Autopsy AFL 2025 Round 11 - Cats v Dogs Thurs May 22nd 7:30pm AEST (GMHBA)

[someday-somehow]

That's enough to make me stop watching for a while and im a Tigers supporter...
This games gone stupid.

You'll be back!

 

[someday-somehow]

Getting free wins at their cheat ground helps keep them perpetually competitive.

Some very good late picks and free agents on top gets them up at the pointy end most seasons.

Aah yes the cheat ground argument. Question for you....if Geelong were to play Hawthorn in Geelongs home final....whose home ground would we have to play on?

Of the last 25 grand finals there has been a MCG club in 16 of them....yet there's only 4 MCG clubs - yours being one of them, coincidence? - I think not!.

You are in no position to talk about cheat grounds.

 

[joe444]

You know that comedy joke where the sergeant calls for volunteers to step forward and everyone steps backwards, leaving one guy?

This home ground stuff is like that. Nobody forced the other clubs to abandon their identity and soul. Getting lectured by a team called "Western" about that stuff in particular is silly.

 

[MaxiBont]

You know that comedy joke where the sergeant calls for volunteers to step forward and everyone steps backwards, leaving one guy?

This home ground stuff is like that. Nobody forced the other clubs to abandon their identity and soul. Getting lectured by a team called "Western" about that stuff in particular is silly.

 

[someday-somehow]

the boundary umpire that allowed the cats the ball when it was clearly out of bounds should be demoted.
pure incompetence or pure wink,wink I've got you cats.

watch the replay - there was two of them on either side of the contest and neither of them called it. Guess it may have been not quite over the line before it was controlled.

OR, the evil geniuses at geelong have worked out that bribing boundary umpires can be more fruitful than field umpires, remember the umpires touched call on the goal line against collingwood?....that must confirm it!

So that's 8 points we have courtesy of boundary umpires, pity your busted arse mob haven't figured out how the world works yet.

 

[danster168]

Oh we can’t talk about this.. doesn’t suit the sulks narrative.

Grow some balls doggie fans. You lost again to a top side… you can bully crap sides all you want, but you guys constantly choke against the best.

Suck it up and deal with it

my take as a neutral is that the dogs played really well. They should be proud of their efforts. I personally don't get the Dempset fuss. The ball looked in to me anyway. and he was getting held anyway.

However, the umpires were probably a 4 goal advantage to the cats so they were a big influence on the match.

 

[joe444]

My point exactly.

What's your next trick, accidentally agreeing Ballarat is a joke?

 

[_Mike_]

Of course we were. At no point in 120 minutes of football were the Bulldogs in the lead.

You might want to go back and check what the score at Qtr time was.

 

[PhatBoy]

Aah yes the cheat ground argument. Question for you....if Geelong were to play Hawthorn in Geelongs home final....whose home ground would we have to play on?

Of the last 25 grand finals there has been a MCG club in 16 of them....yet there's only 4 MCG clubs - yours being one of them, coincidence? - I think not!.

You are in no position to talk about cheat grounds.

It’s the dumbest point in history. We are 53-30 over the last 5 and a half seasons AWAY from there. And that includes a season we didn’t make the finals

But nah it’s the home ground advantage that keeps us competitive.

The disparity gets even better as you go back further through the previous 15 years.
I for one am certain that a side that at one point won 52 out of 55 games, was only winning because of its home ground.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

You might want to go back and check what the score at Qtr time was.

115 minutes then. Point still is valid.
Dogs can't argue they should have won.

 

[_Mike_]

115 minutes then. Point still is valid.
Dogs can't argue they should have won.

Nah, you cant backpedal after making that assertion. Cats piled on the pressure in the 2nd and stopped the run, in the end had a much more damaging attack and cleaner footy that won the game.

 

[tropicaltiger]

Bevo was tbh badly out coached. When geelongs pressure ramped up and we closed down your handpass chains in tight and leap frogging over the top, you didn’t have an answer or adjustment.

Top sides will continue to beat doggies unless you can adjust when things go wrong and the heat is on

the lopsided free kick count and 33 shots at goals (5 Posters) suggests poor umpiring and inaccuracy were the major factors.

 

[Mofra]

115 minutes then. Point still is valid.
Dogs can't argue they should have won.

We had more scoring shots. Including 5 posters.

Yes, I think we should have kicked better and should have won.
That is within our control though so is not blaming any other factors. We kicked poorly and got the result we deserved for that.

 

[Munich]

my take as a neutral is that the dogs played really well. They should be proud of their efforts. I personally don't get the Dempset fuss. The ball looked in to me anyway. and he was getting held anyway.

However, the umpires were probably a 4 goal advantage to the cats so they were a big influence on the match.

So dogs still would have won if they'd converted all of their missed goals.

Cool.

 

[Munich]

the lopsided free kick count and 33 shots at goals (5 Posters) suggests poor umpiring and inaccuracy were the major factors.

Was our loss to Carlton due to the lopsided free kick count?

 

[geelong_crazy26]

the lopsided free kick count and 33 shots at goals (5 Posters) suggests poor umpiring and inaccuracy were the major factors.

Why would a lopsided free kick count suggest poor umpiring? Dumb comment. Free kicks are supposed to be based on merit, not ensuring both sides receive even frees

 

[tropicaltiger]

Was our loss to Carlton due to the lopsided free kick count?

re-read please. my point was that Bevo was NOT outcoached but a victim of circumstances.

 

[Munich]

re-read please. my point was that Bevo was NOT outcoached but a victim of circumstances.

I'm not talking about Bevo.

I'm responding to your comments about free kicks being a factor.

 

[G String]

That was a weird game - I honestly thought the Dogs looked like a 5-10 goal better team but somehow Geelong won.

 

[Wojcinski]

re-read please. my point was that Bevo was NOT outcoached but a victim of circumstances.

but you said that circumstance was poor umpiring, why are you backpedaling now

 

[tropicaltiger]

but you said that circumstance was poor umpiring, why are you backpedaling now

whatever.... pretty sure you would think dogs getting a 26-12 umpire ride would still give the cats a 14p win. which is silly. dogs were victims of unusual circumstances and bevo was not outcoached

 

[kickazz]

We got more frees because of our pressure, got quite a few HTB. If you don't watch the game you probably can't comment on that, and indeed as has been said here that no one has really offered up much of any evidence of bad decisions on the night, just vibes based on numbers.

It was a cracking game. Both sides had periods of dominance they didn't capitalise upon. It was a indeed like many cats v dogs games where dogs dominate the middle and cats rely on backline and very fast rebound. Cats should have put the dogs away with easy misses to Mullin, Dempsey and Blicavs. Dogs got some late ones in quarters and many of their behinds were under major pressure, but they missed enough easy ones to feel aggrieved with their performance here

Early cats pressure when without the ball was good, they often prefer to corall and guard space, but last night they pressured the ball carrier, even if it meant the next guy was free, meaning someone else had to leave their man, and so on.

Cameron and Lobb had a great battle. Cameron won but Lobb was very good in some tough contests bodylining the ground ball in that last quarter. An underrated part of Cameron's game last night was his ability to spoil or halve contests when out of position. It really was crucial as Lobb dominated with intercept marks last year.

I think the turning point was a period in the last where Geelong slowed it down. They needed to catch their breath as the dogs were all over them. Indeed Geelong used up all their rotations, unusual. The last Ten minutes cats were the better side. Had more posession and used it better.

 

[The Casey Cat]

whatever.... pretty sure you would think dogs getting a 26-12 umpire ride would still give the cats a 14p win. which is silly. dogs were victims of unusual circumstances and bevo was not outcoached

The Dogs weren't good enough. We've actually been on the receiving end of similar free kick differentials this year. Some wins and some losses. Does not mean it was a factor. And as far as at least one of the important ones that led to a goal late if the Dogs are dumb and unorganised enough have Neale in the ruck against someone miles smaller while English watches from 60m away that's their own fault.

 

[kickazz]

We had more scoring shots. Including 5 posters.

Yes, I think we should have kicked better and should have won.
That is within our control though so is not blaming any other factors. We kicked poorly and got the result we deserved for that.

What was your take on Dogs' field kicking?


It's easy to look at 16.17 or 6 posters and highlight that, but not having seen much of the dogs this year I wonder if that was much below par.

In the last 6 or so years, cats dogs games have often been a case of Dogs dominating midfield and moving the ball well, with Geelong barely hanging in. But there'd inevitably be a turnover on the I50 delivery, and/or Tom Stewart would dominate.

Sure goalkicking mattered, but I think Geelong pouncing on the turnover was a big factor again last night.

 

[Dancing Dougy]

Damn there's a lot of defensive Cats supporters in here.