Review R1: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly vs. Collingwood

[CrowBloke]

He was up and about not long after, thinking/hoping he was just winded. Looked like that sort of landing.

In his presser, Nicks confirmed Dawson was winded but should be ok.

 

[CrowBloke]

You’re right. Keays was definitely a high end contributor in that year, it’s unarguable.

... and last year, when he finished 4th in the B'n'F and won the Sando Medal "...for his professionalism and preparation to play at the highest level" (AFC website).

I wasn’t far behind old mate on Keays value, but I definitely turned when he was moved out of the midfield.

I never understood why the Clam was so vitriolic in his attacks on Keays, by whom I was frustrated because of his lack of a R-foot kick, but his elite two-way running was invaluable to us. For sure, Keays has found his niche up forward and set up 3 goals in the second half vs the Pies. Keays has even learned to look for a teammate in a better poz than him (well, except before he kicked that very good checkside goal in the last ).

That said, if both Rankine and Draper were coming in this week, he’d be on the edge for mine.

Do you mean Keays? I can't see Nicks dropping Keays at all, let alone for Draper.
At this stage of their careers, Keays > Draper.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Who would flame you for that?

Berry.

 

[CrowBloke]

But was last night's first half vs second half contrast in part by design?

I'd love to think so.
The Crows' play in the second was Bizarro-opposite to that of the 3rd quarter. IF that was by design as part of deliberately manipulating a game-style to control game-tempo, ie by shifting gears, then the Nicks/Murray combo has really clicked.
However, if the 2nd quarter was by Nicks' directive, changed up by Murray in the 3rd, then they have a problem.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Well.. looking at the second quarter stats from Keays..

View attachment 2552831

You sure he couldn’t have done much more?.. maybe just a little bit?

Ball hardly came in our forward line.

What were the stats of all our forwards?

BTW, agree Keays had a quieter game.

 

[CrowBloke]

Bond, haven't watched him closely before, he's a lock, Laird out when all fit and back.

Quality post , but I disagree (only) with the above. Bond's disposals created at least 3 very damaging turnovers.

 

[FR0GGY]

Quality post , but I disagree (only) with the above. Bond's disposals created at least 3 very damaging turnovers.

According to the afl site stats
laird 5 turnovers but 8 intercepts 352m gained
Bond 3 turnovers but 5 intercepts, 265m gained

 

[Mutineer]

Reckon it would be seen as a harsh call by some on here. Berry hasn't been bad but we know what his ceiling is.

Then there is the anti-Peatling crew which is basically just Mutineer.

You obviously have me mixed up with another poster I don't have any particular issue with Peatling being in our midfield rotations at all...but you do you. Berry looked pretty good on the weekend with his clean breaks at speed from the centre ball ups too. Doubt he'd be in any discussions to be dropped off that performance.

 

[StonesThrow]

Just watched it. What was going on at the near wing in the 1st qtr? Counted about 5 or so out on the full with little pressure.

A lot has said about the likes of Milera and co. so won't go through the popular ones

Thought Murray had his best game by far since his knee injury. Jumping for intercept marks all over the place and was more assured with his decision making. Was very offence minded. We really need him to reach his potential with Keane and Worrell.

I expected to see worse from Bond, but think he's unfairly treated on this board. He's played 13 games. Had two turn overs by foot and they resulted in goals. One of those was about 1 inch from being a very good kick to Soligo off the outside of his boot that would have opened up play. Was beaten a few times on the lead, but Elliot would be one of the hardest match ups in the comp. I like his confidence and willingness to take the game on and search for more attacking options. I don't think his disposal is a concern (yet) given his experience level. I've got faith he'll be a decent player.

Berry was an interesting one. Had an alright game but I don't think he showed anything new. Knows how to get a break away clearance and has probably improved in this area, but lacks some class by foot. Until he improves his kicking I wouldn't have him as a midfield lock. He's good depth at this stage. Peatling also isn't amazing by foot, but he has better skills than berry imo.

Still think Butts doesn't fit this kicking heavy game plan. He's too slow with the ball. He's important depth, but it's the first one out when Keane is back. Time to invest in a young key back (not using a first rounder) with more polish by foot.

McAndrew surprised given his poor outing against freo. I still think some of these so called taps to advantage are just pure chance, but he definitely has more craft in these contents than ROB. Couple of good handballs and looks like it isn't the first time he's ever held a football.

Pedlar a bit quiet, but his skills look a lot better then recent times. I think like cook, he's a player we need to persist with as he's a pure footballer.

T Murray looked way out of his depth in all facets of the game. Annoying that we need to use a spot right now,but I get it.

It seems like we carried a bunch of players who were managed almost like a pre season game (Soligo, Michalanney, Ah Chee, Peatling). I'm still shocked that this didn't cost us the game. All of these players bar Ah chee seemed to click more as the game went on thankfully. Very much needed coming up against the dogs.

Not sure who comes out for rankine. Think it will be one of Berry or Peatling. I'm all for the removal of laird, but can't see it happening. Think we persist with bond.

 

[Soggy2112]

Well.. looking at the second quarter stats from Keays..

View attachment 2552831

You sure he couldn’t have done much more?.. maybe just a little bit?

I think you’re missing my point. Playing half forward there will be moments in games where it’ll be really hard to get a touch, no matter how hard you work.

I think it’s harsh to question him as a leader because he had a quiet quarter on the stat sheet.

If it turns out he stopped running as hard in that quarter, different story.

 

[Gtowncrow]

Because Keane and Hinge are out ...?

Maybe Nankervis? Bond's turnovers on Saturday night hurt us. He laid only one tackle, too.
I don't think that Rankine comes in for Bond; it would mess up the team structure.
More likely Nankervis <=> Bond, Rankine <=> Pedlar (unlucky), although Nicks doesn't like changing a good-winning side.

Nicks will change a winning side this week methinks.

Unless there's no spot for Izak??

 

[Golumless]

Nicks will change a winning side this week methinks.

Unless there's no spot for Izak??

Yup, Nicks just won't be making any unforced changes.

My bet is Bond -> Rankine. Bit unfortunate for the lad, but Max has another game under his belt and well, it's Rankine.

 

[Slim258]

Because Keane and Hinge are out ...?

Maybe Nankervis? Bond's turnovers on Saturday night hurt us. He laid only one tackle, too.
I don't think that Rankine comes in for Bond; it would mess up the team structure.
More likely Nankervis <=> Bond, Rankine <=> Pedlar (unlucky), although Nicks doesn't like changing a good-winning side.

Nank won't come in, he's not a shut down player.
Bond kept Elliot, they're best forward to 5 Disposals. Turnovers are going to happen when you play a fast paced game, 3 is not bad. Murray also had 3 and Worrell had 4, but they're not going anywhere.

Dogs don't really have electric, dynamic small forwards therefore the only change will be Rankine for Bond.

 

[Not Darryl Moss]

Ugly: our away guernsey Something about it doesn’t seem right.
But 1/1 in it

Good: the white top and shorts make them look bigger.
Bad: Should have gone for something more edgy...
Ugly: That's a bird wing??

 

[Cromulant]

Yup, Nicks just won't be making any unforced changes.

My bet is Bond -> Rankine. Bit unfortunate for the lad, but Max has another game under his belt and well, it's Rankine.

Taking a defender out when our gameplan is built around defence you reckon ??

 

[FR0GGY]

Nank won't come in, he's not a shut down player.
Bond kept Elliot, they're best forward to 5 Disposals. Turnovers are going to happen when you play a fast paced game, 3 is not bad. Murray also had 3 and Worrell had 4, but they're not going anywhere.

Dogs don't really have electric, dynamic small forwards therefore the only change will be Rankine for Bond.

They’ve got west, who goes alright, although he’s playing higher up the ground.

 

[Slim258]

They’ve got west, who goes alright, although he’s playing higher up the ground.

Handy yes, but is also known to run with role, so I reckon he will go to Milera

 

[Golumless]

Taking a defender out when our gameplan is built around defence you reckon ??

Yup. Good old nuance is at play here.

 

[SugarShane]

Just watched it. What was going on at the near wing in the 1st qtr? Counted about 5 or so out on the full with little pressure.

It was incredible. Same spot every time, skewed off around the same angle every time. It was almost like watching a replay of the same incident over and over.

 

[Betts are off]

Can anyone explain why Collingwood got rid of Mihocek? Their tall forward stocks are now abysmal and they got nothing for him

I think they are saving money for a massive Ben King offer.

 

[Golumless]

I'd love to think so.
The Crows' play in the second was Bizarro-opposite to that of the 3rd quarter. IF that was by design as part of deliberately manipulating a game-style to control game-tempo, ie by shifting gears, then the Nicks/Murray combo has really clicked.
However, if the 2nd quarter was by Nicks' directive, changed up by Murray in the 3rd, then they have a problem.

I think these arguments takes away too much agency from Collingwood. It's clear they adjusted to our ball movement game plan (noting we were attacking the wings in the first quarter, so we kept it as is).

The most likely scenario is Collingwood made some adjustments and got ascendancy as they forced us into the trenches (and Collingwood under McRae has been very good at forcing teams into the trenches, as this has been one of the best sides at stopping ball movement in the last few years), Nicks (alongside some brilliance from Murray just prior to half time, you do need these splash plays) then changed it up at half time, alongside probably giving his players a bake, and we kicked back into gear.

The one thing I do find wierd about us in these scenarios is we're rather resistent to rotating Dawson to half back when we're struggling to get the ball moving from the backlines.

 

[Mutineer]

I think they are saving money for a massive Ben King offer.

Or they could actually give young promising athletic KPF Charlie West the opportunities he deserves after an excellent VFL season in 2025.

Charlie West | AFL

Follow Charlie West's progress through AFL

www.collingwoodfc.com.au

 

[Jarman3]

I'd love to think so.
The Crows' play in the second was Bizarro-opposite to that of the 3rd quarter. IF that was by design as part of deliberately manipulating a game-style to control game-tempo, ie by shifting gears, then the Nicks/Murray combo has really clicked.
However, if the 2nd quarter was by Nicks' directive, changed up by Murray in the 3rd, then they have a problem.

I doubt that was either Nicks or Davis. Surely no team would intentionally play like that (unless they're tanking)? We were just bad for that part of the game, I don't think it was part of any grand plan.

 

[skittlebrew]

I feel like some people here have been vastly overstating the capabilities of Toby Murray.

I haven't watched one second of SANFL in the last few years but the vibe I got from here was that he was very raw. Don't recall anyone hyping him up, at least not our lord and savior bigman.

 

[footy4ever]

Well jolly good morning everyone.

I woke up to a gloomy sky and rain and don't GAF.

What a glorious perfect weekend of football.

Crows win

Crows win at the G

Collingwood lose
...and to the Crows no less

I bet on that to happen

Port lose
...and to Norf no less bwahaha




Bring on the Bulldogs and that phone-boy sook!