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
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
HAL 

Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.


Joined: 17 Mar 2003


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:16 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I suppose they could.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Nearly 



Joined: 16 Nov 2012


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 8:02 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies2016 wrote:
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.


Yes. Totally agree. Was just commenting on the rotations impact. The loss of two from one area was huge.

FWITW I would have come away from that game totally happy in the way the team went, were it a blood nose or a one game injury to Shaz. As it is I am gutted for the young man, infinitely more than I am concerned about the result.

And I think that’s the general feeling in here, as it should be.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
E 



Joined: 05 May 2010


PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 9:12 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Nearly wrote:
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.


If you are referring to the Stevo dropped mark, the ball clearly hit the ground. it was the correct call to call play on.

_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk .......
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Jezza Taurus

2023 PREMIERS!


Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:14 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Buckley's Press Conference:

What's the overwhelming feeling out of that? Pride, frustration, disappointment etc.
Quote:
"Bit of both; all of that. We love our effort....[video cut off]... That's the thing you're proud of and we're proud of. We got beaten on the day, but we didn't our lower colours. We'll learn a little bit out of that, that we can take with us".

Was there a tipping point with how many defenders you lost in one game?
Quote:
"It wasn't easy. It made it difficult because it didn't only affect only our back six or seven, but it affected some of the other things that were working for us. It was a challenge upstairs and it was clearly a challenge on the field and one that we were ultimately weren't able to find answers to in the timeframe we had, but there's plenty to take from that game for us".

Would you like to play them again?
Quote:
"Yep. Yep".

What's the latest on Scharenberg?
Quote:
"We fear the worst, which is shattering for him. That's the overwhelming feeling in the rooms at the moment which is disappointment for him and we're shattered for him. That will likely be confirmed by the scans that it's an ACL injury, which for a young member of our club and of our playing group who's had his fair share of setbacks and obstacles. His attitude is first class, his character is first class and we'll put our arms around him and try to support him as best as we can".

It seemed pretty innocuous when he sustained the injury battling Dustin Martin?
Quote:
"Yeah, they mostly do".

How shattering was that for the group [mentally] when Scharenberg went down and it must have had an impact?
Quote:
"You would have to ask the players, but I would suggest it does. There's plenty of things; Howie getting knocked out. There's clearly things that challenge your psyche. You can throw whatever you like at our group, they will find a way to respond positively, to stand up and find a reason to continue to fight. That was there and that was evident today so we haven't lost anything in that regard".

With every challenge then, does your belief in the group continue to grow with the way they never throw in the towel?
Quote:
"Yeah, and we had belief before anyone else understood what it was I suppose. You need to demonstrate it and we've continued to demonstrate it and it's a part of us now. It's not something we're aspiring to, it is who we are. The challenges will keep coming for us and you've got to keep rising to that challenge and we're looking forward to what's to come".

In the last few weeks and again today, you've lost some significant players, but you keep coming back with not only your effort, but also the system that you're showing. I guess today shows that the system keeps working regardless of who's in the side?
Quote:
"Yeah, I don't think we were particularly clean today. It doesn't really matter what system you've got in play or what tactics you're trying to impose on the opposition, you've still got to do the basics really well. I don't think we were quite as sharp today. You can say it's across the board and you can say it's isolated, but I really do think that even our more talented/better players weren't quite as clean today as we can be, so there's still growth in that for us. I think when you're clean inside against a side like Richmond who you need to be clean inside when they put such good pressure on. Having said that, I thought our pressure was pretty strong off the back of pretty good system but we just need to get the basics right more often".

Are the basics your contested work? You did well with your contested work?
Quote:
"Yeah, our contest, our clearance, our ground ball. Richmond are the best ground ball team in the competition. I think they won by a couple after winning the last quarter pretty convincingly. We weren't bad".

Is Jeremy Howe's injury concussion?
Quote:
"Yep. He lost his vision. He couldn't read the scoreboard and that was enough for the docs to make the call. It was a pretty big hit".

Brody Mihocek came off for a while. Did he have to come back on by necessity?
Quote:
"No, bit of an ankle. He would have come back and played regardless. He wasn't 100% after that, but not many players that start the game fit finish it at 100%. He clearly had an incident with his ankle that we'll need to get right".

Dunn and now Scharenberg will be out in the long-term, how much of a bonus would it be if you can manage to get Goldsack back?
Quote:
"There's still a lot of ifs that we really can't be sure of or we can't be clear about. There's still a few fair boys that aren't in the side at the moment on the list that continue to fight for their opportunity to contribute and Goldy is one of those. It is still something we're being pretty positive about and we're looking at the opportunity and Goldy is really bullish and he's training really well. We will continue to make prudent decisions based on the information that we've got. There's always some risk associated with any returned player, but we'll trust our docs and we'll trust the work that we're seeing Goldy do. If he becomes another one of the panel that can fight the fight for us we'd enjoy that".

It might be an obvious response, but how is Matt [Scharenberg]?
Quote:
"Yeah, his family are over. He's shattered. He's a young bloke who loves his footy. He's been through his fair share with his feet firstly and then his ACLs. These last 12 months, he's been actually able to play quite a bit of footy and shown more than glimpses of the ability that we know he has. There's not a lot of light at the end of the tunnel right now for him. He's shattered; he's not in a great spot".

At 3QT you're two down on the bench going against a team who finishes well. Did you think you could win, or were you hoping you could at that stage?
Quote:
"No, our belief was pretty strong. We thought we could win the game. There was a bit of their surge staff, not quite as clean, and they went bang bang bang early in the last quarter. We struggled to finish the game the way we would have liked to and against a good side that's what you get. I think the weight of numbers just tolled against us ultimately today. We can argue that over the course of season, we've had weight of numbers for us and that will pay off in the long run".

What did you think of Jack Higgins' goal?
Quote:
"I don't know the rule. Is it a throw? Can you follow that up for me Rog? It was clever".

What did you think of Greenwood's job on Martin?
Quote:
"I think it was a strong performance. Obviously, Dusty is a good player and goes forward and wins some one on ones and probably should have kicked 4 in the end. That's the headache that every opposition coaching panel goes through when you look at a player like him. [He's] good through the midfield but clearly a really good one on one player in front of the ball. I thought Levi's first class. Asked to play a role, executes it to a tee. His head would be spinning though because we had him forward, mid and back in the last half just trying to rotate and manage game time so we could get through that second half as much as we can and it was ultimately to no avail. The players love him because he's so dedicated and so disciplined".

The Richmond defenders put a lot of work into Cox. What did you think of his performance?
Quote:
"I think Mason went close to playing role. He was committed to the aerial contest. I think you're right that there was a lot of early work from their defenders on him. Some of it is part of the game. It's up to the umpires to adjudicate that. They won that contest on the day; the tall backs. We'll learn a little bit out of that. Some things we tried today were really effective and we'll milk those next time".


http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/video/2018-07-28/bucks-reviews-loss-and-injuries

_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 |
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
inxs88 



Joined: 17 Aug 2014


PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:27 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

think positive wrote:
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) *He and Moore were the backline for the last after Shaz went down, and the three had to cope with the huge loss of Moore for three quarters against the bench mark of the competition, losing by 22 - I refuse to count the throw goal, which also occurred at a crucial point in the game- was a good result for what was left of our defensive players.

2. Murray: no right ride and a truly haphazard exponent on his left - *gave away a goal, didn’t do too much either way, out for a better player

3. Adams: missed his usual quota of critical targets by foot -
*so what? He was mr leadership yesterday, and he just gets better, one of our only enforcer players, so important, I’ll forgive a couple of changers in such a high pressure game

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

*yes he did, it’s called inexperience and probably a little star struck as well. He’s a kid, huge potential, if better is available yes he goes out but he is not a weekness

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

*he’s old, still a reliable stopgap who obviously goes out when younger class comes back. Had a couple of nice dashing moments

6. Greenwood: ineffective disposal and got mostered by Dusty in goal square, *he got dusty rattled more than once, take away the WTF free kicks he gets and dusty wasn’t special, and again, main man down from first quarter, then shazz gone and no dunne. Harsh

7. Phillips: no right side by hand or foot leading to getting caught holding the ball twice. *Yes he needs more time and some bulk

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

9. Maynard: fumble, fumble fumble town -
*1 shocker, the rest I thought he showed his usual courage and effort, harsh. His skills need work under pressure


What did it add up to? 28 point loss


22 legit points with 21 vs 24, against the competition bench mark.
My point, shitty posts like this don’t deserve air after a true gutsy honerable loss. Cheers


You’re grammatically challenged post belies your Nick’s identity of “think positive”

_________________
I love the Pies, hate Carlscum
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
E 



Joined: 05 May 2010


PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 1:24 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

inxs88 wrote:
think positive wrote:
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) *He and Moore were the backline for the last after Shaz went down, and the three had to cope with the huge loss of Moore for three quarters against the bench mark of the competition, losing by 22 - I refuse to count the throw goal, which also occurred at a crucial point in the game- was a good result for what was left of our defensive players.

2. Murray: no right ride and a truly haphazard exponent on his left - *gave away a goal, didn’t do too much either way, out for a better player

3. Adams: missed his usual quota of critical targets by foot -
*so what? He was mr leadership yesterday, and he just gets better, one of our only enforcer players, so important, I’ll forgive a couple of changers in such a high pressure game

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

*yes he did, it’s called inexperience and probably a little star struck as well. He’s a kid, huge potential, if better is available yes he goes out but he is not a weekness

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

*he’s old, still a reliable stopgap who obviously goes out when younger class comes back. Had a couple of nice dashing moments

6. Greenwood: ineffective disposal and got mostered by Dusty in goal square, *he got dusty rattled more than once, take away the WTF free kicks he gets and dusty wasn’t special, and again, main man down from first quarter, then shazz gone and no dunne. Harsh

7. Phillips: no right side by hand or foot leading to getting caught holding the ball twice. *Yes he needs more time and some bulk

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

9. Maynard: fumble, fumble fumble town -
*1 shocker, the rest I thought he showed his usual courage and effort, harsh. His skills need work under pressure


What did it add up to? 28 point loss


22 legit points with 21 vs 24, against the competition bench mark.
My point, shitty posts like this don’t deserve air after a true gutsy honerable loss. Cheers


You’re grammatically challenged post belies your Nick’s identity of “think positive”


Empty vessels always go to grammar when they know they are wrong. Stupid post from you got the business it deserved from TP. Any post that starts by suggesting one of our best players is useless because he slipped over one time speaks for itself.

_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk .......
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Geek 

geek


Joined: 06 Apr 2006
Location: Jacana

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 1:41 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Nearly wrote:
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.


Same. Wonder if it was my mate Findlay again.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
E 



Joined: 05 May 2010


PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 1:43 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Nearly wrote:
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.


you know what though, if you look at it carefully, its possible that reiwoldt was right on the edge of giving away a free without actually doing it. Maybe the sling was a free kick (probably would have been if Moore did it to Reiwodt which kind of proves the point). But the rest was just an experienced player using guile to keep an opponent away from the ball. Other than the sling, i think you would have been annoyed if your player was pinged for that.

I wasnt so troubled by this play to be honest. what troubled me was that Cox was basically not allowed to even get his hands to the marking contest on many occasions (literally couldnt get them above his head such was the way he was being held). I don't understand how that level of holding is permitted. Seems like it goes in phases. Some weeks the umpires protect him and allow him to play and then some weeks they don't.

I have heard opponents say that if you cant stop him getting his hands to the ball, he is undefendable. But the rules shouldnt change just because a player is undefendable. Otherwise, Wayne Carey should have been banned from playing.

_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk .......
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
melliot 



Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Location: Bendigo

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 9:17 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Nearly wrote:
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.


IMO the Tigers first two goals of the last Q should have been frees to Moor. Particularly the 1st one. Revolt marked a high ball. But Moore was blocked about 5-10m off the ball. He was trailing but wasn't allowed a run at the ball.

But it was that kind of a game where the Tiger got the rub of the green all day, injuries, decisions, bouncing of the ball, mung kicks landing in their lap and all that flip of a coin stuff, seemed to go their way far more often than not.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mossi Leo



Joined: 20 May 2002
Location: Vittorio Veneto TV Italy

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 5:02 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I watched the replay. The Tigers are right into putting their opposition out well before the ball gets to the contested zone. The umps just don't see it or just let it go. Not only is it dangerous when one is building for a jump in packs in the case of Howe but it reduces the spectacle of the game the high marking. They had to stop Cox and Howie and they did it!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 5:39 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^ We need a list of all these infringements... (Was this apparent in the previous game too?)

P.S. Prestia broken rib... but will apparently miss only one match. Sad (As an old friend would say, TV obviously does not have enough "spunk".)
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
SwansWay 



Joined: 13 May 2015


PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2018 10:53 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Mossi wrote:
I watched the replay. The Tigers are right into putting their opposition out well before the ball gets to the contested zone. The umps just don't see it or just let it go. Not only is it dangerous when one is building for a jump in packs in the case of Howe but it reduces the spectacle of the game the high marking. They had to stop Cox and Howie and they did it!


They are the new Hawthorn in that way. For some reason the umpires allow them to play outside of the rules.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
BazBoy 



Joined: 11 Sep 2014


PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2018 4:50 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

A Moscow morning at 6.45am all I could achieve was 3AW radio broadcast of the game and one of the breaks they showed Cox and Howe going for mark then for whatever reason Moore over top of pack punch ball out of their reach

Am shattered with Shaz appears another ACL and Elliot in VFL re injury

We just can’t take a blooming trick with soldiers dropping regularly

_________________
I'm not arguing--just explaining why i am right
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:21 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

SwansWay wrote:
Mossi wrote:
I watched the replay. The Tigers are right into putting their opposition out well before the ball gets to the contested zone. The umps just don't see it or just let it go. Not only is it dangerous when one is building for a jump in packs in the case of Howe but it reduces the spectacle of the game the high marking. They had to stop Cox and Howie and they did it!

They are the new Hawthorn in that way. For some reason the umpires allow them to play outside of the rules.

When Sydney beat Hawthorn earlier this year, Clarkson made noises in the press conference and next minute was having coffee with Gil. Are the Pies not influential enough?
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
Page 11 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