Wow, David King really does push the anti Melbourne agenda. Talks louder and louder as others try to moderate. Quite striking tonight on First Crack.

The only other time a team has come from behind like we did last night at Kardinia were the Eagles in 2006.

They were 54 points down during the 3rd but went on to win by 3 points.

West Coast won the flag in 2006…

Edited August 22, 20213 yr by OhMyDees
Spacing

What did David King say?

2 minutes ago, Jaded said:

What did David King say?

I don’t really care, do you?

21 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Nah I believed, we were still within the Chris Sullivan line hey @Supermercado

Correct. Round 6, 1992 - 47 points in front right at the start of the fourth quarter and we stuffed it up. Still haunted, though last night has helped me come to terms with it a bit.

Edited August 22, 20213 yr by Supermercado

3 minutes ago, Supermercado said:

Correct. Round 6, 1992 - 47 points in front right at the start of the fourth quarter and we stuffed it up. Still haunted, though last night has helped me come to terms with it a bit.

@Supermercado I cannot wait to read your Demonblog post when it comes out. You could be up for a record number of views this week.

1 minute ago, Wrecker46 said:

@Supermercado I cannot wait to read your Demonblog post when it comes out. You could be up for a record number of views this week.

Thank you, might reach double figures! It is currently in production, due sometime tomorrow.

36 minutes ago, Jaded said:

What did David King say?

It was a bit weird.

Montagna was saying that we had the better of general play, aside from about 5 minutes of chaos where everything Geelong touched turned to gold. This was exactly what most people would say. King then was trying to say that Chris Scott is a tactical mastermind because they play keepings off and that their golden run was a result of that because Dangerfield and Selwood exist. It was hard to follow his point but he seemed to argue that Geelong was better tactically because they chipped the ball around. The fact that they kicked 4 goals in 3 quarters of footy wasn't important.

Montagna pushed back on that and King was flustered. Montagna eventually just moved on for the sake of the segment. It was weird and pretty hard to follow, but King certainly wasn't particularly full of praise.

Edited August 22, 20213 yr by Axis of Bob

King was 'gushing' about Scott's coaching. 

Montagna focused on Melbourne. He really rates us.

King has in the past been very bullish about the Demons. Now seems to prefer the puddytatts though. [censored].

1 minute ago, Supermercado said:

Thank you, might reach double figures! It is currently in production, due sometime tomorrow.

You will get double figures from my family alone

I find Montagna to be very balanced (and astute) in his analysis.  He's definitely the brightest member of the First Crack team.

2 hours ago, old dee said:

Last night the thing that really got to me is how many victories I have missed live this year. It has really hit home now  how much enjoyment I have missed in 2021.

Both supporters and players.
After last nights game could you imagine the atmosphere at full house MCG next week.
Playing finals infront of big crowds is what the players grow up dreaming of.
Here we are top of the ladder and no-one has been able to go.

2 hours ago, Satan said:

Unlike the titanic we didnt sink yesterday

We were the iceberg.

33 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

It was a bit weird.

Montagna was saying that we had the better of general play, aside from about 5 minutes of chaos where everything Geelong touched turned to gold. This was exactly what most people would say. King then was trying to say that Chris Scott is a tactical mastermind because they play keepings off and that their golden run was a result of that because Dangerfield and Selwood exist. It was hard to follow his point but he seemed to argue that Geelong was better tactically because they chipped the ball around. The fact that they kicked 4 goals in 3 quarters of footy wasn't important.

Montagna pushed back on that and King was flustered. Montagna eventually just moved on for the sake of the segment. It was weird and pretty hard to follow, but King certainly wasn't particularly full of praise.

Great summary.

King was trying to argue that Geelong walk away from that game pleased because our score from turnover was around their season average.

It was a really flimsy argument which made little sense in the context of the game.

I much preferred Montagna pulling up the footage suggesting we'd rolled our spare defender up into stoppages in the first half but reverted back in the second half. Hard to know if that was true given we only saw footage of two stoppages but if so, a really interesting insight into what we were thinking.

What a day yesterday, you bloody beautiful MFC faithful! A lifetime of Kardinia trauma was unexpectedly treated in the space of 34 minutes. After collecting myself from the blubbering mess I had been reduced to, I then spent chunks of the day intricately explaining the magnitude of the moment to scores of baffled Italians, Germans and Canadians who were paying me to hear about Dutch history but instead were  regaled with tales of the historic warriors called Max Gawn and Clayton Oliver. Found myself riding through West Amsterdam at 5am belting out Grand Old Flag in the rain. A day for the ages.

I [censored] love you all and I [censored] love this football team. 

12 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

@picket fence @Soidee

Jog on DD!

3 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I much preferred Montagna pulling up the footage suggesting we'd rolled our spare defender up into stoppages in the first half but reverted back in the second half. Hard to know if that was true given we only saw footage of two stoppages but if so, a really interesting insight into what we were thinking.

I think the idea was probably especially for Kardinia because the ground is so narrow you probably get more value around the ball than you do behind it because there is much less space (since KP is so narrow). By bringing up the extra number you can get extra pressure around the ball and still be able to cover any long kicks into defence. Geelong tend to camp number out behind the ball, which works well at Kardinia but can result in some pretty turgid football. I think we just wanted the game to be as contested as possible and then win the battle of attrition, as we tend to do.

As it turned out our extra ended up being caught too close to the stoppage and they were able to get out of the stoppage too easily. We just brought back a reasonably shallow sweeper half a kick from the contest, which forced them to work through an extra line of defence and slowed the ball down. They had very few chances to look dangerous in the second half. It was good to see our game plan still hold up against Geelong's fairly unique style of play.

I had a listen to King then, and while I don’t agree with his sentiments I think he was more taking the viewpoint of being positive towards Scott and his tactics rather than not rating Melbourne. It was a strange position though because if you look at the course of the game that majority is played on terms that suit us, it was a period where we lost our heads and Geelong just had everything at the centre bounce work for them (as well as a touch of luck a couple of times). The better teams are then able to manage that game, but the cats sat back on their efforts of 10 minutes and allowed us to get back into it bit by bit.

Then I bet you Goody and the team set themselves for that first 3-5 minutes to say let’s try to get a quick 2-3 goals and see how they react. I’ll be honest I’m a bit surprised at how much Geelong collectively [censored] themselves. For a team with so much experience (and plenty of quality) they had no answer. 

Just watching the second half again. 

my word Clarry is a monster. Carried us on his back in the second half. Just relentless. By far the best player I’ve seen in red and blue. 

Spargo just kicked his second. We are coming! I’ll let you know how it ends up 🤣

13 minutes ago, Pates said:

I had a listen to King then, and while I don’t agree with his sentiments I think he was more taking the viewpoint of being positive towards Scott and his tactics rather than not rating Melbourne. It was a strange position though because if you look at the course of the game that majority is played on terms that suit us, it was a period where we lost our heads and Geelong just had everything at the centre bounce work for them (as well as a touch of luck a couple of times). The better teams are then able to manage that game, but the cats sat back on their efforts of 10 minutes and allowed us to get back into it bit by bit.

Then I bet you Goody and the team set themselves for that first 3-5 minutes to say let’s try to get a quick 2-3 goals and see how they react. I’ll be honest I’m a bit surprised at how much Geelong collectively [censored] themselves. For a team with so much experience (and plenty of quality) they had no answer. 

Geelong to me play at a perpetual intensity rating of about 8/10*.

When teams turn up the heat to the max (no pun intended) like we did in the last quarter, they're not capable of breaking that barrier - their default setting is to regain the play on their terms (slower, more controlled) as opposed to matching the opposition. It's why their whole game plan revolves around tempo footy - control & efficiency. This game was reminiscent of Geelong's grandfinal loss last year, their baseline standard of play is extremely high which is why they're a strong chance to win every game they play, but they don't seem capable of flicking the switch like other sides can. 

*Scientifically proven by Swiss scientists 

Edited August 22, 20213 yr by adonski

I watch on afl overseas, a fox stream. 

There was no pre-match lead up to our game.

The change up from the end of Bris v WC, had me a bit exhausted, after the 1 point to get the percentage above the Dogs. Then straight to the bounce of Dees v Cats.

Would like to see games every day/night of the week eventually, so the clashes don't occur.

Long time, no post. 

LID IS OFF!

One of the examples King used was how the chip kicking resulted in the soccer goal to Hawkins (12 minutes in) because Lever was playing on Close. However the kick came in from a turnover in the Geelong attacking half, with a switch kick and then a bomb from 80m out .... to an 8 vs 5 with Max Gawn standing under it. Geelong somehow scrubbed it through because Max got body pressure from the small Parfitt and let the ball over the back, whilst Hawkins and Cameron were worked out of the contest. This is how we want to defend, but a series of weird mishaps resulted in a goal. King, instead, thought this was a coaching masterclass.

I don't have a problem with being bullish on Scott's plan to nurse a slow, old team to a final crack at a premiership. It's smart coaching. But he's started with a conclusion in mind and then went really looking for evidence to support it even when it wasn't there, which made the whole thing look really weird.

2 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

It was bizarre. Montagna was the only one making real sense.

Hated that no one pulled him up on it.

One of my favourite shows.

But only because of montagna. I love his analysis and ability to explain it.

One example tonight was matching their extra at the stoppage in the first half (which is something we have only done once i think). And then going back to no extra in the second hslf. Brilliant coaching he said. 

King is totally random. Mixes some genuinely interesting points with bizarre bulltish.

What the hell was king on about when talking up the cats? 

Sure they were brilliant in that 15 minute patch. But montagna is right  we had the better of the rest of the match.

And we matched that 9 goal run, with 8 unanwered goals to win the game.

They had their 3 talls up and firing. Perfect conditions. 

And in a must win game they could only manage two goals after half time. Two.

Where is the critique of that dismal effort?

Or the acknowledgement of how brilliant our defence was.

And where was his critique of their three most senior players - dangerfield, sellwood and Hawkins. None had any impact in the last quarter. Danger didnt have a possession! Star power indeed.

Their controlled kicking style gets it done in the home and away season. As demonstrated by how phenomenal their home and away record is under scott - who i agree with King is a terrific coach.

(albeit bolsterd by the incredible home ground advantage they are gifted on a stupidly narrow ground they get to train on - are they the only club who get to train on the ground they play home games on?)

But as their finals record shows it simply does not hold up in finals.

When we turned the wick up in the last quarter to finals like intensity their game style fell apart.

They were desperately trying to play tempo and control the ball. We simply didn't let them.

We have beaten them twice this season. The first time we were clearly the better side, despite losing may early. Tbeir chip mark style wasn't up to it.

And in this game tbey had a 44 point lead with 7 minutes to go in the third quarter. On their home ground. And we won. 

And if we play them again we will beat them again. We are a better team.

Edited August 22, 20213 yr by binman

1 hour ago, Supermercado said:

Thank you, might reach double figures! It is currently in production, due sometime tomorrow.

@SupermercadoI remember you saying after Touhy’s winner that it knocked out the 2005 win as one of our best because the memory of this loss left such a bad feeling about that ground. Is this repaired now?  :) 

Hope I remembered that right!