Game Day The Prelims 2022

[Dramoth]

I made an FB post that included them referred to as "Filth" and no one got it. I have always known that Coll, Carl and Ess supporters refer to each other colloquially as either "The Filth" or "The Scum". Personally, Coll = The Filth and Ess = The Scum (as in Essenscum). Did I miss the memo where this is no longer appropriate?

They’re called the Filth because of all the leather workers that used to pollute the Yarra as it wended it’s way through the area.

 

[Dramoth]

Makes no sense, Ginnivan man’s the mark after the Swans player kicks out, meaning he has to be more than 15m from the goal square, he’s about 20m away from goal.

The Swans player is within a couple of metres of the boundary line. The mark is usually 5m back from the boundary. Minivan ran straight over that mark, and took up position right where the swans player took it. the only time when a player can stand the mark on the boundary is when the ball has gone over on the full Or it’s a deliberate.

 

[gbatman]

It's just baffling.

It's the most simple run and gun game plan ever seen. Apply defensive pressure, win ball, stream forward via the corridor. But how do you stop something so chaotic? It almost has no method therefore something methodical can't break it down.

I actually can't help but think if we had the same game plan (and applied it in the same fashion) how scary we would be.

It's a classic game plan. I'm certainly a fan. They rarely play a lose man at the stoppages and purely hunt the ball (unlike us). Teams who do, the forwards set up for the ball coming in more controlled and play unaccountable and hunt the ball, they let the lose defenders just sit off. The defenders know they can play unaccountable and sit in the hole because they know the midfield applies pressure and it will be bombed in. This is how Collingwood brought us undone both times. It's how they have been winning all season. Sydney's forwards were very good at being accountable, they knew the ball was likely to come in bombed and played for it. It's why I have been having a go at our forwards for being unaccountable, unwilling to sacrifice and lacking leadership in the area. Could be coaching as well. Our forward line is the elephant in the room.

The up the corridor game, how often that comes off is nuts. Yeah they rebound from defence well and hit targets really well but a lot of it is the opposition players lack of concentration IMO. They aren't expecting it. Against them, as soon as you get ahead you would be working really hard to cover a man if you were in the middle because they will be looking for it.

It's hard to zone the middle of the ground up, players just have to defend better one on one. Or you do zone it up, one on one the wings and try and catch them at half back with a team defence. But the ball may still move too quickly.

I think we had it figured out in the last game we played. We just kept them really wide and stopped their run and managed to keep them out of the middle for most of it but lack of fitness and concentration late in the game we let them back in there. Only reason we lost that game was due to the immaturity of our forwards as I mentioned above. Had our forwards defended better we would not have been beaten early or let them up the middle late in the game or let them out as quick. They took a lot of intercept marks early because no one made any moves to stop it. Sydney on the other hand, their forwards found a good balance between defending and attacking.

 

[harmesy 37]

Papley should not have received a free kick.
Likewise, Cripps’ mark should have stood in Rd 23. And Carlton would have been in the finals.

Matches are being decided by bad umpiring errors.
If there is grey area you could accept it, but in both instances 99 out of 100 would agree error made.
It’s not good enough.
Umps need to be miked up to a bunker command in last quarter to ensure they can overturn obvious mistakes.

 

[Aphrodite]

This aged well ...

 

[GoBlues!]

In the words of Malcolm Blight…I couldn’t give a rat’s tossbag who wins next week.

* the cats...

I don’t discriminate AG…I hate them equally.

 

[sbwan]

Papley should not have received a free kick.
Likewise, Cripps’ mark should have stood in Rd 23. And Carlton would have been in the finals.

Matches are being decided by bad umpiring errors.
If there is grey area you could accept it, but in both instances 99 out of 100 would agree error made.
It’s not good enough.
Umps need to be miked up to a bunker command in last quarter to ensure they can overturn obvious mistakes.

Papley was paid the mark, no? Which it was if it wasn't a free against him. The free against him was a close call, it was definitely hands in the back which isn't a free anymore. The hands were more used to hold him out. I don't think it was a mistake but it also wouldn't have been a mistake to pay it.

 

[Rustica]

Papley was paid the mark, no? Which it was if it wasn't a free against him. The free against him was a close call, it was definitely hands in the back which isn't a free anymore. The hands were more used to hold him out. I don't think it was a mistake but it also wouldn't have been a mistake to pay it.

I believe they called a high against him instead of a mark

 

[sbwan]

I believe they called a high against him instead of a mark

I just watched it again and don't see the signal either way, but I do see him control the ball and it never hit the ground/be touched. What makes you think it was a free kick?

 

[Accidental genius]

I believe they called a high against him instead of a mark

Yeah think that’s what happened.

Was it a push though...with both hands on the back?

Don’t think there was much in it but when both hands are on the back do they normally pay a push?

 

[teagueyubeauty]

It's just baffling.

It's the most simple run and gun game plan ever seen. Apply defensive pressure, win ball, stream forward via the corridor. But how do you stop something so chaotic? It almost has no method therefore something methodical can't break it down.

I actually can't help but think if we had the same game plan (and applied it in the same fashion) how scary we would be.

We’d be too slow to defend the turnover, no thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Hands On]

 

[Kruezing]

The swans led from start to finish and for the majority of that time led comfortably when the game was there to be won they outplayed Collingwood it most facets … it wasn’t until they tired that the filth came at them … the much better team won and deservedly so … the filth game plan isn’t rocket science it’s basically a soccer game plan implemented by crap teams to keep the better teams at bay in the hope that they can score a late winner … lol

 

[Rustica]

I just watched it again and don't see the signal either way, but I do see him control the ball and it never hit the ground/be touched. What makes you think it was a free kick?

I believe they had called high on Quaynor. He collected Papley’s head instead of the ball

 

[Rustica]

Yeah think that’s what happened.

Was it a push though...with both hands on the back?

Don’t think there was much in it but when both hands are on the back do they normally pay a push?

Don’t think so. Moore put some mayo on it and he kinda flopped forward on the side on push

 

[sbwan]

I believe they had called high on Quaynor. He collected Papley’s head instead of the ball

Yes but what is the source of this belief? For what it's worth, it's been registered as a mark on Champion Data and the AFL app (check Quaynor's stats - 0 frees against in Q4).

 

[harmesy 37]

Yes but what is the source of this belief? For what it's worth, it's been registered as a mark on Champion Data and the AFL app (check Quaynor's stats - 0 frees against in Q4).

I agree. Also, Look at this image in the article.
It is 100% clear it was a push in the back.
Of the two teams, I would have preferred a swans victory.. but that isn’t the point.
The point is the replay came up within a second or two.
Delay the match for max.. 5 seconds to get the right result.

‘He tripped’: Swans star rejects claims of free kick late in prelim, says he marked it fairly

‘He tripped’: Swans star rejects claims of free kick late in prelim, says he marked it fairly

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[Dunna Heartknee]

I agree. Also, Look at this image in the article.
It is 100% clear it was a push in the back.
Of the two teams, I would have preferred a swans victory.. but that isn’t the point.
The point is the replay came up within a second or two.
Delay the match for max.. 5 seconds to get the right result.

‘He tripped’: Swans star rejects claims of free kick late in prelim, says he marked it fairly

‘He tripped’: Swans star rejects claims of free kick late in prelim, says he marked it fairly

www.foxsports.com.au

Who gives a * mate.
About 35 seconds before three quarter time McCreedy ran through the protected zone to man the mark 70M out from goal, easily a fifty penalty there.
They miss this s**t all the time using a camera to fix these things is garbage, score reviews are bad enough in delaying the game, yet still, it seems people want to slow it down even more.

 

[carlton_99]

I agree. Also, Look at this image in the article.
It is 100% clear it was a push in the back.
Of the two teams, I would have preferred a swans victory.. but that isn’t the point.
The point is the replay came up within a second or two.
Delay the match for max.. 5 seconds to get the right result.

‘He tripped’: Swans star rejects claims of free kick late in prelim, says he marked it fairly

‘He tripped’: Swans star rejects claims of free kick late in prelim, says he marked it fairly

www.foxsports.com.au

Could say the same thing for the many incorrect decisions against the Swans. For instance the clear unrealistic attempted mark by Noble on Papley 15m out from goal. Noble jumps into Papley's back and doesn't touch the ball. Would have been a shot from directly in front.

 

[harmesy 37]

Could say the same thing for the many incorrect decisions against the Swans. For instance the clear unrealistic attempted mark by Noble on Papley 15m out from goal. Noble jumps into Papley's back and doesn't touch the ball. Would have been a shot from directly in front.

Yeah, that incident was a 40/60 or 60/40.
Personally, I thought it was a realistic attempt and he had eyes on the ball.
The Papley push though was a 99% obvious free kick to Collingwood.

I just want it fixed up for next year so my team isn’t disadvantaged.
AGAIN!!
I should have gone to my first finals match since 2013, instead I got nothing.
Cripps mark was a clear cut mark.

 

[Gethelred]

Yeah, that incident was a 40/60 or 60/40.
Personally, I thought it was a realistic attempt and he had eyes on the ball.
The Papley push though was a 99% obvious free kick to Collingwood.

I just want it fixed up for next year so my team isn’t disadvantaged.
AGAIN!!
I should have gone to my first finals match since 2013, instead I got nothing.
Cripps mark was a clear cut mark.

That makes it so much better.

 

[carlton_99]

Yeah, that incident was a 40/60 or 60/40.
Personally, I thought it was a realistic attempt and he had eyes on the ball.
The Papley push though was a 99% obvious free kick to Collingwood.

I just want it fixed up for next year so my team isn’t disadvantaged.
AGAIN!!
I should have gone to my first finals match since 2013, instead I got nothing.
Cripps mark was a clear cut mark.

That's not how the rule has been interpreted. You need to make contact with the ball - even if it is just a fingertip and it is recognised as "realistic". Noble didn't - should have been free. There were many others as well especially in the first half which benefited the Pies. Cripps' mark was just an awful decision - I know this is an unpopular opinion but until there is real accountability with the people that officiate the game there will never be improvement.

 

[NavySteel]

I believe they had called high on Quaynor. He collected Papley’s head instead of the ball

Quaynor skirts the line… mark or free, whatever you want… I was glad to see papley stick it to them

 

[katmanblue]

Papley was paid the mark, no? Which it was if it wasn't a free against him. The free against him was a close call, it was definitely hands in the back which isn't a free anymore. The hands were more used to hold him out. I don't think it was a mistake but it also wouldn't have been a mistake to pay it.

Initial action was a hold off. Then he tried to push off but completely missed. Can't get a free for an attempted push in the back.

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[RPCB]

This aged well ...

Probably the biggest dumbass in the league.