How the hell did they still win?

[Judd2Sewell]

I cannot fathom how Hawthorn actually won the grand final yesterday. Franklin was kept to two goals and scarlett had the honours there well and truly. Roughead was poor all day only kicking the two. Their key player in the engine room, Sam Mitchell, was was well held by ling and they were without two men for most of the second half- one of those being there best player to half time in Young. Brad Ottens was dominant in the ruck all day and Geelong won the midfield battle. For Geelong, Ablett was dominant collecting 34 very handy possessions, perhaps geelongs most dangerous forward, Steve Johnson, collected 34 himself and there worst player tom harley was off the ground for most the game. Yet the Hawks still got up and while it can be argued that geelong were unlucky with there missed shots, good on hawks to capitalize on there chances and take the win.

Was all about the game-plan buddy.

Geelong's zone was very well set up, but we kept possession, kept calm, conceeded ground and points (11 of them!) all in order to wait for the right option. When it presented itself we took it and went from there.

Hodge and Guerra were instrumental in this.

We also pressured them very well, they blazed away a little and were forced into making poor options. Some of their players took hopelessly selfish options too.

And lastly, we were simply more desperate.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Teams win premierships when their 15th-22nd best players on the field step up. Stars on each side will normally perform well so they will cancel each other out. Therefore the reliance on the lesser players to perform is the key, that's why it is called a team sport.

VERY good point. I forgot to mention that above.

Look at Ellis's game, he was our 22nd player picked - and ended up in the top three Hawthorn players for the day.

 

[Richard Cranium]

Hawthorn were lucky to be in it at the half time, and probably wouldn't have been had the Cats not squandered all those easy goals. There were the ridiculously easy ones (Mooney, Ottens) and some other ones that should've resulted in a goal. Add some bad decision that prevented them from even getting a shot.....

Not saying that Hawthorn couldn't/wouldn't have come back, but Geelong had and threw it away, Hawks just made the most of the situation.

My .02

 

[Spoofy]

Agree with what's written above ^^^^

Most of which were rushed. Geelong just couldn't match it with the best team in the competition.

People keep saying "most of Geelong's 23 behinds were rushed" as if to say that "Geelong didn't make 23 errors". I heard the same thing after the Prelim. But Guerra, Hodge & co. rushed them for a reason, because there was nothing up ahead. Even Clarkson has said he expects a rule change in regard to rushed behinds.

Had those 11 rushed behinds been worth 3 points instead of 1, that would reduce the margin to 4 points. And who knows what would have happened if the footy was bounced at the top of the square instead. But this rule change would more likely result Hawthorn being forced to find a way through Geelong's zone and thus, turning it over (and then another Geelong clanger..)

I'm not saying that every entry was screwed up by Geelong and Hawthorn's defence wasn't great (Hodge made and absolute Di*k out of Stokes and Geelong's 4ward line, and thoroughly deserved the Norm Smith).. but, a large number of those rushed behinds were due to Geelong mistakes. Everyone knows, even you Hawk fans.. had both teams brought their A-games, Geelong would have won.

How did Hawthorn Win? Because Hawthorn did bring their A-game, and Geelong was terrible.

 

[Hawkzzz]

Geelong had 11 rushed behinds. Hawks had zero.

So shots on goal the hawks had 2 more than the cats. Dispels the inaccuracy fallacy spreading around. I just had a look at the second quarter. Again there were rushed behinds. BUT:

I have never ever seen a Hawks defence play with such guts, put so much pressure on the opposition and force them wide and into super hard contested possies. Never seen us absorb and dish out that much pressure in our back half. And the irony is that it was talked about as our weak point...Hodge, admittedly was the general who turned players into soldiers. It was really stirring stuff.

Fabulous effort by the cats to smash us down and it looked like a matter of time before we would surely crack. Who could withstand this sort of barrage and keep the intensity up so high. Somehow they did. They will look back at that quarter in amazement.

Well played Cats. You did what you had to do. Both sides made mistakes. The intensity was amazing. Stuey Dew 19 gutsy quality possies and a match turning 10 minutes - no wonder Choco wanted him to come back...

And Brownless said throughout the year the experiment would backfire...I love Billy, though, he is a wonderful character and a humble soul.

 

[Carn Hawkas]

Great team effort, everyone played for each other.
And my god the heart and toughness of this team is off the charts.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

People keep saying "most of Geelong's 23 behinds were rushed" as if to say that "Geelong didn't make 23 errors". I heard the same thing after the Prelim. But Guerra, Hodge & co. rushed them for a reason, because there was nothing up ahead. Even Clarkson has said he expects a rule change in regard to rushed behinds.

Had those 11 rushed behinds been worth 3 points instead of 1, that would reduce the margin to 4 points. And who knows what would have happened if the footy was bounced at the top of the square instead. But this rule change would more likely result Hawthorn being forced to find a way through Geelong's zone and thus, turning it over (and then another Geelong clanger..)

I'm not saying that every entry was screwed up by Geelong and Hawthorn's defence wasn't great.. but, a large number of those rushed behinds were due to Geelong mistakes. Everyone knows, even you Hawk fans.. had both teams brought their A-games, Geelong would have won.

How did Hawthorn Win? Because Geelong was terrible.

And why were Geelong terrible?

Because we harrassed, tackled harder, attacked the ball harder, were more desperate and simply wanted it more.

 

[Shane Hird]

Constant pressure at their opponents and attacking the ball with great desperation.

Kicking straight for goal.

By grabbing their opponents like wild animals and applying hard tackles..alot.

and....


Hodge.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

One thing i cant fathom is why Bomber didnt send out the message to Dew's opponent, to run him ragged when Geelong had the ball, make him puff like a steam train.

 

[Richard Cranium]

Geelong had 11 rushed behinds. Hawks had zero.

So shots on goal the hawks had 2 more than the cats. Dispels the inaccuracy fallacy spreading around. I just had a look at the second quarter. Again there were rushed behinds. BUT:

Mooney missed a couple of easy ones, Otten stuffed it all up fairly well, there were a couple of ill-advised snaps that missed....

If you look at quantity over quality, sure, they weren't that innacurate, but they stuffed up a fair few certain goals. In all honesty, Geelong probably should've been a good 4-5 goals up at half time, instead of being behind.

 

[t3te50]

Geelong only missed 2-3 'easy' shots. The rest were all out to the side at less than 50% chance angles which the Hawk's backline pushed them to. I also thought the cats were not very smart when hawks had the ball in the defensive 50. They should have known the hawks were not afraid to rush through the behinds and just coaxed them to play down field...instead they chased the player with the ball through the behinds. Silly.

Hawks were far from their best....if they were on song the margin would have been 40+

 

[Carn the Coasters]

The Ottens one was the worst of the lot. Two players streaming into an open goal square and he chose to kick from 30m on an angle. Cost the team more than 5 points IMO. Then you add up Mooney's three easy misses either side of half time and you see why they weren't 4 goals up half way through the third quarter (as they should have been). Then with the game still in the balance, the Hawks had a 5 minute spell that won a flag. They were brilliant though, and deserve the flag.

 

[Hawkzzz]

Mooney missed a couple of easy ones, Otten stuffed it all up fairly well, there were a couple of ill-advised snaps that missed....

If you look at quantity over quality, sure, they weren't that innacurate, but they stuffed up a fair few certain goals. In all honesty, Geelong probably should've been a good 4-5 goals up at half time, instead of being behind.

ok true. But Mooney snapped one over his shoulder that was a gem. One that could often be missed. He also kicked an absolute pearler from the boundary line which shocked everyone... Granted the one Mooney missed was a shocker. But Campbell Brown, if he had a bit of composure would of calmly taken a step inside and slotted that through. I looked carefully at that replay and where he took the mark was not on such an acute angle. He ended up over the points line due to the momentum but take a look at the grab. It was just before the goal post which would have put him on a 70 degree angle, not the rediculour 90 degree angle the ump put him on.

And let's not mention the downfield free kick when Ablett was felled by a high tackle, the ball went to Ling who took a few steps and banged it into the fwd 50 with the ump calling it downfield. That was blatant cheating( the ump was right there, was he temporarily blind, deaf and dumb) or incredible incompetence. It cost us a goal.

A great match. Geelong did barrage our defensive 50 during the 2nd qtr, but look at the replay. Ive never seen us more courageous and intense in the back half for years than during that 30 minutes. The conclusion was the backline beat the fwd line. Missed opportunities yes, but pressure was enormous.

 

[Spoofy]

And why were Geelong terrible?

Because we harrassed, tackled harder, attacked the ball harder, were more desperate and simply wanted it more.

Is that why Mooney missed that one from 2 metres out? and why Otto missed that sitter when he had a paddock and a half of space?
Had Geelong been a few goals up, which they should have been at half time, it would be difficult to imagine them losing from there you must say.

 

[iameviljez]

Apart from Geelong spending all of the second and half of the third quarter shooting themselves in the foot.... Really, the major difference was Alistair Clarkson. The Hawks played to a system, and just as appropriately, it was a system that worked.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Is that why Mooney missed that one from 2 metres out? and why Otto missed that sitter when he had a paddock and a half of space?
Had Geelong been a few goals up, which they should have been at half time, it would be difficult to imagine them losing from there you must say.

No.

Though they did get three charity case goals, and several bolloxy free-kicks. So those miss's were just poetic justice.

 

[Bourky23]

i still can't believe geelong lost either.. ah well, kudos to the hawks

 

[jod23]

I cannot fathom how Hawthorn actually won the grand final yesterday. Franklin was kept to two goals and scarlett had the honours there well and truly. Roughead was poor all day only kicking the two. Their key player in the engine room, Sam Mitchell, was was well held by ling and they were without two men for most of the second half- one of those being there best player to half time in Young. Brad Ottens was dominant in the ruck all day and Geelong won the midfield battle. For Geelong, Ablett was dominant collecting 34 very handy possessions, perhaps geelongs most dangerous forward, Steve Johnson, collected 34 himself and there worst player tom harley was off the ground for most the game. Yet the Hawks still got up and while it can be argued that geelong were unlucky with there missed shots, good on hawks to capitalize on there chances and take the win.

Not to mention the horrible umpiring that the Hawks were on the recieving end of. Im a WCE man so im competely impartial, and im telling ya, the Hawks had consistently bad umpiring decisions go against them all day. But they still won??

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Not to mention the horrible umpiring that the Hawks were on the recieving end of. Im a WCE man so im competely impartial, and im telling ya, the Hawks had consistently bad umpiring decisions go against them all day. But they still won??

Not to mention the fact the BOG to half time, & our best defender, went off only with only having played half the game.

Two men down, half a game to play - meaning less rotations, more drained/tireder legs/bodies in an even more pressure-filled game where every single contest counted..... The efforts of the boys were simply incredible.

Just incredible.

 

[Spoofy]

No.

Though they did get three charity case goals, and several bolloxy free-kicks. So those miss's were just poetic justice.

Yep, Geelong didn't earn another Goal after Gaz's in the second half, but the game was already lost by then. I can only imagine how scared Geelong would have been at half time. They couldn't handle the pressure and expectations that were applied to them by the whole footy world (they had a very young side too). They shouldn't have let themselves get into this position however. They surely would have won had they been up at half time and can thank themselves that they weren't.

 

[bigmac_41]

97 GF repeat

 

[cs61]

glad a neutral supporter agrees.

i thought we were absolutely burnt in that department, and to win the game with T. Croad down for a more than half the game, Clinton Young as well (close to BOG at the time), have the umpires favour the opposition, and to have our tall forwards and mitchell have quiet (by their standards) games, is incredible.

 

[Spoofy]

glad a neutral supporter agrees.

i thought we were absolutely burnt in that department, and to win the game with T. Croad down for a more than half the game, Clinton Young as well (close to BOG at the time), have the umpires favour the opposition, and to have our tall forwards and mitchell have quiet (by their standards) games, is incredible.

Could they have done it without Hodge? I doubt it. Don't forget, the cats lost their Luke Hodge, Tom Harley, and missed him in the premiership quarter. The umpires were dodgy, but only in the last quarter when the Hawks had it wrapped up already.

 

[Mazza44]

Could they have done it without Hodge? I doubt it. Don't forget, the cats lost their Luke Hodge, Tom Harley, and missed him in the premiership quarter. The umpires were dodgy, but only in the last quarter when the Hawks had it wrapped up already.

Mclaren had it in for the Hawks all day. He only called a few for them at the end to probably save his career. Worst and most biased umpiring I have ever seen and if Geelong had of won by a goal there would have been chaos.

 

[Dikigoros]

One thing is absolutely for certain, Geelong did not lose the Grand Final. Hawthorn won it. If you cancel out the umpiring decisions in the first quarter (the double fifty, the hodge holding the ball), and of course the arsy Mooney goal which he would never kick again, the missed chances in the 2nd quarter for Geelong are well and truly evened out. Furthermore we had the same scoring opportunities. Hawthorn rushing through behinds has been part of our defensive mind set all year. Even when in front by 60 points against the Saints we do it. No easy goals for the opposition and utilising the rules to your advantage to achieve this outcome is Hawthorn's strength.

A truly wonderful team performance, and Franklin's involvement in 4 goals (kicking 2 himself) is still an excellent effort for a 21 year old in his first ever GF. Furthermore, he was playing injured, Crawfs article in the Herald confirms this point. Hawthorn's test now is to continue developing their young list and take this GF win as a positive experience moving forward. The HFC are about Premierships not could haves etc etc. There is a reason why this club has won 10 flags in under 50 years.