How They Played?

[shuveradda]

Okay i missed the Match because i was Playing Footy, i know we Lost i would just like to know the Highlights and Lowlights of The Game, who had games games, bad games etc.

Also i would like to know how these four players went: Mullins, King, Williams and Dane Swan.

I saw a Tad of The Game in the Third quarter and Mullins had about 5 touches in as many minutes, and i saw mullins and king run in tandem, but overall can i know about thise players gamkes please.

 

[shuveradda]

Somebody Please Respond.. PLZ..

Also some info on Shaw and Clokes Games.. Thanks.

 

[The Scarecrow]

Originally posted by shuveradda
Somebody Please Respond.. PLZ..

Also some info on Shaw and Clokes Games.. Thanks.

From the Highlights I've seen Cloke and Shaw really didn't play the great. I've been hearing some good things about Mullins' game.

 

[Pedro]

Mullins and King were o.k. For deutants, they showed a little bit. Mullins was good early and then again at the end. King did a few nice things towards the end of the game.

Shaw made one glaring mistake but after that was ok. Didn't get a lot of it though. Cloke was Cloke. Did he play? Enough said. Williams was his usual self. Scared.

 

[rychenroller]

Liked Mullins, got a fair bit of it. showed some poise and rarely wasted it. King had a few touches but nothing special. Swan again played a good game, although Farmer gave him a hiding for a while, just couldnt convert. Williams had no effect as a leading forward mainly. Kicked a nice long goal from 50, but not much else.

On the positive side...Josh played an excellent game after a slow first half. Although he got a fair bit of it in junk time (before he twisted a knee) was quite encouraging. Gave Sandilands a lesson in around the ground play and I think was pretty much even in hitouts.

Cole and Johnson were our shining lights I thought, with great runs out of the backline (it was there enough). Just didnt have targets to hit. I thought Cole's decision making improved out of sight form the last few weeks, and Johnno was just Johnno, like I said a shining light. Clement also had a return to form....although it is all the backline players I'm quoting. Not a good sign.

We need a lift from the likes of Rocca (did quite a few dumb things, like the play on missed goal, drop a few marks, ran under a few marks). Didnt assert his dominance across the forward line like he should with Taz missing. He is a couple of rungs below the elite CHF's in the comp, although important to our structure....Mcpharlin flogged him today. Didak also seems a shadow of even last years players, although by rights he is a young guy and should be improving. didnt show his customary dash today. O'bree and Woewodin were once again making up the midfield numbers and little to no effect. How we miss Tarks (not to mention Bucks) at a time like this. Even (dare I say it) Heath would have been most welcome today.

Honourable mentions to Lonie (kept Pavlich influence minimal), Holland (ditto Bell) and Burns although he wasnt fit for the majority of it. Cloke was again tried as a forward to no effect and spent the entire third on the bench.

Thats how I saw it anyway, mainly with binoculars.

 

[shuveradda]

Thankyou for That Guys.

Any more Things would Be Interesting, Good to see Cole return to form.

 

[Murray]

Originally posted by rychenroller
Liked Mullins, got a fair bit of it. showed some poise and rarely wasted it. King had a few touches but nothing special. Swan again played a good game, although Farmer gave him a hiding for a while, just couldnt convert. Williams had no effect as a leading forward mainly. Kicked a nice long goal from 50, but not much else.

On the positive side...Josh played an excellent game after a slow first half. Although he got a fair bit of it in junk time (before he twisted a knee) was quite encouraging. Gave Sandilands a lesson in around the ground play and I think was pretty much even in hitouts.

Cole and Johnson were our shining lights I thought, with great runs out of the backline (it was there enough). Just didnt have targets to hit. I thought Cole's decision making improved out of sight form the last few weeks, and Johnno was just Johnno, like I said a shining light. Clement also had a return to form....although it is all the backline players I'm quoting. Not a good sign.

We need a lift from the likes of Rocca (did quite a few dumb things, like the play on missed goal, drop a few marks, ran under a few marks). Didnt assert his dominance across the forward line like he should with Taz missing. He is a couple of rungs below the elite CHF's in the comp, although important to our structure....Mcpharlin flogged him today. Didak also seems a shadow of even last years players, although by rights he is a young guy and should be improving. didnt show his customary dash today. O'bree and Woewodin were once again making up the midfield numbers and little to no effect. How we miss Tarks (not to mention Bucks) at a time like this. Even (dare I say it) Heath would have been most welcome today.

Honourable mentions to Lonie (kept Pavlich influence minimal), Holland (ditto Bell) and Burns although he wasnt fit for the majority of it. Cloke was again tried as a forward to no effect and spent the entire third on the bench.

Thats how I saw it anyway, mainly with binoculars.

Now this is what I don't understand how two people can see the game so differently.
From my position in ailse 36.

Swan was crap and gave away 2 goals
Josh hurt his ankle not his knee and he played his heart out all day.
BJ back to his old tricks of turning over the ball.
OB was probably our best mid fielder
Pavlich flogged Lonie
Burns tried all day and was only off for a short time in the last Q.

 

[the ranter]

Originally posted by Murray
Swan was crap and gave away 2 goals
Josh hurt his ankle not his knee and he played his heart out all day.
BJ back to his old tricks of turning over the ball.
OB was probably our best mid fielder
Pavlich flogged Lonie
Burns tried all day and was only off for a short time in the last Q.

And who the hell was Mullins playing on?

Finally somebody who watched the same game that I did......

I watched 3 solid defensive units keeping their teams competitive and 3 units that were ****e.

The West cost, Brians and Melbourne showed coherency, fluency and positional competence down back to be competitive for four quarters.

Swans and kangaroos battled it out for the most positionally incompetent defensive displays of the round.

But no. We had to come along and go one better than them.
Our defense showed below average positional competence. They have been consistently ****e.

They do not display the mental toughness, nor the positional ability to play 4 solid quarters as a defensive unit.

The commentators repeated "So who could kick the goals for Collingwood in the forwards, freo look like getting to 16 or 18 goals", which reads as, their backmen are crap, leaking goals like a sieve.
Flashy runs out of defence but 50% of the time out of position as individuals and no postiional competency as a group.

Leigh Mathews commented that the most important thing in the brians was a rock solid rebounding defence. You loose the ball in the middle and your defence kills the forward thrust dead and slingshots it back up the field.

Forwards win you games, but your defence makes you COMPETITIVE FOR FOUR QUARTERS. Our defence is dysfunctional except in a few rare and exceptional moments.

 

[Joel]

To say I am ****ed off with out current form is an understatement. The guys seem to have lost heart....and along with it, any mongrel.

Just a couple of positives; Swan was better than most, collecting 17 possies, and King showed poise when he came on (as did Mullins).

For the first time this year, I'm going to admit, we're in trouble.

 

[grayza]

I was there, behind the goals at the lockett end
from what i saw mullins was good when he had the footy, but wasnt accountable enough, and he was lacking some pace
king was also good for a first gamer, did a few good things, his skills need a little work
i thought lonie did ok, pavlich didnt have a huge influence on the game from where i was sitting
williams was frustrating, couldnt pick up the pace of the game, spoiled a fraser mark 4m out in last quarter when he flew in to mark it himself, when he really shouldnt have
swan was good, a few little stuff ups but overall was good
obree was good in the midfield, he really needs to step up in next few weeks IMO, yesterday he did some good things
fraser was great, tried his heart out was our best player by far
richards is still raw, working into it, what i saw of him yesterday he was ok
shaw did some good things, he found plenty of space, got some of the footy and i thought his skills were good
cloke needs to go back to Williamstown and get a full game and some form into him
rocca was very poor IMO, dropped marks, missed 2 easy goals

thats from my vantage point anyway

 

[FIGJAM]

Originally posted by Murray
Now this is what I don't understand how two people can see the game so differently.
From my position in ailse 36.

Swan was crap and gave away 2 goals
Josh hurt his ankle not his knee and he played his heart out all day.
BJ back to his old tricks of turning over the ball.
OB was probably our best mid fielder
Pavlich flogged Lonie
Burns tried all day and was only off for a short time in the last Q.

1. Swan made some errors, but he was far from crap. See number 3.

2. Josh was our best player.

3. O'Bree got 10 posessions. He made Swan look like Nathan Buckley! O'Bree gets some loose ball up on the wing, but that only infers that he's left a loose man somewhaere on the ground. He looks very slow and very unfit. Perhaps he's just not capable. Holland and Johnson were our best midfielders.

4. Bull****. Lonie did very well on Pavlich.

5. Burns was fair.

 

[the ranter]

Originally posted by FIGJAM

4. Bull****. Lonie did very well on Pavlich.

Not for four quarters he didn't. Backmen don't get time out to take a nap they have to be mentally strong for every minute of four quarters.
'very well' is very nice, but beating your opponent witless is what the game is about.

 

[rychenroller]

Originally posted by the ranter
Not for four quarters he didn't. Backmen don't get time out to take a nap they have to be mentally strong for every minute of four quarters.
'very well' is very nice, but beating your opponent witless is what the game is about.

Pavlich is all class, and its nigh on impossible to keep him down for four quarters. Lonies form for 18 months has been not so great so for the effort that he put up to keep Pavlichs influence minimal, I thought was commendable. Pavlich is one of those guys I would love to say that he is on over-rated top 3 pick, but he just isnt.

When Freo have a good win like this, Pavlich and Bell are very very often the best 2. This time I thought our run with players were OK, good on em. I'll still concentrate on the positives for now, as this is not Richmond or its supporters we are talking about. Good on Swan, Lonie, Mullins and co for at least showing something. I still cant believe the touch up Rocca got from McPharlin, got flogged. Tough for blokes running from half back to hit the big guys when one isnt there, and one is getting caned.

 

[Knowledge]

Wtf is with MM taking king off after he set up a goal?

 

[the ranter]

Originally posted by Knowledge
Wtf is with MM taking king off after he set up a goal?

Depends on the task you set the player.
You tell them to stick to 'a' like glue and then they don't perform that simple task,
then if they are young you yank their chain so they understand your instruction.

What position was he mean't to be in at the time?

Does he have the skill and maturity to ignore the coaches instructions?

Is that a habit you want the player to develop?

Was he simply due to be rotated?

What was his opponent doing in the previous 5 minutes?

Was there a glitch in the "SONY move your player" software?

Only MM will know why.....

 

[dunno4]

Originally posted by Murray
Now this is what I don't understand how two people can see the game so differently.
From my position in ailse 36.

Swan was crap and gave away 2 goals
Josh hurt his ankle not his knee and he played his heart out all day.
BJ back to his old tricks of turning over the ball.
OB was probably our best mid fielder
Pavlich flogged Lonie
Burns tried all day and was only off for a short time in the last Q.

Swan was as good as Swan can be.......fair at best
BJ was our saviour, if only a few others put in like he did
OB our best midfielder??? You were at a different game!
Pavlich vs Lonie, Pavlich only just on points
Burns did try all day, when doesn't he.

 

[Murray]

Originally posted by dunno4
Swan was as good as Swan can be.......fair at best
BJ was our saviour, if only a few others put in like he did
OB our best midfielder??? You were at a different game!
Pavlich vs Lonie, Pavlich only just on points
Burns did try all day, when doesn't he.

I agree BJ gets the ball but it is what he does with it that annoys me. Turn over after turn over. If the criteria to be a good player was simply to get the ball then McG would be a champion.

When OB came on he got heaps of the ball, he was then moved onto Walker who was cutting us up on his wing. OB not only had the pace to go with Walker (and thus make a contest) but he nullified that wing in the second half. I guess I was at a different game.

Pavlich ran where ever he liked. Lonie just ran around with him. When Lonie did get the ball it was because Pavlich had got too far a head of him and as a result Lonie found himself on his own.

I don't know what you mean about Burns ie "When doesn't he?" what is the point you are trying to make?

 

[guess_who]

From my position in aisle 14, i could gather that

Johnson, Cole, Fraser, O'bree and Clement were by far our best players, Shaw was ok, as was Burns even though he did he knee.

The current list has to many players that are simply front runners, who when the team is going well are playing great football and are everybodies heros. When the team is playing ****, they too are ****..thats is my theory on why collingwood will be so crap this year, I say this again CLOKE IS NOT A ****ING forward it is getting beyond a bloody joke.

Mullins and King both played well i thought exept for the fact that Mullins does not know hoe too chase!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Collingwood has their core group of players, and the rest theire is no in between. The frustrating thing is when we are forced to play players like Mullins and throw them into the deep end, I think **** like that could be avoided if we play people like Goughy or McKee....

The collingwood juniors so too speak should either bloody start performing eventhe most simple task, no body expects them to fill the shoes of Tarrant or Buckley. Chasing your man when he is 5 Meters away, is a must at any frikking level let alone AFL football.

I think that Rocca tried to show leadership the wrong way, he thought that Collingwood were in trouble so he decided to go up the ground and help out, everytime this happend and we won the ball we had no one to kick it too, as for Lonie and Lokan starting in the centre bounce at stages to tag theire men, thats is an absolutle farce... to leave you with a quote from a friend of mine " Lonie should be the Williamstown runner at best"

 

[dunno4]

Originally posted by Murray
I agree BJ gets the ball but it is what he does with it that annoys me. Turn over after turn over. If the criteria to be a good player was simply to get the ball then McG would be a champion.

When OB came on he got heaps of the ball, he was then moved onto Walker who was cutting us up on his wing. OB not only had the pace to go with Walker (and thus make a contest) but he nullified that wing in the second half. I guess I was at a different game.

Pavlich ran where ever he liked. Lonie just ran around with him. When Lonie did get the ball it was because Pavlich had got too far a head of him and as a result Lonie found himself on his own.

I don't know what you mean about Burns ie "When doesn't he?" what is the point you are trying to make?

With BJ I guess I was happy just to see someone really putting in. I just get the feeling several guys are just going through the motions, maybe they need something like Anzac day to get them fired up again. Sure his disposal wasn't great but I think "turnover after turnover" is a little harsh.

With OB maybe he did nullify that wing but he was nullified as well. Some of his disposals weren't great either.

Pavlich may have run where he liked but he didn't have a great game (by his standards). Some credit should go to Lonie. At least Lonie started to show some signs.

With Burns I mean he always put in, so he was just being his usual self. We could use a few more like him right now.

Maybe we were just on opposite sides of the ground

 

[Murray]

Originally posted by dunno4
With BJ I guess I was happy just to see someone really putting in. I just get the feeling several guys are just going through the motions, maybe they need something like Anzac day to get them fired up again. Sure his disposal wasn't great but I think "turnover after turnover" is a little harsh.

With OB maybe he did nullify that wing but he was nullified as well. Some of his disposals weren't great either.

Pavlich may have run where he liked but he didn't have a great game (by his standards). Some credit should go to Lonie. At least Lonie started to show some signs.

With Burns I mean he always put in, so he was just being his usual self. We could use a few more like him right now.

Maybe we were just on opposite sides of the ground

See how good discussion works.

We started off poles apart and after discussing it we find we are much closer than we both originally thought.

Yep BJ puts in no question about that and I agree that he is a better player now than he was a couple of years ago but under pressure he "kicks and hopes" good players always have time to dispose of the ball properly.

Agree on OB some of his disposals were poor but he put in and gave us something that others, wearing black and white around him, were not prepared to do.

And I agree on Lonie he did "start to show some signs" but I maintain Pavlich beat him easily and I fully accept that Pavlich will beat most players. He is a gun (and to think we could have got him).

Agree on Burns, he is all guts. I can't ever recall a time when he didn't give it his all. He has no fear.


Good discussion
Cheers

 

[dunno4]

Originally posted by Murray
See how good discussion works.

We started off poles apart and after discussing it we find we are much closer than we both originally thought.

Yep BJ puts in no question about that and I agree that he is a better player now than he was a couple of years ago but under pressure he "kicks and hopes" good players always have time to dispose of the ball properly.

Agree on OB some of his disposals were poor but he put in and gave us something that others, wearing black and white around him, were not prepared to do.

And I agree on Lonie he did "start to show some signs" but I maintain Pavlich beat him easily and I fully accept that Pavlich will beat most players. He is a gun (and to think we could have got him).

Agree on Burns, he is all guts. I can't ever recall a time when he didn't give it his all. He has no fear.


Good discussion
Cheers

Thats why we love this board