| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| The past is history, the future a mystery. Today is a gift, that's why it is called "the present". |
|
|
|
 |
daicos from the boundry
Joined: 28 Feb 2006
Location: 6ft under
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | daicos from the boundry wrote: | Sinclair will come in if he has another good in the seconds.
ins. Williams Sinclair Greenwood
Outs. Moore Toovey Adams (susp). |
Assume Broomy will miss and Toovey keep his place. That replacement list sounds just dandy. When is Goldsack due back ? |
Forgot about Broomhead. Maybe Seedsman in for Broomy. I want more attacking footy coming out of the back line to give the fwd line and Cloke especially a chance one on one. Greenwood to sit on Priddis. I don't want Priddis getting anymore than 5 clearances for the game. And don't let McGovern just play as a loose man in the backline like he did against Richmond.
_________________
Utter B@stards |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Why do you want more attacking footy coming out of the back line to give the fwd line and Cloke a chance one on one? |
|
|
|
|
yin-YANG
Joined: 03 Oct 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| daicos from the boundry wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | | daicos from the boundry wrote: | Sinclair will come in if he has another good in the seconds.
ins. Williams Sinclair Greenwood
Outs. Moore Toovey Adams (susp). |
Assume Broomy will miss and Toovey keep his place. That replacement list sounds just dandy. When is Goldsack due back ? |
Forgot about Broomhead. Maybe Seedsman in for Broomy. I want more attacking footy coming out of the back line to give the fwd line and Cloke especially a chance one on one. Greenwood to sit on Priddis. I don't want Priddis getting anymore than 5 clearances for the game. And don't let McGovern just play as a loose man in the back line like he did against Richmond. |
yes indeed we need more run and I have Seedsman ahead of Sinclair atm Docklands is a different ground to all the others and we need to pick the right team. We are clearly too big and should drop one tall and maybe even 2?
OUT: Moore, Broomhead, Adams, Blair?,
IN : Marley, Seedsman, Greenwood, BK?
Our small forwards need to fire up… they have been quiet and not doing enuf over the last few weeks. They have been ok and even good in patches but they are good enough to be kicking 6 goals or more collectively each game. Give BK a go to get some competition going for the small fwd spots. They are all below par with Blair looking the least dangerous.
_________________
Love us or Hate us... we are Collingwood - you can't ignore the Mighty Magpies!!! |
|
|
|
|
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Jezza wrote: | That's too many changes in one go Swoop and I can't see it happening even though I wouldn't mind that to be honest. I expect the changes will be:
In: Greenwood, Kennedy and Williams
Out: Broomhead (inj.), Adams (susp.), Moore (omitted) |
I know it wont happen but it's cathartic all the same.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I expect the 'Pies to lose the next two games: Docklands is not a proper football ground and neither our team nor our game-plan is designed to play well there.
I get quite angry every time Collingwood plays a "home" game against an interstate club there - instead of us having a fortress for "guaranteed" wins like Geelong and Hawthorn, we play these games at a ground we don't like playing on and which has absolutely nothing to do with deciding whether a team will or won't perform well in finals. It's an exercise in foot-shooting futility.
I hate these games because, even if Collingwood wins, I don't consider the result relevant to anything except the 4 points on the day. |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | I expect the 'Pies to lose the next two games: Docklands is not a proper football ground and neither our team nor our game-plan is designed to play well there.
I get quite angry every time Collingwood plays a "home" game against an interstate club there - instead of us having a fortress for "guaranteed" wins like Geelong and Hawthorn, we play these games at a ground we don't like playing on and which has absolutely nothing to do with deciding whether a team will or won't perform well in finals. It's an exercise in foot-shooting futility.
I hate these games because, even if Collingwood wins, I don't consider the result relevant to anything except the 4 points on the day. |
why don't you think it is a proper football ground? is it the roof? other than that it also has everything that a football ground needs to have. every time we play there the same thing gets said about etihad which i have never fully understood.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
It's a great ground to watch the footy in no question but I always prefer our chances at the MCG.
Don't know the stats but my gut feel would say our record against interstate teams at docklands would be poor compared to the G.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | I expect the 'Pies to lose the next two games: Docklands is not a proper football ground and neither our team nor our game-plan is designed to play well there.
I get quite angry every time Collingwood plays a "home" game against an interstate club there - instead of us having a fortress for "guaranteed" wins like Geelong and Hawthorn, we play these games at a ground we don't like playing on and which has absolutely nothing to do with deciding whether a team will or won't perform well in finals. It's an exercise in foot-shooting futility.
I hate these games because, even if Collingwood wins, I don't consider the result relevant to anything except the 4 points on the day. |
Agree, both the next 2 games against the Weagles and Doggies 50/50 at best. Much prefer to be taking both on at the G. |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | It's a great ground to watch the footy in no question but I always prefer our chances at the MCG.
Don't know the stats but my gut feel would say our record against interstate teams at docklands would be poor compared to the G. |
played 72 games for 42 wins, 30 losses. since 2007, we're 5-3 vs interstate teams.
http://afltables.com/afl/teams/collingwood/allgames_vn.html
further to this, the current incarnation of the eagles (since 2013) have won 4 of 9 at etihad.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Dangles
Balmey Army
Joined: 14 May 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Changes I'd like to see:
OUT: Bombing it long into the forward 50 and hoping for the best
IN: Being more precise with our forward 50 entries
OUT: Too many players around the ball
IN: More outside run. So that when the ball gets cleared from a stoppage we actually have players on the perimeter ready to receive it. Our run and spread has to improve.
OUT: Less emphasis on personnel change
IN: More emphasis on looking at how the existing senior players can improve on their endeavour and execution of their skills.
OUT: Blaming the players for everything
IN: Looking at how the coaches can alter our structures to address problem areas like the aforementioned lack of outside run and allowing the opposition to have a loose man in our backline who can keep picking off our forward 50 entries and double team our forwards. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| It would be nice if our run and spread has to improve. |
|
|
|
|
Dangles
Balmey Army
Joined: 14 May 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| HAL wrote: | | It would be nice if our run and spread has to improve. |
No. It would be better if our run and spread did improve. |
|
|
|
|
MAGPIEAVENGER
Joined: 15 Apr 2012
Location: Narre Warren
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Ok since when has Greenwood been ready for selection??
He hasn't had that much game time in the VFL and I'm pretty sure he was rested last week due to tightness in his leg.
I would be very surprised if he was selected to play against the eagles.
Got to be realistic.
_________________
BLACK n WHITE
SIDE by SIDE !!! |
|
|
|
|
mattdally
Joined: 21 Feb 2003
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Hate bagging our own but Toovey has to be dropped for a spell.
He has cost us the last 3 games with his pathetic attempts to chase easy kicks and leave his opponent unmanned.
Walters, Rioli and Wingard have been the 3 match winners in tight games and Toovey needs to be taught his defensive lesson in the twos.
Had enough. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
