titan_uranus

Another point to add to the mix when considering what Round 23 says about the prelim.

When Geelong hit 44 points up, the scoreline was 11.2.68 to 3.6.24.

So that was 13 scoring shots to 9.

Four more scoring shots does not often equate to a 44 point lead. But it did that night.

So much of what they did in the second quarter just...worked. We were off, sure, but they could not have capitalised any more. They didn't miss a shot on goal, the ball bounced the right way (literally, for the Cameron goal in the goalsquare), frees went their way both in terms of what was paid and what wasn't (e.g. Dangerfield running very close to the limit, if not beyond, twice in succession).

I'd argue that, 9 times out of 10 (or more), Geelong wouldn't get up to a 44 point lead with the amount of time we spent "off".

3 hours ago, Deemania since 56 said:

I am not saying that he will be playing. I am analysing why he is training with our top squad. This is something that I would like to know, particularly at the training level, to attempt to understand what he is bringing to our preparation (so far, twice in the past week). Alternatively, it may be a decoy to unwelcome observers from Geelong FC or some other purpose, and why? As i stated, inquisitive I do remain whilst also speculative and reasoned in a circumstance where someone on DL might have a more accurate knowledge than my humble reasonings.

 

The entire list is in Perth and training at the moment.

Having the whole squad means we got to run an intraclub on the weekend.

2 hours ago, Deemania since 56 said:

In support of an animal game from Viney, I have noticed again in the second footage of training for this week (far background only, not the sharp-focussed foreground) that Majak is training in body work and recovery with the big boys of the team. This may be an interesting observation. I have visions of the unexpected Hawkins shut-down, releasing May a little to a more advantageous role with forward penetration (his kicking can be sublime) and to ease potential moves by Geelong to drop in resting rucks and/or talls as forward targets. Could all be speculation, but it still crosses the mind.

 

 

There is absolutely no way we will, or should, play Majak Daw this week.

He was always a break glass in case of emergency list addition. There is no emergency.

12 hours ago, Superunknown said:

I’ll take that bet. Look overseas as a guide - Israel 

Israel is only at 60% double vaccinated coverage, though.

They hit 50% double vaccinated in March but have plateaued significantly since then.

Just posted in another thread that without the pre-finals bye, from 2000-2015 only four sides lost the QF but then won the prelim (i.e. a 28-4 record).

They were two threepeat sides (Brisbane in 2003 and Hawthorn in 2015), and then Sydney and West Coast in 2005 and 2006 respectively, after beating each other in close QFs.

5 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Or 5 out of the last 6 as losses.

I noted in another post that as a sample of Prelim performances, in the immediate last 6 years prior to introduction of the pre-finalsbye, as in this years structure, 11 of those 12 PF's were won by the QF winning teams.

i.e. this year Dees and Port.

The mighty Threepeat hawks the only team to buck this trend

Yep. Prior to the pre-finals bye, the QF winners are 28-4 in prelims.

The four losers are:

1. Fremantle in 2015 - beaten by the threepeat Hawks
2. Adelaide in 2006 - beaten by West Coast, who had lost their QF by a point to Sydney during the peak Sydney-West Coast rivalry era
3. St Kilda in 2005 - beaten by Sydney, who had lost their QF to West Coast by four points during the peak Sydney-West Coast rivalry era
4. Sydney in 2003 - beaten by the threepeat Brisbane

A bit of a trend there. The only four sides from 2000-2015 to lose the QF but make the Grand Final were either three-peat sides or lost their QF by a tiny margin as part of an amazing rivalry. 2021 Geelong does not fall into either of those buckets.

(Note that all four of these sides went on to win the flag, though...)

6 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I got crucified the other day for suggesting in dropping Bowey, so just watch yourself..

My reason was pretty much exactly yours. I simply don't see a match up for Bowey and with Geelongs much taller line up, it's not a risk I'm willing to take on a 5th gamer who looked overawed for 3 quarters against Brisbane.

For me I think Hibberd has to come in. He's experienced, and adds further leadership down back but also plays a good negating role. I have every confidence Hibberd could take Rohan because Rohan has been in poor form and the guy crumbles against extreme pressure and finals heat.

GWS barely applied any pressure on Geelong hence why Rohan was able to get a bit more of the ball this week.

My match ups. 

May > Hawkins

Petty > Ratugolea 

Smith > Cameron

HIbberd/Lever > Rohan

Salem > Miers 

Rivers > Close

I should say I didn't suggest it because I'm worried about Bowey, or that I think he doesn't deserve his spot in the 22.

It's more that I worry that if we need to mix things up Hibberd and Smith can be flexible and take Rohan or Cameron or Miers or Close. Bowey doesn't give us that flexibility as much.

It's not a massive concern - I think Geelong will be going in too tall and I think that plays into our hands already. Provided we bring the same level of defensive pressure in the forward and middle thirds of the ground as we've done all year, that's as much a part of how we stop them scoring as the individuals in the back six are.

4 hours ago, rpfc said:

They have lost 5 PFs (19, 17, 16, 13, 10) and have won 5 PFs (20, 11, 09, 08, 17) for 3 flags (07, 09, 11).

So 50% winning record in PFs is pretty good…

Wish our record was so horrific.

Yes but under Chris Scott, since the 2011 flag they're 1-4 in prelims.

I just saw the grab of Selwood's post-game interview from On the Couch, where he smugly (literally with a smile on his face) told the camera that they didn't care about their loss to Port because they'd won 11 straight in the middle of the season (which wasn't true, it was 11 from 12).

[censored] if we lose on Friday it's going to be so hard to stomach.

Maybe we'll bring Hibberd in for Bowey, allowing May, Petty and Smith to take Hawkins, Cameron and Ratugolea, Hibberd goes to Rohan, and that lets Lever run free? Rivers and Salem with Clark/Miers?

Does Hibberd allow a bit more flexibility than Bowey for a taller Geelong forward line?

You couldn't have asked for a better run in than Port.

I expect them to take care of the Dogs easily enough.

Just hope we can join them on GF day.

25 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

Or at 28 yo and a Brownlow in tow he is worth more now than in 2 years time when the contract is up.

From what I xan see his 44 possessions do not hurt the opposition too much this year so his currency is now and he knows it. Rip 4 years from Fremantle.

Can't see what covid has to do with it. Neale has a contract to an employer for 5 years to live away from Perth signed 3 years ago.

You can't see what COVID's got to do with it?

When he signed his 5 year contract no one foresaw border closures. 

They may well have planned on starting a family three years back, but they may also have not. Not everyone plans their entire life around children, no matter what previous generations might have done.

Regardless, the situation three years ago is completely different to what it is now and if it turns out that being separated from family in WA is hitting them hard, that should be completely understandable to everyone.

Having said that, he's had a five year contract and been paid accordingly, and Brisbane has framed a list around him, so I'd understand if they want to take a relatively hard stance, but Neale's position is completely understandable.

Well this week we know we can break the 21 year drought of winning a prelim final/making a Grand Final.

We can also beat a side for the third time in one season, which will be the first time we've done that I believe since we beat Carlton three times in 1988.

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

All good points mate.

It's certainly the MFCSS kicking in for me. Certainly think the battle will be won in the midfield and defence for us to break away.

I also think we'll take a lot out of round 23. I watched highlights from that game and I think May will play a good lock down role on Hawkins. Few times Hawkins used his smarts to get away from May. 

I also would hope we've tightened our stoppage work also. Hearing Yze on radio yesterday say they'll put considerable time into making sure it doesn't happen again gives me some confidence. 

Hawkins is amazing but I'll be pretty surprised if May gets beaten like that again. 

I'll be far more surprised if Gawn lets Stanley get on top early like he did in Round 23, and I'll be even more surprised if our mids don't at least break even.

At least we know from Round 23 that even if we're behind at half time, the game won't be over. And we know Geelong can lose from good positions: their last two seasons have ended with them building up a half time lead and then watching it disintegrate.

it's been a while since Geelong beat a good side.

I'd argue they haven't done it since Round 14 when they beat the Dogs (with a kick after the siren, at GMHBA).

I think someone looked at the numbers and noticed that the Dogs aren't 1st for free kicks for, they're mid-table, but the reason their differential is so high is that they have a seriously low number of free kicks against.

So the whole "ducking for frees" thing isn't the issue. They're not sucking umpires in to pay frees to them.

If you're playing in front, you can't push your opponent in the back or get them high in a marking contest. The Dogs play in front a lot. 

If you're first to the ball, you can only be penalised for HTB, but the player second to the ball can be penalised for a whole host of things. The Dogs are regularly first to the ball.

These are, I think, the two principal reasons they give away fewer free kicks than their opponents. I don't have any data to back it up, but then again no one has any proof of conspiracies, bias or corruption.

11 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I know some on here are pretty confident against the cats, but for me I just have this uneasy feeling that losing twice to us during the season won't sit well with this Geelong outfit. Scott is a very smart and tactical coach. They would have taken so much learnings out of the last game and I expect a much sound response.

They've also improved their side since the last round. They'll have Duncan, Touhy and potentially Higgins. Watched Touhy Friday night and he just makes them so much better off half back and wing.

I have it in the back of my head that it was only 3 weeks ago this same Geelong team were 44 points up. So when up and going they can be at their deadly best. 

The other thing to look at is their track record at optus stadium is actually pretty good. Much better record then ours. 

I know they are a bit banged up, but they always seem to find a ways to get into this position.  Their finals record under Scott is phenomenal even though the wins haven't been on their side. 

Geelong is a strong side no doubt, but don't get too worried about it.

If Scott's so smart and tactical, he would have learnt something about their ball movement from when we beat them the first time this year. But they played the precise same way again in Round 23.

I also expect we'll have learnt plenty about the bad parts of Round 23. We won't be seeing them waltz out the front of repeated centre stoppages, and without that Geelong didn't look like scoring in Round 23.

I'm not sure about their "phenomenal" finals record under Scott, either. They're 7-14 since the 2011 flag. They've only won more than one final in a season once (last year). They've had some seriously non-competitive losses, too: this year vs Port, their 2018 EF loss to us, they had two 50+ finals losses in 2017, the 2016 prelim where they were 7 goals behind Sydney at quarter time, the straight sets 2014 finals exit.

Personnel-wise, Tuohy is a huge inclusion for them, but don't forget they lost O'Connor, a handy defender. Duncan's looked cooked in both of his games back so far, whilst Higgins is dropped, not injured, and just can't get a game (same with Dahlhaus).

Look, Geelong are dangerous no doubt. They were clearly one of the four best sides in it this year and for all our amazing football this year we finished 1.5 wins in front of them, needing a kick after the siren to beat them in Round 23 after having been 44 points down. But there's a lot of MFCSS in our thinking that we're in trouble. We shouldn't feel that way. They should feel that way. They made the GF last year and took their squad and added Cameron, Smith and Higgins to it. They went all in for a 2021 flag. The pressure is squarely on them.

20 hours ago, Stein9193 said:

I don't know what kind of crazy intel you have but what makes you think they are going to go tall and do the precise thing that we excel at? You're off your rocker if you think that.

What makes me think it is that they just won a final playing that forward line, having lost two straight games to finalists (us Round 23, Port first final) trying the smaller forward line.

Who replaces Ratugolea if they want to revert back to the forward line that lost them those games? They dropped Dahlhaus because he's out of form. Higgins couldn't even get a medi-sub gig this week.

11 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Agreed.

Oddly, Scott said Optus suited their style of play.  Yet, this was the first game they have won there in several attempts.  Maybe he was pumping up his player's confidence. Optus might suit their game but it suits ours better. 

And we have won several games there vs the Eagles and the crowd.  We can draw on that for confidence.  

Like you I think that whatever positives Geelong take out of playing at Optus ours trumps theirs.

I know you missed their Fremantle win there this year but remember how after Round 23 Scott said it didn't matter because they were playing in Adelaide regardless?

He's a master of spin. Whether it's to project positivity on his players, or he's delusional, or whatever else, I don't read anything into it. There's no way Geelong didn't care about playing Brisbane at the Adelaide Oval as compared to Port, and so I put no stock into him saying they like Optus.

Yep I'll give it another crack.

Geelong are likely to go with the extra tall in Ratugolea, but that isn't necessarily that bad for us. That will encourage them to kick it long and high to make marking contests, which is the sort of ball movement we love to defend.

The height of their forward line might mean Smith holds his spot, and could mean Hibberd replaces Bowey for positional flexibility - both he and Smith have the ability to stand players like Rohan but to run off them. 

Meanwhile Brisbane over the last three years have finished top 4 three times for a 1-5 record in finals (all bar one of those finals have been at the Gabba) and two straight sets exits.

Umpires [censored] the bed late.

That wasn't a mark to Bont, clearly second to the ball.

That shouldn't have been a free kick against McCarthy, jostling like that in the forward line happens all the time.

And was that really a block free kick against McInerney?

(meanwhile Zac Bailey might have ran too far for his goal at the end...)

1 minute ago, OhMyDees said:

Are we not forgetting they played with basically their full squad against the Giants who were missing, Toby Greene, Tom Green, Jessie Hogan, Sam Reid, Xavier O’Halloran, Brent Daniels, Nick Shipley and Braydon Preuss…

Yes my MFCSS is in overdrive right now but having said that the Cats were lucky not to face a fully fit Giants outfit and it’s not surprising they won by 35.

Yep, full strength minus Stewart (and Parfitt going down early). Plus had the extra day break, and didn't exactly exert themselves last week whereas GWS played a hugely intense game vs Sydney.

My MFCSS is also strong right now, but objectively there are plenty of reasons we can/should be confident.

12 minutes ago, Nascent said:

On tonights team

In: Duncan, Ratugolea and Tuohy 

Out: Dahlhaus, Simpson and O'Connor

 

Looks to be a better team and they've had an extra run on Perth stadium now.

Still think we should have their measure at our best and run them off their legs. Just don't fall asleep for a quarter again dees.

 

Their 22 tonight is definitely better than the 22 they fielded against us in Round 23.

However, we had their measure for most of that Round 23 game. I wouldn't bet on Gawn getting beaten by Stanley a second time in three weeks, nor would I bet on our mids putting in 20 minutes of genuinely absent football to let Geelong walk the ball out of stoppages.

I'm also hopeful that Geelong will be feeling the pinch having played this week and not having had a rest for a few months. Hopefully we'll be fresh and focused.

4 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The Cats had us covered until they started resting their stars at 3/4 time last time we met. It's going to be a huge test. They've definitely improved their side with their changes this week as well. 

Sounds like our boys had a good first week in the hub, getting some much deserved rest, but it has to be all business from here. 

This is rubbish, propaganda driven by Geelong people.

The only time they "had us covered" was the 20 minute patch in the second quarter where they dominated stoppages and kicked 6 goals.

If anyone had anyone covered the rest of the game, it was us covering them.

And they didn't rest anyone. Dangerfield was (allegedly) sick and spent time on the bench in the fourth but that was it.

Why do people have to minimise our win?