Footyology podcast

[RohanConnolly]

Hi guys,

The Round 18 preview episode is up. Full look at all nine games, we review last Monday night's Pies-Suns clash, plus plenty of discussion on list rumblings, retirements, and how any of us will possibly survive this year without the Brownlow night red carpet special!

Cheers,
Rohan

Footyology Podcast: Rumblings and retirements | Footyology

footyology.com.au

 

[Registered User]

Is finey going to disclose the cause of his current speech impediment and how long it’s going to last because it has drastically changed how he sounds and his pronunciation of words.....

I can't not notice this now. It sounds like he's got something wrong with his tongue

 

[lumpinee]

what a farce, these isolation rules get changed to suit,is that an admittance of engineering ? if i was Collingwood i would default on principle.
not because theyre disadvantaged by about 5 days of less outdoor practice,no,because every other person has to do 14 days these so called
experts say,this whole scenario is just one big hoax and scam.the season should be cancelled immediately and shoulda been cancelled back in july
same for horse racing,its either one or the other,its either a pandemic or its not ?....shaving 7 days off quarantine clearly demonstrates that its a crock of s**t

 

[1870 yeh right]

Great summation by Finey of the Brownlow count as a tv spectacle and the medals relevance as an award.

Rohan, could you and Finey create your own alternative award for your podcast prior to or after the Brownlow; the best non midfielder for the year?

 

[Harry O]

I can't not notice this now. It sounds like he's got something wrong with his tongue

He was known for playing in cricket teams at Ajax that always choked in finals. Not sure if related

 

[RohanConnolly]

Hi folks,

The Round 18 review (plus preview of Monday night) episode is up now. Spent a fair bit of time on each game this week, hope you find something to like in it.

Cheers,
Rohan

Footyology Podcast: And then there were eight | Footyology

footyology.com.au

 

[BrainOfMorbius]

Before you praise Finey for his knowledge of trivia, you might want to just google his claims quickly:

Nylon

Was the fabric called 'nylon' named for a conflation of the 'New York' and 'London'?

www.snopes.com

Sorry Finey, not true.

 

[RohanConnolly]

Before you praise Finey for his knowledge of trivia, you might want to just google his claims quickly:

Nylon

Was the fabric called 'nylon' named for a conflation of the 'New York' and 'London'?

www.snopes.com

Sorry Finey, not true.

Well, what do you know! I've passed this disturbing revelation on to my co-host!

 

[RohanConnolly]

Hi guys,

No footy this weekend but still plenty to discuss on the podcast. This week we talk Ben Brown on the trade table, the All-Australian squad, with Finey giving his team, and there's a thorough review of each of the 10 clubs who missed out on finals. Hope you enjoy it.

Cheers,
Rohan

Footyology Podcast: All-Australians and also-rans | Footyology

footyology.com.au

 

[joey_jo_jo]

RoCo I dont have a twitter account but like to lurk sometimes so thought Id ask you here about one of your recent posts.

Why do you think the announcement of Sheedy as a new board member is a good thing? Its not consistent with what you have been saying the last few months. It smack of the classic essendon short term thinking/quick fix/messiah complex attitude that has engulfed this club for the last 20 years.

And his comments last night being supportive of Dodoro and the state of the list also seem diametrically opposed to what you have been saying.

Personally I think as good as sheeds was he has some responsibility for the downward trajectory of the club too. stayed on way too long, and went for quick fix trades instead of regenerating the list. It set us back years.

I also dont like that he is meant to be a "mentor" to rutten and is talking about us "needing to stop copying richmond and have our own identity". It feels alot like the club is jumping at shadows again instead of backing a new coach, this feels alot like history repeating with the way we treated knights /worsfold, not saying either of them were the right or wrong choice nor do I think Rutten is or isnt but we dont even give them a chance to put their plans into motion. SLightest noise from past players/influential supporters and we toss it all in the bin for next shiny new object. If the hawks/tigers/cats leaders acted the way ours do Clarkson/Bomber/Hardwick would all have been out the door within a year or two of their coaching careers.

 

[lumpinee]

As a neutral this is an interesting post Above ^^^^ Nefarious club Essendon at the moment imo...reminds of Victorias and Australias present
Administrators in that theyre all puppets out up front and behind the scenes in the dark shadows lies a sh*t swamp of corruption,deceit,inbred issues
that need be drained asap before any progress can be made

 

[HeathComeBack]

As a neutral this is an interesting post Above ^^^^ Nefarious club Essendon at the moment imo...reminds of Victorias and Australias present
Administrators in that theyre all puppets out up front and behind the scenes in the dark shadows lies a sh*t swamp of corruption,deceit,inbred issues
that need be drained asap before any progress can be made

haha thats very Qanon!
i personally think its just as simple as the club thinks they are better than they are and thats due to Daddoro over rating his players to the point where he cannot improve his team because he is too hard to negotiate with.

 

[TP86]

Where’s today’s update!? Need to hear it before first bounce tonight.

 

[RohanConnolly]

RoCo I dont have a twitter account but like to lurk sometimes so thought Id ask you here about one of your recent posts.

Why do you think the announcement of Sheedy as a new board member is a good thing? Its not consistent with what you have been saying the last few months. It smack of the classic essendon short term thinking/quick fix/messiah complex attitude that has engulfed this club for the last 20 years.

And his comments last night being supportive of Dodoro and the state of the list also seem diametrically opposed to what you have been saying.

Personally I think as good as sheeds was he has some responsibility for the downward trajectory of the club too. stayed on way too long, and went for quick fix trades instead of regenerating the list. It set us back years.

I also dont like that he is meant to be a "mentor" to rutten and is talking about us "needing to stop copying richmond and have our own identity". It feels alot like the club is jumping at shadows again instead of backing a new coach, this feels alot like history repeating with the way we treated knights /worsfold, not saying either of them were the right or wrong choice nor do I think Rutten is or isnt but we dont even give them a chance to put their plans into motion. SLightest noise from past players/influential supporters and we toss it all in the bin for next shiny new object. If the hawks/tigers/cats leaders acted the way ours do Clarkson/Bomber/Hardwick would all have been out the door within a year or two of their coaching careers.

G'day Joey,

I've actually spoken about it in the podcast today (which should be up shortly). In short, I think getting Sheeds on board as at least some sort of check and to ask the right questions is a good move. What I DO have reservations about (and should have said in that tweet) is the effective subveritng of the democratic process of a board election.

They've effectively wiped out the hopes of any potential candidates (as Sheeds will be re-elected in Dec along with Wellman). And it effectively makes the board largely consist of club rather than member-based appointments, so that does concern me.

That said, I don't think at moment even a couple of member-backed new board appointees would make nearly enough difference to how the club is being run. Fair to say I'm pretty disillusioned with the whole joint at the moment.

Anyway, like I said, it's on the podcast, so have a listen.

Cheers,
Rohan

 

[RohanConnolly]

Where’s today’s update!? Need to hear it before first bounce tonight.

Will be posted very shortly!

 

[RohanConnolly]

Hi guys,

Here's the new podcast episode, all four finals previewed in detail, plus discussions on trades, the pre-finals bye, Kevin Sheedy on the Essendon board and the purchase of Angry Anderson's infamous "Batmobile" from the 1991 grand final! Enjoy.

Cheers,
Rohan

Footyology Podcast: A final blow to integrity? | Footyology

footyology.com.au

 

[RohanConnolly]

Hi guys,

The latest episode is up nice and early! We've got comprehensive reviews of all four finals, and what rippers they were! Check it out.

Cheers,
Rohan

Footyology Podcast: Four fantastic finals fill us up | Footyology

footyology.com.au

 

[RohanConnolly]

Hi guys,

Here's the latest ep. Plenty of trade talk, big previews of both semi-finals, and the return of the Rant-Off, in which I don't hold back on the Bombers (been brewing a while, this one).

Cheers,
Rohan

Footyology Podcast: Bombers blow a gasket | Footyology

footyology.com.au

 

[lumpinee]

Finey that was one RIPPING rant ...ROFL

 

[Registered User]

Hoorah! The rants are back.

 

[workhorse]

Hi guys,

Here's the latest ep. Plenty of trade talk, big previews of both semi-finals, and the return of the Rant-Off, in which I don't hold back on the Bombers (been brewing a while, this one).

Cheers,
Rohan

Footyology Podcast: Bombers blow a gasket | Footyology

footyology.com.au

Rohan,

Love the podcast! In fact, I’ve been listening since it’s inception, hell, I even used to watch the live Youtube/C31 shows in the good old says (remember stars in cars!). That said, yesterday was the first time I had a legitimate gripe with what you discussed. Yes, the dreaded “Collingwood Clash Jumper”

Firstly, Collingwood’s ‘inverse of their home jumper’ is absolutely a sufficient clash jumper, as when worn with white shorts it creates a majority white strip, much the same as the Geelong home jumper with white shorts. Considering the Collingwood home strip is defined as ‘dark’, this clash works perfectly well when we play other ‘dark’ teams. In fact, we have worn the white strip 8 times this year, out of 10 away games! Funnily enough, one of those games was not versus Geelong. Further to this, why should Collingwood be the only club in the league that needs to provide a single separate clash jumper for one opponent (Geelong), when the simple solution is to do away with the out-dated white shorts principle and have the shorts match the teams' home jumper? As an aside, Collingwood are actually the only team, in the clash jumper era, to provide a single, one-off clash jumper for one opponent – 2011 and 2012 vs North Melbourne.

Here is the 2011-2012 "2nd" Collingwood Clash Jumper

I love that you and Finey are traditionalists, but this view that it seems you’ve taken up, that many old-timers trot out ad nauseum, that the ‘away’ team has to wear white shorts is just an absolute nonsense. Sydney have not worn White shorts against anyone bar similarly coloured Gold Coast since the early 90’s, or perhaps even earlier! You also make it seem like this issue is unique to Collingwood vs Geelong. It absolutely is not. Geelong wearing their home shorts vs a ‘dark’ team in white shorts creates the same issue. Refer below – Geelong vs Carlton, Round 3 2013. Dogs breakfast.

I agree that Eddie McGuire’s tenuous “hand-shake agreement” with Frank Costa is no reason for teams to wear certain strips, but his actual point is absolutely spot on. Common sense should prevail. Do I need to remind you of every Geelong vs Collingwood match up from 2007 (beginning of the clash jumper era) until last years Qualifying Final? Collingwood in home jumper plus black shorts, versus Geelong in home jumper plus white shorts. Every single time. That includes finals in 2007, 2009, 2010 and 2011, of which two were contested with Geelong being the “home” team.

I made the point earlier about Collingwood being one of the most prolific wearers of their Clash Jumper, and I think it’s important to remind everyone of this, especially when you compare it to fellow ‘big-4’ clubs. Collingwood is the only big 4 club to wear the full clash strip against the other three in away games. We wore it versus Carlton this year, hell, we even wore it in the famous 2018 Preliminary Final vs Richmond. Compare that to Carlton, Richmond and Essendon who, when fall as the away team vs Collingwood, trot out their dark home jumper with White shorts. Why? Let’s, also, not forget the absolutely abominable Clash strips the Bombers and Essendon have trotted out. A few of which barely created a sufficient clash.

http://footyjumpers.com/images/Richmond-Clash-2011.gif

http://footyjumpers.com/images/Essendon-Clash-2009.gif

Finally, if you’re going to criticise Collingwood as being arrogant for expecting the AFL to apply common sense, I’d be interested in your thoughts on two other recent finals, West Coast vs Carlton 2011 Semi Final, and Port Adelaide vs Richmond 2014 Semi Final? West Coast were forced to wear white shorts in a game at Subiaco so Carlton could wear their full dark home strip, and 2014 was probably one of the greatest jumper fiascos of all time – Richmond in their ‘clash’ jumper with black shorts, vs Port Adelaide in black and white prison bars (for which they had to get made the week of that game) and white shorts, at Adelaide Oval. Absolute farce.

Why do shorts matter? If home jumpers don't clash, then both teams should wear them with appropriate shorts to differentiate!

Anyway, hope you get a chance to read this. Looking forward to the next pod, Go Pies!!

 

[Hard Ball Get]

Hi guys,

Here's the latest ep. Plenty of trade talk, big previews of both semi-finals, and the return of the Rant-Off, in which I don't hold back on the Bombers (been brewing a while, this one).

Cheers,
Rohan

Footyology Podcast: Bombers blow a gasket | Footyology

footyology.com.au

Hey mate,
Appreciate your work as always, easily the best analysis available, given your coverage of all games and teams.

Two quick things...
Will you be doing a full wrap of the dogs and WCE like was done for the non finals teams? I was a bit disappointed that more time wasnt spent on them through the week.

Secondly, I appreciate your frustration with Essendon, but what makes the show great is that equal time is given to all teams and games - Dogs/Saints/Dees get as much time as Pies, Tigers etc.
I wonder if one of the latter sides was in a similar predicament, if you would give as much air time to them in a rant? I appreciate the reasons and agree with most, but felt it took away from what makes the show great (and different from rubbish like footy classified)

Keep up the great work. Cheers.

 

[HeathComeBack]

Hey mate,
Appreciate your work as always, easily the best analysis available, given your coverage of all games and teams.

Two quick things...
Will you be doing a full wrap of the dogs and WCE like was done for the non finals teams? I was a bit disappointed that more time wasnt spent on them through the week.

Secondly, I appreciate your frustration with Essendon, but what makes the show great is that equal time is given to all teams and games - Dogs/Saints/Dees get as much time as Pies, Tigers etc.
I wonder if one of the latter sides was in a similar predicament, if you would give as much air time to them in a rant? I appreciate the reasons and agree with most, but felt it took away from what makes the show great (and different from rubbish like footy classified)

Keep up the great work. Cheers.

i tend to agree with you but i love seeing the bombers in disarray so i don't mind all the Essendon talk at the moment!

 

[lumpinee]

i tend to agree with you but i love seeing the bombers in disarray so i don't mind all the Essendon talk at the moment!

same dont know what im enjoying more,Essendon's mass exodus of experience & upheavel or Carltons splash of cash on over rated outside half bank flankers come mercenaries

 

[RohanConnolly]

Rohan,

Love the podcast! In fact, I’ve been listening since it’s inception, hell, I even used to watch the live Youtube/C31 shows in the good old says (remember stars in cars!). That said, yesterday was the first time I had a legitimate gripe with what you discussed. Yes, the dreaded “Collingwood Clash Jumper”

Firstly, Collingwood’s ‘inverse of their home jumper’ is absolutely a sufficient clash jumper, as when worn with white shorts it creates a majority white strip, much the same as the Geelong home jumper with white shorts. Considering the Collingwood home strip is defined as ‘dark’, this clash works perfectly well when we play other ‘dark’ teams. In fact, we have worn the white strip 8 times this year, out of 10 away games! Funnily enough, one of those games was not versus Geelong. Further to this, why should Collingwood be the only club in the league that needs to provide a single separate clash jumper for one opponent (Geelong), when the simple solution is to do away with the out-dated white shorts principle and have the shorts match the teams' home jumper? As an aside, Collingwood are actually the only team, in the clash jumper era, to provide a single, one-off clash jumper for one opponent – 2011 and 2012 vs North Melbourne.

Here is the 2011-2012 "2nd" Collingwood Clash Jumper

I love that you and Finey are traditionalists, but this view that it seems you’ve taken up, that many old-timers trot out ad nauseum, that the ‘away’ team has to wear white shorts is just an absolute nonsense. Sydney have not worn White shorts against anyone bar similarly coloured Gold Coast since the early 90’s, or perhaps even earlier! You also make it seem like this issue is unique to Collingwood vs Geelong. It absolutely is not. Geelong wearing their home shorts vs a ‘dark’ team in white shorts creates the same issue. Refer below – Geelong vs Carlton, Round 3 2013. Dogs breakfast.

I agree that Eddie McGuire’s tenuous “hand-shake agreement” with Frank Costa is no reason for teams to wear certain strips, but his actual point is absolutely spot on. Common sense should prevail. Do I need to remind you of every Geelong vs Collingwood match up from 2007 (beginning of the clash jumper era) until last years Qualifying Final? Collingwood in home jumper plus black shorts, versus Geelong in home jumper plus white shorts. Every single time. That includes finals in 2007, 2009, 2010 and 2011, of which two were contested with Geelong being the “home” team.

I made the point earlier about Collingwood being one of the most prolific wearers of their Clash Jumper, and I think it’s important to remind everyone of this, especially when you compare it to fellow ‘big-4’ clubs. Collingwood is the only big 4 club to wear the full clash strip against the other three in away games. We wore it versus Carlton this year, hell, we even wore it in the famous 2018 Preliminary Final vs Richmond. Compare that to Carlton, Richmond and Essendon who, when fall as the away team vs Collingwood, trot out their dark home jumper with White shorts. Why? Let’s, also, not forget the absolutely abominable Clash strips the Bombers and Essendon have trotted out. A few of which barely created a sufficient clash.

http://footyjumpers.com/images/Richmond-Clash-2011.gif

http://footyjumpers.com/images/Essendon-Clash-2009.gif

Finally, if you’re going to criticise Collingwood as being arrogant for expecting the AFL to apply common sense, I’d be interested in your thoughts on two other recent finals, West Coast vs Carlton 2011 Semi Final, and Port Adelaide vs Richmond 2014 Semi Final? West Coast were forced to wear white shorts in a game at Subiaco so Carlton could wear their full dark home strip, and 2014 was probably one of the greatest jumper fiascos of all time – Richmond in their ‘clash’ jumper with black shorts, vs Port Adelaide in black and white prison bars (for which they had to get made the week of that game) and white shorts, at Adelaide Oval. Absolute farce.

Why do shorts matter? If home jumpers don't clash, then both teams should wear them with appropriate shorts to differentiate!

Anyway, hope you get a chance to read this. Looking forward to the next pod, Go Pies!!

Hi workhorse,

That's a pretty comprehensive statement of your position! And fair enough. Look, to be honest, I'm not "that" fussed by the whole jumper clash thing anymore, it's been going on for at least 25 years now, and I'm a bit over it. Just a bit tired of how it only ever seems to be Ed driving the discussion. And on a broader issue, I'm not sure why Port can't wear the "prison bars" (except v Coll). Think how many English soccer teams have similar colours and/or strips. Probably my biggest bugbear is there seems to be games where there isn't that much of a clash where one team if forced to wear an alternative strip, then others where the clash IS obvious and they don't. Just inconsistency of policy. Anyway, appreciate the time you put into that, and the feedback. Cheers.