Dogs blew it!

[Il Naso De Gastev]

Game was over when Eagleton, Minson etc missed routine shots at goal that AFL players should gobble up every day of the week. They only have themselves to blame.

And Johnson squibbed that contest. Took his eyes off the footy, dropped it and allowed the chance for the umpire to make a mistake. Should have taken it on the chest, instead he sh!t himself and opened the door for the Cats.

 

[Bulldog4life]

Amazingly wise. What does a club listing have to do with anything??

You are an idiot too.....you only have to read your other posts. A tool of the highest order.

 

[Ashb23]

You're kidding right. Watching the game as a neutral supporter, I thought Geelong actually had the run of the green with the umpires early in the game. And the Johnston non free kick was easily the worst.

You didn't really watch it, did you? Harry Taylor had his arm chopped in the second quater - no free. Dogs goal from resultant throw in. Then in the third, Taylor barely touches Harbrow(?) and the ump calls it. Disgraceful. And how harsh were they on the holding the balls? I remember at least 3 occassions when the Geelong guys got the ball, were wrapped up imediately (no prior opp) and they paid holding the ball. At least one against the dogs as well which was disgraceful.

Don't think the umps favoured either team, but they certainly didn't favour geelong, I can tell you that much...

 

[Il Naso De Gastev]

You are an idiot too.....you only have to read your other posts. A tool of the highest order.

HA!! So not listing my club makes me a tool?? I really don't see what difference it makes... is it because by not having a club to fire back tit-for-tat jibes at, you're now bereft of any argument at all??

And I'm an idiot?? Jeez.

 

[The Pies Are In Front]

Crucial misses from Hahn(Dudd), Eagleton(Average) and "BIG Minno"(Donkey) cost the boys from the West tonight. I can kick better than Minno and Hahn on my left and as for Eagleton well, couldnt even make the distance from 45, GIVE IT UP ROMPER STOMPER!

 

[Bulldog4life]

HA!! So not listing my club makes me a tool?? I really don't see what difference it makes... is it because by not having a club to fire back tit-for-tat jibes at, you're now bereft of any argument at all??

And I'm an idiot?? Jeez.

The reason you are an idiot is that most of your posts are senseless.

 

[jeemak]

I think we put up a reasonable fight and were probably the better side in the second half. A couple of decisions early went with the Cats and we got a few our way in the second. The Johnson one was pretty ordinary, IMO he should have taken the mark anyway, but Rooke infringed.

The 50m penalty given to Harley hurt us, and when you see Boyd take a grab around the 50m arc in the last quarter and then get pulled along by a guy who wasn't in the contest to spoil you have to ask why he wasn't given the same concession...........but it happens.

But, the Cats were always the superior team and they took the chances they had presented to them. I think this game showed that if the Cats aren't playing their best game a less fancied team can be competitive against them. But fair play, an all that.

 

[Il Naso De Gastev]

Replace 'idiot' with 'champ', and 'senseless' with 'spot on' and you have yourself a truthful comment.

You've made 3 posts on this thread, and the only contribution you've made is calling me an idiot 3 times. Pure genius... must be hard coming up with such witty brilliance. How do you do it time and again??

 

[TheNextBigThing]

Geelong were no good but still won, shows just how good they really are.

 

[caitsith01]

Cannot believe anyone thought Geelong got the better of the umpiring.

What about Bartel being pinged for "deliberate" out of bounds when he had the ball for approximately 0.1 seconds whilst being tackled? Result: dogs shot on goal.

Or Milburn being done for holding the ball when he didn't actually have it? Result: dogs shot on goal.

Taylor not actually touching the dogs player who coughed the ball up in the marking contest. Result: dogs shot on goal.

And of course the umpire directly interfering with the play when Geelong had possession but not calling it back. Result: dogs shot on goal.

How many shots on goal did the Cats get from bad umpiring decisions?

We would have won by 10 goals if the umpiring had been close to fair.

 

[Bulldog4life]

Replace 'idiot' with 'champ', and 'senseless' with 'spot on' and you have yourself a truthful comment.

You've made 3 posts on this thread, and the only contribution you've made is calling me an idiot 3 times. Pure genius... must be hard coming up with such witty brilliance. How do you do it time and again??

"Champ" get your facts right....it has been two posts not 3.......I've called you an idiot twice not three times. Your trouble is that all your posts are negative and you repeat yourself over and over again and then repeat yourself again in another thread. You are a bore.

 

[scottydeewah]

I dont understand this "the dogs had momentum before the johnson/rooke contest" crap. The ball had been parked in our forward 50 for about 5 minutes.

 

[caitsith01]

I dont understand this "the dogs had momentum before the johnson/rooke contest" crap. The ball had been parked in our forward 50 for about 5 minutes.

No no, if Johnson had got that (alleged) free kick, he would have torped a 300 metre goal to win the game. Pay attention.

 

[Il Naso De Gastev]

"Champ" get your facts right....it has been two posts not 3.......I've called you an idiot twice not three times. Your trouble is that all your posts are negative and you repeat yourself over and over again and then repeat yourself again in another thread. You are a bore.

Suck it up.

Your trouble is that you are behind the eight-ball intellectually, and can only resort to petty name-calling.... the first sign of the dim.

In any of your mind-bending posts, you haven't addressed the argument of the whole incident. All you've done is call me an idiot.

You are from the top rung of society, no doubt.

 

[Il Naso De Gastev]

I dont understand this "the dogs had momentum before the johnson/rooke contest" crap. The ball had been parked in our forward 50 for about 5 minutes.

Agreed.

 

[Bulldog4life]

Suck it up.

Your trouble is that you are behind the eight-ball intellectually, and can only resort to petty name-calling.... the first sign of the dim.

In any of your mind-bending posts, you haven't addressed the argument of the whole incident. All you've done is call me an idiot.

You are from the top rung of society, no doubt.

You have addressed the argument for both of us with your never ending posting. All you do is go on and on. Have a nice sleep and enjoy the school holidays.

 

[magilla]

The dogs momentum came as a result of several incredibly ordinary decisions in the third quarter. The Johnson one was nowhere near the worst.

It was the worst call I've seen in a while.

You didn't really watch it, did you? Harry Taylor had his arm chopped in the second quater - no free. Dogs goal from resultant throw in. Then in the third, Taylor barely touches Harbrow(?) and the ump calls it. Disgraceful. And how harsh were they on the holding the balls? I remember at least 3 occassions when the Geelong guys got the ball, were wrapped up imediately (no prior opp) and they paid holding the ball. At least one against the dogs as well which was disgraceful.

Don't think the umps favoured either team, but they certainly didn't favour geelong, I can tell you that much...

Do you remember all the throws you got away with though?
The umps definetely favoured the cats.

Cannot believe anyone thought Geelong got the better of the umpiring.

What about Bartel being pinged for "deliberate" out of bounds when he had the ball for approximately 0.1 seconds whilst being tackled? Result: dogs shot on goal.

Or Milburn being done for holding the ball when he didn't actually have it? Result: dogs shot on goal.

Taylor not actually touching the dogs player who coughed the ball up in the marking contest. Result: dogs shot on goal.

And of course the umpire directly interfering with the play when Geelong had possession but not calling it back. Result: dogs shot on goal.

How many shots on goal did the Cats get from bad umpiring decisions?

We would have won by 10 goals if the umpiring had been close to fair.

Bartel felt contact from a tackler and handballed it out of bounds, you can't get much more deliberate than that.

He did have it for about a minute before that though

You're right, the missed Johnson one evens it out.

Don't know about the rest.


Geelong were always going to win, they are just better. But man they get a good run from the umps.

 

[And_ROOS]

Game ended when johnson wasnt given a free kick when they had the momentum. Very very ordinary decision which slowed the game down an saw the cats home. If the bulldogs kicked straight it would of been a different story. Who ever plays them next week are a serious chance.

Pretty sure i heard someone say that after last years Prelim... convenient considering who you support really...

 

[Mingo]

Pretty sure i heard someone say that after last years Prelim... convenient considering who you support really...

So you're saying the team you'll play next week has no chance? Think you're in for a rude shock.

With all due respect to Port, Hawthorn will be much better opposition this year if they make it.

 

[The Fireman]

Bad luck doggies, most were going for you.

 

[kirky]

Pretty sure i heard someone say that after last years Prelim... convenient considering who you support really...

As a neutral, I agree. I don't believe Geelong play their best football at night (I don't have records to prove it, its just an inkling) but play best football during the day. And some reason Preliminaries aren't their best games but all you have to do is win them - whether it be by 1 point or 60.

Gut feel - will comfortably win next week.

 

[kirky]

Bad luck doggies, most were going for you.

I want the best team to win not this romantic crap a lot want - Dogs weren't in the Cats league. If you want romance go see a "chick flick".

That means I want a Cats vs Hawks GF. The best 2 teams of the year.

 

[Mingo]

That means I want a Cats vs Hawks GF. The best 2 teams of the year.

So I assume you were barracking for us in the 98 Prelim, considering we were the better team for the year?

 

[kirky]

So I assume you were barracking for us in the 98 Prelim, considering we were the better team for the year?

What sort of idiotic comment is that? I'm talking as a neutral supporter not when my team is in the mix.

By the way, Crows were the best defensive side and had the best % in 1998 (same as 1997).

 

[Patronus]

So I assume you were barracking for us in the 98 Prelim, considering we were the better team for the year?

I was but not becuase the Bulldogs were the better team, I just don't like Adelaide.