Autopsy Round 16 = Collingwood 61-70 St Kilda

[jmac70]

You're probably right and there's no logic to it, but footy isn't always logical. I just sense that Cox is going to turn it on soon. How good would it be if he fired against the Tiges? They would recall the 2018 prelim and it would mess with their heads and they would doubt themselves. Worth it on the off chance, and what have we got to lose?

I would rather see a young player selected. I’m only looking forward now, and Cox is very much in the past.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

He is our VFL Head Coach and they playing way better then the AFL.

I was just making a Joke about it

I knew what you meant!

 

[Albert Parker]

Need to play to the whistle, however the sensible thing to do in that situation would be to call the footy back for a ball up.

Whistle came after Grundy handballed it.
Players are taught by the Umpire department/AFL to leave the ball as a signal of not taking an 'advantage' situation - as Sidebottom did.
At a minimum, under the circumstances the umpire should have balled it up as you note.
It went from a so called 'advantage' situation to a massive disadvantage that cost us a goal at a time when things were tight.
The umpire made a mistake.... and not his only one for the day. That umpire was poor I thought and seemed quite arrogant.

But more broadly, we saw more of the same.

- Brodie in weird hitout positions which saw him fall over, rendering him useless in the contest and the ball not falling to our advantage.
- Jordy as our only mid really on the move to take the ball in the clearance
- Lack of leg speed on the spread allowing our opposition to score
- Stagnant, conservative ball movement out of the backline by Roughead, Madgen and Mayne which allows our opposition to flood back and make scoring more difficult. Mayne made more kicking errors this week than usual, despite the slow play too.

When we play like all is lost and take the game on we show we can score (last quarter this week and against Geelong and against Melbourne the whole game). I don't believe it is all about the opposition completely relaxing.

It's not completely broken. We should be competing for the bottom half of the 8 I think.

 

[barrackers]

When we play like all is lost and take the game on we show we can score (last quarter this week and against Geelong and against Melbourne the whole game). I don't believe it is all about the opposition completely relaxing.

It's not completely broken. We should be competing for the bottom half of the 8 I think.

Yeah, I agree and we're not a bottom four side on talent. Even with the stagnant game plan with a bit more luck we could have had 2-3 more wins, which would put us just out of the 8, so it's not inconceivable that with quicker footy and more dare we could have a couple more on top of that.

I hope our next coach allows that dare as the first option. I also hope they're more into motivating players instead of self-motivation that seems to be the preferred manner of both Buckley and Harvey.

 

[partypie]

He should be playing VFL. No point continuing with him.

It's hard to get anything back in return for a player if they're playing VFL. Odds are against getting any compo for him anyway as a 30 year old, but keeping him out of the AFL team for the rest of the year isn't going to help the $$$ value of his contract at another club if one does pick him up as a UFA and thus would seal the deal on no compo pick.

Remember that even a last band compo pick (4th round) for him will be useful for us this year, given our ladder position.

Same thing goes for Cox - play him back into a bit of form for the rest of the year and hopefully someone gets interested enough to throw us a 3rd round pick for him.

Every little bit we can get for any players who depart at the end of the season will be useful for us this year.

 

[Queenie Hearts]

This game was lost at selection and yesterday I was telling people Brad Hill would have a day out. Cox, Grundy and Cameron made us too top heavy and slow (just like the week before) and even before the wet weather set in. Mayne and Madgen in the backline are a liability. One stops and kicks sideways or backwards and the other has poor disposal skills so my heart is in my throat when he has the ball. Without an intercepting marking defender to replace Howe/Moore who can play on talls the structure is dismantled and we were undermanned down back. This not only put Roughead under immense pressure but means that the attack from the backline was constrained with Maynard having to play a lockdown role. The midfield had to roll back to defend to cover the gaps and so if it did rebound there was no one forward of the ball and by the time they got there they were spent and would result in a poor inside 50 or a missed shot. With 3 talls, there were less players to chase down the likes of Hill in the rebound so too much left to too few. All the Saints had to do was run it out.

Sidebottom needs to be rested to take care of whatever injury he has as the year is done. Cox needs to be dropped and no contract next year, please. He is infuriating to watch. Mayne and Madgen the same.

I would rather be getting games into players who are at least a possible part of 2022 and beyond.

Please then get the appointment of the coach done asap.

 

[Hardas]

Dragged, and so he should have been. Needs to go back to the VFL.

It will be the making of him.

I would love to see that, but not holding my breath.

Someone needs to sit him down and explain a few things.

 

[Jen2310]

Terrible lack of effort in the firstb 3 quarters.

But we could have stolen that if not for a couple of missed shots.

bring the effort from that last quarter through the whole game and we win.
We didn't deserve to be as close as we were, but just goes to show what happens when you bring effort and take risks in moving the ball.

 

[Kappa]

Terrible lack of effort in the firstb 3 quarters.

But we could have stolen that if not for a couple of missed shots.

bring the effort from that last quarter through the whole game and we win.
We didn't deserve to be as close as we were, but just goes to show what happens when you bring effort and take risks in moving the ball.

Maybe if the game was close the Saints would've played differently in the last quarter... Something everyone seems to have forgotten..

 

[partypie]

Maybe if the game was close the Saints would've played differently in the last quarter... Something everyone seems to have forgotten..

Or maybe they are just epic fourth quarter chokers?

If one of the two moments we failed to capitslise on (Thomas' pretty easy set shot from 30m out on a slight angle or the I50 ball that Mihocek failed to clunk on the lead 40m out) had resulted in a goal then it might have been a very interesting last two minutes.

 

[domus]

We got pounded by a better side.

A 9 point pounding. It's funny how you can twist results to suit any narrative. Collingwood gave Carlton a humiliating pounding for a large portion of the 1970 and 79 grand finals but nobody focuses on that.
We played all over the saints in the last term and given a couple more minutes may have pinched the game but most simply dismiss that term as too little too late.
One thing is clear. Collingwood teams, no matter how poor, rarely cop a royal hiding. Even in our wooden spoon years we were mostly very competitive. This year is no different.
They talk about the shinboner spirit but that mob has endured multiple annihilations in its history.
We have been fighters for most of our history. I appreciate that.

 

[domus]

In one of the most uninspiring displays of football I've ever seen, Collingwood produced three deplorable quarters of footy, before a late rally of goals in the final term saw the Magpies fall 9 points short of St Kilda. At one stage, the Saints had a lead of 49 points during time on of the third quarter, with a margin of 43 points at the last change. Collingwood gave the Saints too much time and space in the first three quarters which gave them enough opportunities to apply scoreboard pressure and hold on when it truly counted, despite the fact that St Kilda went goalless in the final term themselves with just two behinds, and allowed the Woods to have 11 shots at goal for a return of 5 goals. Only the players can answer why they did not impact the contest in the first three quarters, before extracting their digits to almost pull off a Houdini escape to end all escapes. Alas, that did not occur, and a superior performance is required next weekend.

There were only three categories that Collingwood won from the game, and that was handballs by +14 (164 - 150), while intercept possessions were won by +1 (68 - 67). and Marks Inside 50 had a margin of +7 (15 - 8). St Kilda won all of the other statistical categories, such as disposals by +33 (410 - 377), kicks were won by +47 (260 - 213), while contested possessions had an advantage of +11 (143 - 132), with uncontested possessions won by +15 (256 - 241). Hit-outs had a margin of +1 (39 - 38), +7 for clearances (40 - 33), centre clearances were up by +5 (13 - 8), while stoppage clearances were won by +2 (27 - 25). Uncontested marks went the way of the Saints by +7 (95 - 88), Contested Marks had a differential of +6 (12 - 6), while tackles were up by +10 (70 - 60), with Tackles Inside 50 won by +8 (14 - 6), and Inside 50s were won by +6 (54 - 48).

Taylor Adams (34 disposals @ 65%, 336 metres gained, 17 contested possessions, 17 uncontested possessions, 6 intercept possessions, 15 kicks, 19 handballs, 6 tackles, 2 goal assists, 5 score involvements, 4 clearances, 2 centre clearances, 2 stoppage clearances & 6 Inside 50s) was Collingwood's key extractor from stoppages to release his teammates into space, but when Adams found time and space to hit targets, he could not produce quality ball use every time. Leading by example is Adams' strength, his skill execution is not always consistent.

Jordan De Goey (32 disposals @ 78%, 486 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 26 uncontested possessions, 17 kicks, 15 handballs, 9 marks, 3 Marks Inside 50, 2 tackles, 10 score involvements, 3 clearances, 3 stoppage clearances, 6 Inside 50s & 1 goal) produced reasonable numbers across the board, unfortunately there were two shots at goal during the second term that he would've loved to have had back. Given where the team ended up, those behinds came back to bite the Magpies.

Scott Pendlebury (28 disposals @ 86%, 328 metres gained, 12 contested possessions, 16 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 10 kicks, 18 handballs, 4 marks, 6 tackles, 1 goal assist, 4 score involvements, 8 clearances, 2 centre clearances, 6 stoppage clearances, 3 Inside 50s & 4 Rebound 50s) displayed composure with effective ball use to create more time for himself to open up passages for his teammates. The Saints made a conscious effort to reduce Pendlebury's attacking potency which did prove to be telling and decisive.

Jack Crisp (23 disposals @ 78%, 453 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 15 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 17 kicks, 6 handballs, 4 marks, 7 tackles, 2 goal assists, 6 score involvements, 4 clearances, 3 stoppage clearances, 7 Inside 50s & 3 Rebound 50s) performed admirably in his midfield role. Crisp gave his forwards opportunities to impact the scoreboard with effective ball use from the midfield.

Brodie Grundy (19 disposals @ 68%, 181 metres gained, 10 contested possessions, 9 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 33 hit-outs, 8 kicks, 11 handballs, 2 marks, 5 tackles, 2 score involvements, 3 Inside 50s & 3 Rebound 50s) had a game that was big on quantity, but his influence on the contest did not match the effort he had produced.

Chris Mayne (26 disposals @ 81%, 371 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 23 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 15 kicks, 11 handballs, 8 marks, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements & 6 Rebound 50s) provided great stability behind the ball in defence on a trying day for the Pies, with well-judged marks, regular tackles, and maintained possession at a high level once again to be amongst Collingwood's best players.

Isaac Quaynor (18 disposals @ 72%, 254 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 10 uncontested possessions, 9 intercept possessions, 10 kicks, 8 handballs, 3 marks, 3 score involvements & 4 Rebound 50s) played with dare to take risks and regained possession regularly to start chains from defence.

John Noble (15 disposals @ 67%, 290 metres gained, 4 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 10 kicks, 5 handballs, 3 marks, 4 tackles, 4 score involvements & 5 Rebound 50s) won enough possessions to be influential, but could not break many lines to be truly beneficial and effective for his team to thrive successfully.

Jordan Roughead (14 disposals @ 71%, 272 metres gained, 2 contested possessions, 12 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 11 kicks, 3 handballs, 5 marks, 4 score involvements & 4 Rebound 50s) looked to kick as long as possible to a contest to give the team more time to defend, and managed to take some marks to prevent goals being conceded.

Jack Madgen (13 disposals @ 92%, 118 metres gained, 9 contested possessions, 4 uncontested possessions, 11 intercept possessions, 5 kicks, 8 handballs, 4 marks, 4 score involvements & 2 Rebound 50s) defended really well, played within his limitations and vastly reduced his skill errors.

Josh Daicos (20 disposals @ 65%, 260 metres gained, 7 contested possessions, 13 uncontested possessions, 11 kicks, 9 handballs, 4 marks, 6 tackles, 3 score involvements, 2 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 2 Inside 50s, 3 Rebound 50s & 1 goal) showed ability to win the ball around the ground in his 50th game. However, he could not take all of his chances at goal which was largely symbolic of the whole side.

Josh Thomas (17 disposals @ 82%, 293 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 14 uncontested possessions, 11 kicks, 6 handballs, 7 marks, 2 Marks Inside 50, 6 score involvements & 1 goal) was one of the few forwards who won a bit of the ball further up the ground, got involved in scoring chains, and like a number of his teammates, he also had his chances to kick accurately and wasted most of them.

Will Hoskin-Elliott (16 disposals @ 69%, 281 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 10 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 11 kicks, 5 handballs, 5 marks, 3 tackles, 3 score involvements, 3 clearances, 3 stoppage clearances, & 1 goal) worked hard for his possessions to take marks on the wing. Bobbed up late with a goal that kept the flame flickering until it got extinguished in the dying minutes.

Jamie Elliott (15 disposals @ 80%, 235 metres gained, 7 contested possessions, 8 uncontested possessions, 2 intercept possessions, 9 kicks, 6 handballs, 3 marks, 7 score involvements, 5 Inside 50s & 1 goal) booted a great goal early in the first term, before finding life extremely challenging for the remainder of the game. Stayed busy in scoring chains further up the ground for his team to start scoring.

Trent Bianco (12 disposals @ 92%, 145 metres gained, 11 uncontested possessions, 6 kicks, 6 handballs, 7 marks, 4 tackles & 6 score involvements) worked his way through a tough day up forward with high score involvement numbers, plenty of marks and adequate tackling numbers.

Brody Mihocek (8 disposals @ 62%, 167 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 5 uncontested possessions, 6 kicks, 2 handballs, 6 marks, 2 Contested Marks, 4 Marks Inside 50, 1 goal assist, 6 score involvements & 2 goals) had an amazing quarter in the final term after he could not get near it in the first three quarters. Mihocek was synonymous of the team performance.

Mason Cox (8 disposals @ 88%, 114 metres gained, 5 contested possessions, 3 uncontested possessions, 4 kicks, 4 handballs, 6 marks, 2 Contested Marks, 2 Marks Inside 50, 2 tackles, 2 Tackles Inside 50, 3 score involvements & 1 goal) bobbed up late like Mihocek to clunk a couple of marks up forward, and chimed in with a goal deep into time on of the last quarter. I would've preferred Cox to take a shot at goal instead of passing short to Mihocek. Cox was in a better position to score that goal and did not want responsibility to convert it. I fear that Cox is no longer the assured forward he previously was, and it will remain to be seen if list management staff have a place for him after this season which is diminishing by the week at present.

Collingwood's next game will be against Richmond at the MCG. Big opportunity next weekend to exploit a weakened Tigers outfit who have lost most of their best defenders in recent weeks. For that to occur though, the Magpies will need to play well for four quarters and not leave it until the 4th quarter to win the game. It drives me spare knowing that Collingwood waited until the last quarter of their last two matches to challenge for victories and failed each time. Do the work early, before finishing games off, Woods! Do that, and victories will occur over the coming weeks.

How many contested marks did the superstar King take in a side that dominated for three quarters.?

 

[domus]

I heard that too. He was being polite.
Grundy was garbage today.

Grundy papers over many ineffective performances because he racks up a number of meaningless dinky possessions. People then trot out his 22 possession game in response to criticism, but it's an illusion. Ryder is a far more damaging ruckman. His possessions hurt the opposition.

 

[jmac70]

A 9 point pounding. It's funny how you can twist results to suit any narrative. Collingwood gave Carlton a humiliating pounding for a large portion of the 1970 and 79 grand finals but nobody focuses on that.
We played all over the saints in the last term and given a couple more minutes may have pinched the game but most simply dismiss that term as too little too late.
One thing is clear. Collingwood teams, no matter how poor, rarely cop a royal hiding. Even in our wooden spoon years we were mostly very competitive. This year is no different.
They talk about the shinboner spirit but that mob has endured multiple annihilations in its history.
We have been fighters for most of our history. I appreciate that.

I haven’t twisted anything. For three quarters we played deplorable footy. Kicking the final six goals doesn’t change that.

 

[jmac70]

Grundy papers over many ineffective performances because he racks up a number of meaningless dinky possessions. People then trot out his 22 possession game in response to criticism, but it's an illusion. Ryder is a far more damaging ruckman. His possessions hurt the opposition.

I believe Grundy is a very good player who can be great. He’s not playing at his best, and hasn’t been for some time.
Is he worth $1 million per year?
No.
Can we change his contract?
Probably not.

I think he should be dropped this week.

 

[Spuddd]

Sure, we lost yesterday but I think it was much more telling of St Kilda's position than ours.

A 9 point game at the end of the day, is arguably the difference of having Moore and/ore Howe.

It's not all doom and gloom, but it does highlight that we need another KPD as you need two talls to be able to compete in todays AFL. I have little worry about this as a KPD will be easy to find. Most clubs have cycled through this over the years.

A lot of complaining about the umpiring, sure things didn't go our way but I'm a big believe in the following:

1. You make your own luck - complaining about calls and dropping your head doesn't encourage the umpires to 'go easier' on you next time, in fact its probably the opposite. Poulter for example, the freekick he gave up in D50 - the bloke had no intent at all to do anything with the ball other than sit on it. It was a touch and go call, but I can see why it was made.

2. The way the team acted and complained on field about nearly every call was embarrassing - this is where coaching come into it for me. Lets see how Harvey handles this moving forward, but if this starts to creep into our game and no-one is getting penalized for it, that's a guidance and coaching issue. One of many reasons I don't think Harvey will be a Senior Coach.

 

[loki04]

The opposition put the cue in the rack in the last quarter.

We also changed the way we played.

Stopped the conservative dross and took the game on.

When you play on 0 times in a quarter (Q1) you know instruction is the issue.
You often hear protecting our defence or if leading protecting our lead at the expense of attacking play.

We have played either a blitz first then protecting for 3 qtrs or a bog down 3 qtrs followed by a late run home with shackles off for the last 3 years.

 

[loki04]

I know it will be an unpopular view but I think I actually saw signs of Cox starting to find form today. As the game wore on you could see he was making position to mark better. Didn't take too many, but he almost clunker a couple. I would keep him in the side for 1 more week to see if he clicks.

Cox is the ultimate almost man.

 

[loki04]

Sure, we lost yesterday but I think it was much more telling of St Kilda's position than ours.

A 9 point game at the end of the day, is arguably the difference of having Moore and/ore Howe.

It's not all doom and gloom, but it does highlight that we need another KPD as you need two talls to be able to compete in todays AFL. I have little worry about this as a KPD will be easy to find. Most clubs have cycled through this over the years.

A lot of complaining about the umpiring, sure things didn't go our way but I'm a big believe in the following:

1. You make your own luck - complaining about calls and dropping your head doesn't encourage the umpires to 'go easier' on you next time, in fact its probably the opposite. Poulter for example, the freekick he gave up in D50 - the bloke had no intent at all to do anything with the ball other than sit on it. It was a touch and go call, but I can see why it was made.

2. The way the team acted and complained on field about nearly every call was embarrassing - this is where coaching come into it for me. Lets see how Harvey handles this moving forward, but if this starts to creep into our game and no-one is getting penalized for it, that's a guidance and coaching issue. One of many reasons I don't think Harvey will be a Senior Coach.

You aren't Bucks are you?

I like that your suggestion to fix our game is to add defensively....

 

[Spuddd]

You aren't Bucks are you?

I like that your suggestion to fix our game is to add defensively....

No, but it was evident yesterday, we couldn't contain all of Membrey, King and Marshall/Ryder. I don't know that Keane is the answer to that, I actually think we need a more dour defender to replace Roughead in the not too distant future

 

[Gaspard]

We lost this game in the first quarter, when Cameron, De Goey (twice) and Elliott missed straight forward set shots. Those misses set the tone for the game.

The third quarter saw the team as a whole drop its bundle for the first time this year. If I had been out there, I would have too in the face of the terrible umpiring. The umpires knew they had lost it too. They clearly have a set against De Goey, which is a real worry.

The last quarter didn't mean much, except that the players got their heads back up, which was pretty commendable. St. Kilda, however, had settled back to enjoy a game already won. The last few minutes, when they realized they had to rally, showed that the comeback was illusory.

 

[jonmacTrag]

We lost this game in the first quarter, when Cameron, De Goey (twice) and Elliott missed straight forward set shots. Those misses set the tone for the game.

The third quarter saw the team as a whole drop its bundle for the first time this year. If I had been out there, I would have too in the face of the terrible umpiring. The umpires knew they had lost it too. They clearly have a set against De Goey, which is a real worry.

The last quarter didn't mean much, except that the players got their heads back up, which was pretty commendable. St. Kilda, however, had settled back to enjoy a game already won. The last few minutes, when they realized they had to rally, showed that the comeback was illusory.

Yes it was illusory and no it wasn't.
We got ourselves in the position to win it and really should have if we had been better.

So yes we didn't deserve to win it and yes St Thuggy backed off but also yes we came at them hard and would have won it if things had gone our way.

 

[jimmy35]

Moore and Howe would’ve been awesome but the result would still be the same. It’s the weird arsed game plan/lack of game plan or whatever it is. I can understand if you get your defensive game right and then ‘layer’ (shudder) in more to the game plan but we’ve done nothing like that for seasons so that’s obviously not the plan.
One of the commentators made the point yesterday, was it Bartel?, that a game plan like that is implemented to help protect the backline, allowing them to get set up. I can understand that but when the balls trapped in your back half and you can’t win clearances then weight of numbers are going to say they score, even if it’s slowly, and our plan doesn’t have the capacity to do likewise.
**** that shit off.

 

[vinnievavoom]

It's hard to get anything back in return for a player if they're playing VFL. Odds are against getting any compo for him anyway as a 30 year old, but keeping him out of the AFL team for the rest of the year isn't going to help the $$$ value of his contract at another club if one does pick him up as a UFA and thus would seal the deal on no compo pick.

Remember that even a last band compo pick (4th round) for him will be useful for us this year, given our ladder position.

Same thing goes for Cox - play him back into a bit of form for the rest of the year and hopefully someone gets interested enough to throw us a 3rd round pick for him.

Every little bit we can get for any players who depart at the end of the season will be useful for us this year.

Doesnt make sense to play Cox on so many fronts.
*To increase his trade value? You are assuming recruiters are imbeciles and will be fooled because we keep playing him? I suggest that recruiters have made up their mind about him by now, and also, there are plenty of players who get picked up and traded while not getting senior game time. We truly look stupid playing Grundy, Cameron and Cox in the same team. Well, just playing Cox is stupid in its own right. But lets not tell the recruiters.
*He may turn it around. let him turn it around in the VFL. That's what the Ressie is for. Although I would prefer if he didn't play at all to be frank. But we have to.
*Since we brought him back from the dead for these 2 games, he has shown himself to be a liability. A few more nails in his coffin. Playing him more will seal the lid.
*His selection was unwarranted and I know id be annoyed if I wasn't getting a game while he is gifted games.
*Takes away the opportunity to develop young players with potential. Its strange that Harvey plays a top heavy ruck, forward line with just 1 actual key defender. And Roughead as that sole key defender had a shocker because he had no support and tried to do it all on his own. As a rule, defenders need to play a role, and no more, and once they try to do more than their role, then are often undone. Exception to the rule is Moore, but he is a freak. I would have liked to play Keane for team balance. Tohil is in the frame as well. Acknowledge Keane for Cox is not a straight swap, but given the team balance is all wrong, it is preferable.
*The team is unbalanced with him in it
*Detrimental impact on team harmony. Play Cox when he doesn't deserve it and team mates rightly ask questions as to why. Then we lose while he plays and that impacts on the morale of the playing squad. Manifersts a losing culture... like the Blues... So not only the AFL "best 22" suffer, but the entire squad loses trust in the selection panel and coaches.
*He wont turn it around because he is useless and not a footballer.

I could go on... I am not running out of reasons... i have bored you enough with all this...

In summary, don't believe any other clubs would be interested in Cox, and happy to let go as a free agent with no compo...

Good Bye Cox.

Please go...

 

[gouki88]

This team trying to set the record for "honourable losses" in a season. New coach, same shit