titan_uranus

Yes. We still are yet to be behind in the fourth quarter at any stage this year, though.

Petty was poor but IMO should hold his spot to work on his connection with the others in the backline. Brayshaw's positioning was excellent but his disposal poor. Wouldn't drop him, though. Melksham was significantly better this week than last week. Not the week to be calling for his head if you don't like him. Harmes' fourth quarter was important so I'd keep him but I'm far from convinced. So all of that said, may be no change.

6 - Oliver 5 - TMac 4 - May 3 - Salem 2 - Rivers 1 - Jordon

You can't be someone who was upset during the Gameday thread and not be in here in raptures with that win. We dug deep when we needed to and although we didn't cash in on our dominance in the middle two quarters as much as we should have, we remained really tough to play against and put Sydney, a top 4 side, off their game. They lifted immensely from when we hit the 22 point margin. They moved it quicker, took us on more directly, and opened up the ground more. But despite everything they threw at us, they didn't get in front. Which means that's 8 straight games in which we have not been behind at any stage in the fourth quarter (although that was the first fourth quarter we've lost). Oliver and TMac were the big stars. I thought Harmes was poor early but his fourth quarter was really good. Brown's first half was really important, and as TMac said in the post-match interview the two of them were more in sync tonight than last week. May good on Buddy but I reckon he was clearly unfit. Also loved Rivers' game. Petty struggled but IMO we have to keep playing him to work on that synergy with Lever and May.

Again, we dominate the first two thirds of the quarter but don’t convert that dominance into goals. 22 points was good but should have been 2-3 goals more. Couple of critical moments go against us and we end up losing the quarter it’s only a 10 point margin. We must take our chances if we want to win this.

Petty’s having an absolute shocker. He started poorly but improved in the Hawthorn game so let’s see what the second half brings. Should be 4 goals up after the dominance we had for the first 15 minutes of that quarter.

Can’t be this bad at clearances and expect to win. Jordon and Harmes getting plenty of it but turning it over with aplomb. Real problems with both of their decision making. Brown’s leading and follow up work better than last week.

Win tomorrow and we go 4 games and ~40% clear of Richmond.

I’m really disappointed Sparrow’s missed out to Harmes. Sparrow’s 2021 form exceeds anything we’ve seen from Harmes since 2018. Weid is being made to bide his time until a spot opens, IMO Harmes should have too.

It really cannot be understated just how appallingly bad Collingwood's list management and overall progress through 2020 into 2021 has been. The same one that numbered 24,397 vs Gold Coast this weekend?

Classic.

I’m seeing a lot of posts like this that have both Tomlinson and Jones out. It’s only one of them - Jones was the sub, not in the 22. If you replace Tomlinson with someone, Jones automatically reverts to the sub and doesn’t free up another spot. And the .1 was so close to a goal that if the goal umpire had called it a goal I’m 99% sure it would have survived a score review.

Correct result. Great news.

Excited? Yes. Absolutely. We’re 7-0 and our best football is clearly flag worthy. But sure as [censored] keeping the lid on. There are 15 games to go and every second game post-bye is on the road and/or against a flag contender.

Can we just ditch the stupid conspiracy theories? He hasn’t copped a week because Collingwood lost, or because someone at Melbourne has incriminating photos of Christian, or because Christian has a vendetta against us. He’s copped a week because the MRO process is horrendously inconsistent and produces unfair results repeatedly due to its poorly designed box ticking exercise, the wide grey areas, Christian’s inability and/or unwillingness to follow precedent, and the fact that these decisions are made by one person, rather than a panel.

@Fat Tony setting the bar at 3.5 goals is silly. I accept your concern about his defensive pressure, and it's a fair one. But is he a "complete defensive liability"? Over his career he averages 8 pressure acts per game. Josh Kennedy averages 8.1. Buddy Franklin averages 7.8. Other forwards: Harry Mackay - 7.4 Hawkins - 7.6 Riewoldt - 9.4 Taylor Walker - 9.6 Naughton - 9.8 Tom Lynch - 10.8 If tackles inside 50 is more your thing, Brown averages 0.6 per game. Naughton is 0.5, Lynch 0.7, Mackay 0.8, Walker 0.9, Hawkins 1.1, Riewoldt 1.1, Franklin 1.2, Kennedy 1.2. Those figures are all pretty tight - are we that phased with half a tackle less per game? Are Mackay and Hawkins "complete defensive liabilities" because they average fewer pressure acts than Brown?

Yep, agree. They've also been building some reasonable form, at least in the context of being an injury hit bottom 4 side. They were a disgrace in the opening three rounds. Since then they were leading Adelaide at three quarter time (back when Adelaide were half decent), they were only two goals behind Geelong deep into time on in the third quarter at Kardinia Park (the same ground where West Coast the following week lost by 97), and they stayed in touch with Fremantle for 2.5 quarters in Perth.They surely have to be half a chance of getting up this Saturday.

A few weeks back Ben Cunnington knocked Rory Laird out, he was taken from the field but returned, and played out the game. The MRO classified that as medium impact, Cunnington appealed to the tribunal, and the tribunal downgraded it to low impact. How much difference is there between the impact on Laird and the impact on Powell?

No, he hasn't. Presumably you'll continue to say this unless and until we win the flag. Which means that, unless we win the flag, you'll be right. Which appears to be your complex. You need to be right, all the time. Agree, but I'm telling myself we had our down week this week, and got away with it. Don't forget Geelong were on most measures on top in general play against Sydney, who struggled to win it at the coal face (-33 in CPs, -3 clearances), allowed Geelong to spread (-68 in UPs, -17 uncontested marks), and let the ball spend a fair amount of time down in Geelong's half (-26 inside 50s). They also kicked very straight so won despite have 8 fewer scoring shots (14.6 to 12.16). Had we won that game, we'd be self-criticising and downplaying that win given those stats.

Dangerfield's actions were deemed "not unreasonable". Here's a screenshot of the lead up: He sees Vlastuin coming, raises his elbow to punch the ball and/or to brace himself. Clip here for context. Here's Fritsch: Clip here for context. He and Powell are running towards each other. He braces to fend off Powell, who will otherwise cannon into him. Yes, he does so in a way that hits him high, but that didn't matter for Dangerfield. So why was what Fritsch did "unreasonable", and what was his alternative?

If you tick the boxes, you get this outcome. But the boxes weren't ticked this way for Dangerfield in the Grand Final. Why? Because "it was the view of the MRO that Dangerfield's actions were not unreasonable in the circumstances". Implicitly the same result was reached in the Hawkins and Hipwood incidents earlier this year (I can't find any MRO statement on either of those incidents). So why was Fritsch's incident deemed "unreasonable" when the other three weren't? Each of the other three resulted in worse injuries than Fritsch's, so that can't be it.

And an 8-1-21 record overall.

Does any club? Might be Hunt for us.

Good pick up, thanks.

Did he? This is what he said: "Harrison Petty played a few weeks ago and is ready to play some good AFL footy so that is exciting for us that he will get an opportunity and Tom McDonald, as you saw today, we pushed him back and he performed really strongly," Goodwin said. "Competition for spots is healthy and we will keep picking the team that we think is best for the opposition and the way we want to play." I'm not sure if "he will get an opportunity" means "he'll play next week" given everything else he said.