pitmaster

That loss had nothing to do with fitness. I was really impressed with how the Dees kept pushing through the final quarter even as the goal tide shifted. The third term was brilliant: after losing centre clearances in the first half we turned the game on its head with some great work from Rivers running off the work of Oliver and Trac. Fritters' 55 metre goal was a ripper. And while we were a little lucky to be as close as we were at half time JVR and Petty had really showed something early. That same drive was still there in the final term but what cost us was lack of composure in front of goal. One goal from eight shots with five behinds and two OOB was crucial. We needed one of those snaps to go through. I was at the city end but from what I saw Trac did well to win a contest in close but missed from very close in. Langdon sprayed wide. Trac too. Gawn's attempt I'll never understand. From one of those points the Pies played on quickly up the guts and foaled within seconds - a huge two goal moment - because we had not set up defensively for the kick in. We did not make that mistake again. There were several marking contests where it seemed Petty or JVR might replicate that gras they'd taken earlier but it was not to be. Our sixth loss by a goal or less and the third in the past (is it four?) few games: Saints Dogs and Filth. The answer is in the heads of our forwards and midfielders. I hate to say it but that was a brave effort. It showed much more heart than I feared might be displayed before the game. Oh, and May's lazy short pass brain face kick did not help. Is it time Steven?

It used to be the case that players would not rat on one another at the tribunal and would leave what happened on the ground to be settled on the ground. Yet it seems no longer to be the case as Collingwood ratted - "dobbed in" if your prefer - on Izak Rankine. Sydney's Blakey had been similarly insulted but said nothing. Collingwood, with Maynard of all people taking the high moral ground, has driven this. It interests me that no one in the media has remarked on Collingwood's role and the fact that it simultaneously diminishes the prospects of one of its stronger rivals for the premiership. I understand that folks don't want to diminish the sense of wrong here, but surely Collingwood's role and consequent benefit is worthy of recognition. What do others think?

I'd have liked to see Johnson included for some random vigour.

I'm going. It's a long time between seasons and this is the last chance to see the boys this year. But I'm dreading what I am going to see. Hoping to be surprised.

Different incident HW. Smith (35) despatches Filth No 24 a few seconds after Jim Durnan (21) settles another score.

Knock a bloke out and end his career in a final, do so while playing for Collingwood: no penalty. Call a Collingwood player an offensive name on the eve of the finals: penalty is five weeks suspension. Mind numbing.

And for those too young to know, that's the incoming president at the 21 second mark flooring a Magpie. Look for number 35.

As much as I hate to admit it, Buckley does have respect in the game and he would be good for the following: retaining players, attracting players, keeping sponsors, encouraging membership sales, winning over the media, and maybe most importantly, securing from the AFL some R E S P E C T for the club and support with fixturing for one. I say these things because they're true, but also to stop myself having a quiet upchuck when (if) he gets the gig.

No way is Hinkley anywhere near it.

More than once on this website have I been accused of being a pedant, but even I don't have enough tolerance to sit through Howard parsing the difference between 'mainly' and 'huge'.

We were never in this contest but when we did bring some intensity after half time and dominated play it was our forward craft that let us down. That and the fact that Fritter and Kozzie both had shockers and both spilled markable balls directed to the hot spot in front of goal in the early stages of that quarter. Turner drilled a sharp 45 metre kick into the hot spot but the only player there to mark it was from the other mob. Several other kicks into the prime scoring region were either intercepted or simply kicked to contests. We need to find some natural, instinctive forwards who can create separation from their opponents. It's clear players are trying to create chances in front of goal but our forwards are either out of positioned or unable to find separation. Or at least a specialist forward coach with a Gunstan like feel for the game.

Umpiring as bad at this level as the seniors. Tholstrup deserved to be rewarded for that tackle, not penalised.

Not much here that offers hope for the future. No impact from the tall forwards, Laurie as unreliable in front of goal as ever and Hawthorn as slick as their seniors: everything we are not

Spot on. Gunston's lead towards open space 30-40 metres out as the ball carrier heads towards goal, then with a shift in direction towards the corridor for two steps caused Turner to change stride, then to resume his original course towards that open space gifted him an uncontested mark. No fault of Turner's who was on the job but just one play in a master class. The second point is equally right. Gunston took several marks in the 15-40 metre space that was wide open. Hawks delivered it there and he knew to run into it. We tried it as well with a number of spearing passes into the hot spot at the PUNT ROAD end but no forward of ours knew to run to the spot and interceptions resulted. We seem not to know how to create space or how to use it, hence we won the inside 50s but never looked like winning the game.

You mean I would actually penalise the throws? Damn right!

It's so obvious isn't it? Just cannot talk them up enough. (Insert spew emoji here.)

Incessant. And yes, it is, Sharp being the worst offender, although Fritter with his fumbled marks ran him a close second. Normally I avoid this thread post-loss but everything said here is right. It is sadly true. A real [censored] show.

Remember Steve Newport's two goals in time on in the first semi of '88 (I think)? Good times.

How about losing six Grand Finals: 1926, ‘39, ‘55, ‘56, ‘60 and ‘64?

Just as Yze was marked to take over from Simon until a premiership got in the way. If Enright is the one the Saints’ plans won’t stop us.

Longmire has had too many hits to take it on again. Four losing GFs he’s punch drunk.

Horse has taken himself to the knackery.

I think that’s why we have moved now.

Exactly. Bruce’s history includes Hawthorn under Clarkson and Lions under Fagan as well as Blues under Bolton so he has seen both sides of the role. Enright I don’t know much about beyond pñaying history but he knows strong culture. I would prefer a younger coach. People pushing Buckley and Simpson chills me.

It hurts more now because we did to the Eagles what we coulda shoulda done to those clowns. Sorry Norf didn’t make it