Toast Round 22 = Collingwood 109-101 Geelong

[sr36]

Not sure how to feel about David King noticing and talking about two of the exact things I noticed and talked about Friday night

• Pendles too slow to be in the middle
• Defence actually looked more stable with Moore not there

King can get hyperbolic at times but he does analyse the game within an inch of its life

We really did look a little more “solid” down back once Moore wasn’t there.

Maybe Darcy just needs a straighten up like he got after the Richmond game last year to get him back on course?

Reckon Pendles maybe belongs forward? His lack of speed can’t hurt as much there but his brain and height can still be weapons there

King is very analytical but super reactive to results. Quarters 2 and 3 we stopped losing stoppage and tightened up defensively around the ground and thus the ball barely hit our defensive 50 - when it did, they goaled. Q4 they got back on top around stoppage and had about 15 shots on goal.

 

[unplugged]

Not sure how to feel about David King noticing and talking about two of the exact things I noticed and talked about Friday night

• Pendles too slow to be in the middle
• Defence actually looked more stable with Moore not there

King can get hyperbolic at times but he does analyse the game within an inch of its life

We really did look a little more “solid” down back once Moore wasn’t there.

Maybe Darcy just needs a straighten up like he got after the Richmond game last year to get him back on course?

Reckon Pendles maybe belongs forward? His lack of speed can’t hurt as much there but his brain and height can still be weapons there

Kingy was going with the same analysis on Crunch Time on SEN on Saturday morning RE Pendlebury.

I'd love to know the gps stats on Pendles now compared to the majority of his career. He's probably running no slower than he did at his peak!

We obviously don't put him on Dangerfield expecting him to run with him every inch and stop his drive or run him down from behind. We get him to utilise good body positioning to try to stop him getting dominant position and running it out each and every time.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

King is very analytical but super reactive to results. Quarters 2 and 3 we stopped losing stoppage and tightened up defensively around the ground and thus the ball barely hit our defensive 50 - when it did, they goaled. Q4 they got back on top around stoppage and had about 15 shots on goal.

I'd like to think others lift when a player of Darcy's calibre & our captain goes off injured. Similar to how I'd hope the whole team lifted their intensity even moreso knowing Nick wasn't going to be there either.

 

[Greenaicos]

It’s just not possible to say from a single image whether it’s in or out. You need another angle snapped at the same time.

I’ve got to say I agreed with you originally because I thought that the 2 pies players were right beside Cameron but in fact they were some distance apart. Now that I know this I believe he’s a foot or so over.


View attachment 1773420

Great pic, from the original pic you can see Murphy’s head is above the line, this one shows how far in front of Murphy Cameron is. Definitely out, matter settled.

 

[JOELY]

I see the Cameron mark discussion has continued on. Just to chime in, I was sitting in the Olympic stand with a perfect view of it. Better than the TV angle. It was pretty clearly out. The TV angle makes it look closer than it was.

 

[60 Yards Out]

Genuinely stand by it. It was in. Here's a frame or so later then:

It's right on top of the line for me.

Before you get to that frame he has taken the ball with arms out and reeled it back in. That frame doesn’t show how far out it was when he got hands to it.

 

[swoop42]

Collingwood should send a please explain letter to the AFL about the ridiculous non call on Cameron being fed the ball while he was clearly out of bounds.

The other 17 clubs (well 16 at least) should then thank us.

It's an absolute farce that you can have a goal review system in place only for it to then not be broad enough to cover such an obvious error by the umpires.

This is the kind of shite that could cost a side a win, a place in the finals (or place within), or premiership.

It's not good enough for a professional sporting competition and I can only imagine the outrage in the media would have been much louder if it had of been Collingwood benefiting from such an incident.

 

[Anzacday]

Imagine if we had lost

 

[NMBB]

Imagine if we had lost

AFL Headquarters

 

[JuniorB]

Imagine if we had lost

The descriptor "massive shitstorm" comes to mind.

 

[BuildEmUp]

For the lions game ill have the following:

In: McRae Allan time to debut some players and Sidebottom if fully recovered
Out: Even tho he played well be it a scratchy match De goey time for a 1 week rest Mitchell see De goey

Time to try some untapped talent from the vfl and rest up JDG mitchell.

I like the Howe to forward move be it temp but kind of like it.

Thinking the likes of Murphy can cover Moore ill even try McInness as that extra tall as well.

Thinking time to try out Begg in the ruck and Cox and give Cameron a weeks spell.

Other then that keep the same.

We can at least in a way start tuning up for week 1 finals.

I feel we can win at marvel friday night as well by a few goals.

Great to see us back clicking again.

Allan is not ready .. Macrae probably is, Fly has Repeatedly said we dont "rest" players ... I just dont get this resting bit - these are professional footballers playing once a week. Get out there and earn your $$$!

 

[jathanas]

Collingwood should send a please explain letter to the AFL about the ridiculous non call on Cameron being fed the ball while he was clearly out of bounds.

The other 17 clubs (well 16 at least) should then thank us.

It's an absolute farce that you can have a goal review system in place only for it to then not be broad enough to cover such an obvious error by the umpires.

This is the kind of shite that could cost a side a win, a place in the finals (or place within), or premiership.

It's not good enough for a professional sporting competition and I can only imagine the outrage in the media would have been much louder if it had of been Collingwood benefiting from such an incident.

The AFL has reviewed this using their high resolution cameras and it seems it's just the fans being difficult (again). Their expert panel found that it's hard to get every call millimetre perfect and this was too slight a margin to call.

 

[Horaceg]

The AFL has reviewed this using their high resolution cameras and it seems it's just the fans being difficult (again). Their expert panel found that it's hard to get every call millimetre perfect and this was too slight a margin to call.

View attachment 1773689

I personally think it was pretty special to kick it from there, umpires didn’t have line of sight on the actual line, tough to see it from the car park.

 

[sr36]

It wasn’t fair in the sense that it clearly benefited us but my understanding is it’s within the rules as long as the ball is in the circle and both ruckman can get to it.

The Geelong ruck should have tried to block Cameron’s run in hindsight.

It only benefitted is because the Cats ruckman didn't play to the whistle and didn't compete

 

[BuildEmUp]

Genuinely stand by it. It was in. Here's a frame or so later then:

It's right on top of the line for me.

Yep agree, if you then extrapolate the umpires view ( from correct angle side on to th eline ) he would then see it being over the line .. the angle of this camera shot ( also remembering zoom) is totally misleading...

 

[3rdMan]

It only benefitted is because the Cats ruckman didn't play to the whistle and didn't compete

Rewatched the game and there was another similar centre bounce that went the Cats way, didn't have much effect.

 

[jathanas]

Not sure how to feel about David King noticing and talking about two of the exact things I noticed and talked about Friday night

• Pendles too slow to be in the middle
• Defence actually looked more stable with Moore not there

**

He like the rest of us seems to be deferring to your developed football instincts.

King is not referencing you, is selling it as his knowledge, and is commercially benefiting; so you might have a claim.

 

[gouki88]

Not sure how to feel about David King noticing and talking about two of the exact things I noticed and talked about Friday night

• Pendles too slow to be in the middle
• Defence actually looked more stable with Moore not there

King can get hyperbolic at times but he does analyse the game within an inch of its life

We really did look a little more “solid” down back once Moore wasn’t there.

Maybe Darcy just needs a straighten up like he got after the Richmond game last year to get him back on course?

Reckon Pendles maybe belongs forward? His lack of speed can’t hurt as much there but his brain and height can still be weapons there

Pendlebury being too slow in the midfield is a myth. He's too slow to be directly matched up on burst athletes like Dangerfield. Two completely different things.

The defence looking 'more solid' without Moore is likely due to systematic adjustment more than anything. I feel as if our zone became more man-aware than when Moore was playing, and we stuck tighter to the opposition.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

He like the rest of us seems to be deferring to your developed football instincts.

King is not referencing you, is selling it as his knowledge, and is commercially benefiting; so you might have a claim.

Reckon you missed the point of what I was saying

 

[Gaspard]

When it comes to Colingwood the umpires view it as Open Season and we are fair game. As soon as I saw Robert O'Gorman and Mathew Nicholls officiating I knew we were in for a tough night - watch them , they have form.

This is not my point. I really believe that the umpires as a group don't like what they have been required to with Jack Ginnivan. It makes every other decision they make about a high tackle questionable, and brings the game into more disrepute than any drug misdemeanour that might occur outside the playing arena could possibly manage. The AFL is responsible for the good name of the game, forgetting the safety of the players (all of them). Until this directive is reversed, and publiclly reversed, the AFL as an organization is responsible for all of the damage it is doing.

 

[Eric Shin]

Pendles being slow has been known for the last 18 years.

As Bucks stated on SEN this morning, Pendles is almost always a sweeper at stoppages.

Come finals, Pendles will go to another level and make us all look stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[The Royal Sampler]

The defence looking 'more solid' without Moore is likely due to systematic adjustment more than anything. I feel as if our zone became more man-aware than when Moore was playing, and we stuck tighter to the opposition.

I reckon Moore/Frampton/Murphy is probably our best combination down back with Howe up forward instead of AJ or Cox at present.

Depending on matchups, Howe could spend time down back while Frampton relieves in the ruck. Unconventional but I think it releases Moore to be Moore, and Frampton is far better in ruck than AJ. Howe provided better pressure than AJ or Cox.

 

[NMBB]

.....Come finals, Pendles will go to another level and make us all look stupid

Happy with that if we win the damn thing

 

[gouki88]

I reckon Moore/Frampton/Murphy is probably our best combination down back with Howe up forward instead of AJ or Cox at present.

Depending on matchups, Howe could spend time down back while Frampton relieves in the ruck. Unconventional but I think it releases Moore to be Moore, and Frampton is far better in ruck than AJ. Howe provided better pressure than AJ or Cox.

In agreement there. Murphy & Frampton are good match-ups for various players and seem to operate well alongside one another. Frampton has the right athletic combination for the bigger blokes that Murphy probably cannot stick to

 

[danielnajdek]

Lately King seems to always pick on one of our players. Was Mitchell and Cox. Now it’s Pendles.