Preview AFL Preliminary Final - Pies vs Hawks - Prematch Discussion

[MinerBoy]

Sorry guys but you are having a bit each way.

When Hawks smash Sydney, it is because Sydney were poor.

When Swans light it up for a bit, it is because Sydney turned it on and Hawks couldn't handle it.

The result reflects the reality however. The better team thoroughly outplayed the other most of the night. Both sides had a dip and for a brief period the Swans were on top (in play - not scoreboard) but for the most part couldn't go with us.

Means nothing of course for this match. As I've said Collingwood are justifiably favourites and you deserve your confidence. We will have to play even better than we did against the Swans and it still might not be good enough. I just think the ease of this win sees it get written off too simply as Sydney being poor, rather than outplayed.

I think you guys are kidding yourself if you don't think bodies were hitting hard. The intensity was there - what was lacking was atmosphere because we were comfortably in front.

 

[Zahki]

When Hawks smash Sydney, it is because Sydney were poor.

When Swans light it up for a bit, it is because Sydney turned it on and Hawks couldn't handle it.

I see no contradiction here and that is pretty much what happened so? When the Hawks were on top Sydney were absolutely abysmal. Both sides were actually but Hawthorn slightly less so. Int he 3rd quarter there was a noticible rise in intensity and execution from Sydney and they ended up winning the quarter 5 goals to 2. They couldn't sustain it over the entire match and because of that Hawthorn won comfortably, but it wasn't because Hawthorn played well it's because their opposition only showed up for 1 quarter.

Think you can rely on Collingwood only putting in an effort for 1 quarter? Cause thats the only way Hawthorn stands a chance is they play at that level when we meet.

 

[KissStephanie]

Does anyone think Blair get's to keep his spot next Friday?

Yes. The sign of a good side though is not knowing who the sub should be. I think it will probably be Jarryd Blair.

B: Leon Davis, Chris Tarrant, Nick Maxwell
HB: Heath Shaw, Ben Reid, Harry O'Brien
C: Dale Thomas, Luke Ball, Sharrod Wellingham
HF: Alan Didak, Travis Cloke, Dayne Beams
For: Andrew Krakouer, Chris Dawes, Steele Sidebottom
Foll: Darren Jolly, Scott Pendlebury
Rov: Dane Swan
Inter: Alan Toovey, Ben Johnson, Leigh Brown, Jarryd Blair
Emer: Tyson Goldsack, Alex Fasolo, Cameron Wood, Brent Macaffer

In: Reid, Thomas
Out: Goldsack, Fasolo

Interesting odds the bookies have put up for this game...Pies around $1.30..... ie ( they win this game 7 out of 10 times )

And the line is 22.5 points which is not too much different from the 2nd Preliminary Final though. Geelong are $1.23 and West Coast are $4.20 and the line is 26.5 points.

You have close to your best side in... a weeks break....and are a superior team to the Hawks. The unknown for me and possibly an unbiased Pies follower who knows the team better than me could give there thoughts is this.

I think one of the reasons the bookies have that price is because there has been a lot of mention in the media of Collingwood players being underdone and they've taken that into account. I don't think they've taken into account that last week was Collingwood's first bye in twelve weeks though which was the longest period of any of the finalists. I think has had more to do with recent performances than anything else.

I believe Bookies are giving Hawks some small chance is more to do with Pies form than Hawthorns. 3 of your last 4 games you have looked noticably below your best.....

Apart from what I just said, I also think it's got to do with a couple of particular Hawthorn players in particular that can cause trouble, such as Lance Franklin and Cyril Rioli if they're not contained.

Despite your outs, many Pies followers and outsiders expected you to destroy the Eagles.... you were in a position where you could lose with 5 mins to go.

That was never going to happen without Dale Thomas and Ben Reid, and a few players in defence playing with injuries in the hope of finding a way to win so they can get a week off to freshen up before the Preliminary Final. The line in the match was only 30.5 points, but I don't think the bookies or outsiders took into account that Collingwood were playing their twelfth successive match and desperate for a week off.

If you come out in pre round 18 form this is over before halftime..... If you play as you did v West Coast.....not that it was that bad.... this will be a grind of a match where i believe the game will be very much alive in the last qrt.

I don't agree. I thought West Coast were terrific, and they play a different game style to Hawthorn. They laid 100 tackles, and usually when a team does that, they win. Their performance in the Qualifying Final was better than Hawthorn's performances in either of their two finals so far, and prior to Saturday night's match, it was the only match of five finals that was played at finals intensity.

 

[Terex8]

I think you guys are kidding yourself if you don't think bodies were hitting hard. The intensity was there - what was lacking was atmosphere because we were comfortably in front.

It's not just Collingwood supporters who were making comment at about the low intensity of the match. Everyone from David Parkin to Matthew Lloyd to Leigh Matthews made valid points after the match regarding the intensity, it resembled a H&A game. You are the one kidding yourself if you think they were plucking these comments out of the air.

 

[MinerBoy]

I see no contradiction here

Yeah, there is. I'll have to respectfully disagree.

However, I couldn't agree more that we still have a massive task ahead of us and that even playing at our very best we may well still fall short.

Good luck.

 

[ThexderX]

What I find most amusing is how supporters and media all glow over teams because they get within 3-4 goals of us...Case in point:

Carlton (becuase they got within 19 and 28 points)
Essendong (becuase they got within 5 gols and lead at half time)
Hawthorn (because they ONLY lost by 7 goals but had some players out)

I could go on and on.

That means we are a damn good side and supporters of other clubs are "proud" to get within 5 goals of us.

 

[iGNITER]

Im in agreement with most Pie supporters in this thread about the changes. They seem like the most obvious to me.

INS: Reid, Thomas
OUTS: Goldsack, Fasolo

Both omissions are very stiff IMO but we have to select the best possible 22 and those 2 inclusions to the side are automatic selections.

Hopefully line up something like this:

B - Toovey Tarrant Maxwell
HB - Davis Reid O'Brien
C - Shaw Swan Thomas
HF - Beams Cloke Wellingham
F - Blair Dawes Krakouer
R - Jolly Ball Pendlebury
INT - L.Brown Sidebottom Johnson
SUB - Didak


Really looking forward to this game.

 

[Mickaman]

Im in agreement with most Pie supporters in this thread about the changes. They seem like the most obvious to me.

INS: Reid, Thomas
OUTS: Goldsack, Fasolo

Both omissions are very stiff IMO but we have to select the best possible 22 and those 2 inclusions to the side are automatic selections.

Hopefully line up something like this:

B - Toovey Tarrant Maxwell
HB - Davis Reid O'Brien
C - Shaw Swan Thomas
HF - Beams Cloke Wellingham
F - Blair Dawes Krakouer
R - Jolly Ball Pendlebury
INT - L.Brown Sidebottom Johnson
SUB - Didak


Really looking forward to this game.

Yeah agree with the outs. Love to see Fas play again but Reid and Thomas must come back in.

There is always a hard luck story this time of the year.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

I just think Goldsack and Fasolo are going out for the wrong reasons.

If it was going to be done on FORM, then Sidebottom/Didak and Johnson/Toovey should be the ones going out.

But that would NEVER happen in a million years. But that's if we're talking form. But Mick RARELY drops players on form, and basically sticks with favourites/big names.

Goldsack and Fasolo have both been great over the last month (barring Geelong game which everynoe was shit in), and should be keeping their spots.

 

[Hawkzzz]

No injuries. No suspensions. May the best team on the night win.

Cooooollingwooooooooooooooooooooooooood. I just had to get that off my chest. Boy it's annoying for opposition supporters. You guys must love it, though.

 

[Zahki]

Fasolo is too much of a risk Ed. He's played a grand total of 5 minutes of finals footy in his career, he did alright but this is a cuthroat do or die final, I think Fas is too green to stay in ahead of anyone he'd be displacing. He'll get his shot in future, but right now the safe thing to do is rely on the names we KNOW can stand up in finals football, and that is Didak and Sidebottom, not the Fas.

 

[mdc]

If we're talking about FORM, then Goldsack isn't FIT to carry Toovey's BAGS.

But you RARELY show the ability to have a CLUE, so your latest failed post is not surpRISING.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Yeah ok mdc, so please, since Goldy and Tooves have been playing shut down roles in their last few games, please explain how Goldsack, in your eyes hasn't been at least as good as Tooves in shutting an opponent down.

I'm sorry, were you at the same game where Embley dominated? Or were you at the one I was at where Lynch kicked 3?

Oooohhhh right. I have no clue.

Goldsack also doesn't turn the ball over anywhere near as much. Toovey has acutally been pretty good this year compared to other years, but if we're talking form in the last month or so (when Toovey wasn't injured), then Toovey should be dropped ahead of Goldsack.

 

[Optimax]

Johnson tagged Shuey to 18 touches, and tooves made Lynch (who is 4 inches taller and 20kg heavier) a non event until he was moved in to the ruck.

So yes let's drop johnson and toovey

Yeah ok mdc, so please, since Goldy and Tooves have been playing shut down roles in their last few games, please explain how Goldsack, in your eyes hasn't been at least as good as Tooves in shutting an opponent down.

I'm sorry, were you at the same game where Embley dominated? Or were you at the one I was at where Lynch kicked 3?

Oooohhhh right. I have no clue.

Goldsack also doesn't turn the ball over anywhere near as much. Toovey has acutally been pretty good this year compared to other years, but if we're talking form in the last month or so (when Toovey wasn't injured), then Toovey should be dropped ahead of Goldsack.

Lynch kicked two from ruck contests, and one where he blatantly pushed toovey in the back. Even if you put the last one completely on Toovey's head he did a brilliant job keeping a much larger opponent under control

 

[PieBeast]

I think we can all agree that Dids is the one who will be lucky to hold his spot.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

I love the way you're all so quick to jump on me, but yet no one even tries to give an actual reason why Goldsack should be dropped? At least Zahki gave a logical thought out reason for not playing Fas, regardless of whether I agree or not.

I mean, outside of just loving Toovey and Johnson more, why else would you drop Goldsack?

Even if Johnson and Toovey both shut down opponents (barely), Goldsack doesn't turn over the ball as much. So given all 3 managed shut down roles successfully (Goldsack better than the other 2 and on a better opponent no less), then surely what they do with the ball should be next on the list of reasons?

Goldsack actually didn't get many possessions, but I'd rather that than turning it over as much as Toovey and Johnson does/did. Goldsack is also more versatile and can plug a hole if one is needed.

Sack just has more pros to him than the other 2, and again, I'm basing this on more recent form as opposed to some of you which seem to be basing opinions on overall careers, and your own personal bias.

I mean, even Blair hasn't done much of any note almost all year outside the Carlton game, yet no one mentions his name either, but Goldsack and Fasolo are on the chopping block.

Just so frustrating.

I think we can all agree that Dids is the one who will be lucky to hold his spot.

I would have mentioned Did but pointless since there's zero chance of him being dropped. It pains me to say too since I love him to death, but no matter how many weeks, he just can't seem to get his touch back. He seems to find the ball ok, but his disposal and goal sense is off in a very noticeable way.

 

[Optimax]

I think we can all agree that Dids is the one who will be lucky to hold his spot.

and sidebottom who looked treacle slow against west coast.

Neither will get dropped though.

The reason behind Goldsack emission, he generally plays on mediums and talls, Ben Reid plays on mediums and talls but is better much better.

Goldsack is poor on smalls, toovey is as good if not better then Goldsack on mediums and better on smalls much better, the equal of sack on big talls tbh

Ben Johnson is a better midfielder then goldsack much better, tagger (watch him take a batemen or sheils out of the game) and again better small defender.

Toovey and Johnson, contrary to you bias, are better disposer then Goldsack.

So in short we don't need Goldsack taking a medium or tall Ben Reid can do that, we don't need Goldsack taking mediums or smalls toovey can do that, we also don't need Goldsack in the midfield tagging or taking a small forward because johnson is better at that.

Other general reasons to drop Goldsack, he is a fumbler and a bad one, he is prone to panicking and kicking blindly.

So there you go thought out reasons why Goldsack goes and Toovey and Johnson stays.

 

[mattys123]

3 reasons why Goldsack should be dropped;

1. AND THIS IS REASON ENOUGH. Turnovers. I simply do not care what the stats say, in the last 2 games Goldy has turned the ball over directly to the opposition on more occasions then anyone else in our side.

2. He is not a defender. We all know this, Goldy is better on a wing, or as a midfield tagger, as shown against the Eagles, and we do not need that type of player against the Hawks, especially with Thomas coming back and allowing Wellingham, Sidebottom etc to play that midfield defensive role if required.

3. Composure under pressure. This is a little to do with point 1 and his turnovers, but he simply isn't composed under the pressure of a final, and he has shown this on numerous occasions in the past.

Goldsack is good depth, in fact he may well be great depth, but seeing as we have the ability to play probably the best 22 we have been able to put on the park all year, then there simply isn't any room for Goldsack.

He can not be rated ahead of Sidebottom (never played a bad final), Blair (forward pressure, and goals), which only leaves the struggling Didak, and well Goldy could only play as a defensive forward anyway, and we don't want that this week.

I like Goldy, but he's not in our best 22, he may be close, he may even be our 23rd player, but he can not play this week, the Hawks will exploit him and his weaknesses.

 

[PieBeast]

I love the way you're all so quick to jump on me, but yet no one even tries to give an actual reason why Goldsack should be dropped? At least Zahki gave a logical thought out reason for not playing Fas, regardless of whether I agree or not.

I mean, outside of just loving Toovey and Johnson more, why else would you drop Goldsack?

Even if Johnson and Toovey both shut down opponents (barely), Goldsack doesn't turn over the ball as much. So given all 3 managed shut down roles successfully (Goldsack better than the other 2 and on a better opponent no less), then surely what they do with the ball should be next on the list of reasons?

Goldsack actually didn't get many possessions, but I'd rather that than turning it over as much as Toovey and Johnson does/did. Goldsack is also more versatile and can plug a hole if one is needed.

Sack just has more pros to him than the other 2, and again, I'm basing this on more recent form as opposed to some of you which seem to be basing opinions on overall careers, and your own personal bias.

I mean, even Blair hasn't done much of any note almost all year outside the Carlton game, yet no one mentions his name either, but Goldsack and Fasolo are on the chopping block.

Just so frustrating.

I understand where you coming from but there isn't much difference in Johnson, Goldsack and Toovey's forms so the pecking order criteria will apply, feel for Sack though.
You are underestimating Blair's chasing and tackling, its a vital ingredient of our forward line.

I would have mentioned Did but pointless since there's zero chance of him being dropped. It pains me to say too since I love him to death, but no matter how many weeks, he just can't seem to get his touch back. He seems to find the ball ok, but his disposal and goal sense is off in a very noticeable way.

Yeah chances of him getting dropped are slim but this is as ineffectual as he's ever been, what makes his form even worse is that he seems absolutely reluctant to tackle, more so than usual.

and sidebottom who looked treacle slow against west coast.

Neither will get dropped though

Rusty always looks slow but he was good enough to lay 9 tackles and set up couple of goals against the Eagles. His game was ten fold better than Dids'

 

[Ed D]

It's not just Collingwood supporters who were making comment at about the low intensity of the match. Everyone from David Parkin to Matthew Lloyd to Leigh Matthews made valid points after the match regarding the intensity, it resembled a H&A game. You are the one kidding yourself if you think they were plucking these comments out of the air.

Exactly. I've never seen the opposition stopping a team from tackling or causing uncontested turnovers in the backline. Swans were rubbish in the 1st half and it was all down to them because they weren't attacking the ball, not laying tackles and were turning the ball over without pressure.

Hawks certainly outplayed Sydney in the last qtr and they deserved the win, but to say it was Hawthorn dominating Sydney that caused a first half blowout is delusional.

 

[mdc]

I love the way you're all so quick to jump on me, but yet no one even tries to give an actual reason why Goldsack should be dropped?

Because Toovey is a significantly better player in significantly better form. The only thing TG can do that Toovey can't is kick it 55m. And as you've been told over and over, Goldsack turns it over more than Toovey, that's just a statistical fact.

Because Johnson is a significantly better player playing a completely different role. If you want Johnson dropped, you should be campaigning for Buckley, not Goldsack.

 

[mattys123]

The match will be broadcast live into Melbourne.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...awthorn-showdown/story-e6frf9jf-1226140350114

But the AFL decision allowing Channel Seven to broadcast live to metropolitan audiences will come as a relief to fans who last weekend endured a half-hour delay.
"This is now looming as the most anticipated game of the year,'' Channel Seven Melbourne managing director Lewis Martin said.
Coverage of the match will start at 7:30pm. Better Homes and Gardens will be shifted to 6:30pm Saturday night.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...awthorn-showdown/story-e6frf9jf-1226140350114

 

[Jules Winnfield]

Exactly. I've never seen the opposition stopping a team from tackling or causing uncontested turnovers in the backline. Swans were rubbish in the 1st half and it was all down to them because they weren't attacking the ball, not laying tackles and were turning the ball over without pressure.

Hawks certainly outplayed Sydney in the last qtr and they deserved the win, but to say it was Hawthorn dominating Sydney that caused a first half blowout is delusional.

Lol. Yeah, Sydney kicked the goals for the Hawks. We weren't even out there. Hawks got a 40 point lead by standing there and allowing the Swans to simply f*** it up.

 

[Ed D]

Lol. Yeah, Sydney kicked the goals for the Hawks. We weren't even out there. Hawks got a 40 point lead by standing there and allowing the Swans to simply f*** it up.

What are you even talking about? I think my comment went over your head (not surprising). The way Sydney was playing in the first half and the errors they were making had nothing to do with Hawthorn, it was due to their own lack of commitment. Sydney played like absolute crap while Hawthorn did their own thing and piled on the goals. Sydney showed in the 2nd half the difference between being switched on and not. If you seriously think Sydney were playing well in the first half you need to get your eyes checked or actually look at how they played.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Well, at least I got some reasoning this time. Much appreciated. It hasn't swayed my stance much on goldsack being the one to go out, but still, something to ponder.

By the way, goldsack is actually better on talls than Toovey, especially if we're going to be opinionated about it.

The sack has owned o'loughlin, goodes and even kept Franklin to 4 goals (in 07). Outside Tarrant, no other Collingwood backman can lay such a claim in the last 5 years.

Smalls? Fair enough, I'll give Toovey the nod there. But I'd still prefer sack on meds and talls. As to Johnno being the better tagger, well embley was one of the first legitimate whole game tags goldy has ever done, and he did a pretty damn good job of it too. Not sure what other examples there are for the sack and tagging a mid.