Collingwoods Performance tonite

[KissStephanie]

Love how the Collingwood supporters go on about how 1 quarter of footy won't win you a game of footy. Well, hello, it nearly did tonight.

Footscray didn't play just one quarter of footy. Collingwood were the better team in the first quarter, but the second and third quarters were quite even. Their dominance in the final quarter was greater than Collingwood's dominance in the first quarter. Collingwood were down on their season averages of possessions, clearances, marks and inside-50's. The Bulldogs were up on their season averages in all of those, and they use that ground better too, so I believe Collingwood has more improvement in them than the Bulldogs do, yet we still won.

Yes, congratulations for Collingwood to come away with a win but after being nearly 6 goals up at 3/4 time, you shouldn't have been in a position to nearly lose it!

It is far easier to throw caution to the wind in the last quarter with nothing to lose than it is in the first quarter when the heat is on, and the Bulldogs couldn't take the early heat. Some dreadful umpiring decisions in the final quarter also helped them, and when Josh Fraser came off, the Bulldogs were winning too many clearances. Collingwood still won against a good team though, yet can play much better than that.

Personally, would rather the other way, plenty of upside in the latter rather than the former!

Are you a dill? If Collingwood had lost, then we would be 8 points behind third and out of the top-4. A win meant that Collingwood is equal third, yet you would rather have lost. Unbelievable.

Collingwood has more upside than Footscray because Collingwood were down on season averages, while the Bulldogs were above season averages, and the match was played on a ground that the Bulldogs use much better. Collingwood's leading goalkicker and their centre half forward both failed to kick a goal as well. There is more upside for Collingwood for sure despite winning.

Don't mention Davis' mark a metre over the boundary line either.

That didn't happen though. Rodney Eade mentioned it in his press conference, but he was wrong and was simply whinging, and making excuses without acknowledging Collingwood once. He was a bad sport and a bad loser and I hope the club made note of it.

We were lucky to get that close after the tripe we served up in the first three quarters let's be honest. Looking forward to the rematch.

Actually, the Bulldogs played well, but were forced into mistakes. It is Collingwood that can play much better. By Round 22, Collingwood may be safely in the top-4, so the re-match may not mean anything. Footscray may well slip out of the top-4 with their tough draw because a loss such as this may lead to a form and confidence slump. Time will tell.

Collingwood showed it's hand last night, superflood then counter attack. Thing is they didn't have the legs to do it for 4 quarters. Won't hold up in September.

Collingwood showed last season that they can beat both Geelong and St.Kilda, and I have no doubt that it can be done again. The thought of playing the Bulldogs on the M.C.G for a change sounds better than on their home ground all of the time. Collingwood are capable of beating anybody in September. Collingwood's game plan was for the one match on that ground only.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

Oh well you a point is a point, you got the win - see you in round 22.

 

[Pigdog]

Collingwood has more upside than Footscray because Collingwood were down on season averages, while the Bulldogs were above season averages, and the match was played on a ground that the Bulldogs use much better. Collingwood's leading goalkicker and their centre half forward both failed to kick a goal as well. There is more upside for Collingwood for sure despite winning.

That's a lie.

Your three best players played at a very high level and were ably supported by the rest of your team. Your leading goalkicker was pantsed by a far better opponent who will do a similar job on him next time. Travis Cloke has had a very poor season and isn't the same player he was 2 years ago.

That didn't happen though. Rodney Eade mentioned it in his press conference, but he was wrong and was simply whinging, and making excuses without acknowledging Collingwood once. He was a bad sport and a bad loser and I hope the club made note of it.

It did so. The ball was clearly out.

As for being a bad sport you have to be kidding. He would have been bitterly disappointed some 10 or 15 minutes after a game which he feels we should of won so I think he can be forgiven for being a little pissed off.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

Footscray didn't play just one quarter of footy. Collingwood were the better team in the first quarter, but the second and third quarters were quite even. Their dominance in the final quarter was greater than Collingwood's dominance in the first quarter. Collingwood were down on their season averages of possessions, clearances, marks and inside-50's. The Bulldogs were up on their season averages in all of those, and they use that ground better too, so I believe Collingwood has more improvement in them than the Bulldogs do, yet we still won.It is far easier to throw caution to the wind in the last quarter with nothing to lose than it is in the first quarter when the heat is on, and the Bulldogs couldn't take the early heat. Some dreadful umpiring decisions in the final quarter also helped them, and when Josh Fraser came off, the Bulldogs were winning too many clearances. Collingwood still won against a good team though, yet can play much better than that.Are you a dill? If Collingwood had lost, then we would be 8 points behind third and out of the top-4. A win meant that Collingwood is equal third, yet you would rather have lost. Unbelievable.

Collingwood has more upside than Footscray because Collingwood were down on season averages, while the Bulldogs were above season averages, and the match was played on a ground that the Bulldogs use much better. Collingwood's leading goalkicker and their centre half forward both failed to kick a goal as well. There is more upside for Collingwood for sure despite winning.

That didn't happen though. Rodney Eade mentioned it in his press conference, but he was wrong and was simply whinging, and making excuses without acknowledging Collingwood once. He was a bad sport and a bad loser and I hope the club made note of it.Actually, the Bulldogs played well, but were forced into mistakes. It is Collingwood that can play much better. By Round 22, Collingwood may be safely in the top-4, so the re-match may not mean anything. Footscray may well slip out of the top-4 with their tough draw because a loss such as this may lead to a form and confidence slump. Time will tell.Collingwood showed last season that they can beat both Geelong and St.Kilda, and I have no doubt that it can be done again. The thought of playing the Bulldogs on the M.C.G for a change sounds better than on their home ground all of the time. Collingwood are capable of beating anybody in September. Collingwood's game plan was for the one match on that ground only.

You really are a one eyed supporrter arne't you. Manipulating the stats to support your arguements. The facts are simple, you lead by 41 points in the middle of the third quarter, and you only won by 1 point. If you had beaten us by 41 points+ you would earn a bit more credibility.

 

[Adz]

Bulldogs rely on their midfield to kick their goals and when they come up against quality opposition (Pies, cats, saints), their midfields don't allow them the freedom and they struggle. This will continue until they develop a decent forward line.

 

[#1 pies]

Oh well you a point is a point, you got the win - see you in round 22.

Can't wait!

 

[Pigdog]

Bulldogs rely on their midfield to kick their goals and when they come up against quality opposition (Pies, cats, saints), their midfields don't allow them the freedom and they struggle. This will continue until they develop a decent forward line.

That's crap.

We had 62 inside 50's and 30 scoring shots last night. I don't think thats a bad result. We were let down by poor finishing and some of our forwards playing poorly and not that the supply wasn't there.

Against Geelong in rd 9 we had 29 scoring shots.

 

[OniAu]

You really are a one eyed supporrter arne't you. Manipulating the stats to support your arguements. The facts are simple, you lead by 41 points in the middle of the third quarter, and you only won by 1 point. If you had beaten us by 41 points+ you would earn a bit more credibility.

Since this thread is full of illogical crap, Lets swap the quarters around, put the last quarter to the first and vice versa.

Now tell me who would be classed the better side on the night if the first and fourth quarters were swapped around?

I dont get the logic of " bulldogs only played one quarter of footy and smashed the pies" You had four quarters to play that type of footy and you didnt get the chance. 2nd and 3rd were fairly even.

Hanging on to one quarter of good footy is pretty pathetic, obviously most bulldogs supporters are happy with a loss if thats the case.

We earnt a lot of credibility last night considerin most of the footy world tipped the dogs and the pies werent expected to win. Wins a win, harden up and move on stop making excuses.

 

[Harry_8_Anaconda]

I'd like to say that Collingwood deserved to win as they outplayed us for the majority of the game. There is no use saying if we played 4 quarters of football we would have won, bottom line is we didn't. Whether it was their pressure or our inability no one will know.
Surely magpie supporters must acknowledge that tonight's result tell us nothing about the differences in the two sides. The StKilda V Geelong result didn't tell me that the Saints were a better side, all it said was that they were in front when it counted. I think there is very little separating Collingwood and us, two determined sides that have already been written off.
I for one enjoy the way Collingwood play and have admiration for some of their players. I just hope come September all the top 4 teams are in good form and that will give us a true indication of who is the better team.

Hope we get one back in round 22.

YAY, bout time someone acknoledged our excellent win and didnt make excuses... good on ya m8

 

[KissStephanie]

You really are a one eyed supporrter arne't you.

I am a Collingwood supporter, but I think I have shown that I can be quite objective considering.

Manipulating the stats to support your arguements.

Excuse me? I have not manipulated anything. I have simply stated the truth regarding that, but if you can show examples of how they have been manipulated, then go right ahead. Collingwood were down on season averages of possessions, marks, clearances and inside-50's. The Bulldogs were up on season averages of possessions, marks, clearances and inside-50's. I believe that Collingwood can play better, and will have to do so to beat the Bulldogs in Round 22, considering it is on their home ground yet again as it so often is. It was great to win against a team in the top-4 on a ground they use better when Collingwood were below their season averages.

The facts are simple, you lead by 41 points in the middle of the third quarter, and you only won by 1 point.

That would be the simple logic from a one-eyed Bulldogs supporter, and/or someone that doesn't like Collingwood. It was the third time this year that the Bulldogs have been outplayed in the first quarter by a team in the top-4 when the heat is on and the match is up for grabs. To throw caution to the wind when there is nothing to lose in a final quarter when the heat is out of the match is easier than it is to fight for a hot ball early in the match. The dreadful umpiring in the final quarter certainly didn't help Collingwood as well.

If you had beaten us by 41 points+ you would earn a bit more credibility.

I don't care about credibility because that doesn't win matches. Many supporters would still find a reason to not give Collingwood any credit if they won a premiership. The percentage would have been useful though, but that's all.

That's a lie. Your three best players played at a very high level and were ably supported by the rest of your team.

No it's not. It's the truth. I believe that Collingwood has more upside. Paul Medhurst is still looking for match fitness after missing a lot of games with his badly sprained ankle. Scott Pendlebury was supposed to miss a month with his knee injury, but he was back in a week which was a great effort and dedication to play, but he is not quite right yet. Most of the important Bulldogs players were able to get plenty of the ball, and were named in the best players. Collingwood were down on season averages, and the Bulldogs were up on season averages.

Your leading goalkicker was pantsed by a far better opponent who will do a similar job on him next time.

John Anthony was taught a lesson by Brian Lake, but maybe he needs to have a rest to get his hip injury right.

Travis Cloke has had a very poor season and isn't the same player he was 2 years ago.

He is only 22 years of age. The entire footy world knows the off-field reason that he has struggled this season, but he has shown improvement in recent times, and he is too good not to have a lot more influence on the rest of the season. I think that Cloke and Anthony will have an influence on the scoreboard next time.

It did so. The ball was clearly out.

The ball was on the line.

As for being a bad sport you have to be kidding. He would have been bitterly disappointed some 10 or 15 minutes after a game which he feels we should of won so I think he can be forgiven for being a little pissed off.

He was not the slightest bit gracious or humble. I cannot remember a coach that failed to mention the opposition once after a loss. It was bloody disgraceful. All he did was whinge and make excuses, and I hope that Collingwood took note of it.

 

[beyondthevalley ofthedogs]

I cannot remember a coach that failed to mention the opposition once after a loss. It was bloody disgraceful. All he did was whinge and make excuses, and I hope that Collingwood took note of it.

"Two six-day breaks against a quality team, we seemed to be flat,” he (Eade) said of the Dogs’ opening term.

I guess he was referring to the Pies there at least once but oh well keep living the life in the heart of the Big Apple analysing Dream Team and Super Coach scores from half a world away.

By the way - in case you're still sooking - well played Pies. You were too good on the night that's for sure

 

[KissStephanie]

"Two six-day breaks against a quality team, we seemed to be flat,” he (Eade) said of the Dogs’ opening term.

Ha ha ha! Come on now. That was just another bloody excuse that he rattled off. He did not acknowledge the opposition.

I guess he was referring to the Pies there at least once

He did not mention Collingwood once. What you have given was yet another example of his excuses. He did not give credit to Collingwood at all, and he clealry stated that the loss was either bad luck, excuses, or the fault of his own team. I cannot remember hearing anything like it before, and if this is your example of the one time that he did mention "a quality team," then it only confirms my opinion.

but oh well keep living the life in the heart of the Big Apple analysing Dream Team and Super Coach scores from half a world away.

I don't know what my location has to do with anything in this thread, and there is no need to be condescending. I have stated more than once that those scores were only used as an example to support my opinion that Collingwood's midfield runs at least equally as deep as the Western Bulldogs.

By the way - in case you're still sooking

I was never sooking. I was simply stating an opinion that I thought was bad sportsmanship, and I still do. I have also seen a number of Bulldogs supporters that have suggested that the one point loss means that it will be automatically reversed next time. I have no doubt that the Bulldogs can play better, but I feel the same that Collingwood can too.

well played Pies. You were too good on the night that's for sure

Collingwood were committed early when the heat was on and when the match was undecided, and that was terrific, and in the end it won the match. There were still areas that the team was down on, and hopefully they've recognised it too. The Western Bulldogs are a very good team that I thought were going to win when they got within 2 points with 9 minutes left, and credit to them for not giving up.

 

[Xx_Toomey_xX]

Did well the first 3 quarters but always new that a quality side like the Dogs would come back our last quarter was quite poor tho.

 

[Smoky]

Did well the first 3 quarters but always new that a quality side like the Dogs would come back our last quarter was quite poor tho.

I think it was nerves. It has been a while since we knocked off a team that could be considered a contender... we will be better in that situation next time thanks to those 4 points.

See you in round 22 doggies... you know cause you guys are sooooo looking forward to it

 

[rose jam]

yeah see you for our home game in round 22 at your home ground!

 

[Smoky]

yeah see you for our home game in round 22 at your home ground!

The AFL always bows to Collingwood dont they

 

[WindyHillWinners]

Dogs only played one quarter
would back them in a rematch


Wood were good though, played above themselfs perhaps

I rate the crows over the Pies

 

[Lazyboy]

The dogs still need to play Geelong and the Saints.. So it wont be easy and for once the pies will be holding the cards come rd 22.

 

[Smoky]

Dogs only played one quarter
would back them in a rematch


Wood were good though, played above themselfs perhaps

I rate the crows over the Pies

Agreed... Crows are a big danger

 

[MarkT]

Collingwood beat the 3rd placed team who were in good form. They did it without goals from their FF and CHF and with Pendlebury struggling for fitness and his usual influence. As a performance it was very good. I hardly think they settled any arguments about whether they or the Dog's (or Adelaide) are the 3rd best side this year but they sure as hell settled the arguments about being top 4 worthy and not beating anyone.

There is upside with the 2 key forwards that can play better, Medhust getting touch after injury, Pendlebury getting fully fit, Beams developing and 2 good midfield prospects developing at VFL level who should get games in the next few weeks. The ruck is the only real concern but Saints are the only side without a real positional concern in their best 25 or so players. Injuries in September are going to be crucial.

 

[Galactico]

Medhurst is still gaining match fitness, Anthony had a shocker against Lake, we were down on averages for clearances, inside 50's etc, Pendlebury still struggled with his knee problem (I'm surprised he's playing) and yet we had the measure of the Bulldogs until we ran out of legs in the final term (something that is a slight worry.....).

Collingwood still have much upside as do the Dogs IMO. Except that at the MCG, it will suit Collingwood far more. You may think the open spaces will suit the Dogs more but given Collingwood's penchant to go the flanks/wings just as much as the corridor, I think the pies will benefit. Travis Cloke and Paul Medhurst in particular.

Our forward line is far more dangerous though and that could be the difference in a re-match. Also don't underestimate the importance of Scott Pendlebury. One of the best inside mids now and he's down on input (especially clearances) due to his knee issues. Time will fix that.

Given the strength of both midfields and defences, you'd back Collingwood in a final if the forwards hit their straps. Cracking game it was last friday anyhow.

 

[didak#4]

Speaking for any sport, not just football, but there is nothing more pathetic than to not give credit to the winning team for winning and instead putting it purely down to the losing team "not showing up". IMO its the lowest form of any sporting commentary and shows a complete lack of general sporting knowledge.

Bulldog supporters are being a little smug saying they hope they meet us in the finals (obviously they are concluding they are big game players, so we better watch out) for some reason foolishly assuming that they have it in the bag and once again judging things purely on paper as well as the media hype which has got them thinking they are a formidable unit. I think both teams have strenghts and weaknesses, people just seem to focus on the bulldogs strengths and collingwoods weakness and use this to conclude that the bulldogs are better.

Bottom line is sport it all about competing on the day, so they need to accept the fact that they were not good enough on Friday night and move on and not let the dissapointment of the loss affect you into making foolish comments about beating us in finals. P.S I am aware you beat us in the 2006 finals but that was 3 years ago and means nothing.

 

[Nardz]

i said in another thread before the game that both sides have similar strength defenses, similar strength midfields (though doggies would edge it), and similar strength forward lines (that the pies would edge due to having talls)

as it turned out, our talls in the forward line, pretty much the only area i thought we were better than them, didnt offer much and we still won, so i'm happy.

 

[The King of Leon]

Gday

As a Dogs supporter, i am not the slightest bit worried about tonites result

There is no way Collingwood will replicate that that performance again...They scored almost 1 in 2 of their total inside 50's, which is practically unheard of......

I look forward to facing Collingwood in the finals as i am not the slightest bit worried at all by the Colly Wobbles !!

cheers

The rest of the league is worried about the Dogs, I mean 1 flag in 84 years is a mean feat.

 

[boydsno1]

better then reaching the final hurdle and constantly falling over time after time after time..