Game Day The Good, the Frustrating, and the Downright Awful vs Collingwood

[Roovolution]

Imagine if Dangerflog comes first in the brownlow, and Crouch second. But Danger is ineligible because of the suspension. And then has to hang the brownlow around Matts neck. Delicious.

Only problem is the grand final teams don't usually attend the brownlow do they?

And then we play Geelong in the Granny and beat them.... oh oh oh oh oh sorry I just soiled my pants!!!'

 

[Bicks]

I know that but we needed to play another inside mid to replace the one we lost for this game

Wigg an inside mid?


He's an outside mid or hbf'er..

Would get carved up playing inside midfield at AFL.

 

[pirate bob]

Imagine if Dangerflog comes first in the brownlow, and Crouch second. But Danger is ineligible because of the suspension. And then has to hang the brownlow around Matts neck. Delicious.

Only problem is the grand final teams don't usually attend the brownlow do they?

Or Geelong challenge and lose and Dangerfield is sanctioned for 2 weeks and misses the home game against Richmond.

Scott Selwood goes to Dustin Martin and niggles him relentlessly. Martin retaliates and is given a financial sanction which translates into an automatic 1 week suspension based on 2 priors.

Brownlow is thrown wide open for ..

 

[CrowBloke]

In the first half, they looked like they had an extra 5 players on the ground, more at stoppages and as soon as they got it had unmarked outlet targets.

In the first half, they looked like us, especially with the end-to-end out-the-back goals.

 

[Elite Crow]

Wigg an inside mid?


He's an outside mid or hbf'er..

Would get carved up playing inside midfield at AFL.

What position is he playing in the sanfl?

 

[Walshy_The_Goat]

You are a brilliant analyst of the game. Much my thoughts while it was being played.

Haha, kind words. Seems so obvious a tactic to try and use, it's just a wonder why the Crows haven't used it yet?

Pretty sure West Coast used to do the same thing with Judd at times when he was getting tagged early in his career.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Absolutely.

You can't be that stupid.

 

[Godallblighty]

It won't get much positive press around here (for reasons that I can't work out he's rapidly approaching one of the board's regular targets), but the work that Milera does on the boundary to fight with two players and get rid of at least one tackler keeping the ball in play with about 90 seconds left was immense and unheralded. As much a part of our saving the game as some of the plays that followed.

He actually won or got involved in a few hard ball contests in the second half, so he can do it...and do it well. Took so many soft options in the first half though, including incredibly timid kicks when he should be looking for a damaging pass. Rarely takes the responsibility to kick for goal. Hopefully, it's all about building confidence and not a fundamental temperament because he's got ability in spades. You're right, that play in the last was tough, desperate and critical.

 

[Huntercrow]

You can't be that stupid.

Please feel free to enlighten me. What were his stats in the second half? What did I miss?

 

[WetCrow1991]

Watching the replay again, we didn't deserve to win after the first half, but we should have won given how much time we had after we got it back to 3 points the 2nd time.

 

[fortunatecrow]

That Sauce tackle at 9.26 in the third quarter was the galvanizer for mine, love the big guy.

My rule of thumb is that when Jacobs lays a tackle, he is switched on.

When he is switched on, we usually win

 

[Wood_Duck]

Please feel free to enlighten me. What were his stats in the second half? What did I miss?

To prove what.

 

[MRB37]

Just adding to my previous post regarding Sloane being tagged...

If I were part of the Crows coaching staff, I'd have put Sloane H2H with Wells and have Wells' Crows opponent (not sure who was playing on him) switch to 'tagging' the tagger in Levi Greenwood, by blocking and scragging him at every centre bounce.

This would allow Sloane the time and space he needed to have an impact.

Is 'tagging a tagger' a thing? If not, Pyke should perhaps try this and see how it goes, as the boy needs help!

The problem is with Pyke seems he doesn't like making huge adjustments to how we play at times. That would require Sloane being thrown out of his role as #1 mid, whether he's being tagged or not, he wants Sloane there and just expects him to "work through it" in regards to being slowed down. That solution would be us reacting to the opposition, Pyke wants us to play our way most the time, regardless of what the opposition is doing.

That's where we kept getting unstuck in our losses earlier in the year because the opposition had clear tactics to counter us, and we wouldn't change anything up. We changed a few things for games against the Bulldogs and Geelong, but in both of those games Sloane didn't have a lockdown tagger on him (Blicavs tried to tag Sloane, but sucked ass at doing it cause he's not physical enough).

We will continue to sit on our hands for the rest of the year + finals with Sloane and expect the other midfielders to step up. We saw on Sunday, minus Brad Crouch we can't do that, it's going to be a serious impediment to us going all the way to the GF. Sloane needs to play at his best through the finals.

 

[Huntercrow]

To prove what.

To prove your point.

 

[Wood_Duck]

To prove your point.

Which stat do I need to prove that Sloane added some aggression and intensity to our defence in the second half. You could always try watching the game.

 

[PCORF]

Win, draw or lose, we have to fight every week. No game is easy, no matter if it is against Brisbane or Geelong, we have to bring our best and if this year does not work out for us we can never give up. Everyone on this team, not just Sloane needs to contribute for us to have that shot at ultimate success, a chance that doesn't often come. We have 2 games we need to win to get the top 2 finish, don't care if we don't finish 1st ..... double chance is good, particularly playing in the first week at home. But still 1st or 2nd does not guarantee a premiership or a grand final appearance. We have never made the grand final from top 2, ever. Last year's round 23 still hurts and the guys on this team are hungry to make up for that. Go you Crows!

 

[mistylake]

Win, draw or lose, we have to fight every week. No game is easy, no matter if it is against Brisbane or Geelong, we have to bring our best and if this year does not work out for us we can never give up. Everyone on this team, not just Sloane needs to contribute for us to have that shot at ultimate success, a chance that doesn't often come. We have 2 games we need to win to get the top 2 finish, don't care if we don't finish 1st ..... double chance is good, particularly playing in the first week at home. But still 1st or 2nd does not guarantee a premiership or a grand final appearance. We have never made the grand final from top 2, ever. Last year's round 23 still hurts and the guys on this team are hungry to make up for that. Go you Crows!

You would think it's easier to come out all guns blazing and then be able to slacken off or rest sore players etc in the 4th once 50 points up rather than having to come from behind constantly.
It's just more efficient and it takes those stinking umpires out of the equation to.

 

[skoobydoo]

Watching the replay again, we didn't deserve to win after the first half, but we should have won given how much time we had after we got it back to 3 points the 2nd time.

Agree that we should have won the game from the 3point deficit stage and while I applaud achieving (salvaging) a draw I also feel Colingwood should have won. They had 2 posters and other misses.

But any sort of comeback by a Crows side is to be cherished.

 

[skoobydoo]

The problem is with Pyke seems he doesn't like making huge adjustments to how we play at times. That would require Sloane being thrown out of his role as #1 mid, whether he's being tagged or not, he wants Sloane there and just expects him to "work through it" in regards to being slowed down. That solution would be us reacting to the opposition, Pyke wants us to play our way most the time, regardless of what the opposition is doing.

That's where we kept getting unstuck in our losses earlier in the year because the opposition had clear tactics to counter us, and we wouldn't change anything up. We changed a few things for games against the Bulldogs and Geelong, but in both of those games Sloane didn't have a lockdown tagger on him (Blicavs tried to tag Sloane, but sucked ass at doing it cause he's not physical enough).

We will continue to sit on our hands for the rest of the year + finals with Sloane and expect the other midfielders to step up. We saw on Sunday, minus Brad Crouch we can't do that, it's going to be a serious impediment to us going all the way to the GF. Sloane needs to play at his best through the finals.

Pyke's way seems to be one of patience and perseverance with the game style. This is evidenced by Lynch's after game comments that Pyke did not make big adjustments at half time but asked the players to be patient and keep with the way we want to play', even though we looked completely done. All good coaches have absolute faith in their game plan and this is certainly how Pykey ticks. Nothing from left field before, or more importantly, during a game. Other coaches know this and therefore know pretty much what to expect each Saturday from the Crows. Hence the comments 'they played just as we expected them to play'. This gives some advantage to opposing coaches who can confidently take the initiative with changes that are geared to dismantling the 'way we want to play'.

This season has shown that when our game works it is nigh unbeatable, but when it doesn't (a la Cwood), it is way off.

 

[Brown_DOG68]

Finally got a chance to watch the replay last night, and as most have said, the umpiring, for the most part, was pretty reasonable.

However, there was an incident in the second quarter, that had me fuming, but maybe marking rules changed and I missed it?

Kick came into our forward line and McGovern (the man IN FRONT) got full purchase on the ball with both hands, at the same time that Howe flew from behind and got full purchase on the ball, with both players coming to ground holding onto the ball. The umpire pays the mark to Howe. Someone (McGovern?) says "what about the man in front" - the ump says "nah, he (Howe) got hands on it first" WTF?

Has the rule changed? Does the fly from behind trump the man in front?

Nothing was said by the commentators, and from what I've read on here, no one has mentioned it (although I haven't read the gameday thread).

Did I imagine it or see it differently to others? was it just my supporter bias?

 

[displacedaussie]

Did I imagine it or see it differently to others? was it just my supporter bias?

That pissed me off too.

 

[SugarShane]

Finally got a chance to watch the replay last night, and as most have said, the umpiring, for the most part, was pretty reasonable.

However, there was an incident in the second quarter, that had me fuming, but maybe marking rules changed and I missed it?

Kick came into our forward line and McGovern (the man IN FRONT) got full purchase on the ball with both hands, at the same time that Howe flew from behind and got full purchase on the ball, with both players coming to ground holding onto the ball. The umpire pays the mark to Howe. Someone (McGovern?) says "what about the man in front" - the ump says "nah, he (Howe) got hands on it first" WTF?

Has the rule changed? Does the fly from behind trump the man in front?

Nothing was said by the commentators, and from what I've read on here, no one has mentioned it (although I haven't read the gameday thread).

Did I imagine it or see it differently to others? was it just my supporter bias?

I mentioned it in the gameday thread but forgot about it afterwards. As far as I'm aware "man in front" trumps "It's Jeremy Howe."

 

[Moonwatcher]

Finally got a chance to watch the replay last night, and as most have said, the umpiring, for the most part, was pretty reasonable.

However, there was an incident in the second quarter, that had me fuming, but maybe marking rules changed and I missed it?

Kick came into our forward line and McGovern (the man IN FRONT) got full purchase on the ball with both hands, at the same time that Howe flew from behind and got full purchase on the ball, with both players coming to ground holding onto the ball. The umpire pays the mark to Howe. Someone (McGovern?) says "what about the man in front" - the ump says "nah, he (Howe) got hands on it first" WTF?

Has the rule changed? Does the fly from behind trump the man in front?

Nothing was said by the commentators, and from what I've read on here, no one has mentioned it (although I haven't read the gameday thread).

Did I imagine it or see it differently to others? was it just my supporter bias?

The first person to grab the ball has always been paid the mark. When the umpire can't tell, he pays the man in front.

 

[Brown_DOG68]

The first person to grab the ball has always been paid the mark. When the umpire can't tell, he pays the man in front.

Yes - I get that that is the rule, but its not what happened in this case.

It is just not physically possible for Howe to get hands on the ball from behind BEFORE McGovern - especially from 3 deep - maybe at the same, more like ly a split second after. But there is no way that Howe took the mark and then McGovern got hands on it after the fact.

 

[CrowBloke]

Has the rule changed? Does the fly from behind trump the man in front?

Nothing was said by the commentators, and from what I've read on here, no one has mentioned it (although I haven't read the gameday thread).

Did I imagine it or see it differently to others? was it just my supporter bias?

Yeah, I thought the same thing. When it happened I said to my mate "Man in front", yet Howe got the mark, in fact McGovern held the ball still (first) so that Howe could grab it!
I'd like to know the rules on that too.