Highly Unlikely the Handbaggers can take the next step in 09!

[Boyler_Room]

Interesting thread this one.

"It's highly unlikely the handbaggers can take the next step."

"Hawthorn would give Geelong a good run at the moment."

This time last year, it'd have been "There's no chance in hell the handbaggers will take the next step" and "Hawthorn will smash Geelong".

Looks to me like there's a bit of a crisis of confidence amongst Hawks fans at the moment.

What's your point here?

We said it and it was true. So it is more likely that what we say this year will be true as well. Can't fault 100% accuracy.

We see our place on the ladder and we cannot in good conscience say that we will smash you. Hawthorn supporters are more astute than that and live in reality.

Geelong supporters are purely delusional, if you cannot see that your team still holds onto the flaws that lost you the GF last year then you are among the Geelong supporters who have been blinded by a home and away win loss record that means nothing come September.

A blinding haze that even a GF "slap in the face" defeat should have lifted but seems not to have. I think Geelong are happy to declare on there 2007 premiership, destined to fall back to familiar territory, decades of mediocrity.

 

[themuddy#3]

can the mods merge this with the other "Blah blah blah Handbag blah blah blah Choke" threads shotta has been so kind to share with us?

 

[JD11]

While this thread is a bit over the top, Geelong definitely don't seem as dominant as they have in the past 2.5 years.

This year they have surrended large leads on multiple occasions where they have been lucky to fall across the line. When you couple this with their below (their own) average performance in big games when at their peak, and the fact that all year their key forward has looked like a ticking time bomb, just waiting to choke on the big stage, I also wouldn't be betting on Geelong in the finals.

That said, they are still the best team in the comp, and it is still up to them to lose as much as it is up to someone to beat them. It will be interesting to see what happens.

So what your saying is. Although Geelong are the best team, by your own admission, you still wouldn't bet on them in a final. Err...what?

 

[SunKing]

St Kilda would annihilate you atm we would give you a run.

Nonsense a vastly undermanned brisbane side almost beat the saints on their home ground.

Geelong annihilated us.

Make no mistake the cats are an awesome team and will win the flag this year.

The saints are their biggest threat though..

 

[catspremiers2007]

Looks like Shitta has the overwhelming support of at least a couple of his fellow Hawks supporters.

THIS THREAD STINKS LIKE SHITTA

 

[Major Colvin]

Hawthorn are last years news. No way they'll pull that off again...ever? Anyway, the Saints and the Cats will play in the Grand Final, and like last year it will be a 50/50, which the Cats would be unfotunate to lose, given their consistency.

 

[willo_k]

Nonsense a vastly undermanned brisbane side almost beat the saints on their home ground.

Geelong annihilated us.

Make no mistake the cats are an awesome team and will win the flag this year.

The saints are their biggest threat though..

YES like I have said multiple times Geelong are and have been the best team in the comp. They do however almost always fail to play up to their ability in the big games. So YES YES YES they would struggle against Hawthorn but probably just get the chocolates when they are probably a ten goal better team ATM (injuries factored) and they would get smashed by St Kilda who they are marginally better than. They would beat collingwood maybe two out of three times even though they are a twenty goal better team.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

YES like I have said multiple times Geelong are and have been the best team in the comp. They do however almost always fail to play up to their ability in the big games. So YES YES YES they would struggle against Hawthorn but probably just get the chocolates when they are probably a ten goal better team ATM (injuries factored) and they would get smashed by St Kilda who they are marginally better than. They would beat collingwood maybe two out of three times even though they are a twenty goal better team.

How are St Kilda any better than Geelong in big games?

Flog on willo.

 

[Hinkley29]

Oh sorry if your after definite wording? Here goes. We'd beat you with a near to full list. We'd comfortably beat you in a finals match.

Your "definitive wording" comes with a caveat attached. Hardly definitive.

And no, I am not going to provide you with a definition of the word caveat. You can use the opportunity to look it up and improve your research skills. These will will come in handy as you look for a job. Think of it as my favour to you.

 

[willo_k]

How are St Kilda any better than Geelong in big games?

Flog on willo.

Well just this year? I would probably for the sakes of a study set a parameter of 40k+ crowds as the definition of a big match.

Your year average result is a 21.25 win including an 8 point win to a dismal hawks who were kept in it by terrible goal shooting, a less than impressive 27 point win against the pies who were below par even for them, and the dogs game that could of obviously been a win. And an acceptable 48 point win over the crows at home

St Kilda have averaged a 46 point win including a 88 point thumping of the collingwood, holding a resurgent Essendon at arms length for a 19 point and a comperative 32 point win over the crows at home.

Oh and they comfortably beat the dogs in front of 36...

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Well just this year? I would probably for the sakes of a study set a parameter of 40k+ crowds as the definition of a big match.

Your year average result is a 21.25 win including an 8 point win to a dismal hawks who were kept in it by terrible goal shooting, a less than impressive 27 point win against the pies who were below par even for them, and the dogs game that could of obviously been a win. And an acceptable 48 point win over the crows at home

St Kilda have averaged a 46 point win including a 88 point thumping of the collingwood, holding a resurgent Essendon at arms length for a 19 point and a comperative 32 point win over the crows at home.

Oh and they comfortably beat the dogs in front of 36...

Oh dear, using winning margins to draw parallels. And setting arbitrary parameters involving crowd numbers. And of course just this year, nothing else would suit your inane argument.

Yep, you're flogging it.

 

[willo_k]

Oh dear, using winning margins to draw parallels. And setting arbitrary parameters involving crowd numbers. And of course just this year, nothing else would suit your inane argument.

Yep, you're flogging it.

Point taken but I was asked an ambiguous question and tried to set up a line of argument to answer it. I think that my post didnt only include winning margins but you can skip over that if it suits your perspective.

Of more note to me is that no Geelong supporter has tried to counter the point that Geelong under achieve in big games. Nor that they do so less than Hawthorn, your just holding onto this point that St Kilda are no better. Well I honestly think this year they have (st kilda) have been a better clutch team, but its obviously a limited study, given they only hit their straps this year.

Oh well, I'm not going to convince you so you can keep on enjoying whatever blissful ignorance is helping you to hold strong on what you've been posting. If I was you I'd focus my efforts on trying to force the AFL to adopt an EPL style of premiers so being the best team three years in a row in and of itself will count for something.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Of more note to me is that no Geelong supporter has tried to counter the point that Geelong under achieve in big games. Nor that they do so less than Hawthorn, your just holding onto this point that St Kilda are no better. Well I honestly think this year they have (st kilda) have been a better clutch team, but its obviously a limited study, given they only hit their straps this year.

Why bother countering a point that is made with little to no basis?

Geelong have won 5/6 finals over the past 2 years, with a 63 point average winning margin. Won finals in both 2004 and 2005, without getting to the GF.

St Kilda won 1/3 in 2008, missed in 07 and lost their only final in 2006.

If you want to point to a 5 point win over Collingwood, or a 29 point win over the Doggies, and use them to say we underperform in 'big games' then that's your perogative. I would then ask you to show me a club with sustained finals appearances that never had close games, or heaven forbid lost a couple.

 

[willo_k]

Why bother countering a point that is made with little to no basis?

Geelong have won 5/6 finals over the past 2 years, with a 63 point average winning margin. Won finals in both 2004 and 2005, without getting to the GF.

St Kilda won 1/3 in 2008, missed in 07 and lost their only final in 2006.

If you want to point to a 5 point win over Collingwood, or a 29 point win over the Doggies, and use them to say we underperform in 'big games' then that's your perogative. I would then ask you to show me a club with sustained finals appearances that never had close games, or heaven forbid lost a couple.

Doris, you're continually missing points from my posts so this little to and fro is becoming somewhat inefficient. The point im making is your inability to beat teams your clearly better than in big games whilst chalking up an (admittedly impressive) tally of H&A games.

I also stated that St Kilda were hard to compare to Geelong as they have only really being playing solid footy starting this year, but you completely bypassed that to mention their previous finals efforts (06-08). Regardless, I feel like I pointed out that this year St Kilda have handled the big stage better.

Yes I will point out the Collingwood, WBD finals and GF as examples when Geelong nearly lost (or lost) a big game against a team they were clearly better than. In addition to WBD and Haw games this year, collingwood over the last few years and assorted others.

In answer to your question I would obviously point out brisbane as a team that was consistently able to step up to finals games as well as WCE/Syd 05 & 06. But neither were as far ahead of the comp as Geelong have been.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

The point im making is your inability to beat teams your clearly better than in big games whilst chalking up an (admittedly impressive) tally of H&A games.

H & A games should be completely disregarded when it comes to finals. And we have beaten every team we have played in finals except Hawthorn in the last 2 years. You have no point.

I also stated that St Kilda were hard to compare to Geelong as they have only really being playing solid footy starting this year, but you completely bypassed that to mention their previous finals efforts (06-08). Regardless, I feel like I pointed out that this year St Kilda have handled the big stage better.

You are willing to tell us that St Kilda would thrash us in a final right now, on the basis that they beat Collingwood by more than we did. And that we took the foot off the pedal against Hawthorn, after being nigh on 10 goals up.

Yes I will point out the Collingwood, WBD finals and GF as examples when Geelong nearly lost (or lost) a big game against a team they were clearly better than. In addition to WBD and Haw games this year, collingwood over the last few years and assorted others.

**** me, Geelong have lost the occasional game, and had a few close ones over the last couple of years. Amazing isn't it.

In answer to your question I would obviously point out brisbane as a team that was consistently able to step up to finals games as well as WCE/Syd 05 & 06. But neither were as far ahead of the comp as Geelong have been.

Obviously you would, but you'd be wrong. Have you forgotten that Brisbane nealry lost the 02 GF? Or that they lost their QF in 2003 to Collingwood? The only beat Geelong by 9 points in the 04 PF, and lost the 04 GF.

Or that Sydney lost their 04 SF to St Kilda, got thrashed really. They lost the QF in 05, their flag year, to the Eagles. They only got through their SF with a last minute goal to win by 3 points. They only won the GF by 4 points, according to you that's nearly losing and should be looked down upon!

I understand, you're just another in a long line of Hawthorn supporters with a superiority complex and some predetermined notions. It's probably not even your fault.

 

[willo_k]

I'm not saying losing, nearly losing or even getting flogged is grounds to be looked down upon. The nature of sport is that teams go up and down, Geelong have over the course of their domination consistently done that in "big games".

So maybe you need to think about that for a little while then readdress my points and we can get back on track.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

I'm not saying losing, nearly losing or even getting flogged is grounds to be looked down upon. The nature of sport is that teams go up and down, Geelong have over the course of their domination consistently done that in "big games".

But Geelong have similar or better recent finals records than even these sides that you chose as shining examples of 'big game' teams. I have clearly demonstrated this. Brisbane obviously get massive points for winning three GFs in a row, but they did lose one. And they lost others and had close ones along the way, much like every team ever in existence.

So maybe you need to think about that for a little while then readdress my points and we can get back on track.

I don't need to think about anything. You've got no evidence, just admit you are going off half cocked and be done with it.

 

[willo_k]

But Geelong have similar or better recent finals records than even these sides that you chose as shining examples of 'big game' teams. I have clearly demonstrated this. Brisbane obviously get massive points for winning three GFs in a row, but they did lose one. And they lost others and had close ones along the way, much like every team ever in existence.

None of these teams were as far in front of their opposition as Geelong. I was giving examples of teams I feel reguarly played to or above their capacity in big games. Which Geelong are evidently incapable of doing under pressure. I'm just saying (AGAIN) that Geelong dont play their best footy on the big stage and fail to achieve their best (THIS COULD MEAN LOSING, IT COULD MEAN ALMOST LOSING TO A FAR INFERIOR TEAM) reguarly when it matters.

So maybe you need to think about that for a little while then readdress my points and we can get back on track.

 

[Dangerwooodlett]

all this talk about geelong not performing in big games - they lost 1 final out of 6 in the last 2 years. puh-lease.

and all this talk about geelong having a crap forward line - they have the best attack in terms of points scored and the second best defence this year. so again, puh-lease.

 

[STC]

While this thread is a bit over the top, Geelong definitely don't seem as dominant as they have in the past 2.5 years.

This year they have surrended large leads on multiple occasions where they have been lucky to fall across the line. When you couple this with their below (their own) average performance in big games when at their peak, and the fact that all year their key forward has looked like a ticking time bomb, just waiting to choke on the big stage, I also wouldn't be betting on Geelong in the finals.

That said, they are still the best team in the comp, and it is still up to them to lose as much as it is up to someone to beat them. It will be interesting to see what happens.

On multiple occassions we've been lucky to fall over the line? I can think of one game where we were genuinely lucky (last week) and one other, 8 weeks ago, where we dominated all game but held on to it (not through luck) when challenged.

 

[STC]

Doris, you're continually missing points from my posts so this little to and fro is becoming somewhat inefficient. The point im making is your inability to beat teams your clearly better than in big games whilst chalking up an (admittedly impressive) tally of H&A games.

I also stated that St Kilda were hard to compare to Geelong as they have only really being playing solid footy starting this year, but you completely bypassed that to mention their previous finals efforts (06-08). Regardless, I feel like I pointed out that this year St Kilda have handled the big stage better.

Yes I will point out the Collingwood, WBD finals and GF as examples when Geelong nearly lost (or lost) a big game against a team they were clearly better than. In addition to WBD and Haw games this year, collingwood over the last few years and assorted others.

In answer to your question I would obviously point out brisbane as a team that was consistently able to step up to finals games as well as WCE/Syd 05 & 06. But neither were as far ahead of the comp as Geelong have been.

So you're saying Brisbane were never challenged? We were seriously challenged in the 2007 PF and sort of challenged in the 2008 PF (we really were never going to lose), yes. Brisbane were seriously challenged in the 2002 GF against Collingwood. They were also beaten in the 2003 Qualifying Final by the same team. They were also seriously challenged by us in the 2004 Prelim Final (before losing the Grand Final).

So as you can see, across our last 2 years of finals, we've been challenged in 2 winning games and lost one (GF).
Brisbane across their era of 01-04 were challenged in 3 winning games and lost 2 (including one GF).

What do you think? How invincible were they really?

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

So you're saying Brisbane were never challenged? We were seriously challenged in the 2007 PF and sort of challenged in the 2008 PF (we really were never going to lose), yes. Brisbane were seriously challenged in the 2002 GF against Collingwood. They were also beaten in the 2003 Qualifying Final by the same team. They were also seriously challenged by us in the 2004 Prelim Final (before losing the Grand Final).

So as you can see, across our last 2 years of finals, we've been challenged in 2 winning games and lost one (GF).
Brisbane across their era of 01-04 were challenged in 3 winning games and lost 2 (including one GF).

What do you think? How invincible were they really?

You're wasting your time sherr, lost cause.

 

[STC]

You're wasting your time sherr, lost cause.

It's a step up from shitta, so I figured I'd give him a try.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

It's a step up from shitta, so I figured I'd give him a try.

Don't get me wrong, willo seems a perfectly reasonable poster, but just stuck in his ways on this one. As I said, it's probably to be expected all things considered.

 

[willo_k]

So you're saying Brisbane were never challenged? We were seriously challenged in the 2007 PF and sort of challenged in the 2008 PF (we really were never going to lose), yes. Brisbane were seriously challenged in the 2002 GF against Collingwood. They were also beaten in the 2003 Qualifying Final by the same team. They were also seriously challenged by us in the 2004 Prelim Final (before losing the Grand Final).

So as you can see, across our last 2 years of finals, we've been challenged in 2 winning games and lost one (GF).
Brisbane across their era of 01-04 were challenged in 3 winning games and lost 2 (including one GF).

What do you think? How invincible were they really?

OK I totally understand your position BUT I'm not saying that Brisbane were invincible just that they had a habit of stepping up in finals and getting the job done. Geelong were easily the best team the last two years but they failed to get the job done in 08 and could of just as easy lost a prelim in 07 (arguably 08 as well) to a team that was nowhere near them. We can agree (I assume) that in a close match a few lucky things can determine the result. And I'm saying although you got the job done and kudos for it, it should never have been left to chance as you were way better than Collingwood. And all the examples I've provided were seeking to illustrate that point.

And to me that ilustrates that even though you've played reasonable football in big games you havent played your best and with the competition catching up its a major concern.

This conversation can keep going downb the me: "you dont perform in big games" you: "but we've won finals". But for mine there is a clear point that were not going to see eye to eye on. I guess I'll proven one way or the other in round 14 & 17.

Cheers lads.