Post match: Pies lose another thriller. All comments please.

[HAL]

What is that feeling like? It is a pleasure to introduce myself to you, Toovey's position is going to come under threat.

[uuuuu..... The LoneSTAR]

- We probably didn't handle that in tight 'hot footy' game as well as Port?
- Had we stuck more tackles [that is, not let our opponents dispose of the footy to their advantage whilst being tackled], we probably would've won?
- Wines was very good for them
- Our three <10 gamers probably made more mistakes than theirs?
- How many times did they want to replay Adams knee making contact Hipster Hasselhoff during the telecast??... Then after the game BT says something like 'Well, we haven't had a chance to look at this,...' and they play it again?!?!? How about replaying the Adam's contender for GOTY!!!!!

[HAL]

replaying the Adam's contender for GOTY?

[mudlark]

We wont play finals, not a friggin chance.

Spud.

[mudlark]

I went to the game last night. Conditions were atrocious and as far as the moronica on this board go,Collingwood are far from "Gutless" and "Season over".What a pack of wankers you are.But I expect nothing less from the usual array of clowns.
The game was lost in the first qtr. ANOTHER sitter missed by Jesse White early in the first term.The game was lost early when someone in the backline decided it might be a good idea to let Chad Wyngard run around on his lonesome and kick 3 goals.The game was lost early first term when Jamie Elliott dropped a magnificently delivered ,lace out pass,20 meters out and Port took it down the other end and Wyngard was was there ,by himself, to kick a goal.
We battled it out and I was proud to be a Collingwood supporter last night.
As far as Bucks being "Out coached"?? I reiterate that some people here wouldn't know shite from clay and perhaps they'd be better off supporting Bichmond or in other cases ,the Bulldogs,who are "Apparently??" going to overtake us. I certainly wouldn't miss any of them.

[John Wren]

Shattering loss last night and I'm still hurting.
The selection of Moore was in hindsight a mistake that was made worse when Broomhead went down injured as we couldn't sub Moore off.

Clearly the club is committed to playing two ruckmen in Witts and Grundy and that provides us with a strength that we will be advantaged by in the years to come, especially when the AFL does away with the sub next year to revert to just 4 interchange. I agree with this policy as both play the ruck in an agressive manner and I thought both gave us some drive, albeit it would be good if they could take a mark up forward. Witts is a reliable kick for goal when he gets the chance.

I like the look of Maynard - I agree with some other posters that he looks to be a footballer we can develop further over the next few years.

Toovey still makes some mistakes but his pace is a plus and his record on West Coast's Darling will be tested again next week. I feel Toovey's position is going to come under threat from Scharenberg eventually, but at the moment I doubt Scharenberg has the pace or toughness to be as effective as Toovey albeit his class would be nice to have when rebounding.

Langdon is a beauty.

Elliot is sadly out of form. Something needs to be done with him. I would consider dropping him for Kennedy since Kennedy was an elite forward rover in his junior career.

Fazolo has skill and I would persist with him.

Jessie White is my whipping boy but when played as a key forward he does offer a bit. If he can kick straight he is worth persisting with. Big if there.

Cloke is Cloke. Still the most important player we have in our forward line. The dissapointing thing about last night was that he didn't seem to be able to bring the ball to ground in some of the contests allowing Port to take free possession too often. It does appear the way to beat Collingwood is to simply run a free man in our forward line. Bucks has to work on that to have the team lower their view when coming into the forward line rather than bomb it in without looking.

My suggested changes are;
Out : Moore, Broomhead and Adams( Assuming he is suspended)
In: Williams, Greenwood, Kennedy

excellent summary. agree on all counts. good point re the likes of cloke not creating the ground level contests. i do think that in any other week we would have dealt to port. our starts have been hurting us. start on at least an even keel and we win.

[uuuuu..... The LoneSTAR]

^ The game did start at 0 to 0

[ThePieMind]

fasolo vfl is looking good for rest of the year

Not sure which game you watched - huge FWD pressure with 7 tackles - equal 2nd behind Swanny with 8.
Bucks will be loving his work right now.

[ThePieMind]

[RudeBoy]

I'm still gutted by that loss because that's the game we should have won, whereas the last 2 weeks would have been upset results had we pinched victories. However, I'm still convinced we're on the right track with this developing team. As someone else noted, we've found another beauty in Maynard. He's hard, quite quick and is a good mark and beautiful kick. He'll be a 10 yr player for us imo. Apart from that shocking 1st quarter, our team battled fantastically under worsening conditions and against shocking umpiring. However, there were several reasons we lost imo.

1. We started slowly because we've had 2 incredibly ferocious games in consecutive weeks, the last only 6 days ago. It's very hard to maintain that level of intensity without a break with a very young team.

2. We clearly went in with at least one, possibly 2, too many talls under those conditions. Moore will be a future star, but the future is not this year. He needs to go back and play VFL.

3. De Goey should not have been the sub. He's a warrior and had an immediate impact when he came on.

4. Elliott is out of sorts emotionally atm. I'm not sure what the problem is, but he's lost all confidence. Given that Cloke is Cloke, we desperately need Elliott to contribute 2-3 goals each week if we're to beat anyone.

The good thing is that none of these issues are permanent. They are all fixable. I just hope that the emotional disappointment of losing another thriller for the third week in a row hasn't left our young team bereft of confidence going into next week's game. The game against the Eagles is now a must win game, or we're facing the prospect of missing out on the finals again. I'm still confident of our development, but losing these last 3 games has obviously put this season's prospects under enormous pressure.

[John Wren]

^ The game did start at 0 to 0

you know what i meant.

[TimetoFly]

This loss is all in bucks.. He was our worst offender performer tonight. Picking 5 talls in wet conditions and allowing broadbent to be lose man in last quarter when we should Of went man on man.

He has had a good year but last night it is all in him.. Disgusting effort

If we miss finals again after 8-3 start then questions need to be asked.. I can take the freo & Hawks loss as much as they hurt but losing a game because your coach had a brain fade is unacceptable..

Never been so angry about a loss before

[Collingwood Crackerjack]

We lost a game of football we should not have lost last week.

We made 1 enforced change(a bad one at that)

That right there is the acceptance of mediocrity.

Gee, and just who else should have been included in the side? Which of the other inexperienced or untried kids would have done better? Or maybe you want our experienced players like Armstrong or Dwyer or maybe even Young included?

Dwyer plays instead of Grundy and we win the game, never seen the knock on Dwyer, especially in the wet, he is a good 21-22 player

[Collingwood Crackerjack]

Jamie has been disappointing for a while now, need to get that sorted, whatever the cause may be

[melliot]

Haven't read the whole thread. But IMO . .....

Lost it at the selection table.

7 talls in the side. On a dry day I'd be worried it was too top heavy and exposed for lack of run and ground ball ability.

On a clear night with dew on the grass. Or if anyone bother to check the weather new rain was likely, the tall side was always going to be exposed.

Port's wasn't

The flip side of course is that we could have got an advantage with more running power on a wet night in place of a second ruck.

The tall forwards on both sides had minimal impact scoreboard wise.

Thanks Swoop. Pretty much my thinking.

Port may have had more talls when you look just at the height stat. But some don't actually play like true talls. For example, Westhoff, actually can play as a wingman. He is very mobile and agile and good on the deck.

Where as our talls are more traditional types. ie. not great off the deck.

Regardless of what Port did/does, our side was completely unbalanced. The ball was always going to be on the deck a whole heap.

We needed runners and ground ball winning players. So it completely bewilders me why Williams was replaced with Grundy. I thought Scharenberg or Kennedy especially was the obvious (maybe not so Obvious??) choice.

Considering the forecast conditions, it was bewildering, why we didn't swap Moore for another medium or small? Yet we added a tall, not reduced the numbers.

If the talls we had were stars, then I could accept trying to fit them all in. But their not stars. Not yet. "Horses for Courses" should have been applied.

Two additional runners and ground winning players (instead of Grundy and Moore)would have made a massive difference.

The 1st Quarter smashing in better conditions even showed our lack of mobility. We got cut up for run and clearances.

Water under the bridge now. Must make sure the same mistake is not made again.