pitmaster

There is another element to this. Collingwood has a unique deal with the MCC which means whenever they play at the MCG, as home or away team, they get the Ponsford stand area behind the goals as their social club. No other club has such a favourable deal. Eddie may not be 'gifting' us much at all.

Even Huddo sounds brilliant. I have done the Eddie thing which ranges from tedious to occasionally funny to mostly crappy. The normal commentary is a breath of fresh air. Congrats to those who heavied Fox.

OK Finally had time to watch the replay as promised and while I said I would name names, I can't be bothered tracking them all down since I am supposed to be working so Adam Farr ("Grimes an absolute liability") will have to stand in for the Grimes haters. Yes, he was caught twice with the ball and penalised in the first half, but in his defence he was trying to create some run in the first case. Yes, he gave Gawn one of those 1 metre handpasses that put Max under pressure and resulted in a ball up. Yes, he was out marked on the lead (twice). Yes he kicked out on the full first possession. BUT...He took at least four second half marks including a strong contested mark in the back 25 when they had the momentum late in the 3rd and cleared with a pass to T MAC. He took an uncontested mark in the first term and with a pass to Garland started the possession chain that ended in Hogan's first goal. He created run in the 3rd term with the ball ending with Garlett who kicked to the square resulting in another Hogan goal. He consistently, so far as you can tell on the teeve, ran to space to create options for run out of defence and was still running late in the last when we were controlling the game with a possession game. He cleared the ball out of defence, or assisted in an effective clearance, several times. Stats, for what they're worth gave him 18 possessions, including 13 kicks at 85% effective, although that effectiveness figure probably overstates him slightly since a couple of hand passes simply went to team mates who were immediately wrapped up. I admit I over-stated his worth but I was reacting to claims he is an outright liability. He clearly isn't. I don't know if indirect goal assists is a thing but he had a couple (see above). He was caught a few times but he is generally in the hot zone so that's going to happen. T Mac I rate very highly, but he plays in the hot zone too and averages an outright clanger every week. But we don't label him an outright liability, rightly so. I reckon what's going on with Grimes' critics at the moment is that some of us are primed to see him make a disposal blue (which everyone does, even Jones) so when he makes an error it is the thing his critics remember and they overlook the other stuff. In psychology it's called 'confirmation bias'. Anyone condemning Grimes outright needs to take another look.

I hven't watched the replay yet but I intend taking particular note of GRIMES when I do. At the game I thought he played his best game for us for a long while and was a very useful contributor - solid saving marks made good position and used the ball well and was a strong element in our defensive structure. Then I get on here and found people bagging him and my immediate reaction is to note who the critics are and I resolve not to regard their opinions as of any value in future. As they say in the classics ' you know who you are'. So here's my promise. I will thoroughly review the game for the sheer pleasure of it, but if I am wrong and Grimes was no good I will post my apology. If my opinion is confirmed I will name names because the negativity and rushes to judgement on this site sometimes get up my nose. My best: Vince (obviously) Watts (another who cops unwarranted #@$% on this site and elsewhere), Gawn, Jones, Grimes

Very satisfying to control the last quarter so emphatically. Had they lost the form reversal over last week would have been a positive, the readiness to kick long and to run and carry would have been encouraging etc, but it's so much better when you don't need to look for positives in the wreckage of another loss!

The problem I have with explanations like this is that the context has shifted. Incidental booing of Goodes if he stages for a free, or plays to the umpires, or flattens some bloke is fine, just as it would be directed against any other player. But what you are excusing by raising a litany of 'reasons' is an institutionalised booing that is not about what is going on the ground at the time of the booing. It CAN be seen as racist and therefore it should stop simply because of that perception. If that is misconstruing the reason for some people, the truth is that it is racist for a significant proportion of those indulging themselves.

We're no longer at the point we can blame injuries for our lousy showing. Kent and Salem would have been handy but they would not make the difference with the Saints. But the injury that is hurting us most is Frost because he would free McDonald to go forward and still keep our defensive structure.

I agree - they murdered us but we made so many blues of our own that I can't even get angry at their performance. It was incompetent and so inconsistent as to suggest they were closet Saints supporters. Maybe Biffo you should watch the replay and direct GM's attention to specific decisions rather than a general rant. Some of our last quarter tackles were penalised for unfathomable reasons. So good luck with your hatred of the appalling Wallace (him again!) but I want to focus on what we do wrong.

The lack of run resulted in too few options for our players and too little pressure on the opposition. What really appalled me was the lack of skill from players who train several times a week and 16 weeks into the season. We over used the ball, hand passing when a kick was a better option, hand balled to players under pressure, failed to hit targets and failed to see players who had created space. Possibly the skills problem was a greasy surface which we failed to adapt to at all. We knew all week the day was going to be wet and we tried to play dry weather football. I am a fan of Cross but we saw his limitations writ large. And our forwards are dysfunctional. We have now kicked (from memory) 7.18, 8.12 and 6.12 for a total of 21.42 since Geelong. That is a 33% success rate in front of goal. Did I say our skills weren't good enough? And is there anyone who can tell me why Hogan has to walk back to the 50 metre arc to take a kick from the top of the goal square? This Mathew Lloyd routine thing might work from distance, but any shot from inside 30 metres does not need more than a three step run up.

Made a point of checking the week before we played the Saints: they had one...we had 12, of which half were arguably first 22.

Brayshaw copped a whack last week and was quiet today. I agree with those who think he is ready for a spell. JKH struggled and is not as fast as he thinks he is. He is likely to miss but if Roos did not change a losing team last week two changes would be about the limit this week. Ins; Newton for forward impact and Grimes for a hard(er) body.

No forward system. Blind kicks to nobody. How many uncontested marks did they take at half back? Our forwards weren't going to the right spaces and when they were in the zone people like Dawes and Hogan were generally two or three metres out of position. Also, we did not kick to advantage. Lots more chances but from bad places.

It should be left to the Crows players to decide what they want to do. Awful news that puts football into perspective. Cannot lose sight of this first of all as a family tragedy.

I endorse your attitude...and your venom.

Bit unkind to Lloyd. I was delighted when Roos was appointed and I am still very happy with the club's progress - recruiting is so much smarter - you can see a style of play that is winning footy evolving, so don't get me wrong, but Lloyd's column was spot on. The one blemish I have seen Roos repeat is the talk about the past. There is nothing to be gained in speculation that some players are so scarred they will never recover. If anything past failures should make them hungrier. I remember Don Scott saying of the several premierships he played in his favourite was the first (1971) because it was with blokes who had been smashed many times a few years before. I think Lloyd was right when he said Roos had had a couple of bad weeks. Failing to play around or deal with Oxley helped cost us the QB game and he had 2 and 1/2 quarters to do it. And the mess we made of the St Kilda game really put us under the hammer because we were getting into winning positions and failing to finish off. Lloyd's a better commentator than many and a bit of a surprise - like Carey who is also surprisingly articulate. Roos is not above criticism but he is the best thing we have had going since Neale D.

Vince is not only highly effective, he has virtually invented a new role, that of the creative stopper, shutting down a key opposition player while being a playmaker and finisher himself. Equally important I think, is his work as chief morale officer. Clubs need blokes like Bernie - always up beat, likeable and ready for a laugh. Anyone can make themselves a dour professional if they try hard enough (think a former number one draft pick who absconded north), but professionals who also lift everyone up around them regardless of what else is happening are invaluable. That's how I see Bernie giving us some X factor.

Was mentioned on Footy Classified as one of the absolute great trades in one of those 'the less said the better' moments.

foxtel wednesday better get on to it

Strictly no...it was the meat, not the bag it was carried in, that he tore. But thanks to all concerned for reminding me of all this. I remember thinking at the time that Kelly was a [censored] for that stunt in the song but now I am becoming anatomically confused.

Dwayne is no good. That's agreed. In fact he's toxic. But Sandy Roberts, who is normally inoffensive even if he cannot differentiate between Gawn and Spencer, got up my nose with his repeated under playing of Watts' efforts. Watts' handpass sets up a goal - Roberts says "he can't get through". Watts sends a smart centering kick to the top of the goal square and Neal-Bullen goals - Roberts calls it as Watts missing. It was repeated and it was as if he was determined to maintain a negative story about a player because that's what he thinks "the story" is about Watts. Just like, when SJ received a soft 50m penalty for the Cats' first goal Sandy and others start salivating about SJ kicking eight! (Good luck with that.)

I don't agree they are poor. They have been better than their win-loss suggests and their kids are improving. They have a deeper reserve of experienced players - hell, their core played three grand finals not so long ago - but I think we are improving and have the better mid-term prospects. We're just coming from a lot further back and I thought you were being too dismissive of their gains and background.

lost narrowly to giants - we lost big beat GC - like us flogged by pies - we did better beat dogs - like us lost to crows - like us flogged by hawks - like us you ain't been paying attention old dee. very like us.

Spot on.

I didn't want to check this any earlier - it's now 12.30pm Monday - because the venting is, as expected totally over the top. I expected to lose to the Saints since they have been travelling well, better than us, and they had zero injuries. We have, what, six of our best 22 out? Kent, Vanders, Salem are all walk ups, Pederson/Dawes - one has to play and neither did in the second half, then you can start thinking about prospects like Petracca. After yesterday I am much more optimistic about the rest of the year. The most worrying thing for me is that the players weren't smart enough to get two forwards behind the ball for the final bounce. To that point only one goal had been scored in the quarter - OURS! so there was not going to be much on the clock. They should not have needed to be told. That aside, Watts continued his revival, the Toump has arrived after so many on here - including me - doubted him, Gawn dominated, Viney was incredibly strong at stoppages and even when they were in front we were dominating around the ball - we just did not use it well enough. Some really dumb umpiring decisions hurt us in the third term when we had a run on but I actually rate us as a chance at Geelong...and we have Carlton, Brisbane, the Saints and Dogs again - there's four winnable. I also count the return bout with the Pies as winnable if we can get a few players back - Cloke ain't going seven zip again. And there's the Bombers. Make that six winnable. So cheer up. We have showed quite a bit these last couple of weeks and one or two lucky breaks and you'd have been singing last night. We will again.

Somewhat harsh considering we had a several defensive errors that just dished the ball up to the opposition...Dunn (usually reliable) and Viney (rusty on the comeback trail) both responsible for goals the other way, but then they are not everyday whipping boys so their blues don't qualify for consideration in Worst Play of the Day. Of course that belongs to Watts even if we can't bag him for failing to tackle any more, and as for slipping through packs like mercury, well we'll forget that too. Yep, Watts gets the Worst Play of the Day award. But then, why even post it. It was always the case. Right?