i cant bear to watch the game after listening on abc because of the 3hr delay,im too pissed off to watch it.
I made a few comments in the general board,but i cant do a match report from a drew morphett call as he leaves out half the play anyway.
so sorry,cant do one this week.
maybe i might look at it on tuesday on fox but i doubt it.
v carlscum
Moderator: bbmods
-
junkboy75
- Posts: 840
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2001 6:01 pm
I went to the match but haven't watched the replay yet as well. for those who have, did the umpiring appear as bad on TV as it appeared to us live? I'm not using this as an excuse for why we lost, but it was very bloody frustrating as it appeared to be very inconsistent to me.
maybe I'm stupid, so I want to clarify a few rules with you guys. is it considered holding the ball when -
1) bradley grabs hold of the ball, takes off, slips, and is tackled.
2) a player (don't remember who) grabs hold of the ball, is tackled, the tackle slips down the body but the player drops the ball before he is legged.
3) McKay misses the mark, falls on the ball, drags the ball under him and is tackled.
I would think that all three constituted holding the ball yet none were paid. two happened inside 50 which would have resulted in set shots for goal for the pies.
also, it seems that a c'wood player merely has to touch a carlton player for it to be paid a free. many times shitnall and bradley sucked the umpire in by diving and acting. felt like kernahan was back in the team.
also, malthouse has to shoulder some of the blame. prestigiacomo on hulme in the 1st quarter??! result: goal to hulme. and why did they persist in chipping the ball wide, and trying to over finesse the ball. sure, carlton had a flood going, but c'wood still went wide even on the counter attacks, when c'wood players would automatically run wide. what happened with going down the corridor??
"..we flew at them as a hawk to his prey, passed through them in the disordered state in which they were, separated them into two distinct parts and then tacked upon their largest division.." -- Captain Cuthbert Collingwood, 1797
maybe I'm stupid, so I want to clarify a few rules with you guys. is it considered holding the ball when -
1) bradley grabs hold of the ball, takes off, slips, and is tackled.
2) a player (don't remember who) grabs hold of the ball, is tackled, the tackle slips down the body but the player drops the ball before he is legged.
3) McKay misses the mark, falls on the ball, drags the ball under him and is tackled.
I would think that all three constituted holding the ball yet none were paid. two happened inside 50 which would have resulted in set shots for goal for the pies.
also, it seems that a c'wood player merely has to touch a carlton player for it to be paid a free. many times shitnall and bradley sucked the umpire in by diving and acting. felt like kernahan was back in the team.
also, malthouse has to shoulder some of the blame. prestigiacomo on hulme in the 1st quarter??! result: goal to hulme. and why did they persist in chipping the ball wide, and trying to over finesse the ball. sure, carlton had a flood going, but c'wood still went wide even on the counter attacks, when c'wood players would automatically run wide. what happened with going down the corridor??
"..we flew at them as a hawk to his prey, passed through them in the disordered state in which they were, separated them into two distinct parts and then tacked upon their largest division.." -- Captain Cuthbert Collingwood, 1797
-
MargOZ
- Posts: 2137
- Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 6:01 pm
- Location: Vic, Australia
Well, that wasn't a good show of Aussie Rules Football in the slightest! The conditions were the major cause of that, it was never going to be a high quality match once the heavens opened! We also had two teams who have been struggling so far this year, with one in particular having a lot to prove, so it was bound to be a tough battle from start to finish.
Really, if we'd had our kicking boots on, both around the ground and in front of goal, it would have been a different result at the final siren. It wouldn't have been a pretty win, but we still would have come away with the points. Of course "what if's" aren't of much use to us!
Our goal kicking really let us down with Bucks, Tarks, Leon and a few other guys missing goals they really should have kicked. The conditions weren't condusive to a high scoring game BUT some of those shots were missed from close range - not good enough.
Our disposal and and in particular some VERY BAD turnovers in the backline really killed us. And as for kicking across the ground and messing around with the ball - I would have thought in those conditions, that going as direct as possible and straight down the centre corridor would have been the best option. I really don't think our skill level can get much worse at the moment so in theory we should see our skills improving over coming weeks (I hope!).
With literally no forward line it was always going to be a tough match up forward for us. Two of our best forwards (Tazz and Molly) and potentially our highest goal kicker (Cummings) were out - talk about a nightmare! And we REALLY have a problem with flooding. I honestly don't know what the answer is but we have to find a way to combat it because it's beats us every time.
The umpiring was as inconsistent as usual. Didn't cost us the game but it's heartbreaking when you're battling your guts out and the umpire gives the opposition a weak free or doesn't give us a hard-earned decision. If Tarks was caught for deliberate, why wasn't Bradley caught for it TWICE in the last quarter? What happened to holding the ball and dragging it back in? And Wakes being completely manhandled at full back resulting in a Blues goal? I could go on and on!
Okay, the players. There were some guys who really battled their hearts out and can hold their heads high. Burns (never stopped), Buckley (does everything although didn't have his goal-kicking boots on), Lockyer (battled hard), Cloke (made a few errors but shows so much promise), and Leon (always tries to create opportunities).
Some of the guys I thought battled hard but came in and out of the match were Wakelin (loved his mark and worked hard on the backline but his decision making is too slow at times), Clement, Betheras, Lonie (top goal and he'll keep improving with every match), Nick Davis, Licuria (got a lot of the ball but still nowhere near last year's form) and Rocca (didn't star but even with an injury still battled hard).
The guys that didn't seem to have as big an impact on the game as they should have were Kinnear (gets plenty of the ball but disposal not good enough), Josh, Presti, Steinfort, Scotland, Holland (what a difference a week in football can be), Rintoul, Freeborn and Johnson.
We actually weren't far away but still a match well worth forgetting! Time to get fired up and hopefully get some good players back and show what we CAN do against the Hawks.
GO PIES!
Marg
Really, if we'd had our kicking boots on, both around the ground and in front of goal, it would have been a different result at the final siren. It wouldn't have been a pretty win, but we still would have come away with the points. Of course "what if's" aren't of much use to us!
Our goal kicking really let us down with Bucks, Tarks, Leon and a few other guys missing goals they really should have kicked. The conditions weren't condusive to a high scoring game BUT some of those shots were missed from close range - not good enough.
Our disposal and and in particular some VERY BAD turnovers in the backline really killed us. And as for kicking across the ground and messing around with the ball - I would have thought in those conditions, that going as direct as possible and straight down the centre corridor would have been the best option. I really don't think our skill level can get much worse at the moment so in theory we should see our skills improving over coming weeks (I hope!).
With literally no forward line it was always going to be a tough match up forward for us. Two of our best forwards (Tazz and Molly) and potentially our highest goal kicker (Cummings) were out - talk about a nightmare! And we REALLY have a problem with flooding. I honestly don't know what the answer is but we have to find a way to combat it because it's beats us every time.
The umpiring was as inconsistent as usual. Didn't cost us the game but it's heartbreaking when you're battling your guts out and the umpire gives the opposition a weak free or doesn't give us a hard-earned decision. If Tarks was caught for deliberate, why wasn't Bradley caught for it TWICE in the last quarter? What happened to holding the ball and dragging it back in? And Wakes being completely manhandled at full back resulting in a Blues goal? I could go on and on!
Okay, the players. There were some guys who really battled their hearts out and can hold their heads high. Burns (never stopped), Buckley (does everything although didn't have his goal-kicking boots on), Lockyer (battled hard), Cloke (made a few errors but shows so much promise), and Leon (always tries to create opportunities).
Some of the guys I thought battled hard but came in and out of the match were Wakelin (loved his mark and worked hard on the backline but his decision making is too slow at times), Clement, Betheras, Lonie (top goal and he'll keep improving with every match), Nick Davis, Licuria (got a lot of the ball but still nowhere near last year's form) and Rocca (didn't star but even with an injury still battled hard).
The guys that didn't seem to have as big an impact on the game as they should have were Kinnear (gets plenty of the ball but disposal not good enough), Josh, Presti, Steinfort, Scotland, Holland (what a difference a week in football can be), Rintoul, Freeborn and Johnson.
We actually weren't far away but still a match well worth forgetting! Time to get fired up and hopefully get some good players back and show what we CAN do against the Hawks.
GO PIES!
Marg