innaccuracy myth

[stefoid]

cop out.

we missed a few gimmie set shots as well - giansiracusa the main culprit.

fact is you kicked 10 behinds and we kicked 9, and the rest were rushed. maybe one OOB by rocca?

you tend to kick long to contests, (usually rocca) which get punched through or rushed, while we tend to spot up a small leading player more often.

 

[ChipDouglas]

cop out.

we missed a few gimmie set shots as well - giansiracusa the main culprit.

fact is you kicked 10 behinds and we kicked 9, and the rest were rushed. maybe one OOB by rocca?

you tend to kick long to contests, (usually rocca) which get punched through or rushed, while we tend to spot up a small leading player more often.

If you listened to those involved at Collingwood I think you'll find that they said based on our second half we were out worked and out run. We did miss several easy set shots from 30 meters or closer (which I can't recall the Bulldogs doing, missed a few easy ones on the run but so did we) which certainly didn't help so stop feeling so incredulous about a few internet posts and enjoy the win.

 

[1892]

cop out.

we missed a few gimmie set shots as well - giansiracusa the main culprit.

fact is you kicked 10 behinds and we kicked 9, and the rest were rushed. maybe one OOB by rocca?

you tend to kick long to contests, (usually rocca) which get punched through or rushed, while we tend to spot up a small leading player more often.

Football's a funny game, think that we missed crucial goals at crucial times, where as the dogs didn't. That was probably the difference. WB tend to be a fast running side that gains pace and run as mometum/confidence builds. One or two goals instead of points may have arrested that.

I also think that Collingwood seem to be similar in that regard, the Carlton game is a good example. Think that we had more of it in the first half but it wasn't unitl we kicked straight that the game broke open.

Only my opinion, if, buts and maybes mean nothing to the end result. You won, we lost.

Still think that goal kicking is one area can improve in, though.

 

[Torpy]

Straight from The Age...

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/ne...ng-scoring-yips/2007/05/20/1179601242511.html

In all, Collingwood kicked 2.6 in the third quarter, compared with the Dogs' 7.4, allowing the victors to gain momentum, wipe off the deficit and take the lead late in the term, setting them up for the last-quarter kill.

Was Collingwoods inaccuracy part of the reason why we lost? Certainly. We had the chance to really put you guys to the pump (Heath Shaw ) and we let you off the hook.

 

[Darpy]

Football's a funny game, think that we missed crucial goals at crucial times, where as the dogs didn't. That was probably the difference. WB tend to be a fast running side that gains pace and run as mometum/confidence builds. One or two goals instead of points may have arrested that.

I also think that Collingwood seem to be similar in that regard, the Carlton game is a good example. Think that we had more of it in the first half but it wasn't unitl we kicked straight that the game broke open.

Only my opinion, if, buts and maybes mean nothing to the end result. You won, we lost.

Still think that goal kicking is one area can improve in, though.

good post, entirely agree

i think if we kicked straighter when 25 in front we would have crushed their spirit and gone on to a comfortable victory.
Rocca is starting to annoy me with his kicking, i dont recall it ever being this bad.

 

[Medstar]

cop out.

we missed a few gimmie set shots as well - giansiracusa the main culprit.

fact is you kicked 10 behinds and we kicked 9, and the rest were rushed. maybe one OOB by rocca?

you tend to kick long to contests, (usually rocca) which get punched through or rushed, while we tend to spot up a small leading player more often.

Its not a cop out, there were some bad misses but it didnt really effect the result.

I can think of 3 puds that were missed which would have helped our cause.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Two of Rocca's misses led to rebound goals to the Bulldogs, so they were extremely expensive. Thats a four goal turnaround just on two set shots.

 

[stefoid]

good post, entirely agree

i think if we kicked straighter when 25 in front we would have crushed their spirit and gone on to a comfortable victory.
Rocca is starting to annoy me with his kicking, i dont recall it ever being this bad.

and if we had kicked straighter with the sitters we missed, we wouldnt have been so behind... if, if..

Did collingwood have 8 shots on goal during the 3rd quarter? sloppy journalism - 6 points were registered does not equate to 6 missed shots on goal. the stats say your players registered 10 kicked behinds, while ours registered 9. i can remember one OOB by rocca.

you kick deep to contests in your forward line - unless roca marks all of them, you are going to get a lot of rushed behinds, which is what you got.

im just saying you werent much more innacurate than we were when it came to actual shots on goal. its just that we had a lot more shots on goal than you.

 

[anzacs]

cop out.

we missed a few gimmie set shots as well - giansiracusa the main culprit.

fact is you kicked 10 behinds and we kicked 9, and the rest were rushed. maybe one OOB by rocca?

you tend to kick long to contests, (usually rocca) which get punched through or rushed, while we tend to spot up a small leading player more often.

Premiership myth... you'll ever win one with those 22 runts

 

[DWil6]

Premiership myth... you'll ever win one with those 22 runts

lol was always gonna turn. There is no doubt that we have hurt ourselves with innacuracy over the last few weeks. We have gotten away with it against lesser teams, but need to make every post a winner against the better teams. We didn't, we helped make the Bulldogs job easier. We may have lost anyway, but it certainly doesn't help.

 

[stefoid]

Premiership myth... you'll ever win one with those 22 runts

which runts? the ones that pantsed you at clearances and contested ball in the 2nd half? those runts?

whats the use of having slow players with crap skills if they get pantsed by runts at the hard stuff?

(you asked for it)

 

[boydsno1]

both side's missed easy oppetunities and collingwood had only 1 extrapoint if you removed all the rushed behinds. also gia missed a good set shot chance by kicking it out o the full lol. but was a greatgame espically that first quarter were it was goal for goal.

 

[MACDAICOS]

cop out.

we missed a few gimmie set shots as well - giansiracusa the main culprit.

fact is you kicked 10 behinds and we kicked 9, and the rest were rushed. maybe one OOB by rocca?

you tend to kick long to contests, (usually rocca) which get punched through or rushed, while we tend to spot up a small leading player more often.

Get F**ked.

 

[Benno From Berwick]

Premiership myth... you'll ever win one with those 22 runts

Good contribution!

 

[Benno From Berwick]

Get F**ked.

Classy contribution.

Where is MACPIE when you need him??

 

[ChipDouglas]

and if we had kicked straighter with the sitters we missed, we wouldnt have been so behind... if, if..

Did collingwood have 8 shots on goal during the 3rd quarter? sloppy journalism - 6 points were registered does not equate to 6 missed shots on goal. the stats say your players registered 10 kicked behinds, while ours registered 9. i can remember one OOB by rocca.

you kick deep to contests in your forward line - unless roca marks all of them, you are going to get a lot of rushed behinds, which is what you got.

im just saying you werent much more innacurate than we were when it came to actual shots on goal. its just that we had a lot more shots on goal than you.

Now its you who are prepertrating myths. Collingwood do not exclusively bomb it deep into our forward line but rather we can spot up targets (like the Bulldogs) AND we can kick long to a couple of tall targets unlike the Bulldogs who can't employ that tactic because of their height issues (lowest for contested marks inside 50). Its what made us the highest scoring team last year and but for this years inaccuracy we would be well up there again. You can't tell me the Bulldogs missed the easy set shots fron infront like we did because its simply not true and if you don't agree then you didn't see the game. Feel free to chew the fat on the Collingwood board but don't make stuff up or at the very least expand your knowledge on the other teams that way your argument might stand up.

Bottom line the Pies missed 4 relatively simple shots from pretty much directly infront when the game was still "on" and the Bulldogs none. And I'm no rocket scientist but 6 points has always been better than 1 or in Rocca's case none here endith the lesson.

 

[Art Corvelay]

lol @ myth.

The reason why it hurt us so much is we missed at crucial times. If we had converted we would have stopped the run of play you guys were gaining, and cemented our lead. Missing from 30m out doesn't do anyones confidence any good, and can bring the whole team down. See, it happened

 

[Coin_Toss]

It's not a myth, it's a fact. We have been very inaccurate this year, a lot of it stems from confidence, but that's no excuse; these are well-paid professionals missing from 15 metres, 20 metres and 30 metres. Anthony Rocca is the worst culprit, but from (outisde) 50 he is a natural. If Paul Medhurst doesn't return this week, I think I'll have to say something to the coach personally. He has kicked 6-1 this year, at an average of 2 goals per game, which is very good and he has the knack of contributing at the highest level, never been a very good player at the seconds, so get him in.

 

[Torpy]

and if we had kicked straighter with the sitters we missed, we wouldnt have been so behind... if, if..

Did collingwood have 8 shots on goal during the 3rd quarter? sloppy journalism - 6 points were registered does not equate to 6 missed shots on goal. the stats say your players registered 10 kicked behinds, while ours registered 9. i can remember one OOB by rocca.

you kick deep to contests in your forward line - unless roca marks all of them, you are going to get a lot of rushed behinds, which is what you got.

im just saying you werent much more innacurate than we were when it came to actual shots on goal. its just that we had a lot more shots on goal than you.

FFS, you'd think by now you'll realise we are talking about inaccuracy from SET SHOTS, especially the easy gimmes from 20 - 30m out. What's the stat for set shots huh? Especially from close range, as these are the ones that a good team MUST convert.

You had one main culprit in Giansiracusa missing his kicking boots, we had Cloke, Rocca and Heath Shaw all missing basically sitters. Professionals should NOT miss those kind of shots, at least not on a consistent basis. It saps confidence and we all know how well the Bulldogs run the ball out of defence...

 

[Notus]

cop out.

we missed a few gimmie set shots as well - giansiracusa the main culprit.

fact is you kicked 10 behinds and we kicked 9, and the rest were rushed. maybe one OOB by rocca?

We were 25 points in front. We then had 3 behinds in a row. You then kicked 3 goals. That put you 7 points behind and on a roll. If we kicked the 3 goals instead of the 3 behinds, when we were 25 points in front -that would have made it 3 x 6 = 18 + 25 = 43 points in front. To say our inaccuracy didn't end up meaning anything is absurd.

p.s Has Rocca ever kicked over 50 goals in a season?

 

[Jabso]

Steffy my boy, bad kicking is bad football, good kicking is good football. If you can kick accurately and we are kicking bad, it means you are playing better football. Why do people think it's a cop out?

 

[Benno From Berwick]

Steffy my boy, bad kicking is bad football, good kicking is good football. If you can kick accurately and we are kicking bad, it means you are playing better football. Why do people think it's a cop out?

Actually i agree with you. It isn't a COP OUT. One goal instead of a point changes the entire change. (Sliding doors type of thing)

Collingwoods misses were all at important times in the game.

 

[stefoid]

Actually i agree with you. It isn't a COP OUT. One goal instead of a point changes the entire change. (Sliding doors type of thing)

Collingwoods misses were all at important times in the game.

the sliding doors work both ways. we missed almost as many set shots as the pies, many gimmies too. had we kicked a couple of goals instead of points in the first half (scoreline 8.8 vs 11.7)....

yet all we hear about is 'if only the pies didnt misss so many goals', which underrates our dominate performance in the second half. pies had one good quarter and we had two and thats why they lost.

 

[deck]

cop out.

we missed a few gimmie set shots as well - giansiracusa the main culprit.

fact is you kicked 10 behinds and we kicked 9, and the rest were rushed. maybe one OOB by rocca?

you tend to kick long to contests, (usually rocca) which get punched through or rushed, while we tend to spot up a small leading player more often.

Maybe true. But I as a Collingwood supporter I worry only about what Collingwood do wrong. If the opposition kick 5.30 I don't care it is not Collingwoods problem. No one is taking anything away from your win but we do have a inaccuracy that needs to be rectified sooner rather than later.

The fact is we missed 3 get able shots early in the 3rd quarter that could have put the game out of reach. It not a matter of whether that would have been the case but a matter of we shouldn't have to beg that question at all. We should have kicked those goals and should know the answer of whether 40 points early in the 3rd was enough for a win.

 

[ChipDouglas]

the sliding doors work both ways. we missed almost as many set shots as the pies, many gimmies too. had we kicked a couple of goals instead of points in the first half (scoreline 8.8 vs 11.7)....

yet all we hear about is 'if only the pies didnt misss so many goals', which underrates our dominate performance in the second half. pies had one good quarter and we had two and thats why they lost.

Time to come clean, you weren't at the game were you. I can recall Rocca missing two, Heath Shaw, Cloke and Swan in the last all missing easy set shots from 30 or closer. The only "easy" miss for the Bullies was from Giansiracusa on the run in the third, all their other set shots from 30 they nailed. Our inaccuracy was more costly than the dogs it's that simple and if your head wasn't jammed up your ass you could see that.