Geelong – most loved to most disliked?

[Angus Young]

I don't get the hate...

I respect and admire them. Great team. And their supporters are all good.. albeit a bit quiet.

I like the Cats.

 

[Dan26]

I'm sick of them I admit it. Sick to death of them.

Would be brilliant if they go out in straight sets. Even better if we are the ones who get to do it to them.

Some of their players are getting a little too enamoured with themselves. Tom Hawkins, on Saturday night, at least twice gestured to the crowd in an arrogant manner after kicking two goals, as if to say, "Yeah, we'll beat this mob, so I'm allowed to carry on however I want"

He sure as hell shut up in the last half.

I think it's more the fact that they don't deserve to be where they are on the ladder. I hate Hawthorn, but at least they deserve their spot. Geelong are going to fluke their way to 17-5. If you have a percentage of 110%, you don't deserve to be 17-5, it's as simple as that. They are a 13-9 team on ability and merit. I suspect they will be exposed in the finals.

 

[romeoh]

I don't get the hate...

I respect and admire them. Great team. And their supporters are all good.. albeit a bit quiet.

I like the Cats.

Me too.

 

[azyboy]

I'm sick of them I admit it. Sick to death of them.

Would be brilliant if they go out in straight sets. Even better if we are the ones who get to do it to them.

Some of their players are getting a little too enamoured with themselves. Tom Hawkins, on Saturday night, at least twice gestured to the crowd in an arrogant manner after kicking two goals, as if to say, "Yeah, we'll beat this mob, so I'm allowed to carry on however I want"

He sure as hell shut up in the last half.

I think it's more the fact that they don't deserve to be where they are on the ladder. I hate Hawthorn, but at least they deserve their spot. Geelong are going to fluke their way to 17-5. If you have a percentage of 110%, you don't deserve to be 17-5, it's as simple as that. They are a 13-9 team on ability and merit. I suspect they will be exposed in the finals.

I've got no problem with you brandishing Hawky a bit of a show pony or the fact that you are sick of the cats. But I find it laughable that we have fluked our way to a 17-5 win-loss record. In fact it greatly amuses me. Please.

 

[Dan26]

I've got no problem with you brandishing Hawky a bit of a show pony or the fact that you are sick of the cats. But I find it laughable that we have fluked our way to a 17-5 win-loss record. In fact it greatly amuses me. Please.

You have fluked your way to a 17-5 record.

To put it another way, if you went back in time 100 times to the start of the year, and played the season again, only I in 100 could Geelong go 17-5.

99 out of 100, they'd be somewhere between 11 and 16 wins.

Maybe fluke is too strong a word, but they don't deserve to be 17-5. They are not good enough to be a 17-5 team. To be 17-5 with a percentage of 110% is laughable. They have won EIGHT games by 13 points or fewer and havn't lost any. In three of those wins, you had less scoring shots than your vanquished opponent.

I know the usual line is "Oh, but good teams win the close ones", which is rubbish because they didn't win the close ones last year. Also, if they were a 5 goal better side, they wouldn't be close games in the first place. The 5 point wins become 35 point wins.

Sydney don't win the close ones, because the games are rarely close. They are too busy winning by 35 points, instead of 5.

They are the most underserving 17 win team I've seen in the history of the game. Even more so than the Kangaroos in 1999 (who only had a percentage of 115% and has the statistically worst defence of the top ten teams)

 

[romeoh]

I'm sick of them I admit it. Sick to death of them.

Would be brilliant if they go out in straight sets. Even better if we are the ones who get to do it to them.

Some of their players are getting a little too enamoured with themselves. Tom Hawkins, on Saturday night, at least twice gestured to the crowd in an arrogant manner after kicking two goals, as if to say, "Yeah, we'll beat this mob, so I'm allowed to carry on however I want"

He sure as hell shut up in the last half.

I think it's more the fact that they don't deserve to be where they are on the ladder. I hate Hawthorn, but at least they deserve their spot. Geelong are going to fluke their way to 17-5. If you have a percentage of 110%, you don't deserve to be 17-5, it's as simple as that. They are a 13-9 team on ability and merit. I suspect they will be exposed in the finals.

Wow, why so nasty Dan? So you hate Geelong because they fluked their way into the top 4? Is that it? I can think of maybe 2 games when we had some luck. But in fact it wasn't luck after all. The Freo game -they had lots of entries into their forward line in the last quarter but the Geelong defenders stood up and kept repelling them and in the end Freo had to go a fair way out to get a shot on goal-shots that went from being gimmes ( if they had been able to get closer) to 50/50's. The Carlton game-you hate us for getting a soft free-is that it?-we scored again in any case so still would have won the game-how many entries into the 50 did each those teams have in the last 10 minutes? Have a look. You make your own luck. All our other games we were the better team and won.
We are actually a very good team for 60 minutes. If the GF was for 60 minutes I'd be on us. But the combination of old legs (who have played a lot of footy-an extra season with so many finals) and young legs means we can't keep it going for a full game. Look out if we ever do.
Still hardly seems deserving of such vitriol.

 

[romeoh]

You have fluked your way to a 17-5 record.

To put it another way, if you went back in time 100 times to the start of the year, and played the season again, only I in 100 could Geelong go 17-5.

99 out of 100, they'd be somewhere between 11 and 16 wins.

Maybe fluke is too strong a word, but they don't deserve to be 17-5. They are not good enough to be a 17-5 team. To be 17-5 with a percentage of 110% is laughable. They have won EIGHT games by 13 points or fewer and havn't lost any. In three of those wins, you had less scoring shots than your vanquished opponent.

I know the usual line is "Oh, but good teams win the close ones", which is rubbish because they didn't win the close ones last year. Also, if they were a 5 goal better side, they wouldn't be close games in the first place. The 5 point wins become 35 point wins.

Sydney don't win the close ones, because the games are rarely close. They are too busy winning by 35 points, instead of 5.

They are the most underserving 17 win team I've seen in the history of the game. Even more so than the Kangaroos in 1999 (who only had a percentage of 115% and has the statistically worst defence of the top ten teams)

We lost the close ones last year because we weren't good enough. This year we have been.

 

[azyboy]

You have fluked your way to a 17-5 record.

To put it another way, if you went back in time 100 times to the start of the year, and played the season again, only I in 100 could Geelong go 17-5.

99 out of 100, they'd be somewhere between 11 and 16 wins.

Maybe fluke is too strong a word, but they don't deserve to be 17-5. They are not good enough to be a 17-5 team. To be 17-5 with a percentage of 110% is laughable. They have won EIGHT games by 13 points or fewer and havn't lost any.

I know the usual line is "Oh, but good teams win the close ones", which is rubbish because they didn't win the close ones last year. Also, if they were a 5 goal better side, they wouldn't be close games in the first place. The 5 point wins become 35 point wins.

Sydney don't win the close ones, because the games are rarely close. They are too busy winning by 35 points, instead of 5.

They are the most underserving 17 win team I've seen in the history of the game. Even more so than the Kangaroos in 1999 (who only had a percentage of 115% and has the statistically worst defence of the top ten teams)

They are 17-5. It's irrelevant that you think them to be the worst performed 17-5 side ever. Fact is they are 17-5. Quoting statistics ain't going to change it. Statistically, every game is a 50:50 proposition. Good sides get the job done. Why is it that I read last week that opposition clubs spend their time studying how the Cats continue to win the close ones? But hey, it's all a fluke. Right. I'll take the 17-5. You hang on to your theories.

 

[LongBomb]

You have fluked your way to a 17-5 record.

To put it another way, if you went back in time 100 times to the start of the year, and played the season again, only I in 100 could Geelong go 17-5.

99 out of 100, they'd be somewhere between 11 and 16 wins.

Maybe fluke is too strong a word, but they don't deserve to be 17-5. They are not good enough to be a 17-5 team. To be 17-5 with a percentage of 110% is laughable. They have won EIGHT games by 13 points or fewer and havn't lost any. In three of those wins, you had less scoring shots than your vanquished opponent.

I know the usual line is "Oh, but good teams win the close ones", which is rubbish because they didn't win the close ones last year. Also, if they were a 5 goal better side, they wouldn't be close games in the first place. The 5 point wins become 35 point wins.

Sydney don't win the close ones, because the games are rarely close. They are too busy winning by 35 points, instead of 5.

They are the most underserving 17 win team I've seen in the history of the game. Even more so than the Kangaroos in 1999 (who only had a percentage of 115% and has the statistically worst defence of the top ten teams)

LOL. Dan still crying about stats.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Hey mate went through my posts to find this.. how does it feel that Bartel went and did one worse was no contact at all.. Clap clap

Hehe, thought you might seize the opportunity. Bartel has a lot more diving to do to catch up with Lindsay Louganis

 

[Dan26]

Wow, why so nasty Dan? So you hate Geelong because they fluked their way into the top 4? Is that it?

Pretty much, yeah. I was sick of them anyway. But then winning undeservedly was the last straw.

I can think of maybe 2 games when we had some luck.

Any close game requires luck.

The Freo game -they had lots of entries into their forward line in the last quarter but the Geelong defenders stood up and kept repelling them and in the end Freo had to go a fair way out to get a shot on goal-shots that went from being gimmes ( if they had been able to get closer) to 50/50's.

In the Freo game I felt like throwing my shoe at the TV in the first half. Geelong had 25 free kicks in the first half. The previous most by any team in 2014 was 16. You can argue they were all there but they weren't really. Geelong was getting all the 20/80s, all the 30/70's free kicks, which technically might be there, but in a normal game would only be paid 30% of the time. They were getting them 100% of the time in the first half and Freo couldn't get any momentum. None. Think about it. 25 free kicks is a free kick to Geelong every two minutes. How can the opposition possibly get their game going when technically correct decisions that normally get paid 20-30% of the time were getting paid ALL the time?

The Carlton game-you hate us for getting a soft free-is that it?

Both Carlton games had dodgy decisions that favoured Geelong in the last minute. In the earlier Carlton game, there should have been a free kick paid to the Blues in the last 20 seconds. And in the second Carlton game, the Christensen free has been well publicized and admitted as an error. And I'm no fan of Carlton I can assure you. They are my most hated team.

We are actually a very good team for 60 minutes.

Exactly. Like most 13-9 teams who have a percentage of about 110% (much like my Bombers) you are good for 60 minutes. The top-4 teams on merit (Haw, Syd, Port, Freo) are usually 4 quarter teams most weeks.

But the combination of old legs (who have played a lot of footy-an extra season with so many finals) and young legs means we can't keep it going for a full game. Look out if we ever do.

You havn't played 4 quarters all year, I'll doubt you'd start now.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

You have fluked your way to a 17-5 record.

To put it another way, if you went back in time 100 times to the start of the year, and played the season again, only I in 100 could Geelong go 17-5.

99 out of 100, they'd be somewhere between 11 and 16 wins.

Maybe fluke is too strong a word, but they don't deserve to be 17-5. They are not good enough to be a 17-5 team. To be 17-5 with a percentage of 110% is laughable. They have won EIGHT games by 13 points or fewer and havn't lost any. In three of those wins, you had less scoring shots than your vanquished opponent.

I know the usual line is "Oh, but good teams win the close ones", which is rubbish because they didn't win the close ones last year. Also, if they were a 5 goal better side, they wouldn't be close games in the first place. The 5 point wins become 35 point wins.

Sydney don't win the close ones, because the games are rarely close. They are too busy winning by 35 points, instead of 5.

They are the most underserving 17 win team I've seen in the history of the game. Even more so than the Kangaroos in 1999 (who only had a percentage of 115% and has the statistically worst defence of the top ten teams)

So I'm guessing if Geelong win the flag you'll ranking it below Essendon's 1897 premiership.

 

[romeoh]

Pretty much, yeah. I was sick of them anyway. But then winning undeservedly was the last straw.



Any close game requires luck.



In the Freo game I felt like throwing my shoe at the TV in the first half. Geelong had 25 free kicks in the first half. The previous most by any team in 2014 was 16. You can argue they were all there but they weren't really. Geelong was getting all the 20/80s, all the 30/70's free kicks, which technically might be there, but in a normal game would only be paid 30% of the time. They were getting them 100% of the time in the first half and Freo couldn't get any momentum. None. Think about it. 25 free kicks is a free kick to Geelong every two minutes. How can the opposition possibly get their game going when technically correct decisions that normally get paid 20-30% of the time were getting paid ALL the time?



Both Carlton games had dodgy decisions that favoured Geelong in the last minute. In the earlier Carlton game, there should have been a free kick paid to the Blues in the last 20 seconds. And in the second Carlton game, the Christensen free has been well publicized and admitted as an error. And I'm no fan of Carlton I can assure you. They are my most hated team.




Exactly. Like most 13-9 teams who have a percentage of about 110% (much like my Bombers) you are good for 60 minutes. The top-4 teams on merit (Haw, Syd, Port, Freo) are usually 4 quarter teams most weeks.




You havn't played 4 quarters all year, I'll doubt you'd start now.

Can't agree with any of the above-if we have just fluked all this then how come all those 13- 9 teams aren't in our position? Free kicks -is that it? You cannot be cereal.
You didn't address the why so nasty?

 

[Dan26]

So I'm guessing if Geelong win the flag you'll ranking it below Essendon's 1897 premiership.

They'll be towards the bottom of the list, if that situation unfolded. Surely it couldn't happen though.

 

[romeoh]

They'll be towards the bottom of the list, if that situation unfolded. Surely it couldn't happen though.

Well for your sake, one would hope not Danny boy, because you will look like a right tosser?

 

[Dan26]

Can't agree with any of the above-if we have just fluked all this then how come all those 13- 9 teams aren't in our position? Free kicks -is that it? You cannot be cereal.
You didn't address the why so nasty?

I'm not an umpire basher and I admit that the rub of the green goes both ways depending on the night.

But that Freo game at Kardinia Park in the first half was an utter disgrace. You expect the 30/70's free's to be paid 30% of time, not EVERY time. Freo couldn't literally get any momentum. At all.

I think you'll find that Geelong could have very, very easily been a 13-9 team this year had a few little things gone differently in a few games. You deserve to be where you were on the ladder in 2012 (6th). I think your quality of football this season has been about the same as 2012.

 

[romeoh]

I'm not an umpire basher and I admit that the rub of the green goes both ways depending on the night.

But that Freo game at Kardinia Park in the first half was an utter disgrace. You expect the 30/70's free's to be paid 30% of time, not EVERY time. Freo couldn't literally get any momentum. At all.

I think you'll find that Geelong could have very, very easily been a 13-9 team this year had a few little things gone differently in a few games. You deserve to be where you were on the ladder in 2012 (6th). I think your quality of football this season has been about the same as 2012.

Yep but you aren't watching with clear eyes are you? Who was first to the ball in that Geelong/Freo game for the first three quarters? Have you looked where Freo sit on the free kick list-it tells you something-its not just against Geelong. We simply outplayed Freo for 3 quarters. Other than this last couple of games I can't think of another game we were lucky to win. The first game against Carlton could have gone either way.

 

[Dan26]

Yep but you aren't watching with clear eyes are you? Who was first to the ball in that Geelong/Freo game for the first three quarters? Have you looked where Freo sit on the free kick list-it tells you something-its not just against Geelong. We simply outplayed Freo for 3 quarters. Other than this last couple of games I can't think of another game we were lucky to win. The first game against Carlton we were easily the better team.

I don't agree with that. But, anyway, it doesn't matter. You won. Can you back it up in the finals, or are you top-4 frauds? That's what the next few weeks will tell us.

 

[romeoh]

I don't agree with that. But, anyway, it doesn't matter. You won. Can you back it up in the finals, or are you top-4 frauds? That's what the next few weeks will tell us.

I have already acknowledged we can't play 4 good quarters-it has been demonstrated over and over this year-but we have still been good enough to beat most. And yep that won't win a flag against good opponents.
But just enjoy the footy Dan-sometimes our football is still full of dare and skill and is great to watch.

 

[Dan26]

I have already acknowledged we can't play 4 good quarters-it has been demonstrated over and over this year-but we have still been good enough to beat most. And yep that won't win a flag against good opponents.
But just enjoy the footy Dan-sometimes our football is still full of dare and skill and is great to watch.

I know I know. You're a good team to watch. I'm just sick of you.

 

[romeoh]

I know I know. You're a good team to watch. I'm just sick of you.

Fair enough.

 

[Big Fozza]

you're a crack up Dan.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

There is a bloke called Lindsay Thomas who plays for North, Cats don't have anyone who can compete with his Academy Award "throwing yourself forward" performances.

Did this get bumped yet?

 

[Dan26]

why though?.

The constant winning. Sick of it. I hate them now like I hated Hawthorn in about 1992-ish (after they had won 5 premierships in the previous 9 years)

Absolutely over them.

 

[JUBJUB]

Some of their players are getting a little too enamoured with themselves. Tom Hawkins, on Saturday night, at least twice gestured to the crowd in an arrogant manner after kicking two goals

Yeah some dumb old twerp in a hideously bright orange top leans his fat gut over the fence and abuses Hawkins [was it Mod Dog or Pess ?] and he just simply smiles,doesn't say a word,and he's "arrogant"

Crikey the moron brigade really are struggling for reasons to hate Geelong