another look at that season.

Blues2001, at your hottest you may have been very, very good, but you can say that about a lot of teams when they are at their best over several weeks. Could you maintain a percentage of 160 over 25 weeks? No. To think that you would even contemplate upsetting Essendon in 2000, even if you were at full strength is laughable. Essendon would have to have played well below their best for that to happen.

In 2001, you had injuries, but then again, so did a lot of other teams, including...you guseed it....Essendon. I do think that if you were at full strength, you could have won it all in 2001 (provided the injuries for the other teams stayed as they are) but in 2000, you are pushing sh*t uphill if you think you could have beaten Essendon.


Dan, you must have read about 5 words of my post. Since when did I say we were robbed of a flag? I said we were robbed of a CHANCE at a flag. That is a HUGE difference.

Also, our best in 2000 wasn't just over 2 or 3 weeks. We did win 13 in a row, and most premiership teams don't even manage that. You lost to the Bulldogs and yet fail to concede that we couldn't have beaten you in 2000. Are you saying we weren't better than the Bulldogs? I would hope not. Us being able to beat you in 2000 is not laughable. You can't use the excuse of having Lloyd and Hird not contributing. Have you thought that it may be because Manton and Beaumont played well? What I am saying about that game is that we were more than a match for you. You only got a some late goals to make the margin more respectable, but it was widely acknowledged as the game of the year. We had an empty bench to use in that last quarter, and we were missing Kouta and Braddles for the whole game. You can't say for sure that we couldn't have won that one.

Never have I said that we were better than you in 2000. However, to win a flag or a finals match or even just a home and away match, you don't need to be the overall better side, as you found out in 1999. All you need to do is to play better ON THE DAY. And I think, if we had been spared injuries in 2000, we would have been good enough to possibly beat you ON A GIVEN DAY.

I can't believe you would even put Rioli in the same sentence as SOS. Now THAT is laughable.