- Oct 3, 2013
- 13,617
- 33,094
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chelsea
Yep, and we did it without Buckley that night.How special was that! Amazing win!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yep, and we did it without Buckley that night.How special was that! Amazing win!
I had a dream last night that Bruz actually tackled him on the bench. Bruz was sent to the tribunal, where everyone stood up and applauded. Weird how the mind worksKen has really got me worked up. Nothing worse than a smartass who has to make s**t up to justify his existence. I want to really mess them up bad
Butters is all hip no sprainI don't mind this kind of stuff. It spices up the game like the "all duck no dinner" and the "dirty pies" games.
We really do need to win it. We need at worst a 50/50 record against our top four rivals. Currently we are 1-2We don't really need to win this game. Only for bragging rights. We'll still be top of the ladder even if we lose tonight.
How are you replacing Noble and Markovs critical line breaking, and link up play under this scenario?Not sure why it’s assumed it’s Howe v Frampton v Murphy. Could just as easily be Frampton v Noble v Markov. Some suggest we lose run if we lose Noble or Markov (the obvious choice) but I’d argue Moore-Murphy-Frampton frees up Howe and Maynard from pseudo 3rd tall roles doesn’t diminish our run that much.
We really do need to win it. We need at worst a 50/50 record against our top four rivals. Currently we are 1-2
Not happening Molly. Our run from defence is our biggest weapon . No way we're adding an extra tall and weakening it. Particularly as we're dominating when balls are bombed to tall forwards. The need for Framptons height is an issue on paper and theoretical match ups. It isn't an issue on the field and whats been occurring on game day.Not sure why it’s assumed it’s Howe v Frampton v Murphy. Could just as easily be Frampton v Noble v Markov. Some suggest we lose run if we lose Noble or Markov (the obvious choice) but I’d argue Moore-Murphy-Frampton frees up Howe and Maynard from pseudo 3rd tall roles doesn’t diminish our run that much.
Not happening Molly. Our run from defence is our biggest weapon . No way we're adding an extra tall and weakening it. Particularly as we're dominating when balls are bombed to tall forwards.
We don't need that at all. A loss however would be worrying as we're at full strength. And it would suggest that there's something wrong with the plan.We really do need to win it. We need at worst a 50/50 record against our top four rivals. Currently we are 1-2
I hate to admit it but I think you're right FonzieNot happening Molly. Our run from defence is our biggest weapon . No way we're adding an extra tall and weakening it. Particularly as we're dominating when balls are bombed to tall forwards. The need for Framptons height is an issue on paper and theoretical match ups. It isn't an issue on the field and whats been occurring on game day.
We don't really need to win this game. Only for bragging rights. We'll still be top of the ladder even if we lose tonight.
Is that you, Digger?Yep, it just feels like I am just waiting for “the other shoe to drop”. It all just seems to be going too well. Of course I have been following the Pies for 55+ years. I think it could be a form of PTSD.
The mediums work and are a better bet - even defensively. Our defenders roll up and switch all the time. Frampton wouldn't get just one to nullify. He has to cover off Charlie Cameron or Raynor when IQ or Bruzzy roll up to pressure the ball carrier or to try to intercept. Darcy has to play deepest as he's got the pace and skillset to have the best chance of covering off two when rolling up leaves us exposed. So Frampton can't just sit back in the goal square on a gorilla. He has to be part of the rolling and covering defence. Just isn't as suited as Murphy or Howe. Even if Murphy or Howe get injured, I think we'd switch Maynard to tall, rather than bringing in Billy.I hate to admit it but I think you're right Fonzie
we’re coming up against a capable side on their home deck, a loss isn’t out of the question and not necessarily a worry, it’ll come down to how the game unfolds. If it’s only a goal or two either way, I think both sides would walk away knowing they’re around the mark and still with good chances in finals, but if one side completely dominates, the other side would have reason to be concerned.We don't need that at all. A loss however would be worrying as we're at full strength. And it would suggest that there's something wrong with the plan.
Nah I get your point. But just as Hinkley implied. We don't need to peak in July. Just as long as we peak come finals time.I think you missed my point, but that's fine.
It's because the bogans over there can't pronounce Power properly .. people from Adelaide say “power” like perwarr.Can someone remind me what the "pear" thing is all about? Either I've forgotten or just can't for the life of me work it out.
Shhhhhhhh! Not happeningOddly enough I could bare a loss tonight. Hopefully won’t have to. But can take a loss (no injuries). Just couldn’t stand for losing to Carlton next week.
Yes that’s right.Yep, and we did it without Buckley that night.
Codabeens on the bench album is a fave of mine! Go ahead, you’re talking to TonyIs that you, Digger?
I’m not sure if you’re agreeing or disagreeing with me there.We don't need that at all. A loss however would be worrying as we're at full strength. And it would suggest that there's something wrong with the plan.