Toast Round 6 = Collingwood 90-77 Essendon

Remove this Banner Ad

Its gonna be very interesting when that time comes. As given our small forward brigade, dont think we have the luxury of playing a third tall along with cameron and cox and mihocek and mcstay. So either we play 2 rucks and the other talls. Or 1 ruck and Johnson as a forward/ruck.
When we get a ruck back. 2nd ruck to become a combo of McStay/Kreuger and Johnson with Frampton taking the defensive 50 contests
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I agree with what you stated. He has done well over the past weeks however you are wrong claiming that his current good form makes those who criticised look silly. He was poor in the finals and he had a poor pre-season. Nothing changes that

On SM-N975F using BigFooty.com mobile app
So by this logic AJ’s critics can’t forgive his past, regardless if his performances improve.
That is just very very strange.
 
Last edited:
I agree with what you stated. He has done well over the past weeks however you are wrong claiming that his current good form makes those who criticised look silly. He was poor in the finals and he had a poor pre-season. Nothing changes that

On SM-N975F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Yeah that was last year. A poor pre season? Based on what? One pre season jog?
He's looking like a machine right now.

Peter McKenna always came last in time trials.
No one better to replace Ash right now.

Apart from my mate Edward. I'd drop everyone for him. Not Nick though.
 
You underestimate us youngsters. A few of us on here are Brunswick indie hipsters who like The Pixies and The Cure and op shop clothes. You should know this as well as anyone.
Yes I know you are a hipster doofus veggie muncher.

I'm sure you'll be getting yourself a fixie soon.
 
Yeah that was last year. A poor pre season? Based on what? One pre season jog?
He's looking like a machine right now.

Peter McKenna always came last in time trials.
No one better to replace Ash right now.

Apart from my mate Edward. I'd drop everyone for him. Not Nick though.

He’s done a fantastic job in getting back to fitness but let’s not gloss over something that clearly was there in the preseason and not even talking about the time trial. The preseason games too. He was taken aside in the preseason from the coaches and HP manager that he had to get fitter. And power to him, he did just that and reaping the rewards.
Just like ginni has admitted he was not his fittest in the preseason, but he is now after using that time off in his suspension.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Instances that aren't football related actions, such as punching someone, should be adjudicated differently from football related actions, like a tackle.

Hear, hear!
 
So by this logic AJ’s critics can’t forgive his past, regardless if his performances improve.
That is just very very strange.

What’s it got to do with forgiveness? No matter what his future brings, his past is already written, can’t change it.
 
Cheers for the time making this detailed assessment. The front on contacts are technical and annoying, but mostly always paid currently. I can’t remember the pies player, perhaps Mihocek?, received similar contact, but it wasn’t paid. The difference with that one was a second opposition player being behind the contest, but there was still front contact. There’s also a few more that come to mind.
Front on contact, certainly could have been some I missed. Technical and annoying for sure, especially as all those paid in this game were so minor.


In the contest before Stringer’s goal in the third quarter he was tackled, got his hands & the footy free of the tackle and then dragged both back in closer to his body. I’ve seen these paid as holding the footy previously.
I just watched this a few times, no issue with ball up for me. He was tackled immediately and was attempting to dispose I feel. Yes he managed to get hands and ball free but only very briefly and would have been a harsh holding the ball call. Move it to the 50/50 non-free to Coll category if you like.

In the third quarter a second Essendon player stood & encroached very close to the back of the player on the mark when we were taking a set shot on goal (we kicked a behind). I wasn’t on the best angle, but it looked within 5m & therefore should have been a 50m penalty. A similar one was paid in an earlier game this round.
Nothing captured on the vision at all for the two set shot behinds in the third quarter from Elliott and De Goey. Perhaps something when the vision was zoomed in on player preparing to kick, but certainly nothing as obvious as Lever who ran right up behind the player on the mark as Richmond player was kicking, the recent example you referred to. Note – ugh, what a silly pedantic rule that is.

After Daicos’ first goal in the last quarter he was dumped via a heavy push in the back. He had already kicked the ball. These often see a second shot on goal given. On replay a different Essendon player bumped Daicos (not late), but the push in the back still occurred.
Daicos push after kicking goal. Yeah, I’d say if this was around the ground with the same force/timing then it would probably be a down field free kick, but not surprised it wasn’t paid in this situation. Even though the hit was after ball left boot, it was a quick play so I’ll say a split second later and I’d be on board with a free being paid, but as it is probably another 50/50. Maybe I’m still trying too hard to be unbiased!

I appreciate your commitment to the cause but its pretty pointless going back complaining about the umpires. I thought it was fairly umpired, our mistakes caused a lot of the free kicks that Essendon got but we won so we move on.
Yeah, not complaining about the umpiring in the “they’re out to get us” manner, just an interesting exercise to do occasionally and another reason to watch the replay again!

Lmao the amount of obvious frees to Collingwood that you’ve called as 50/50 is absurd.
Josh Daicos, fair shove in the back, 50/50. Seriously?
Regardless of that, your analysis highlights the rise that Essendon was given, with 4x the 50/50 calls given to them, 2 less 50/50’s missed for them, and 3 obvious calls (in your opinion) missed for us vs their 0.
Fair enough, tried too hard to be unbiased perhaps. J Daicos, yep move that to a missed free then. As you say, regardless of my absurd observations, and now also adding the couple above from barrackers it certainly was a game where the calls didn't seem to go our way.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Front on contact, certainly could have been some I missed. Technical and annoying for sure, especially as all those paid in this game were so minor.



I just watched this a few times, no issue with ball up for me. He was tackled immediately and was attempting to dispose I feel. Yes he managed to get hands and ball free but only very briefly and would have been a harsh holding the ball call. Move it to the 50/50 non-free to Coll category if you like.


Nothing captured on the vision at all for the two set shot behinds in the third quarter from Elliott and De Goey. Perhaps something when the vision was zoomed in on player preparing to kick, but certainly nothing as obvious as Lever who ran right up behind the player on the mark as Richmond player was kicking, the recent example you referred to. Note – ugh, what a silly pedantic rule that is.


Daicos push after kicking goal. Yeah, I’d say if this was around the ground with the same force/timing then it would probably be a down field free kick, but not surprised it wasn’t paid in this situation. Even though the hit was after ball left boot, it was a quick play so I’ll say a split second later and I’d be on board with a free being paid, but as it is probably another 50/50. Maybe I’m still trying too hard to be unbiased!


Yeah, not complaining about the umpiring in the “they’re out to get us” manner, just an interesting exercise to do occasionally and another reason to watch the replay again!


Fair enough, tried too hard to be unbiased perhaps. J Daicos, yep move that to a missed free then. As you say, regardless of my absurd observations, and now also adding the couple above from barrackers it certainly was a game where the calls didn't seem to go our way.
Too many are trying too hard to be unbiased and that's just not here nor just in our club.

Though it's not the umpires at fault but the system that allows the AFL to 'shift focus' as it suits them in shaping events through the season.

I've never been a great fan of the V/AFL in general but I started looking very critically at the rules when Trav found himself triple teamed and blocked at every turn for years without the AFL lifting a finger. Next it was Cox - surely likely the most outrageously umpired against player ever to play the game.

I was pretty fed up at this stage but the vindictive and utterly reckless treatment of young Ginni was the final straw for me.
 
Too many are trying too hard to be unbiased and that's just not here nor just in our club.

Though it's not the umpires at fault but the system that allows the AFL to 'shift focus' as it suits them in shaping events through the season.

I've never been a great fan of the V/AFL in general but I started looking very critically at the rules when Trav found himself triple teamed and blocked at every turn for years without the AFL lifting a finger. Next it was Cox - surely likely the most outrageously umpired against player ever to play the game.

I was pretty fed up at this stage but the vindictive and utterly reckless treatment of young Ginni was the final straw for me.

If that was the final straw, then why are you still posting about footy? Isn’t it time for a new hobby?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 


Honestly, Whateley is that far ahead of the other commentators it’s not funny. Captures the moments better than anyone

“The Collingwood fans know what’s happening. The Essendon players know what’s happening. It’s transfixing. It’s paralysing.”

I reckon Gerard is a closet ‘Pie.
 
If you believe his position was “perfectly” logical then, my concerns about your inability to discern nuance, are sadly correct.

Happy for you to think some action in the future will somehow rewrite the past, my concerns about your tenuous grasp on reality are sadly correct.
 

Toast Round 6 = Collingwood 90-77 Essendon

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top