you needn't be mate... more top 125 players than anyone. Shoe in...Sweating madly here. Keep going over my team thinking about where the holes are.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
you needn't be mate... more top 125 players than anyone. Shoe in...Sweating madly here. Keep going over my team thinking about where the holes are.
Just echoing the same thoughts here. What a great summary Michael, appreciate the dissection and your time and effort in putting these summaries together!OK, time for #2 ...
Jelly Bean
Backs: Bob Nash, Gary Pert; Mick Gayfer;
Half Back: Jack Monohan; Len Fitzgerald; Dan Minogue (C)
Centre: Dick Condon; Fred Leach; John Greening
Half Forward: Nick Davis; David Cloke; Charlie Pannam Sr
Forward: Andy Krakouer; Gordon Coventry; Frank Hailwood
Followers: Damian Monkhorst; Brianna Davey; Des Tuddenham (VC)
The good: Structurally really solid, with only one problematic line. Great centre and half-forward lines, with plenty of 1890s heroes (Condon, Leach and Pannam all personal favourites). Love Fitzgerald at CHB – he really could have been anything as a footballer if he’d stayed here (won three Magarey medals in SA after he left). Lots of leadership on offer too – Minogue and Tuddy were two of our great leaders, and Bob Nash was a rascal. Nick Davis and Charlie Pannam Snr playing alongside David Cloke looks really good, and choosing Gordon Coventry with your first pick was a smart move: immediately elevates any team. Good to see the long-forgotten Charger Hailwood in the pocket too. Monkey a good ruckman, and Johnny Greening a standout.
Question marks: Well, well, well – you’ve certainly thrown the cat amongst the proverbials here, haven’t you Mr Bean? The big Q in this team is obviously the ruck-rover spot: Bri Davey is in some ways an inspired call. But it also feels a bit cheeky, and it certainly makes the team very hard to judge overall! I’m still grappling with it, I have to admit.
The only non-Bri question mark is over the defence. I think it’s potentially a little slow, and the half-back line is unbalanced. Jack Monohan really was only a CHB – I don’t think he played on a HBF all that often. Whereas Fitzy could have played on a HBF (although a bit of a waste), or at CHF or as a ruck-rover. Ditto with Dan Minogue – he’s not really a flanker. Players who played as ‘followers’ in that time (think Dan, Con McCarthy, Doc Seddon etc) have proven very hard to categorise in these teams. They’re not big enough to be true ruckmen, and not mobile enough to be flankers or ruck-rovers. I see them mostly as a big back or forward pocket. So Dan is not really agile enough to play HBF regularly (my references to him playing across half-back, especially early in his career, were more about him playing centrally). All up that makes for a slow half-back line. When you then add in the back line, which isn’t exactly uber-quick itself, it makes the whole defence feel a little slow. I think the back half could sustain either Nash or Minogue but probably not both. There’s no back pocket or back flanker who is going to provide much dash out of the back half, to complement the dashing key position players you’ve got.
Best line: Condon-Leach-Greening. Thrilling centre line. I love the whole Fred Leach story and have always been fascinated by him. Dick Condon was a marvel of his time, and a player I would try to have got into my own team. And Greening was a star who would have become even better if he hadn’t been … well, you know.
Weakest link: Aside from the half-back line, I was also a bit surprised to see Andy Krakouer in there, given he really only gave us one good year. Sure, it was a bloody good year, but still ...
Player quality: Good (11 players from the top 125) Rating 7/10
Team balance: 8/10 – only the half-back line stops it from being higher.
Summary: A really good team that hangs together well and has plenty of star power, and a good representation of the deep past, which I admire. But it does have an unhelpfully slow defence. And I still have no idea how to rate a team with Bri Davey as ruck-rover! That has really thrown me
Haha - Ctrl C then Ctrl V againHe did! Peter McKenna was the 8th player selected:
View attachment 1282238
This was a 'draft', with 11 participants taking it in turn to make their selections and form a team (of 18). 198 players were chosen, and (like in a normal draft) nobody could be chosen more than once! Those who participated were not simply naming their best ever Collingwood sides.
Yep I’m eagerly awaiting South of the Yarra feedback to know the benchmark (IMO) for what it could be.Best ever collingwood side is next…. I have mine, thanks in part to this thread
Wow - if i could give you extra credits just for that answer, I would ...Talking about having links to the older players apparently when I was in Grade Two we were asked what we wanted to be when we grew up. Most kids answered Superman, Batman, Policeman, Nurse, Doctor, Fireman or Cowboy (probably politically incorrect now). My answer was Albert Collier.
We all Bleed Black and White.
Thanks for the feedback guys - glad they're hitting the mark thus far!Just echoing the same thoughts here. What a great summary Michael, appreciate the dissection and your time and effort in putting these summaries together!
Wow - if i could give you extra credits just for that answer, I would ...
No current season stats available
No current season stats available
Thanks MM - I had so much fun writing that book, so I'm glad you liked it. Took a year off from work to do it and loved every second. And I'm so glad I did it then, because at least some of the Machine guys were still around, so I could talk to Bruce Andrew, Percy Bowyer, Len Murphy and Harry Collier. That was pretty specialThis thread is exactly the type of thing I wanted to see when I first joined this site a long time ago.
I'll just take this opportunity to thank Lardieslads for all the great Collingwood books he's given us over the years. Particularly 'A Century of the Best', which I got as a present as a young teenager in 1992 and is still with me today. It really sparked my love of Collingwood's history. Although I have to say I reckon I was probably happier not knowing about the horrible story of John Greening.
Another brilliant and insightful review. Fast becoming my favorite part of the day around this time. Start scrambling for my phone to read the next instalmentAnd now it's time for review #3 ...
South Of The Yarra
Backs: Harold Rumney, Jack Hamilton, Alf Dummett
Half Back: Denis Banks, Albert Collier, Shane Morwood
Centre: Graeme Wright, Des Fothergill, Bruce Abernethy
Half Forward: Bill Twomey Sr, Frank Murphy, Ted Lockwood
Forward: Harry Curtis, Brian Taylor, Mick Twomey
Followers: Darren Jolly, Ronnie Wearmouth, Billy Libbis
The good: Love the set-up of most of the team, with the vast majority of players being where they should be. Also plenty of quality individually, and I loved seeing Frank Murphy getting some credit. He’s a vastly underrated footballer and certainly one of the finest CHFs in our history (though he was, in modern terms, more a mobile lead-up forward than a clunking pack mark type player). Fother in the centre is a dream, and there’s plenty of pace and experience throughout.
Question marks: The forward line is too tall. Curtis, BT and Mick Twomey are all big blokes and the team sorely needs a small man there. You took Harry C at 130: take Percy Wilson instead (or Bone, Norman etc who followed later) and it’s just about a perfectly balanced team.
The only other super-nitpicking point is that we have two pure rovers (Wearmouth and Ray Shaw) in the ruck division, rather than a rover and a ruck-rover. But Ronnie could probably handle the ruck-rover role anyway.
Best line: There’s a few to choose from here but I really like the half-back line. Tough as nails with Banks and Leeter, perfectly counterbalanced by Morph’s poise. Superb.
Weakest link: The top-heavy forward line. And leadership: incredibly, only one of the team ever captained Collingwood (Harry Curtis, for one year). That’s a stark contrast with some of the other teams selected here.
Player quality: Outstanding. 15 out of the 18 were in our 125, and Darren Jolly was one of the three others. Plus every player played at least 50 games – no one-season wonders here. 9/10
Team balance: 8/10 – forward line and Ronnie as ruck-rover the only issues
Summary: With a couple of minor exceptions, this is a really well balanced team in terms of selection, populated by 15 of the club’s best 125 players. So the individual quality is there, and few players have been played horribly out of position. And the three players chosen from outside the 125 are all perfect for their roles – Jolly in the ruck, Abernethy on the wing and Teddy Lockwood at half-forward. But the absence of on-field leaders is a negative, as is a too-tall forward line. Still, a bloody good team.
Ray Shaw is in my time I thought, unless there has been a behind the scenes poaching attemptAnd now it's time for review #3 ...
South Of The Yarra
Backs: Harold Rumney, Jack Hamilton, Alf Dummett
Half Back: Denis Banks, Albert Collier, Shane Morwood
Centre: Graeme Wright, Des Fothergill, Bruce Abernethy
Half Forward: Bill Twomey Sr, Frank Murphy, Ted Lockwood
Forward: Harry Curtis, Brian Taylor, Mick Twomey
Followers: Darren Jolly, Ronnie Wearmouth, Billy Libbis
The good: Love the set-up of most of the team, with the vast majority of players being where they should be. Also plenty of quality individually, and I loved seeing Frank Murphy getting some credit. He’s a vastly underrated footballer and certainly one of the finest CHFs in our history (though he was, in modern terms, more a mobile lead-up forward than a clunking pack mark type player). Fother in the centre is a dream, and there’s plenty of pace and experience throughout.
Question marks: The forward line is too tall. Curtis, BT and Mick Twomey are all big blokes and the team sorely needs a small man there. You took Harry C at 130: take Percy Wilson instead (or Bone, Norman etc who followed later) and it’s just about a perfectly balanced team.
The only other super-nitpicking point is that we have two pure rovers (Wearmouth and Ray Shaw) in the ruck division, rather than a rover and a ruck-rover. But Ronnie could probably handle the ruck-rover role anyway.
Best line: There’s a few to choose from here but I really like the half-back line. Tough as nails with Banks and Leeter, perfectly counterbalanced by Morph’s poise. Superb.
Weakest link: The top-heavy forward line. And leadership: incredibly, only one of the team ever captained Collingwood (Harry Curtis, for one year). That’s a stark contrast with some of the other teams selected here.
Player quality: Outstanding. 15 out of the 18 were in our 125, and Darren Jolly was one of the three others. Plus every player played at least 50 games – no one-season wonders here. 9/10
Team balance: 8/10 – forward line and Ronnie as ruck-rover the only issues
Summary: With a couple of minor exceptions, this is a really well balanced team in terms of selection, populated by 15 of the club’s best 125 players. So the individual quality is there, and few players have been played horribly out of position. And the three players chosen from outside the 125 are all perfect for their roles – Jolly in the ruck, Abernethy on the wing and Teddy Lockwood at half-forward. But the absence of on-field leaders is a negative, as is a too-tall forward line. Still, a bloody good team.
Ha ha - you're right! I'd had him on my mind coz I'd checked to see whether Ronnie had played as ruck rover when he and Ray played together, so just mentioned him instead of Billy Libbis. Now corrected - thanksRay Shaw is in my time I thought, unless there has been a behind the scenes poaching attempt
And now it's time for review #3 ...
South Of The Yarra
Backs: Harold Rumney, Jack Hamilton, Alf Dummett
Half Back: Denis Banks, Albert Collier, Shane Morwood
Centre: Graeme Wright, Des Fothergill, Bruce Abernethy
Half Forward: Bill Twomey Sr, Frank Murphy, Ted Lockwood
Forward: Harry Curtis, Brian Taylor, Mick Twomey
Followers: Darren Jolly, Ronnie Wearmouth, Billy Libbis
The good: Love the set-up of most of the team, with the vast majority of players being where they should be. Also plenty of quality individually, and I loved seeing Frank Murphy getting some credit. He’s a vastly underrated footballer and certainly one of the finest CHFs in our history (though he was, in modern terms, more a mobile lead-up forward than a clunking pack mark type player). Fother in the centre is a dream, and there’s plenty of pace and experience throughout.
Question marks: The forward line is too tall. Curtis, BT and Mick Twomey are all big blokes and the team sorely needs a small man there. You took Harry C at 130: take Percy Wilson instead (or Bone, Norman etc who followed later) and it’s just about a perfectly balanced team.
The only other super-nitpicking point is that we have two pure rovers (Wearmouth and Billy Libbis (oops!)) in the ruck division, rather than a rover and a ruck-rover. But Ronnie could probably handle the ruck-rover role anyway.
Best line: There’s a few to choose from here but I really like the half-back line. Tough as nails with Banks and Leeter, perfectly counterbalanced by Morph’s poise. Superb.
Weakest link: The top-heavy forward line. And leadership: incredibly, only one of the team ever captained Collingwood (Harry Curtis, for one year). That’s a stark contrast with some of the other teams selected here.
Player quality: Outstanding. 15 out of the 18 were in our 125, and Darren Jolly was one of the three others. Plus every player played at least 50 games – no one-season wonders here. 9/10
Team balance: 8/10 – forward line and Ronnie as ruck-rover the only issues
Summary: With a couple of minor exceptions, this is a really well balanced team in terms of selection, populated by 15 of the club’s best 125 players. So the individual quality is there, and few players have been played horribly out of position. And the three players chosen from outside the 125 are all perfect for their roles – Jolly in the ruck, Abernethy on the wing and Teddy Lockwood at half-forward. But the absence of on-field leaders is a negative, as is a too-tall forward line. Still, a bloody good team.
I dunno, I picked players based on performances in big games as a criteria…the Weid is legendary from that perspective.Michael.... can you take over the list management role at the club please. Am not joking.
Still think this teams wins. Some tough reviews coming up for other teams (including mine) I fear.....
Good question! I always thought it had to do with their roles in ruck contests….which became irrelevant when it became stacks on at every contest.This may or may not be the appropriate thread to ask this question. However, I’ll give it a shot anyway.
What’s the difference between a Rover and a Ruck Rover in the traditional sense?
I’m young so I’m used to it being “the players in the Center square”.
Thanks!
Would be my guess also 42. Rovers were always your smaller types whereas RRs were mid-size who could also ruck if needed. I believe they all followed the ball too hence followers, though not sure if the centreman did also.Good question! I always thought it had to do with their roles in ruck contests….which became irrelevant when it became stacks on at every contest.
That's a darned good question, and the answer has changed a bit over time.This may or may not be the appropriate thread to ask this question. However, I’ll give it a shot anyway.
What’s the difference between a Rover and a Ruck Rover in the traditional sense?
I’m young so I’m used to it being “the players in the Center square”.
Thanks!
I dunno, I picked players based on performances in big games as a criteria…the Weid is legendary from that perspective.
This thread is exactly the type of thing I wanted to see when I first joined this site a long time ago.
I'll just take this opportunity to thank Lardieslads for all the great Collingwood books he's given us over the years. Particularly 'A Century of the Best', which I got as a present as a young teenager in 1992 and is still with me today. It really sparked my love of Collingwood's history. Although I have to say I reckon I was probably happier not knowing about the horrible story of John Greening.