Review QF = Geelong 78-72 Collingwood

[Pie eyed]

Crisp had the shot to potentially win the match.
He has been poor the second half of the season.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

Under twilight skies at the Melbourne Cricket Ground, Collingwood led Geelong after each of the first three quarters, and were on course to clinch a victory, before poor skill execution and defensive lapses in the dying minutes allowed the Cats to inch ahead and win by 6 points in a captivating contest that had numerous lead changes throughout the game. The first term saw the Magpies jump out of the blocks early to impact the scoreboard, but did not maximise their damage with the opportunities they had up forward, which kept the Cats in the game and Collingwood's lead at quarter time was 14 points. Geelong got to work in the second term by hitting back on the scoreboard themselves and constricting Collingwood's ball movement up forward, until the Magpies found enough time and space to find Will Hoskin-Elliott, who took a mark and converted Collingwood's only goal for the second quarter after the siren, which enabled the Woods to regain the lead by 1 point at the main break. The third term saw both sides exchange majors at various stages, before the Pies closed out the quarter with a slender lead of 7 points heading into the final change. The fourth quarter became a quarter of momentum shifts, and when Jordan De Goey put Collingwood back in front with 5 minutes to play, it was highly possible that the Magpies were going to push on and close out the match with another victory, in a manner that's been achieved so often and frequently this season. However, Geelong put paid to those aspirations and dreams with the last two majors of the contest to outlast the Magpies by 6 points in a cracking final that had everything and remained thrilling until the dying moments. An opportunity missed for Collingwood to remain in Melbourne for the remainder of the 2022 Finals Series, but an opportunity is there as the vanquished seeking redemption.

Collingwood won their statistical categories from areas such as disposals by +22 (373 - 351), +33 for kicks (227 - 194), uncontested possessions were up by +44 (226 - 182), while hit-outs had an advantage of +14 (48 - 34), and clearances were won narrowly by +1 (42 - 41), with stoppage clearances also claimed by +1 (32 - 31). Tackles had a differential of +15 (85 - 70), while marks had a gap of +28 (90 - 62), with the Magpies having a buffer of +32 (81 - 49), while Marks Inside 50 were up by +4 (13 - 9), and Inside 50 were won by +3 (56 - 53). Geelong won their statistical categories from sources such as handballs by +11 (157 - 146), contested possessions were up by +21 (155 - 134), and intercept possessions had a margin of +5 (86 - 81). Geelong had an advantage of +2 from Tackles Inside 50 (12 - 10), while winning contested marks by +4 (13 - 9). Centre clearances was the only statistic (10 each) where both teams broke even.

Scott Pendlebury (34 disposals @ 65%, 318 metres gained, 15 contested possessions, 19 uncontested possessions, 7 intercept possessions, 15 kicks, 19 handballs, 2 marks, 5 tackles, 1 goal assist, 6 score involvements, 5 clearances, 2 centre clearances, 3 stoppage clearances & 2 Rebound 50s) generated the bulk of the team's ball movement, put his nose in the trough countless times to feed handpasses out to his teammates, and gave great direction and leadership as usual under extreme pressure.

Josh Daicos (29 disposals @ 83%, 519 metres gained, 5 contested possessions, 24 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 16 kicks, 13 handballs, 8 marks, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements, 2 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 8 Inside 50s, 2 Rebound 50s & 1 goal) was highly prolific on the wing, and looked to kick or handball it forward as often as possible. Josh will be annoyed he couldn't score when the game was all tied up before Geelong ended up with the match-winning goal which was kicked by Max Holmes. Josh will be eager to respond after that lamentable piece of execution, and does not let that play define his season. Only time will tell over which way that story goes.

Jordan De Goey (26 disposals @ 73%, 465 metres gained, 12 contested possessions, 14 contested possessions, 15 kicks, 11 handballs, 4 marks, 9 tackles, 1 goal assist, 7 score involvements, 8 clearances, 4 centre clearances, 4 stoppage clearances, 6 Inside 50s & 2 goals) was tremendous in the midfield and almost got Collingwood over the line by himself. De Goey won centre clearances and contested ball which gave the team greater access to the forwards to impact marking contests and scoreboard in the same motion. De Goey was equally brilliant with his ball movement to make it as fast and direct as possible.

Steele Sidebottom (23 disposals @ 56%, 474 metres gained, 13 contested possessions, 10 uncontested possessions, 10 intercept possessions, 13 kicks, 10 handballs, 4 marks, 6 tackles, 5 score involvements, 3 clearances, 3 stoppage clearances, 4 Inside 50s & 4 Rebound 50s) accumulated his standard quota of possessions on his wing, and basically played a territory game at all costs by moving the footy forward under any level of pressure.

Jack Crisp (23 disposals @ 56%, 485 metres gained, 10 contested possessions, 13 uncontested possessions, 2 intercept possessions, 12 kicks, 11 handballs, 3 marks, 5 tackles, 5 score involvements, 4 clearances, 4 stoppage clearances, 8 Inside 50s & 1 goal) won the ball often enough to be damaging, but his ball use under pressure and delivery to his team's forwards was not at a level where he could have been more effective. Crisp did have a great moment in the third term where he snapped a goal through to give the Pies back the lead at that stage of the game, then Crisp gathered the ball across the 50-metre arc and had a ping from 45 metres to kick a behind which levelled the scores.

Patrick Lipinski (18 disposals @ 83%, 256 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 10 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 10 kicks, 8 handballs, 5 marks, 2 tackles, 2 Tackles Inside 50, 3 goal assists, 6 score involvements, 3 clearances, 3 stoppage clearances & 1 goal) showed poise and composure with his ball use under pressure, and impacted scoring chains for the team in a solid outing.

Darcy Cameron (14 disposals @ 43%, 159 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 25 hit-outs, 7 kicks, 7 handballs, 3 marks, 7 tackles, 2 score involvements, 4 clearances, 2 centre clearances, 2 stoppage clearances and 3 Rebound 50s) gave his midfield opportunities to win centre clearances and showed adequate intent to tackle opponents.

John Noble (27 disposals @ 74%, 485 metres gained, 5 contested possessions, 22 uncontested possessions, 6 intercept possessions, 20 kicks, 7 handballs, 6 marks, 4 tackles, 2 score involvements, 5 Inside 50s & 3 Rebound 50s) gave great run and carry with steady ball use coming out of defence, and Noble wasn't afraid to push higher up the ground to conjure forward entries for his teammates.

Nick Daicos (25 disposals @ 80%, 411 metres gained, 7 contested possessions, 18 uncontested possessions, 7 intercept possessions, 17 kicks, 8 handballs, 5 marks, 3 tackles, 2 score involvements, 2 clearances & 7 Rebound 50s) adjusted extremely well to the pressure by making his decision-making and ball use as simple as possible for the tempo of finals footy.

Darcy Moore (21 disposals @ 86%, 366 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 18 uncontested possessions, 10 intercept possessions, 15 kicks, 6 handballs, 10 marks, 2 Inside 50s & 8 Rebound 50s) played a brilliant game by blanketing Tom Hawkins and took countless intercept marks to generate rebounds and positive territory forward of the play.

Brayden Maynard (19 disposals @ 68%, 346 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 13 uncontested possessions, 7 intercept possessions, 12 kicks, 7 handballs, 7 marks, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements & 3 Rebound 50s) played with great grit and determination in his want to compete in each contest he had fought. His ball use was a bit off, but he did not let that bother him a great deal when he produces heroic efforts each week.

Jeremy Howe (16 disposals @ 88%, 253 metres gained, 5 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 5 intercept possessions, 10 kicks, 6 handballs, 6 marks, 4 tackles & 4 Rebound 50s) gave the team some stability behind the ball with his marking game and his ball use was sufficiently tidy.

Beau McCreery (14 disposals @ 79%, 316 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 8 uncontested possessions, 2 intercept possessions, 9 kicks, 5 handballs, 3 tackles, 1 goal assist, 3 score involvements, 2 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances & 4 Inside 50s) won enough of the ball up forward to be a damaging and influential player, but could not parlay those efforts onto the scoreboard in an adequate manner. McCreery would also be advised to work on ball-handling skills during the week, so he is in better form against the Dockers next week.

Will Hoskin-Elliott (14 disposals @ 57%, 313 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 12 kicks, 2 handballs, 4 marks, 2 Marks Inside 50, 4 tackles, 1 goal assist, 5 score involvements & 1 goal) accumulated possessions on the outside of the contest by taking marks or using his leg speed to break away from congestion. Not the best of games from Hoskin-Elliott, aside from his goal after the siren at half time.

Ash Johnson (9 disposals @ 78%, 219 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 6 uncontested possessions, 8 kicks, 6 marks, 3 Marks Inside 50, 2 tackles, 2 Tackles Inside 50, 4 score involvements, 3 Inside 50s & 2 goals) was Collingwood's most dangerous forward who impacted the scoreboard immensely in the third term, but was also a bit wasteful with his blasé snap around the corner in the opening term proving to be costly.

Jamie Elliott (8 disposals @ 38%, 209 metres gained, 7 uncontested possessions, 7 kicks, 6 marks, 4 Marks Inside 50, 7 score involvements, 2 Inside 50s & 1 goal) was uncharacteristically wasteful in front of goal, but remained a contributor in scoring chains from his disposals throughout the game. Have your kicking boots back on next week, 'Billy'!

Collingwood's next game will be on September 10 against Fremantle at the MCG. This will be Collingwood's first ever final against the Dockers, and the stakes have never been higher nor more important than now between these two sides. The Magpies need to be cleaner and sharper with their gathering skills at ground level, get on top in the contested ball and generate clearances for the forwards to react first and quicker to each ball that comes in up forward. From there, it will be about converting scores into goals for a trip to Sydney to play the Swans.

Thanks for your analysis and stats throughout the year which are for me always a highlight of these post game threads. Thought I would express my gratitude now just in case next week comes unstuck for us and the Fremantle final is our last game. Cheers Swooper18

 

[Pie eyed]

I think if you can double fist it you can mark it. So was the poor option he chose but over all he was one of our best so can't be too critical of him.

Sure he had no idea how much time he had and played it safe.
I yelled at him at the time.....till I realised.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

I dont care about his disposal stats, i care about his ability to defend his opponent. To answer your question maybe once inside 50, for one of his goals. Cameron is less reliant on contested marking for goals.

Cameron was probably BOG in the end like he was last time he played us and carved up Howe.
Cameron is elite, but tgat still gets back to my continued concern of Howe getting matched against genuine gun forwards.

I don't want to pot him for the sake of it, I just see him as one of the current weaknesses in our structure, which means we just don't have it quite there yet.

I don't so much see him as a weakness in our structure. Rather, I think our structure lacks a player suited to negating the giants of the competition, and in this case, a player to oppose a mobile and roaming tall forward. I fully expected Maynard would get the job despite giving height away to Cameron. I see this match up as one of several questionable coaching decisions, the others being the move of Moore forward, the lack of game time given to Cox and the non-use of our rucks as forward targets.

We were highly competitive and very unlucky to lose to the team that was regarded as the best in the competition. However, when we were 2 goals up late in the final quarter, I believed we were going to win. In retrospect, I am disappointed, not so much with the players, but with match ups and moves made and not made by the coach. Fly has done little wrong this year, but I don't see this as one of his better coaching performances.

 

[GCMagpie]

Anyone have any idea why Moore was moved forward toward end of last qtr or somehow got stranded in no man’s land?

I’m still fuming about this! I know it was well-intentioned as a play for a win…. but I feel so disappointed for Darc! He had an absolute blinder of a game in the backline, I wish he’d been left to see the game through to the end there. Perhaps the outcome would have been different. It feels a bit like his mammoth effort was squandered.

 

[bucksisbest]

I don't so much see him as a weakness in our structure. Rather, I think our structure lacks a player suited to negating the giants of the competition, and in this case, a player to oppose a mobile and roaming tall forward. I fully expected Maynard would get the job despite giving height away to Cameron. I see this match up as one of several questionable coaching decisions, the others being the move of Moore forward, the lack of game time given to Cox and the non-use of our rucks as forward targets.

We were highly competitive and very unlucky to lose to the team that was regarded as the best in the competition. However, when we were 2 goals up late in the final quarter, I believed we were going to win. In retrospect, I am disappointed, not so much with the players, but with match ups and moves made and not made by the coach. Fly has done little wrong this year, but I don't see this as one of his better coaching performances.

I think we are fairly aligned, in that I think the weakness is the role he has to play due to a lack of options currently.

I would still have him in the side in a different role, where he is exposed less.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

I’m still fuming about this! I know it was well-intentioned as a play for a win…. but I feel so disappointed for Darc! He had an absolute blinder of a game in the backline, I wish he’d been left to see the game through to the end there. Perhaps the outcome would have been different. It feels a bit like his mammoth effort was squandered.

I can't understand why he was moved and believe it weakened our defence and contributed significantly to the Geelong win.

 

[Jafo]

I can't understand why he was moved and believe it weakened our defence and contributed significantly to the Geelong win.

Me too

 

[GCMagpie]

I can't understand why he was moved and believe it weakened our defence and contributed significantly to the Geelong win.

I’m so glad it’s not just me that doesn’t get it. I can recognize and admit a massive Darc bias, and so sometimes I can be a bit unreasonable. But this move seemed absolutely nonsensical, ESPECIALLY after the incredible game he’d had! I believe they moved him forward at the end of the Swans game too with no benefit, why do it yesterday? We almost had the game!

 

[Axl the great]

One thing I loved yesterday was the press conference, For those who didn’t see it or notice Fly was seriously pissed and filthy with what happened he just didn’t overly show it but his words and body language told the story.
It was actually great to see that rather than the affable and breezy persona he has shown all year.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

I’m still fuming about this! I know it was well-intentioned as a play for a win…. but I feel so disappointed for Darc! He had an absolute blinder of a game in the backline, I wish he’d been left to see the game through to the end there. Perhaps the outcome would have been different. It feels a bit like his mammoth effort was squandered.

My question is were we not playing to win for the first 116 minutes?

Why throw your best intercept defender forward, and disrupt your whole defensive structure which has held up exceptionally well all game, when we weren’t even down in the first place? If you need one of your best marks forward to make up a deficit that’s one thing, but to suggest moving him while the game was still drawn was beneficial quite simply boggles my mind a bit, because surely if that’s most beneficial to how your side plays you don’t wait until four minutes left in a qualifying final to pull the move out…

Also astounded we didn’t have Cox play deepest forward once Adams went down. If ever you need a get out target on a surge that’s the time.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Maynard going off with the blood rule also coincided with us conceding two quick goals relatively limply. He and Moore are the glue to our defensive structures.

 

[Axl the great]

The difference was some of the decisions made in the last 5 minutes we’re poor and the reason we didn’t ice the game.
That composure was missing and one incident that really stood out to me was Josh Daicos

7

Josh Daicos

Age

26

Ht

178cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

15.6

4star

K

8.3

3star

HB

7.3

5star

M

3.3

3star

T

3.6

5star

CL

1.3

3star

D

16.2

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

7.0

4star

M

3.3

3star

T

3.5

4star

CL

1.5

4star

D

13.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

6.2

4star

M

3.2

4star

T

4.2

5star

CL

1.2

4star

on the back flank had 2 players free, one I think Lipinski was just on the centre square and another runner up the wing 20 metres away but he skied the bloody thing a mile in the air and we turn it over and it goes back. Had he taken those free options we win the game.
Not blaming Josh but it’s a mistake we haven’t made in a tight game and that just costs you.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

The difference was some of the decisions made in the last 5 minutes we’re poor and the reason we didn’t ice the game.
That composure was missing and one incident that really stood out to me was Josh Daicos on the back flank had 2 players free, one I think Lipinski was just on the centre square and another runner up the wing 20 metres away but he skied the bloody thing a mile in the air and we turn it over and it goes back. Had he taken those free options we win the game.
Not blaming Josh but it’s a mistake we haven’t made in a tight game and that just costs you.

His rushed shot could’ve been punched low as a chaos ball but I can at least understand that he probably at that juncture wasn’t expecting to miss everything and a point might have been critically important to us.

I thought he was sensational, and hopefully he learns from those errors and makes better decisions next time around. Certainly can’t blame him but execution cost us.

 

[adammania9]

Watched replay. 100% we were robbed. I’m filthy and always will be. AFL couldn’t take their boys choking a 5th straight qualifying final

 

[No SPIN]

I dont care about his disposal stats, i care about his ability to defend his opponent. To answer your question maybe once inside 50, for one of his goals. Cameron is less reliant on contested marking for goals.

Cameron was probably BOG in the end like he was last time he played us and carved up Howe.
Cameron is elite, but tgat still gets back to my continued concern of Howe getting matched against genuine gun forwards.

I don't want to pot him for the sake of it, I just see him as one of the current weaknesses in our structure, which means we just don't have it quite there yet.

Sorry but again this is wrong.

Watch Cameron’s goals and you’ll find almost all we’re not due to Howes mistakes.
Just because Cameron played well, you immediately caste blame on Howe, when any sensible review of the game suggests that simple assumption is unfounded.

If fact using your own logic, you should be very happy as Howe kept Cameron to only 3 goals compared to 6 last time.

Go to Footywire and compare Howe’s 2019 stats with 2022, they are almost indentical and cover far far more than disposals.

 

[No SPIN]

Anyone have any idea why Moore was moved forward toward end of last qtr or somehow got stranded in no man’s land?

Probably because AJ was injured on the bench.

 

[Jafo]

Probably because AJ was injured on the bench.

We had Krug go forward after subbing Adams?

 

[unplugged]

Watching the replay as we speak, not to self-torture but probably to reaffirm to myself that we're actually the real deal. Did I just say that?

A few of the HTB missed were in places that didn't affect the game per se. Half back line, etc. The biggest blunder was the Howe deliberate which ended up with a Hawkins goal.

A lot of errors that if you take one or two, we don't lose that. So far I've witnessed (prior to half time in replay)

- Ginnivan out in the full in what he'd normally eat for breakfast.

- Mihocek easy shot on goal, plays on, point.

- Pendlebury tackled, should've held onto the ball and either forced the stoppage or risked HTB, quick rebound, Close goal for Geelong.

Sure Geelong missed a couple of easier shots but these things all happened in the second quarter when we were absolutely humming pressure-wise. It wasn't that our second quarter was bad, it was just... I don't know what the best word is for it... panicky?

As a poster said a page or two ago, we came into the finals as the 4th or 5th seed, left this round in 3rd seed.

Provided we get over Fremantle (no easy task, and I suspect we'll be battered and bruised), Sydney will hold about as much threat to us in the Preliminary Final as what Richmond did in 2018.

Ps not even at half time yet and Cox is prominent. Either he was off for most of the second half or the TOG % is an error.

 

[unplugged]

Also, watching the replay with the commentary... yes the Cats kicked 3 goals to 1 in the quarter and at one stage had 9 of the last 10 inside 50s to that point, the commentators were talking as if Geelong had come good because they are the better team; Geelong strangling them, Collingwood have to hang on, Geelong have all the momentum.

They did have a good 5-10 mins of momentum but in that time I think they scored one goal. It didn't feel that bad at the ground, not at all.

 

[manicpie]

Maynard going off with the blood rule also coincided with us conceding two quick goals relatively limply. He and Moore are the glue to our defensive structures.

His brain fade when he kicked it out of bounds, almost cost us the game but besides that he was amazing

 

[unplugged]

Third quarter, Cox seen plenty less. I've gotta wonder if the coaches made a conscious decision to keep Cox off the ground more as our high intensity at ground level was what was troubling the Cats? In the end we probably waste a rotation, maybe run out of puff and also could've done with him as a target down the line.

There were a few times during the game when the obvious option was to kick down the line and I remember thinking 'kick it to Cox' looking down the field expecting to see him. Odd one. That and the Moore forward one. Odd.

 

[Bianconeri]

Clueless appraisal. Do yourself a favour and watch the replay with a focus on Howe's work.

You're potting one of our best defenders.

Oh, it's "Kreuger".

As much as I hate to say it I think Murphy was the weak link out there. His intercept game wasn’t there and struggled to defend his man. If we had a proper full back then Moore goes to Cameron and Howe goes to Murphy’s role and we have a better chance to win.

 

[Maggie5]

He had no influence all day…if he doesn’t take marks he is next to useless
Thats the reality

Can't take marks if he is not on the ground or they don't kick it to where he has positioned himself.

 

[Drought Break]

Exhibit A. This is holding the ball in any game. Took possession, three steps (prior), tackled, dropped it.

How the hell can a “ professional “ umpire miss such a blatant non holding the ball call.