Toast Round 13 = Melbourne 71-72 Collingwood

[Kilmo]

I've gotta side with the Pipe here, that caller was a moron.

Honestly who cares what the commentary team do or say

 

[JuniorB]

The surface was poor for the game. Although we had a lot of rain leading up to it.

I had to be there early (it’s complicated), and when I arrived I saw this contraption out on the ground, which I’d never seen before a game. But it didn’t do much for that patch of muddy surface which was still there when the game started.

But geez we have high standards these days. Brought back not so fond memories of the centre at Vic Park (glue pit?) in the depths of a Melbourne winter.

View attachment 2339921

Moorabbin was next level muddy.

 

[Kilmo]

The argument that Langdon's 4 possessions game made them one player down is dumb as dogshit given he restricted Nick to being half a player he is.
It's glaringly obvious this had a more detrimental impact on us.

I'm not sure it's that clear cut. Nick had 8 clearances (which is higher than his average), 5 frees for, a goal (should have been 2) and 19 touches (he averages 29). Yes he was down on his best, but Ed Langdon can be a damaging player for the Dees. And there's an argument that playing the hard tag on Nick frees up space for another one of our mids.

Obviously I'd rather Nick have free reign but we need to remember that Ed Langdon is not Finn Maginness, he can be a damaging midfielder in his own right.

 

[Robroy22]

He massacred us at stoppage and was a strong interceptor. It was a ripping game from Maxy.

Yep, the clearance differentials weren't due to Oliver and Petracca. Max gave them an armchair ride.

 

[Vicky Park]

That is on the MCG ground all day, every day during the week. It is meant to grow the grass.

Yep I know that, I’ve been to the ground when no footy is being played.

The difference this time is that the ‘lamp’ was on the ground a couple of hours before the bounce. That I thought was unusual, but maybe not unexpected given the wet conditions.

The area under the ‘lamp’ did not improve much by the time the game started, and was a muddy and slippery patch all game.

 

[Doc1763]

Honestly who cares what the commentary team do or say

I didn't think they were any worse than any other game.

 

[Apex36]

The argument that Langdon's 4 possessions game made them one player down is dumb as dogshit given he restricted Nick to being half a player he is.
It's glaringly obvious this had a more detrimental impact on us.

On numbers and impact you could maybe argue that Nick was about 35% down on his average output, saying he made him half the player is laughable.

By comparison Langdon was about 80% down on his average output.

If you really think it affected us more than the demons then have at it, but the numbers don’t agree with you.

 

[MagpieExcalibur]

Need to mention Steele again. That goal from 50 off a step or two another ripper. That's three goals from 50 in the last two weeks (unless I'm confusing the Hawks game with Roos). Distance on his kicks was something I thought he'd been losing even with his improved form (GF miracle aside), but he's been dismissing that.

i reckon last year's form was a mix of having baby Ned , lingering effects from a well deserved Mad Monday and perhaps the knee injury from 2023 still effecting him a little no problem now obviously in ripping form

 

[Mollythedolly]

The surface was poor for the game. Although we had a lot of rain leading up to it.

I had to be there early (it’s complicated), and when I arrived I saw this contraption out on the ground, which I’d never seen before a game. But it didn’t do much for that patch of muddy surface which was still there when the game started.

But geez we have high standards these days. Brought back not so fond memories of the centre at Vic Park (glue pit?) in the depths of a Melbourne winter.

View attachment 2339921

They’ve got a lot of those. Assume they’re grow lights to help with the growth of the grass during the colder months. I’ve seen them across almost a third of the playing surface. Never before a game like that though.

Edit: what others have said.

 

[Mollythedolly]

Yeah not sure what he was talking about but I didn’t listen to most of Midday Madness yesterday to full grasp the context

Gawn was objectively better than Cameron on Monday so not sure how anyone could think otherwise

But I’d be interested to hear what Dwayne’s thoughts were on the umpiring.

It’s funny how everyone wants a Royal Commission on the rare occasion Collingwood wins the free kick count but it’s all “suck it up, don’t blame the umpires” when we don’t.

I saw so many troglodytes highlight the Melksham “push”. Dude tripped over his own feet (most likely intentionally after feeling Darcy’s hand lightly placed on his back) and fell into Howe but they want a push.

All while saying Nick wasn’t pushed by Langdon for hand contact that was more significant than Darcy’s lmao

How people can be stupid enough to not understand how momentum works. Daicos didn’t even attempt to accentuate the contact and it was still obvious Langdon used his rising momentum to further push him under the ball to stop him marking

Major difference between the 2 incidents was that Moore touched the footy, Langdon didn’t. It’s been the interpretation all year, touch the footy and you’re okay, don’t and you’re penalised for a push. Frampton copped a similar free against recently. Against North from memory for shifting Larkey off the line of the mark.

 

[Mollythedolly]

Yep I know that, I’ve been to the ground when no footy is being played.

The difference this time is that the ‘lamp’ was on the ground a couple of hours before the bounce. That I thought was unusual, but maybe not unexpected given the wet conditions.

The area under the ‘lamp’ did not improve much by the time the game started, and was a muddy and slippery patch all game.

Can only assume that they’d had a lot of them out overnight and they’d just decided to leave that particular 1 there for as long as possible. I guess the only other option is the supersoppers but they’d likely inhibit grass growth by mushing it into the mud while providing only limited gains.

 

[foreigner]

Need to mention Steele again. That goal from 50 off a step or two another ripper. That's three goals from 50 in the last two weeks (unless I'm confusing the Hawks game with Roos). Distance on his kicks was something I thought he'd been losing even with his improved form (GF miracle aside), but he's been dismissing that.

We need to exploit this a bit more, when the opponents have a good defence. Get Steele and Houston to bomb it from the 50. They both can make the distance and usually are pretty accurate kicks

 

[BillyElliott]

 

[IlovethePies]

He massacred us at stoppage and was a strong interceptor. It was a ripping game from Maxy.

Should we have played Cox???

 

[BillyElliott]

Should we have played Cox???

 

[jmac70]

Should we have played Cox???

Did we win?

 

[sr36]

Should we have played Cox???

No. Cameron is our best ruckman. Gawn was rarely up against the second ruck. It was Cameron he was massacring at stoppage. He would have massacred Cox at stoppage too and Cox wouldn't have been outstanding around the ground like Cameron was.

 

[Robroy22]

Should we have played Cox???

I'm aware that we're in the process of trying to move from a 2 ruck system to a 1.5 ruck forward system but one of our strengths under Fly has been our ability to pick teams on the "horses for courses" process. Love him or laugh at him, Coxy has troubled both Gawn and McInnerney in the past (and I know its 2 years on from 2023 but we all remember who was in those centre bounces in the last quarter of the Granny). Now playing Cameron on Gawn one on one had to happen, Cameron is in great form and Gawn IS getting older but he really showed Darcy who the smaller ruckman was on Monday night and he rag dolled him so much so that the Melbourne mids all looked a lot more potent than they had for a long time. If the Dees had have had some forwards, that number of clearances would have probably translated into a win.

So, whilst I'm all for the progression (and fitting in all of the forwards we now find ourselves having) I think we have to temper the process against certain sides. I mean if Witts were to get a hold of Cameron like Gawn did then Gold Coast's mids and forwards would certainly make us pay. So too Brisbane's and Geelong's.

We dodged a bullet on Monday letting Gawn run riot, lets be smarter.

 

[Doc1763]

I cant stop watching the Pendles-Beau goal, just sublime

 

[IlovethePies]

I'm aware that we're in the process of trying to move from a 2 ruck system to a 1.5 ruck forward system but one of our strengths under Fly has been our ability to pick teams on the "horses for courses" process. Love him or laugh at him, Coxy has troubled both Gawn and McInnerney in the past (and I know its 2 years on from 2023 but we all remember who was in those centre bounces in the last quarter of the Granny). Now playing Cameron on Gawn one on one had to happen, Cameron is in great form and Gawn IS getting older but he really showed Darcy who the smaller ruckman was on Monday night and he rag dolled him so much so that the Melbourne mids all looked a lot more potent than they had for a long time. If the Dees had have had some forwards, that number of clearances would have probably translated into a win.

So, whilst I'm all for the progression (and fitting in all of the forwards we now find ourselves having) I think we have to temper the process against certain sides. I mean if Witts were to get a hold of Cameron like Gawn did then Gold Coast's mids and forwards would certainly make us pay. So too Brisbane's and Geelong's.

We dodged a bullet on Monday letting Gawn run riot, lets be smarter.

Great answer, and I agree.
I likewise Have noticed we are moving away from the Cox/Cameron structure, but while this his happening (and before our VFL rucks have developed sufficiently) we need to support the change in structure by adjusting with horses for courses.

 

[cankles]

View attachment 2338971

I reckon that performance was all duck no dinner.

All farther and no poor.

 

[jmac70]

Great answer, and I agree.
I likewise Have noticed we are moving away from the Cox/Cameron structure, but while this his happening (and before our VFL rucks have developed sufficiently) we need to support the change in structure by adjusting with horses for courses.

Did you notice that we started the season with Cameron and McStay?

 

[IlovethePies]

Did you notice that we started the season with Cameron and McStay?

Yes maybe i did, no maybe i didn't.
Sorry, I'm not a scholar on Collingwood selections 2025.
I am only going on what i have seen recently, which is that we had Cox in the team, but decided to omit him in the last two games.
This smacks to me of transition, not of a final decision having been made in Round Zero.

 

[jmac70]

Yes maybe i did, no maybe i didn't.
Sorry, I'm not a scholar on Collingwood selections 2025.
I am only going on what i have seen recently, which is that we had Cox in the team, but decided to omit him in the last two games.
This smacks to me of transition, not of a final decision having been made in Round Zero.

You don’t have to be a scholar to know that Cox has played most of his games this year because McStay has been injured.

The Cameron / McStay model is clearly preferred by the coaching team.

 

[IlovethePies]

You don’t have to be a scholar to know that Cox has played most of his games this year because McStay has been injured.

The Cameron / McStay model is clearly preferred by the coaching team.

Correct, no one is denying it is preferred.
What i (and I believe Robroy above) are arguing is that this preferred model needs to be tempered by the constraints of each individual game.
ie....yes prefer Darcy and Dan in general, but have the flexibility to differ from that model if the personnel/conditions of an individual game might require it.