-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Autopsy Opening Round = GWS 104-52 Collingwood
- Thread starter PonsfordMagpie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Cousin of Daicos
HEY MAGPIE ARMY!
I’ve been saying this for a year. Yet people act funny when I do and I’m not sure why
I also have been saying I think he would make a great tagger. Reckon yesterday it might have been worth sending him to shut down Callaghan even if only for one quarter.
He has all the pieces to be a pretty decent mid. I assume just needs the fitness to do it for a full game.
sr36
TheBrownDog
I thought it was a really competitive game for 3 quarters. We just fluffed our chances so were down on the scoreboard.
But they're better athletes at the moment.
sr36
TheBrownDog
Their outs probably made them faster and gave them more run, which is how they got us.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
We won GB gets and most GB stats as well as contested possession.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 19,198
- 51,110
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
By “act funny” do you mean pointing out the lack of evidence that Beau could go with a hard running mid?
Once again, that isn’t an easy fix.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
manicpie
Brownlow Medallist
- Jul 19, 2019
- 26,466
- 48,691
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Yep, it never ends well when you dominate a period but can't score. Especially when you're trailing. We needed to make the most of that period in the 3rd and we didn't. That, as you said, was the ball game
manicpie
Brownlow Medallist
- Jul 19, 2019
- 26,466
- 48,691
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Our problem isn't GB gets, it's what happens with the very next possession. We get first hands to the ball, which counts as a GB get but it's when we dish it off that sides are picking us offWe won GB gets and most GB stats as well as contested possession.
Cousin of Daicos
HEY MAGPIE ARMY!
Well, they sent him to tag for one quarter against North last year and it worked
It was but one part that helped get us back in the game.
Again, that was one quarter. Which makes me assume that currently that’s what his fitness/aerobic capacity allows for.
I have no idea if that’s a thing you can build upon. I assume you can. Hope you can. Because I still think he can be a weapon in there.
I think David King got it right, and yours truly 
, the defensive running was non existent yesterday, we were not defending overly high yet they had players simply working harder to get to contest and the want to get forward.
I don’t subscribe to poor kicking etc as the cause, and I was disappointed to hear Fly reference it to be honest.
Plain and simple we had our pants pulled down around the ground, in nearly every aspect.
Couple that with the declining form of some players, it’s somewhat concerning.
, the defensive running was non existent yesterday, we were not defending overly high yet they had players simply working harder to get to contest and the want to get forward.I don’t subscribe to poor kicking etc as the cause, and I was disappointed to hear Fly reference it to be honest.
Plain and simple we had our pants pulled down around the ground, in nearly every aspect.
Couple that with the declining form of some players, it’s somewhat concerning.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 19,198
- 51,110
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Sigh, once again, raising the AnT in an already trained up elite athlete is not easily done.
Beau isn’t suddenly going to transform into a sheepdog like Kane-o.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Reminds me to much of the Buckley days
nahnah
Hall of Famer
- Sep 26, 2012
- 37,988
- 59,856
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
So now we dont even get an Ed Allan nomination for rising star, opening round is beyond garbage please opt out next year Collingwood
Cousin of Daicos
HEY MAGPIE ARMY!
I didn’t say he would.
I said I assume it can be done and hope it can be done
Even you say yourself “not easily done”. Which would again suggest…it can be done
Cousin of Daicos
HEY MAGPIE ARMY!
I think David King got it right, and yours truly
I don’t subscribe to poor kicking etc as the cause, and I was disappointed to hear Fly reference it to be honest.
Plain and simple we had our pants pulled down around the ground, in nearly every aspect.
Couple that with the declining form of some players, it’s somewhat concerning.
Oh in this specific game the inaccuracy was just an excuse. We’ve won plenty of games kicking inaccurately.
If we had lost this game by say, 20 points. Then you could blame inaccuracy. But if you flip 6.16 to 16.6 we still lost lol
Even if we kicked straighter? They would have just won it out of the middle and scored when they needed to anyway.
The problem wasn’t inaccuracy. The problems were no pressure, no defensive effort anywhere across the ground and terrible transition. Among other things.
Anytime we even looked like we might mount a comeback, they simply scored a goal or two to snuff it out.
We were never winning this game and no amount of accuracy was going to change that. Accuracy would have just made the losing margin smaller.
epistemology
Rookie
The humidity in Sydney this time of year is much much higher than in Melbourne. If you're not acclimated then it sucks the life out of you.
Kirby
Shambolic Rube
Veteran
Collingwood - Beau McCreery Player Sponsor 2023
10k Posts
Collingwood - Caleb Poulter Player Sponsor 2022
Collingwood - Josh Daicos Player Sponsor 2021
Collingwood - Tyler Brown Player Sponsor 2020
Collingwood Magpies - Brayden Sier 2019 Player Sponsor
Collingwood - Jaidyn Stephenson Player Sponsor 2018
It was end possession and ball use that killed us in the end, of which a considerable cause was the giant’s pressure, particularly in the third term.
We dominated possession in the forward half in the third term but couldn’t score. All that energy drained.
Any fool could see that we were then spent by three quarter time and were always going to get pumped in the last.
We didn’t look too slow early, yes we have a couple of slow players, but it wasn’t costing us. It really stung when Nick cramped up because it robbed us of his speed and freed up Bedford for a more attacking role with his pace. When you are spent and chasing tail you look slow.
I agree with others though that we erred in not putting Crisp through the middle with Jordy being out.
Next week will tell us a lot more. If we can put things together and get the win then we’ll still be on track. This also will help stop the dummy spits on this board.
We dominated possession in the forward half in the third term but couldn’t score. All that energy drained.
Any fool could see that we were then spent by three quarter time and were always going to get pumped in the last.
We didn’t look too slow early, yes we have a couple of slow players, but it wasn’t costing us. It really stung when Nick cramped up because it robbed us of his speed and freed up Bedford for a more attacking role with his pace. When you are spent and chasing tail you look slow.
I agree with others though that we erred in not putting Crisp through the middle with Jordy being out.
Next week will tell us a lot more. If we can put things together and get the win then we’ll still be on track. This also will help stop the dummy spits on this board.
GPS wise we ran 8km less than GWS. When we win its even, give or take 5km.
Given the stats were quite even overall. Losing the tackle count 39-59 shows that the 8km of opposition extra running put the pressure on the ball, and in turn giving them a kicking efficiency win 76% to 66% with the extra player to relieve turnovers.
So same story as last year where we need a few rounds for the fitness and pressure to rise. I suspect it's a bit by design to peak in the middle and end of the season. And last year was a fail due to injuries killing momentum, but we are trying it again.
Given the stats were quite even overall. Losing the tackle count 39-59 shows that the 8km of opposition extra running put the pressure on the ball, and in turn giving them a kicking efficiency win 76% to 66% with the extra player to relieve turnovers.
So same story as last year where we need a few rounds for the fitness and pressure to rise. I suspect it's a bit by design to peak in the middle and end of the season. And last year was a fail due to injuries killing momentum, but we are trying it again.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Would we structure up better if one of the talls switched to defence and Cox comes into the team?
I like that Hawthorn experiment with their players and are flexible.
Cox is a massive upgrade in the ruck compared to McStay or any other part time.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 19,198
- 51,110
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Sep 2, 2011
- 2,483
- 2,959
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Phoenix Suns
<> What I saw was a pretty even matchup until midway in the 4th quarter.
<> Giants dominant in the first quarter then Pies dominant in the 2nd and 3rd quarter, with the exception of the last 5 minutes in the 2nd quarter where the midfielders were witches hats when Giants rebounded resulting to 3 easy goals. All midfield generated.
<> Pies inside 50 entries were inefficient and easy challenged because Pies were just too short. Taylor for Giants was best on ground for them and he ate up defensively. No resistance on him.
<> Pendlebury is simply too old now. Especially to play in the middle or as a ball follower. He needs to come off the bench and play forward uptop and use his vision and decision making to find forwards. Defensively up the ground he's just way too slow and doesn't have the burst anymore.
<> Sidebottom, Lipinski, Pendlebury, Jaicos are all silky skilled players but lack the athleticism and acceleration to defend speedsters. This is going to be a weakpoint teams will exploit.
<> Perryman is skilled but he isn't a thoroughbred athlete. So having Perryman, Long, Allan along with Lipinski, Pendlebury meant Pies have an abundance of medium sized players who are skilled but bring the same traits to the table.
<> Membrey, Mihocek, Elliot, Schultz share similarities to the above. All move similarly and aren't elite athletes. Elliot is clearly showing his age. Membrey and Mihocek need to be spread out from each other because they duplicate the same skill sets.
What I think needs to happen,
<> Make Quaynor a fulltime midfielder. He's lost some of his bulkiness and looked spry and agile. He has the speed, athleticism, quickness and burst to defend but also create offensive attacks.
<> De Goey also needs to be fulltime midfielder to help with the lack of speed.
Which means less forward time but that is OK since Membrey was brought in to help.
<> Keep the backline as is and limit Jaicos back there. Houston fixes this. I would also move Reef more uptop and put Moore deep as he is 6'8 and Pies need tall timbers out back. Hoskin Elliot may need to play more backline roles due to his versatility.
<> Get Mason Cox back ASAP. McStay is awful as ruck.
<> Giants dominant in the first quarter then Pies dominant in the 2nd and 3rd quarter, with the exception of the last 5 minutes in the 2nd quarter where the midfielders were witches hats when Giants rebounded resulting to 3 easy goals. All midfield generated.
<> Pies inside 50 entries were inefficient and easy challenged because Pies were just too short. Taylor for Giants was best on ground for them and he ate up defensively. No resistance on him.
<> Pendlebury is simply too old now. Especially to play in the middle or as a ball follower. He needs to come off the bench and play forward uptop and use his vision and decision making to find forwards. Defensively up the ground he's just way too slow and doesn't have the burst anymore.
<> Sidebottom, Lipinski, Pendlebury, Jaicos are all silky skilled players but lack the athleticism and acceleration to defend speedsters. This is going to be a weakpoint teams will exploit.
<> Perryman is skilled but he isn't a thoroughbred athlete. So having Perryman, Long, Allan along with Lipinski, Pendlebury meant Pies have an abundance of medium sized players who are skilled but bring the same traits to the table.
<> Membrey, Mihocek, Elliot, Schultz share similarities to the above. All move similarly and aren't elite athletes. Elliot is clearly showing his age. Membrey and Mihocek need to be spread out from each other because they duplicate the same skill sets.
What I think needs to happen,
<> Make Quaynor a fulltime midfielder. He's lost some of his bulkiness and looked spry and agile. He has the speed, athleticism, quickness and burst to defend but also create offensive attacks.
<> De Goey also needs to be fulltime midfielder to help with the lack of speed.
Which means less forward time but that is OK since Membrey was brought in to help.
<> Keep the backline as is and limit Jaicos back there. Houston fixes this. I would also move Reef more uptop and put Moore deep as he is 6'8 and Pies need tall timbers out back. Hoskin Elliot may need to play more backline roles due to his versatility.
<> Get Mason Cox back ASAP. McStay is awful as ruck.
- Aug 24, 2009
- 1,148
- 2,974
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Expected scores as shown in the Herald Sun were 95 to 80. Highlights to me what was obvious to the naked eye, that we were missing too many easy shots.
Peters_Nuts
Club Legend
- Oct 16, 2024
- 2,239
- 7,434
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Hope everyone woke up and realised the season isn’t over after Round 0.
The effort definitely wasn’t there yesterday and we hope that it was a wake up call. We should beat Port and the Dogs at the G, suddenly we’re 2-1 with positive %.
There are still 21 games to be played. Yesterday was a blip on the radar and when the fixture got released, this was a game that we probably pencilled in as a loss. Yes they had injuries but they’re obviously a well coached outfit. It’s not like we lost to a bottom 8 side.
On to the next one!
The effort definitely wasn’t there yesterday and we hope that it was a wake up call. We should beat Port and the Dogs at the G, suddenly we’re 2-1 with positive %.
There are still 21 games to be played. Yesterday was a blip on the radar and when the fixture got released, this was a game that we probably pencilled in as a loss. Yes they had injuries but they’re obviously a well coached outfit. It’s not like we lost to a bottom 8 side.
On to the next one!
I only watched the second half yesterday, however some observations:
- We have lost our dare. Too many times we were happy to keep possession outside of our forward 50 before a long kick to a contest. GWS were happy to allow this as it allowed them to flood back and meant that Taylor was able to impact contests more effectively. This was also compounded by our insistence on stop-start footy, setting up on the wing and hoping for a contested mark.
- The game appeared to be a carbon copy of last year's season opener. Relatively even first half with the team who was able to capitalise more effectively on the chances afforded to them eventually going on to win the game.
- Teams who are capable of flooding back and then counterattacking effectively appear to have large amounts of success against us. We seem to struggle against this particular game style; perhaps that's because it exposes our lack of leg speed on the counter and our weakness in marking and converting forward 50 entries.
- If (as one poster has suggested) we're looking to peak later in the season, I don't understand this approach. We have been given an incredibly difficult start to the season (again, despite finishing outside the 8) - there's a realistic chance of us sitting 0-6 or 1-5. If this eventuates, it'll be an uphill battle to make the 8, as it was last season.
The upcoming game against Port will in my opinion tell us a lot more about what to expect this season. Last season the GWS game was written off as an Opening Round experiment, however we were belted by Sydney and St Kilda in successive games at the MCG, with ST Kilda choosing to celebrate their 150th season against us.
Similarly, we have a Port team who you could draw parallels with last year's Sydney side (lower expectations, consistent performers across the last decade), and the Dogs who have chosen to celebrate their 100th anniversary against us at the MCG.
- We have lost our dare. Too many times we were happy to keep possession outside of our forward 50 before a long kick to a contest. GWS were happy to allow this as it allowed them to flood back and meant that Taylor was able to impact contests more effectively. This was also compounded by our insistence on stop-start footy, setting up on the wing and hoping for a contested mark.
- The game appeared to be a carbon copy of last year's season opener. Relatively even first half with the team who was able to capitalise more effectively on the chances afforded to them eventually going on to win the game.
- Teams who are capable of flooding back and then counterattacking effectively appear to have large amounts of success against us. We seem to struggle against this particular game style; perhaps that's because it exposes our lack of leg speed on the counter and our weakness in marking and converting forward 50 entries.
- If (as one poster has suggested) we're looking to peak later in the season, I don't understand this approach. We have been given an incredibly difficult start to the season (again, despite finishing outside the 8) - there's a realistic chance of us sitting 0-6 or 1-5. If this eventuates, it'll be an uphill battle to make the 8, as it was last season.
The upcoming game against Port will in my opinion tell us a lot more about what to expect this season. Last season the GWS game was written off as an Opening Round experiment, however we were belted by Sydney and St Kilda in successive games at the MCG, with ST Kilda choosing to celebrate their 150th season against us.
Similarly, we have a Port team who you could draw parallels with last year's Sydney side (lower expectations, consistent performers across the last decade), and the Dogs who have chosen to celebrate their 100th anniversary against us at the MCG.
Similar threads
- Locked
