Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Post Match. Pies down to Tigers - All comments please.

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Match
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
winpies Scorpio



Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Perth, Western Australia

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 2:26 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Jezza wrote:
swoop42 wrote:
Man I want another shot at these bastards with a fielded side closer to our best and no in game injuries.

We can beat them.

Agree 100%. Richmond should be very afraid... Twisted Evil


Double agree. This mob can be beaten. We haven't met them with a full strength squad yet. If Dimma has any brains he will recognise that and be very worried if we meet again with more senior players. They have also been extremely lucky with injuries again!!!

_________________
carn the mighty pies!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
AN_Inkling 



Joined: 06 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 3:15 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the Tigers definitely learnt a lesson: if they play us again they really can't afford to have Grigg as their second ruck. Not sure they have another option though.
_________________
Well done boys!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 3:17 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^ Hope Nankervis goes down, and the whole ship with all its stinking rats will go down with him.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Raw Hammer 



Joined: 11 Sep 2008
Location: The Gutter

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 3:18 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

It needs to be said, that play in the second when Mihocek kept the ball in play at F50 on the boundary, smashed a 45 Mihocheckside to the top of the square into WHE’s breadbasket was a thing of beauty.

The boy (man) can play. I really hope his ankle pulls up this week, but I’m not holding out much hope.

_________________
Est. 2002
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
AN_Inkling 



Joined: 06 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 3:21 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Raw Hammer wrote:
It needs to be said, that play in the second when Mihocek kept the ball in play at F50 on the boundary, smashed a 45 Mihocheckside to the top of the square into WHE’s breadbasket was a thing of beauty.

The boy (man) can play. I really hope his ankle pulls up this week, but I’m not holding out much hope.


Just about the play of the day. Was brilliant.

_________________
Well done boys!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
MatthewBoydFanClub 



Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 4:08 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

AN_Inkling wrote:
Raw Hammer wrote:
It needs to be said, that play in the second when Mihocek kept the ball in play at F50 on the boundary, smashed a 45 Mihocheckside to the top of the square into WHE’s breadbasket was a thing of beauty.

The boy (man) can play. I really hope his ankle pulls up this week, but I’m not holding out much hope.


Just about the play of the day. Was brilliant.

Reminds me a bit of the way Leigh Brown used to play. Neither is that skilled. Neither is that fast, but they have the ability to pull something out of the hat because they have a football brain, as opposed to what athletes do.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
MatthewBoydFanClub 



Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 4:28 pm
Post subject: Re: Our weaknesses exposedReply with quote

inxs88 wrote:
When you play the best, your worst weaknesses get exposed and thus couldn’t have been a truer adage than yesterday:

1. Langdon: the weekly “vague” error (slip)

2. Murray: no right ride and a truly haphazard exponent on his left

3. Adams: missed his usual quota of critical targets by foot

4. C Brown: not once, twice but three times disposes the ball with “look away” handballs and kicks straight to the opposition without looking

5. Varcoe: inability to get 15+ possessions and hit the scoreboard

6. Greenwood: ineffective disposal and got mostered by Dusty in goal square

7. Phillips: no right side by hand or foot leading to getting caught holding the ball twice

8. Crisp: no right side by foot leading to turnover central

9. Maynard: fumble, fumble fumble town


What did it add up to? 28 point loss

You take a few errors under pressure and this is how you extrapolate into explaining the loss against a team coming off a premiership, suffering no injuries in the game and with only 3 players off their best 22.

The reality is this:
1. Langdon: great third quarter giving us drive off the backline with no Howe and Shaz going down with injury
2. Murray: fighting his way back into the team in his 6th-7th game against the best team in the competition and holding his own
3. Adams: some crucial errors, he still puts his body on the line in each contest
4. C. Brown: I'll eat my hat if he doesn't play 200 games. Only losing the contests against guys twice his weight
5. Varcoe: since when has he ever had 15+ possessions to effect the game?
6. Greenwood: how does anyone stop Martin one on one in the goal square when the ball is coming down that quickly? Didn't see Martin named in their best
7. Phillips: Almost now becoming the complete footballer. He's doing now what Sidebottom used to do in being used as a spare parts man having to plug holes
8. Crisp: Richmond had a man on him to stop his run. That's what Hardwick thinks of him
9. Maynard: you must have watched a different game to me. I had him in our best (were you thinking of his fumble in last week's game?)
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Piethagoras' Theorem Taurus

the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk


Joined: 29 May 2006
Location: is where I'm at

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 5:17 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

AN_Inkling wrote:
Raw Hammer wrote:
It needs to be said, that play in the second when Mihocek kept the ball in play at F50 on the boundary, smashed a 45 Mihocheckside to the top of the square into WHE’s breadbasket was a thing of beauty.

The boy (man) can play. I really hope his ankle pulls up this week, but I’m not holding out much hope.


Just about the play of the day. Was brilliant.


A shame stuff like that doesn't get the recognition it deserves. I'd take that over Higgins' goal every day of the week.

_________________
Fault finding is like window washing. All the dirt seems to be on the other side.
________________________________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
3rd degree Aries



Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Location: John Wren's tote

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 5:32 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

A brave display, but f$ck i hate losing to these brats. Mihocek and JT were great yesterday, Grundy tried his arse off along with the skipper and I thought Langdon really stepped up without Howe. We just ran out of legs and a bit of belief in the end. Varcoes smother was magic , Micocheck's snap was a thing of beauty, we rattled those punt road pussies at times, keep fighting Pies.
_________________
" Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".

www.facebook/the hybernators
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Nearly 



Joined: 16 Nov 2012


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 6:35 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Raw Hammer wrote:
I love how Revolt can swing Moore around while he’s trying to take a mark in the last quarter, no free. If it was the other way around whistle blown and Revolt is lining up for goal. Some of the unrewarded tackles of our where they get an eternity to eventually get a toenail to the ball was all I could take.


This one was appalling. And not just in the marking contest, Riewoldt continued on and tackled Moore to ground without the ball keeping him out of the contest and bang! Game over.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Nearly 



Joined: 16 Nov 2012


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 6:45 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Brown26 wrote:
If you have 2 guys on the bench, you only have 2 rotations. So they might not usually have been rotated, but they certainly affected the rotations of everyone else. To imply that because they aren't usually rotated they don't affect rotations doesn't make sense. It IS the reason we couldn't run out the game.

- Ben


This.

The fact they wouldn’t be rotated AS MUCH just makes it worse. They would normally have more game time than midfielders so therefore even more time has to be distributed amongst the midfield than if it was midfielders on the pine.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
AN_Inkling 



Joined: 06 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:00 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^^Interchanges 86:71 (Richmond)
_________________
Well done boys!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Nearly 



Joined: 16 Nov 2012


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:02 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

rad wrote:
I was at the game and thought the turning point was a mark to us in the last quarter that wasn’t paid 40 our directly in front. If we scored that we were back to 4 points behind. Ump paid a ball up instead and they took it the length of the field to make it 16, we didn’t get back after that.

My father in law watched the game on tv and said the ball hit the ground. I thought it was a clear mark.

Can someone verify either way please ?


I was there too (first game this year, came down from Sydney). Not sure even on replay if a mark, but in reality the kick under little pressure should have been better.

Then the length of the field thing was the one where Riewoldt took Moore out illegally in the marking contest and then continued on after the ball hit the ground.

Still, if the kick was what it shoulda even been, that wouldn’t have been an issue.

I thought it was the turning point.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
SwansWay 



Joined: 13 May 2015


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:02 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

As one poster wrote previously, I guess the umpires also decided that Cox is allowed to be held, chopped and blocked! He gets absolutely nothing from the umps.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies2016 



Joined: 12 Sep 2014


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:14 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Nearly wrote:
Brown26 wrote:
If you have 2 guys on the bench, you only have 2 rotations. So they might not usually have been rotated, but they certainly affected the rotations of everyone else. To imply that because they aren't usually rotated they don't affect rotations doesn't make sense. It IS the reason we couldn't run out the game.

- Ben


This.

The fact they wouldn’t be rotated AS MUCH just makes it worse. They would normally have more game time than midfielders so therefore even more time has to be distributed amongst the midfield than if it was midfielders on the pine.


I think of greater relevance, is that we lost two key defenders.
Rotations is one thing but to then lose one third of your zone and defence systems during the course of the game, really knocks you about.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Match All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next
Page 10 of 11   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group