Certified Legendary Thread GEELONG WINS 2022 GRAND FINAL BY PLENTY

[winty]

F*ck me. That was even worse than I could have imagined. Someone needs to have a word to him, as Holmes was clearly uncomfortable and said 'that's a bit forward isn't it?', and all of Holmes, Miers and Conway had a look on their face of 'wow, what the hell is this?'

Seriously, needs to just f*ck off into the sunset with Sam Newman, and his idiotic attitude and backwards ass personality can go with him - all about gambling and drinking now. Used to be funny, now it's just a trainwreck. I swear, that kind of attitude is enough to make a kid want to leave, it makes me so angry. If I was the boys I would have just told him to leave.

Speaking of Sam Newman....

 

[PhatBoy]

Speaking of Sam Newman....

I’m f*en embarrassed that this c* played for my club

 

[year of the cat]

I’m f*en embarrassed that this c* played for my club

He’s just a prize one A hole.

 

[fpm84]

My sense at the ground was that Dangerfield was BOG and a few viewings of the replay have only reinforced that view. He was every bit as effective as in the prelim. Smith was fantastic too and a huge factor in us getting a big early lead but Danger was relentless from start to finish.

 

[winty]

LOL

 

[Isaac Norm Smith]

I’ve attended 4 Grand Finals.
07, 09, 11 and 22.
Missed out on tickets for 08 and obviously couldn’t go in 2020.
Im very lucky to attend 4 for 4 wins.

I've been to four and I've seen 3 wins. Unfortunately '08 was my first one. Didn't go to '07.

But '09, '11 and 2022 have certainly made up for that!

 

[Drunkcat]

Is that “entertainment”? Agree with the others than Brownless has had his day.

There is a time when your time is Done, you get old and no one cares what you say, time to go in the background

 

[Mad_Hatter]

My sense at the ground was that Dangerfield was BOG and a few viewings of the replay have only reinforced that view. He was every bit as effective as in the prelim. Smith was fantastic too and a huge factor in us getting a big early lead but Danger was relentless from start to finish.

The scoreboard impact was likely the point of difference. Stands out more to those voting.
If Danger nailed 1 or 2 he'd have absolutely been given the Norm.

 

[Strange Cat]

One thing that annoyed me today was seeing Billy making fun of Holmes on live TV. Brownless was roaming through the room at St Mary’s live on the Sunday Footy Show and went up to Holmes (who was sitting with a bunch of other players) and said:

“How are you feeling Holmesy? … You played well all year and then missed out. He got the medal and you didn’t [points to Miers who was sitting next to Holmes] I bet you weren’t happy with Gryan getting the medal! Were you cranky with Gryan?”
Holmes looked very uncomfortable/awkward but did a good job of laughing it off.

Poor form to humiliate one of our young players on live TV AND in front of his mates, at a time when he’d been feeling many negative emotions. All weekend Max would’ve been trying his best to be happy despite missing out on the greatest achievement of his life by a fingernail, and then Billy directly makes fun of it in front of everyone. I know that he wasn’t trying to be hurtful, but the way that he dealt with that very sensitive issue was clumsy and unacceptable.

I hope when max has his medal next year he tells Billy to **** off personally

 

[Sttew]

My sense at the ground was that Dangerfield was BOG and a few viewings of the replay have only reinforced that view. He was every bit as effective as in the prelim. Smith was fantastic too and a huge factor in us getting a big early lead but Danger was relentless from start to finish.

Totally agree. After watching the replay it was clear the wrong man won the NS. Smith was great but Danger was sublime. 7 goal assists for 6 goals, and his in and under work was text book stuff

 

[feelinfeline]

The great thing about our season is that we had almost 30 players who could have played their parts on Saturday if requred, even with Holmes injured. Menegola, Higgins, Dahlhaus and Ceglar would have performed well. Stephens, Sav (as a defender) and Narkle would likely have held their own (although I may have had nervous moments with the latter two).

Yes, Sydney made a mistake playing Reid but they had very few options for replacements. McDonald had been poor in in the first two finals. Campbell came on at half time and didn't do much. Admittedly, almost their whole team was poor, but they have nothing like the depth that we have.

 

[#6 Thorp #7 Selwood LOL]

The great thing about our season is that we had almost 30 players who could have played their parts on Saturday if requred, even with Holmes injured. Menegola, Higgins, Dahlhaus and Ceglar would have performed well. Stephens, Sav (as a defender) and Narkle would likely have held their own (although I may have had nervous moments with the latter two).

Yes, Sydney made a mistake playing Reid but they had very few options for replacements. McDonald had been poor in in the first two finals. Campbell came on at half time and didn't do much. Admittedly, almost their whole team was poor, but they have nothing like the depth that we have.

We could have played Sherlock Holmes on the wing and still romped home.

 

[catpremier 07]

Anyone know where to get different grand final radio calls?

 

[Hinkley29]

Smith was clearly best on ground.

only sentimentality for Paddy could make one feel otherwise

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

I’m not sure who else, but this flag has literally made me openly weep.
So much emotion behind it and the way we won it.

 

[Sttew]

Smith was clearly best on ground.

only sentimentality for Paddy could make one feel otherwise

'Clearly'? Smith was a very good and at times selfish finisher, but without the grunt work that Danger did I don't think he would have won it. Watching the replay, even Hodge joked that Smith was playing for the NS, pleading for the ball at every opportunity when he was not necessarily in a better position.

Possession wise, Smith was BOG. But impact wise, Danger was BOG, IMO

 

[Feline]

If you want to see Billy lacking self-control or decorum. Went from bad with Hawkins at the 3 min mark to worse with Holmes shortly after.

No wonder they call him Billy Brainless.

 

[Hinkley29]

'Clearly'? Smith was a very good and at times selfish finisher, but without the grunt work that Danger did I don't think he would have won it. Watching the replay, even Hodge joked that Smith was playing for the NS, pleading for the ball at every opportunity when he was not necessarily in a better position.

Possession wise, Smith was BOG. But impact wise, Danger was BOG, IMO

In any game if you have the most possessions, kick the most goals, have by far the most metres gained, have the most inside 50’s, the second most marks and are at your best when the game needs to be won you will be best on ground.

Forget the names involved and just look at the numbers. They are irrefutable.

It would have been wrong if he didn’t win the medal, regardless of sentimentality.

 

[PhatBoy]

I’m not one of those people who just thinks a player must be above criticism because they play for the cats but I’ve seen a few people mention Isaac smith

7

Isaac Smith

Age

36

Ht

188cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.3

5star

K

13.0

5star

HB

8.4

5star

M

5.5

5star

T

2.9

4star

CL

1.7

4star

D

19.4

4star

K

11.1

4star

HB

8.3

4star

M

3.8

4star

T

2.5

3star

CL

1.3

4star

D

19.2

5star

K

10.6

4star

HB

8.6

5star

M

7.6

5star

T

2.0

4star

CL

0.6

3star

and ideas like selfish and glory hunting by taking shots etc.

He had over 30 touches, 3 goals and a goal assist, and one missed shot.

Now like all cats fans I like our team first footy ethos: look for someone in a better spot than you.

However I also like players playing on instinct and to their strengths and one of the few weaknesses we’ve shown at times this season is a tendency to overpossess the ball close to goal rather than taking the shot.

I won’t ever criticise someone for being proactive if they are good enough more often than not to get it done. Smith did.

 

[Sttew]

In any game if you have the most possessions, kick the most goals, have by far the most metres gained, have the most inside 50’s, the second most marks and are at your best when the game needs to be won you will be best on ground.

Forget the names involved and just look at the numbers. They are irrefutable.

It would have been wrong if he didn’t win the medal, regardless of sentimentality.

I know! Smith is a running machine and he covered so much territory. But I really don't think its sentimentality to say Danger's impact was more influential. 7 direct score assists for 6 goals! How many goals of Smith were receives from Danger? Anyway, its all moot and I'm not going to bang on about this anymore

 

[Hinkley29]

I know! Smith is a running machine and he covered so much territory. But I really don't think its sentimentality to say Danger's impact was more influential. 7 direct score assists for 6 goals! How many goals of Smith were receives from Danger? Anyway, its all moot and I'm not going to bang on about this anymore

We can agree to disagree.

It is a fun argument to have when you are arguing which of our awesome players was a more deserving norm smith medallist! Here’s hoping we are having a similar argument this time next year!

 

[Braklet]

I won’t ever criticise someone for being proactive if they are good enough more often than not to get it done. Smith did.

You miss 100% of the shots you don't take...

 

[barmy44]

Emotional toll, wheelchair fatigue, MCG cement allergy, couldn't move today....but so worth it and grateful.
A couple of replays in, despite seven's stupid bastard replay clock and shite calls. Missed the fox game day panel, and their reluctant praise. No spectacular Robbie either, not sure it's available, maybe you tube somewhere.

Unbelievable how luck can turn, the ball bounce and the breaks, the taps, the rolls, the spills, our marks from an errant kick- in fact everything that went wrong for us against the Pies. The GF turned that around in spades, next time you watch, check it out.
Our luck was simply golden......BUT it didn't come free.
Paul Newman, old departed movie star, had a tattoo on his arm that read - Luck is an Art.
All our artistry like focus, tackling, speed and playing in front, intent and attack on the ball, pinpoint passes, came together to produce and take advantage of the luck. Bloody brilliant to see on replay.

Luck doesn't so much turn, as simply become irrelevant to the final result.

"Bad bounces" would be consistent across all games, on average.

When you're down by a goal in a tight QF where you aren't at your best, a right angle bounce that causes someone to lose their footing can literally be the difference between a win or a loss.

In an 81 point smashing, they absolutely still happen - they just don't matter. The occurrences therefore don't stick in your mind.

Luck absolutely can decide matches. But when a side is that dominant and playing that much better than the opposition, the bad luck is both irrelevant to the result and the observer.

So there would have been plenty of bad bounces in that game... but watching, you just aren't going to focus on it - because we were up by 10 goals.

 

[Sky]

I saw this a week ago and I’ve got to say 5 points off is incredible

 

[barmy44]

We can agree to disagree.

It is a fun argument to have when you are arguing which of our awesome players was a more deserving norm smith medallist! Here’s hoping we are having a similar argument this time next year!

I agree - I thought Smith was the obvious choice for NS. If the panel had a day to think about it and the benefit of a considered replay, Dangerfield may have been given the nod.

But Smith's was the more obvious game, and in the context of his and when the NS medal is decided, was always going to win it.

Very well deserved, too. Brought a ton of run early, kicked some important goals and was simply everywhere.

Dangerfield could have won it, sure - but a few someones were going to be unlucky not to win it.