This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Big T wrote:1. Jolly's attempt to take the ball out of a boundary throw in, penalised for holding the ball - absolute shocker and a sign of a dumb player;
This was a BS decision. The throw in was too short, it did not reach the contest.
2. Jaxon Barhams handball to 3 Melbourne players near their forward 50m line - the worst I have seen for quite some time.
Unfortunately for Jaxon he did this 2 or 3 times yesterday. He was in trouble, so he just gave it directly to the Dees player closest too him. That is not a good sign. I'd give him another chance, but they were very bad mistakes.
Of course you're gonna kick more behinds if your forwards are having shots at goal from ridiculous angles in the pockets.
We're hugging the boundary line every time, why????
Use the fkn corridor & have a shot from directly in front.
Easy, peazy Japanese.
It was SO frustrating to watch yesterday.
WE WERE ROBBED, RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME, RIGHT IN FRONT OF MEEE!
perthmagpie wrote:The seniors and VFL have so many quarters where we do ridiculous things like kick 1.9, 2.8. 0.11 and so on. It was there in the pre-season and is through the whole club. Its got to be the wide game plan. We are so easy to defend against. Just clog up our fwd 50 in the corridor and we'll spend the game shooting from the boundary or bombing to the crowded goal square. Even MM said our quality of inside 50's was poor. But it was exactly the same against Geelong and St.Kilda. They slowed us down clogged us up in front of goal and we shot from crazy angles with no space. This is why we'll have 5 less shots against St.Kilda but still lose easily.
Agreed, our boundary line long way home plan, MM loves it, does our forwards no favours. Other sides like the dees go up the guts, but we go round the boundary via the cape, and our forwards get flooded by opponents. But, MM wont change on this, and thats that.
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb.
ANNODAM wrote:Of course you're gonna kick more behinds if your forwards are having shots at goal from ridiculous angles in the pockets.
We're hugging the boundary line every time, why????
Use the fkn corridor & have a shot from directly in front.
Easy, peazy Japanese.
It was SO frustrating to watch yesterday.
+ 1 you are so right.
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb.
^ Yeah, cant argue with that. The damn Cats have it all sown up this year anyway, nobody can stop them, not the Saints, dogs or us, and that is just how it is at present.
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb.
The meltdown on here isn't as bad as I expected: perhaps more people are realising we really aren't that great (yet?).
Hopefully we can learn a few things from yesterday's game: Josh and Brown are not the answer, and hopefully their fans will remember this when they next want to call for their selection over a kid that may actually improve and become a good player. Take note fans of Tarks and OB! Same goes for them, irrespective of the odd "good" game.
Hopefully our coaching staff took note of how the Dees sliced right through our zone and implement something similar when we are opposing a similar zone.
The Dees method was have 4 or 5 guys all near each other on one side of the ground for the kick, in including the ruckman Jaymar. If he didn't mark it he would bring it to ground where it was 4 or 5 dees versus 2 of ours. They would then use their numbers advantage to move the ball quickly up the other end. Once they had the ball in their hands players were streaming up the corridor at will while we were left looking stupid guarding space. It was a smart plan but an obvious one. Why our coaching staff did not react worries me no end. I can understand never deviating from your game plan if it has brought you numerous premierships in recent years. But why Mick sits on his hands while opposition coaches have their own way all over the ground is beyond me.
woftam wrote:Hopefully our coaching staff took note of how the Dees sliced right through our zone and implement something similar when we are opposing a similar zone.
The Dees method was have 4 or 5 guys all near each other on one side of the ground for the kick, in including the ruckman Jaymar. If he didn't mark it he would bring it to ground where it was 4 or 5 dees versus 2 of ours. They would then use their numbers advantage to move the ball quickly up the other end. Once they had the ball in their hands players were streaming up the corridor at will while we were left looking stupid guarding space. It was a smart plan but an obvious one. Why our coaching staff did not react worries me no end. I can understand never deviating from your game plan if it has brought you numerous premierships in recent years. But why Mick sits on his hands while opposition coaches have their own way all over the ground is beyond me.
The Dee's game plan is very basic. Our game plan is very technical. It's the Hare V Rabbit scenario for my mind.
Don't forget that No Dids or Luke Ball, lost Maxwell in 2nd Qtr, dumb decision not to play Chris Dawes with Demons young backline.
With that said, the fact that we appear to be reluctant to take on the game and just hug the boundary line shows to me a lack of confidence in our forwards, and a game plan that relies on keeping possesion of the ball at all costs. All MBC did was wait for their opportunity and then counter attack. We have a far superior list to Melbourne, but they appear to have a more inventive coaching staff....
Big T wrote:1. Jolly's attempt to take the ball out of a boundary throw in, penalised for holding the ball - absolute shocker and a sign of a dumb player;
This was a BS decision. The throw in was too short, it did not reach the contest.
Can't agree there Joel, I thought Jolly had heaps of time to dispose regardless of the throw in and had options.
To call him dumb I admit is unfair, eg his pass to Lockyer in the dying minutes. But he is hard to watch sometimes.
Wayne Carey got in a lot of trouble for this.
