Autopsy Collingwood Ducks v Roos

[hilly]

I'm surprised so many people thought we would win at 3/4 time.

Coll was about $4.20 on BetFair at 3qt.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Swallow_Wood]

Ignoring the utter dumpster fire this thread is it was great to see 4 young guys have potentially career best games in LDU, McKay, Bonar and Larkey.

More fitness and strength, more quality in midfield, a proper CHF and a continued agressive mindset and we will be going places.

 

[The Anvil]

You would hope common sense takes place and players don’t need to counter it.

If the AFL comes out and reinforces that dropping to your knees and raising your arm is considered ducking and will constitute prior opportunity, then you would hope players stopped doing it.

The worst thing they can do is come out this week and pay him free kicks for that action due to the media outrage.

16 years of watching Joel Selwood suggests to me that common sense will not take place.

 

[Roosurgence]

16 years of watching Joel Selwood suggests to me that common sense will not take place.

Unfortunately I think you are spot on.

In fact I can see the over correction this week where they will pay him free kick after free kick and the confusion continues.

I just don’t get why it’s a story in the first place? The AFL clearly said that action would be deemed to be contributing to the tackle going high and wouldn’t be paid as a free kick.

It’s like the media have totally ignored what the AFL actually came out and clarified and are getting up in arms about it.

 

[andana]

Did you know… in order to play the role of an insane person in the movie “Joker”, Joaquin Phoenix spent an entire season following Collingwood

 

[Warrboy]

Been reflecting the game - watching it was weird. It was like seeing an ex-girlfriend and feeling all warm and fuzzy and entertaining thoughts of re-kindling things again before realising it wouldn't work out.

It was confusing. North looked and played like a competitive AFL team and it didn't quite reconcile with what we have had to put up with for the rest of the year. Warms the heart to think of the potential of some players and the team itself. It also frustrates the hell out of you knowing that level of work rate and hunger for game has been barely evident all season.

 

[RHLK]

That is so sad.

A player who is "revolutionary to the game" is one who bends the rules, attempts to manipulate the umpires, and whose first instinct isn't to engage in a genuine physical contest, or utilises a genuine skill, or to bring teammates into the game with an exquisite footy brain.

The bloke takes possession, drops at the knees and lifts his arm. If there was no tackler there he would be taking possession, dropping at the knees and going straight to ground. His only intention is to draw a free.

 

[SMaturin]

I’d coach my players to swing the forearm violently whenever they tackle him. Around the midriff of course.

But if he continues to want to put his head at midriff height…

 

[The Anvil]

Unfortunately I think you are spot on.

In fact I can see the over correction this week where they will pay him free kick after free kick and the confusion continues.

I just don’t get why it’s a story in the first place? The AFL clearly said that action would be deemed to be contributing to the tackle going high and wouldn’t be paid as a free kick.

It’s like the media have totally ignored what the AFL actually came out and clarified and are getting up in arms about it.

The umpires know who the players are who are doing this (Cody Weightman being another), this would clearly get solved if it got called holding the ball every time for the next month on these known players until they stop doing it.

 

[giantroo]

 

[zoomba23]

View attachment 1444385

Makes the result all the more bittersweet

 

[Merlin007]

I would have less issue with Ginnivan if it was just the occasional getting low on purpose, but he does the full kit and kaboodle.

Sees contact coming and drops like a fainting goat.

Doesn't try and avoid the tackle but invites it knowing he will get hit high.

Lifts his arm to force tackles that were initially legal, high.

All 3 fit into the rule change in 2017 that came about because of Selwood. If you invite the contact and push it high, shrug it up, drop at the knees or lift the arm, then no high free is to be paid if the tackle was initially reasonable.

Can call him smart, but its not smart gambling with your brain. He's going to end up seriously hurt if he plays like that.

Disappointed with David King on this - King was defending Ginnivan on 'first crack' as working within the rules, and people had to be better with their tackling technique; to his credit, Montagna called him out on it - you can't be both the game's leading advocate to protect the head and also extolling the cleverness of players for deliberately inviting contact to the head; if you're going to get penalised for it regardless, you might as well decapitate someone and be done with it

 

[The Anvil]

Disappointed with David King on this - King was defending Ginnivan on 'first crack' as working within the rules, and people had to be better with their tackling technique; to his credit, Montagna called him out on it - you can't be both the game's leading advocate to protect the head and also extolling the cleverness of players for deliberately inviting contact to the head; if you're going to get penalised for it regardless, you might as well decapitate someone and be done with it

I don't mind what DK says about it. End of the day, tackling him like this will get you a free kick:

 

[Forever North]

King and every other moron AFL footy ‘pundit’ defending Ginnivan and other AFL players for ’exploiting the rules’ are full of s**t. They are the first to mock and ridicule soccer players for doing exactly the same thing, diving, gamesmanship, bending the rules, milking for frees etc. Happens in every sport.

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

King and every other moron AFL footy ‘pundit’ defending Ginnivan and other AFL players for ’exploiting the rules’ are full of s**t. They are the first to mock and ridicule soccer players for doing exactly the same thing, diving, gamesmanship, bending the rules, milking for frees etc. Happens in every sport.

I think it's time we acknowledged the wonderful skill of the soccer elites who have perfected the art of diving to earn penalties. The first step in this process will be to accept the 2006 world cup result verses Italy. Australia deserved to lose this and in fact, Italy should have performed several more dives to win at least six more penalties so that we were well and truly put in our place as the losers of that match.

 

[nelroo]

David King the flog.. had to laugh when he questioned why players want to “go after” that bleached turd Ginnivan . I loved Moons response of “your kidding aren’t you?”

 

[Marstermind]

King and every other moron AFL footy ‘pundit’ defending Ginnivan and other AFL players for ’exploiting the rules’ are full of s**t. They are the first to mock and ridicule soccer players for doing exactly the same thing, diving, gamesmanship, bending the rules, milking for frees etc. Happens in every sport.

King has championed himself as the protector of the head and harsh penalties for bumps. Yet he defends a bloke whose first instinct is to draw opponents into tackling him around the head. It's ludicrous.

It's so easy to stamp this nonsense out. Doesn't matter if it's Ginnivan, Selwood, Weightman, a NMFC player or anyone. Not only do you not get the free kick if you 'draw head high contact' - whether it's by ducking, or collapsing at the knees, or shrugging - you get a free kick against you. Watch it stop pretty quickly.

 

[ferball]

King has championed himself as the protector of the head and harsh penalties for bumps. Yet he defends a bloke whose first instinct is to draw opponents into tackling him around the head. It's ludicrous.

It's so easy to stamp this nonsense out. Doesn't matter if it's Ginnivan, Selwood, Weightman, a NMFC player or anyone. Not only do you not get the free kick if you 'draw head high contact' - whether it's by ducking, or collapsing at the knees, or shrugging - you get a free kick against you. Watch it stop pretty quickly.

I don't mind shrugging a tackle. Its a legitimate attempt to break the tackle and get clear. But it should be considered prior opportunity. Dunno if it should be a free if it slips high. Depends on tackling player's intent when the high contact comes honestly.

 

[Mr Lloyd Christmas]

Thing is, were we good or the Pies poor to make it a competitive game? (for a welcome change yes)

WC Eagles beat them in Melbourne!!

They really aren't that great imo, and with two of their best 5 players out, I honestly think we could have won that despite all the excuses of "why" we lost when in control.

 

[Swallow_Wood]

I don't mind shrugging a tackle. Its a legitimate attempt to break the tackle and get clear. But it should be considered prior opportunity. Dunno if it should be a free if it slips high. Depends on tackling player's intent when the high contact comes honestly.

Ginnivan isn't trying to shrug the tackle for the purpose of getting free, he is doing so for the purpose of shifting the tacking arm high above the shoulder, hence his free arm raises as he drops at the knees. Its a clear and obvious tactic and should never be rewarded with a free kick imo. If the afl is serious about head injuries this should be a free against as it is that action that is drawing and thus causing the contact high.

 

[ferball]

Thing is, were we good or the Pies poor?

WC Eagles beat them in Melbourne!!

They really aren't that great imo, and with two of their best 5 players out I think we could/should have won that.

We were missing three top five picks and Tarryn Thomas who went at pick 8.

From our "theoretical" best team.

Plus Aaron Hall, maybe Comben.

 

[Themanbun]

Ginnivan isn't trying to shrug the tackle for the purpose of getting free, he is doing so for the purpose of shifting the tacking arm high above the shoulder, hence his free arm raises as he drops at the knees. Its a clear and obvious tactic and should never be rewarded with a free kick imo. If the afl is serious about head injuries this should be a free against as it is that action that is drawing and thus causing the contact high.

100%. His momentum isn't going out of the tackle. It's going down.

If the tackler aborted mid-tackle, the bloke would hilariously plonk onto his hands and knees.

 

[ferball]

Ginnivan isn't trying to shrug the tackle for the purpose of getting free, he is doing so for the purpose of shifting the tacking arm high above the shoulder, hence his free arm raises as he drops at the knees. Its a clear and obvious tactic and should never be rewarded with a free kick imo. If the afl is serious about head injuries this should be a free against as it is that action that is drawing and thus causing the contact high.

Yeah, there is clear guidance about that being not a free. It gets paid all the time tho. If you tackle someone round the arm and they make you raise your arm high then that should be against you, if its a battle of strength. Cos you've forced them to tackle illegally. But you see those tackles let go and HTB paid all the time these days.

What Ginnivan does is different tho. Its not really part of a strength contest.

 

[Mr Lloyd Christmas]

We were missing three top five picks and Tarryn Thomas who went at pick 8.

From our "theoretical" best team.

Plus Aaron Hall, maybe Comben.

Ferbs i'm not saying we didn't play well, it just seems a bit odd that when they "switched on" all of a sudden we became uncompetitive completely.

Like in the Laidley years years I think we overachieved with what he had available. I maintain with Laidley crew we hold that lead not just become a complete rabble in the space of about 1 second.

I think we are underachieving as we get dominated in quarters by average sides way too easily, too often.

Look at the * injectors? Are they that much better than us to BEAT the Lions yet we were humiliated by them? I simply don't think that gap exists between the lists.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Yeah, there is clear guidance about that being not a free. It gets paid all the time tho. If you tackle someone round the arm and they make you raise your arm high then that should be against you, if its a battle of strength. Cos you've forced them to tackle illegally. But you see those tackles let go and HTB paid all the time these days.

What Ginnivan does is different tho. Its not really part of a strength contest.

Disagree about it being a contest of strength. A shrug or pushing your arms out sideways is taught as self defense when someone grabs you, because it uses short lever points which give you a significant advantage to escape. The person getting tackled always has the advantage in that regard, unless you get them really low around the waist... which is countered by dropping at the knees, theres a reason they do both actions.

If a tackle slips high, then it should rightly be a free.

But if the person getting tackled is the reason for that contact going high, stuff them.

It's the same situation as them relaxing high frees when a player leads with the head. The person who intentionally puts their head down when they don't need to, gains an advantage as they can't be tackled from the front. There was a few of these that were let go in our game alone because the player in possession did it.