| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
perthmagpie 
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Location: Yarrawonga
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
I would like to ask:
1. Was our performance a step backwards?
2. The status quo.
3. A step forward?
Also with our pressure, tackling and effort how many other teams would have we worn down and won against? Curious to know what other Nicksters think as it would be a guide to how many remaining games we win.
_________________
Magpies love pies(Lol) |
|
|
|
 |
Dave The Man 
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Piesnchess wrote: | | Until we smarten up a lot with our field kicking, out of bounds six times cost us the game really, we cant yet challenge for the flag, we must get our sloppy field kicking right, ala the piss and pooh, learn from them. ! |
Agree - Great Effort but need to use the ball batter in Crunch Time IF we want to challenge for a Flag
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
|
|
|
|
yin-YANG
Joined: 03 Oct 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| perthmagpie wrote: | I would like to ask:
1. Was our performance a step backwards?
2. The status quo.
3. A step forward?
Also with our pressure, tackling and effort how many other teams would have we worn down and won against? Curious to know what other Nicksters think as it would be a guide to how many remaining games we win. |
I would suggest status quo - which has been a side developing and improving throughout the year…  With a sprinkling of step forward with the intensity applied for 4 qtrs. The only step backwards might have been the poor form of a few players who have played much better games this season - Goldy, Seeds and White.
Overall the Pies have come a long way from the team spanked by Freo the last few games against them!
_________________
Love us or Hate us... we are Collingwood - you can't ignore the Mighty Magpies!!! |
|
|
|
|
Kosh
Joined: 25 Apr 2013
Location: Carlton, Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| perthmagpie wrote: | Interesting that we played a much slower game tonight. Completely different game plan to the last few weeks. It nearly came off. Inexperience was the difference against the second most experienced team on their home turf. Under extreme pressure (better pressure than the last eleven weeks) we were a bit off with our disposal. It was very dewy out there. The effort was sensational. Not once this year have we fallen away and chucked in the towell.
We are still a team in transition. Structurally we really missed three players tonight. Reid would have had the composure to setup the play down back with his laser kicking. Frost and Brown setup no creative movement. Greenwood and Grundy would have evened up the clearances a lot. We are on the way. Freo look like a typical Lyon team who will likely fall short because they have trouble scoring. They scrounged most of their goals tonight. It was not a night for marking forwards. Not one marking forward looked dangerous.
What is is up with Sidey. Three very quiet weeks. |
For the most part I agree with this assessment. We just felt about 3 quality players short last night. I thought that it was remarkable we were so close, given how many of the boys had so few possessions.
We are desperately short of one more target up forward and another one or two big bodies in the midfield. I don't think that it is any coincidence that the Sack is looking like a deer in the headlights at the moment. Week after week we ask him to play tall, and I just think that he is being ground down by he physical effort. Reid's return will make a huge difference.
Greenwood will also make a big difference when he comes in as he will allow Crisp to be released a bit more.
I was not surprised that Pendles was off for 10 minutes in the second. We needed to see how our structures stood up and bring in his bigger body in the second half of the quarter. I can't say that it worked too well really, but the rest of the coaching was just excellent.
We are starting to see the emergence of a proper football side. I am very, very hopeful for the future. |
|
|
|
|
What'sinaname 
Joined: 29 May 2010
Location: Living rent free
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| perthmagpie wrote: | I would like to ask:
1. Was our performance a step backwards?
2. The status quo.
3. A step forward?
Also with our pressure, tackling and effort how many other teams would have we worn down and won against? Curious to know what other Nicksters think as it would be a guide to how many remaining games we win. |
The game was a throw back. We have been successful playing a fast and attacking style of football. Last night, we reverted to a defensive, around the boundary game and I am not sure if that was the strategy, or players being too afraid to make a critical error.
_________________
Fighting against the objectification of woman. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ I'd have thought it was a big step forward. Put that game on teh 'G and we'd have won, I think. Until last night I was not sure whether we are contenders or pretenders. Now, as long as do not drop off as young sides can do in teh second half, I'm confident we're contenders. I thought we'd end in the 9-12 area this year, and by the time of the bye I thought 5-8. now I think we're a chance to finish top 4, if we bring that - plus a little improvement to be expected - to every game. From there anyhting could happen in a season like this.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Dangles
Balmey Army
Joined: 14 May 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| What'sinaname wrote: | | perthmagpie wrote: | I would like to ask:
1. Was our performance a step backwards?
2. The status quo.
3. A step forward?
Also with our pressure, tackling and effort how many other teams would have we worn down and won against? Curious to know what other Nicksters think as it would be a guide to how many remaining games we win. |
The game was a throw back. We have been successful playing a fast and attacking style of football. Last night, we reverted to a defensive, around the boundary game and I am not sure if that was the strategy, or players being too afraid to make a critical error. |
I agree. As I said in other posts I thought we played into their hands somewhat by playing the type of game they wanted to play. We should've been looking for quicker ball movement into the forward line. But that said I still thought we played very well and could've won if not for a couple of howlers. |
|
|
|
|
slangman
Joined: 11 Aug 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Sloppy kicking in the last qtr cost us the game.
Iron those out and we are definately a top 4 contender.
_________________
- Side By Side - |
|
|
|
|
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | We're not strong enough at the contests to win a premiership at the moment. Will the inclusion of Greenwood, Reid, Karnezis and Scharenberg change the equation? I don't think so. So for me it means at least another year of development before we can challenge for the flag. It still worries me how we go when Swan retires. How do you replace a champion when he retires?
A couple of things worried me last night. Do we have to gang tackle all the time? The ball spills out and three Freemantle players are waiting to pick the ball up. We need to have a Collingwood player waiting on the ground for the spills. Also, if we can't claim clean possession we need to lock the ball in the packs without being pinged by the umpires. To beat Freemantle you can't afford to give them any space to move the ball.
The other point is that we are missing the run and carry off half back that we had earlier in the year with Ramsay and Sinclair. Williams doesn't give us the same type of game that either of those two players give us. We desperately need at least one of those players back. |
Williams is in awesome form shutting down his opponent and providing rebound from defence.
Varcoe is currently playing the role of Ramsay.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
5150 
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Can anyone answer why the sub (Seedsman) who came on in the last quarter and on the ground for less than a minute, kicks a goal using his speed (fresh legs) then runs off to the boundary swapping over for a player that has been in the game for 3 and a bit quarters? |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 5150 wrote: | | Can anyone answer why the sub (Seedsman) who came on in the last quarter and on the ground for less than a minute, kicks a goal using his speed (fresh legs) then runs off to the boundary swapping over for a player that has been in the game for 3 and a bit quarters? |
1. they got the interchange wrong and he should not have come off
2. they needed to get someone else on who had been on the bench longer than desirable
3. they do the rotation due to the burst nature of seedo's goal
4. they wanted to change the structure or balance of the side
5. fukked if i know
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| perthmagpie wrote: | I would like to ask:
1. Was our performance a step backwards?
2. The status quo.
3. A step forward?
Also with our pressure, tackling and effort how many other teams would have we worn down and won against? Curious to know what other Nicksters think as it would be a guide to how many remaining games we win. |
It was 63 steps forward. 
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | | perthmagpie wrote: | I would like to ask:
1. Was our performance a step backwards?
2. The status quo.
3. A step forward?
Also with our pressure, tackling and effort how many other teams would have we worn down and won against? Curious to know what other Nicksters think as it would be a guide to how many remaining games we win. |
It was 63 steps forward. |
neil armstrong only needed the one.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
While no one is complaining about our effort last night let's remember we aren't Melbourne.
We should have won that game.
Bucks knew it was one that got away and you only had to see his presser and terse response to the opening question how much it was hurting him even though he would have been proud of the performance.
Bucks isn't interested in honourable losses.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
