Review Malcolm Blight's take on the 1994 Grand Final

[footscore]

Geelong must have had the slowest midfield I think I ever seen for a good 5 years at one time until Riccardi came along on the wing.
Most of the teams in the 90's had a speedster in the middle who won the hard ball.

Bews, Bairstow, Couch, Hocking, Pickering, Kilpatrick...we did remarkably well to remain a challenger until the deeper we went into September, the slower we'd become.

 

[jim boy]

Disagree. It's played on an oval with goalposts. We were good enough to beat North at the MCG during the home and away season, so I don't buy that suddenly the ground was a factor.

They should have won and didn't. Simple as that.

I'm not saying we were robbed, just that fate dealt us a bad hand. Sure we had beaten North during the season, but they were always a physically stronger team than us which is telling in the wet and alot more used to playing under lights than we were. Playing on a wet Sunday night really did play into their hands. If the match had been played when it was orinally scheduled, then it may have been different, not that we'll ever really know.

FTR I've never felt robbed by the Colbert non-mark, it was just a decision that didn't go our way. You just get up and keep playing.

Another missed opportunity was 1967, as wikipedia succiently said about the last quarter:

Geelong had their chances in the final quarter but were inaccurate, scoring eight behinds

 

[FredLeDeux]

I'm not saying we were robbed, just that fate dealt us a bad hand. Sure we had beaten North during the season, but they were always a physically stronger team than us which is telling in the wet and alot more used to playing under lights than we were. Playing on a wet Sunday night really did play into their hands. If the match had been played when it was orinally scheduled, then it may have been different, not that we'll ever really know.

FTR I've never felt robbed by the Colbert non-mark, it was just a decision that didn't go our way. You just get up and keep playing.

Another missed opportunity was 1967, as wikipedia succiently said about the last quarter:

Geelong had their chances in the final quarter but were inaccurate, scoring eight behinds

Not to mention the one "marked" 5 yards over the line in the b grandstand.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Geelong must have had the slowest midfield I think I ever seen for a good 5 years at one time until Riccardi came along on the wing.
Most of the teams in the 90's had a speedster in the middle who won the hard ball.

Bews, Bairstow, Couch, Hocking, Pickering, Kilpatrick...we did remarkably well to remain a challenger until the deeper we went into September, the slower we'd become.

I don't know about the rest, but Bews was a champion sprinter in his younger days.

 

[JackFlash]

92 was one that got away, 20 points up just before half time and looked the goods until 2 late goals by the Eagles turned the tide. 94 was the result of two after the siren wins and by Grand Final day they were spent. 95 was the big disappointment, they lost by 3 points to Carlton at Princes Park due to poor kicking and won their finals games easily. The Grand Final was over 10 minutes into the first QTR and that one was tough to take. I reckon if Blighty had stayed another year they would've got the win, Hickmott was our best player that day and then Ayres let's him go....to Carlton where he plays another 134 games! Idiot!

 

[FromDawn2Dark]

it robbed us of valuable momentum, Geelong in the 90's were a team which relied on momentum, they'd kick burst of goals in succession and Colbert was really stepping up bigtime in this final, he would have likely kicked the goal and put Geelong up by 3 goals nearing 3qtr time.

I have to agree. We were 8 points up at the time and he would have made it 14. Not a lot but at that point I thought Colbert was our best player and possibly BOG. After a mark like that, running with the flight of the ball into a pack, more likely than not it would lift the whole team. But as it wasn't paid I swear Colbert was in disbelief the rest of the game and went missing. Of course he should of just got on with it but after he put his body on the line and wasn't rewarded as he should of been, well in some ways I don't blame him from going missing either. If we got over the Crows (we lost by 8 points from memory) then who knows how far we could have gone.

It also showed the finals system through the 90s was flawed, took them to 2000 to get it right. Although we lost the first match, after finishing 2nd on the ladder we shouldn't have had to travel interstate. But I also agree with Fred, most of our teams through the 90s weren't deep enough. Our best 12 or so matched if not beat any other team. But after that our level of players fell away dramatically.

 

[FromDawn2Dark]

92 was one that got away, 20 points up just before half time and looked the goods until 2 late goals by the Eagles turned the tide. 94 was the result of two after the siren wins and by Grand Final day they were spent. 95 was the big disappointment, they lost by 3 points to Carlton at Princes Park due to poor kicking and won their finals games easily. The Grand Final was over 10 minutes into the first QTR and that one was tough to take. I reckon if Blighty had stayed another year they would've got the win, Hickmott was our best player that day and then Ayres let's him go....to Carlton where he plays another 134 games! Idiot!

It just goes to show, never trust someone from Hawthorn.

 

[Vdubs]

I don't know about the rest, but Bews was a champion sprinter in his younger days.

Was about to say Bews was very quick, and Bruns had pace too.
Buddha was exceptionally quick with his handball and general reflexes and ball usage.

 

[Vdubs]

It just goes to show, never trust someone from Hawthorn.

I'm sure that's why he recruited Hargraves and Loates to Geelong, the boycott theory.
(Well I hope it was Ayres)

 

[Vdubs]

92 was one that got away, 20 points up just before half time and looked the goods until 2 late goals by the Eagles turned the tide. 94 was the result of two after the siren wins and by Grand Final day they were spent. 95 was the big disappointment, they lost by 3 points to Carlton at Princes Park due to poor kicking and won their finals games easily. The Grand Final was over 10 minutes into the first QTR and that one was tough to take. I reckon if Blighty had stayed another year they would've got the win, Hickmott was our best player that day and then Ayres let's him go....to Carlton where he plays another 134 games! Idiot!

Agree about Hickmott, tragic oversight there, just a really hard, reliable, gutsy player.
But Blight was mentally GONE when he left us, similar to Bomber in his last year with us.
Losing Riccardi in the 1st/4 was so costly.

But the one that got away was 93. We started abysmally, but finished with a flurry, and had the talent and form to go all the way. Sheeds himself said he rested easier after we were out of finals contention. Who knows how far we would have gone, but 94 was an indication of what we could do with momentum and spirit.

 

[jazzee]

Started reading this thread, got depressed.

Imagine if we'd one at least one or two of those GFs?

 

[Cursed Cat]

never understood those who said 1993 was one that got away - you have to actually make the finals to be a chance, and we left our run way too late; we were clearly the form side of the comp, but it doesn't make a lick of difference if you havent chalked up enough H&A wins to compete for the flag.

for mine 1992 was clearly the one that got away - the Eagles were a very very good side of course, as they proved in that 2nd half, but we were up and about early and really should have kicked on - Bairstow on Matera was a poor move, but really we didn't have anyone capable of containing him when he was in that kind of form - still, would rather have seen Bairstow freed up more to play his more natural attacking game.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

never understood those who said 1993 was one that got away - you have to actually make the finals to be a chance, and we left our run way too late; we were clearly the form side of the comp, but it doesn't make a lick of difference if you havent chalked up enough H&A wins to compete for the flag.

It just adds to the mystery of that season though. Almost every other hard luck 'we shoulda won the flag that year' story (not just for Geelong, but for any club) ends the same way: with them trudging off the park after a loss in September. We don't have that final season-ending loss from that season (well, we do...but, in retrospect, it happened in mid-July): we just have the team running the table and belting every top six team it played against over the final six weeks of the season. It makes the team immortal, in a way, because it took on nearly all the contenders and beat them convincingly. Surely it's about time someone wrote a book about the Blight/Ayres years.

 

[FredLeDeux]

It just adds to the mystery of that season though. Almost every other hard luck 'we shoulda won the flag that year' story (not just for Geelong, but for any club) ends the same way: with them trudging off the park after a loss in September. We don't have that final season-ending loss from that season (well, we do...but, in retrospect, it happened in mid-July): we just have the team running the table and belting every top six team it played against over the final six weeks of the season. It makes the team immortal, in a way, because it took on nearly all the contenders and beat them convincingly. Surely it's about time someone wrote a book about the Blight/Ayres years.

"To Hell and Back"

 

[Goggin Our Best]

Geelong must have had the slowest midfield I think I ever seen for a good 5 years at one time until Riccardi came along on the wing.
Most of the teams in the 90's had a speedster in the middle who won the hard ball.

Bews, Bairstow, Couch, Hocking, Pickering, Kilpatrick...we did remarkably well to remain a challenger until the deeper we went into September, the slower we'd become.

I reckon your spot on Bobby -and it wasnt just the midfield -it was all over the ground

I can remember when Philip Walsh (ex Collingwood player) was the Fitness guy at Geelong -i think he only had 1 or 2 years in that role at Geelong -he then went to Pt Adelaide. In his 1st year at PtAdelaide -when they played Geelong over in Adelaide-i was listening to the game on the radio -and Eric Freeman-ex Australian cricketer -who gave the special comments on the ABC for the footy said -Philip Walsh has come out during the week and said GEELONG HAVE GOT NO PACE WHAT SO EVER

So there you go Bobby -the former fitness guru at Geelong -said they had no pace at all-and he would be in the perfect position to make that statement.

 

[Cursed Cat]

It just adds to the mystery of that season though. Almost every other hard luck 'we shoulda won the flag that year' story (not just for Geelong, but for any club) ends the same way: with them trudging off the park after a loss in September. We don't have that final season-ending loss from that season (well, we do...but, in retrospect, it happened in mid-July): we just have the team running the table and belting every top six team it played against over the final six weeks of the season. It makes the team immortal, in a way, because it took on nearly all the contenders and beat them convincingly. Surely it's about time someone wrote a book about the Blight/Ayres years.

won't be sitting on my bookshelf; they're days I'd rather not re-visit too frequently

respectfully disagree with the rest of your post too MC Extra Dollop; we simply didn't have the runs on the board to even be contenders in 1993 - it was a 'different' way of missing out, but we still missed out - 1993 didn't bother me in comparison to the years in which we made finals but failed to deliver; I vaguely remember awaiting the result of another match to see whether we'd squeak in (itself a bad sign; shouldn't be relying on other teams to get you through); once the final 6 were decided I was content that we hadn't done enough during the season to warrant a spot. I certainly wouldn't consider that team to be 'immortal' in any way shape or form.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Of course, but every hard luck story has an element of 'if my auntie had bollocks...' to it. I was just a kid in those years and I don't think I've even seen a lot of the finals from that era. But in 1991, we lost to both grand finalists (narrowly, but still) in the finals and lost to West Coast three times that season (two in Victoria). West Coast beat us three times in Victoria in the space of ten weeks in 1992. In 1994 and 1995 West Coast and Carlton (respectively) were clearly the best teams in the league and we failed to beat both teams throughout the season.

 

[Cursed Cat]

yeah that's a good point MC; taken from that perspective there is a bit of 'what if' about 1993 ..

 

[romeoh]

Agree '92 we were a real chance, 94 nope, Still believe '95 we could have matched Carlton-never believed they were better than us. My recall is that we only played them once that year at Princes park and matched them and should have won-Didn't Bairstow miss everything from a metre out that day near the end of game. Didn't we get rid of Hickmott because he was 'allegedly' out of line in amorous matters? Wasn't there a fight in the change rooms just before the players ran onto the field for 95 GF? Or was that all just nasty rumour? Can someone straighten me on this please?
Anyway, I know I was in such shock I couldn't speak for about 3 hours that day, made even worse by sitting behind people in the members who thought Madden played for Geelong.

 

[newcs]

There's one bloke who we badly miss in those grand finals.

 

[SleazySimon]

Of course, but every hard luck story has an element of 'if my auntie had bollocks...' to it. I was just a kid in those years and I don't think I've even seen a lot of the finals from that era. But in 1991, we lost to both grand finalists (narrowly, but still) in the finals and lost to West Coast three times that season (two in Victoria). West Coast beat us three times in Victoria in the space of ten weeks in 1992. In 1994 and 1995 West Coast and Carlton (respectively) were clearly the best teams in the league and we failed to beat both teams throughout the season.

That's a cop out. West coast were not unbeatable in 92. We did beat them earlier in the year. They finished 4th in the home and away while we were on top of the ladder all season long. We were in front at half time in that GF. Yet the eagles beat the flag favorites. Happens most years I think, so there's no excuse for our horrible GF performances in 94 and 95. If your going to lose, at least put up a fight and make it an honorable loss. That's why our 89 team has a lot more respect than our 90s teams.

 

[Topper Harley]

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_match_statistics?mid=719

This is a big "what if" game for me. Kangas roll Collingwood (as they should have) and we get Sydney first week in 1997. We had Sydney covered.

 

[OldStyle2007]

Blight's biggest regret should have been not playing Riccardi on Matera in 1992. The move was so obvious it's unbelievable he missed it and kept the painfully slow Bairstow on Matera who proceeded to tear us to pieces on his way winning the match and a Norm Smith

I think I went to watch training on that Thursday in 1994 and I thought they were at St Mary's. In any case, that Thursday session before the GF is always just a kickaround. You wouldn't think it would drain the legs that much?

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

That's a cop out. West coast were not unbeatable in 92. We did beat them earlier in the year. They finished 4th in the home and away while we were on top of the ladder all season long. We were in front at half time in that GF. Yet the eagles beat the flag favorites. Happens most years I think, so there's no excuse for our horrible GF performances in 94 and 95. If your going to lose, at least put up a fight and make it an honorable loss. That's why our 89 team has a lot more respect than our 90s teams.

Not really my point. The point is you can choose to make excuses, or not make excuses for any year if you really want to.

And in 1992, we finished equal on points with two other teams and half a game ahead of the Eagles. It wasn't like we were far and away the best team that season. As soon as West Coast knocked us off in the semi final, they should have become the favourites that year (whether they were or not).

 

[jaykay72]

Have to say I'm a big believer in including the years where we didn't make the GF as great missed opportunities too.

Mention has already been made of 93 & 97 (which I agree with), but also what about 91? Sure, we got ultimately got smashed in the Prelim (in the puring rain out at Waverley - thank god we don't have to go out there anymore!), but what if we had managed to just get over Hawthorn in the Semi (IMO if only Trevor Poole took a couple of extra bounces)?

I think 91's often forgotten/dismissed because Gazza wasn't the usual force he could be (remembering he spent half of it 'retired') but I think it shows just what a team we had that year. Thoughts?

(FYI IIRC if we had managed to beat the Hawks & jumped straight into the GF, Gazza would've still been suspended).

I think there were some other injury concerns that came out of that Hawks Semi that meant we were 'dead ducks in the water' come PF day, but may have been right & rested for the GF? Still, all hypothetical I know.