- Thread starter
- Banned
- #26
....and they call it the AFL
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.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Originally posted by dreamkillers
How were they even more screwed.......both were screwed by it in the end and both ended up in the same boat
Originally posted by ok.crows
Both were screwed by the MCG contract, I agree, but -
1. Port decided to go for broke in rd 22, they made that choice, whereas Crows had no choice, and
2. Port did not actually have a supposed "home final" game played in Melbourne, whereas Crows did.
Originally posted by dreamkillers
If the MCG contract issue wasn't there the club didn't have to win the last game of the season to ensure home finals.
Originally posted by grayham
Malthouse would be the one under most pressure because the collingwood fans expect nothing less than a flag, yet most unbiased experts only rate the team as a mid-table finalist (4rd-7th).
Mark Williams is safe for a while. The win against Essendon saved his bacon in last years finals. All he needs is a finals berth anywhere and he's ok.
Neale Daniher is also safe. Any finals birth is an exceptable result, which they should achieve.
Gary Ayres is safe. He can blame the "carey" factor if the team doesnt gell, and claim his coaching ability if carey brings a flag.
You honestly think the MCG contract had any impact on the result of Port's finals campeign? I can't believe it. Port went hard in round 22 for pride adn for top spot, irrespective of the MCG contract and what was or was not riding on it.Originally posted by RIPPER_46
If the was no MCG contract the Rd 22 game would not have had so much riding on it. Certainly if Collingwood and Carton f (for example) had finished 1 & 2 and played for top spot in Rd 22, there would not have been a home fPreliminary Final resting on the result.
I believe (and I dont particularly like the PAP's that they wre carried away by the hype of Rd 22, Won top spot and by the time they woke up that Collingwood were a threat it was too late.
I just cant believe that Pie's supporters cannot acknowlege that they were indeed extremly fortunate.
I think you use the term "my money" loosely. You would only have been borrowing it.Originally posted by topjars
Call it what you will but if Port had met Brisbane in the GF my money would have been on them
Originally posted by MarkT
I have heard some ***** weak excuses for losing games before but this would take the cake. Not even Mark Williams would claim this one.
If Port would not have played exactly the same game in round 22 irrespective of the MCG contract, then they are in the wrong competition. Teams do cruise at times but not in round 22 in a top of teh table battle with a likely GF opponent at home. really this is the worst excuse I have ever heard. Trust me I've heard plenty and many of 'em from fellow Pies.Originally posted by dreamkillers
Possibly as if we had won the game against Collingwood it would have meant a weeks break that a few players needed.........I believe it was the Round 22 game that was our biggest killer.
rubbish. Adelaide I have some sympathy for. Port were completely uunaffected. Absolutley irrelevant. If they were menatlly or physically affected by that contract during a H&A match in those circumstances then they really are not Port Adelaide and never will be. In fact they will never be an AFL team while that is the case.Originally posted by dreamkillers
How were they even more screwed.......both were screwed by it in the end and both ended up in the same boat
Or losing to opponents who played better. sounds strange I know but Collingwood beat two South Australian teams. There must have been some conspiracy!Originally posted by dreamkillers
True but both ended up missing out on the GF possibly due to the same rule........
Originally posted by Jars458
So what?
In which case tehy wouldn't have tried to win and not secure the minor premiership.
Give me a break
Port tries to win every game equally. Remember Fos' little credo.
Port had no-one to blame but themselves.
The MCG contract is completely irrelevant.
Originally posted by MarkT
If Port would not have played exactly the same game in round 22 irrespective of the MCG contract, then they are in the wrong competition. Teams do cruise at times but not in round 22 in a top of teh table battle with a likely GF opponent at home. really this is the worst excuse I have ever heard. Trust me I've heard plenty and many of 'em from fellow Pies.
Apart from anything else you lost 2 out of three finals after never having won one. To assume you would or could have been premiers is more than speculative, it is downright illogical. Nothing at all whatsoever point to Port winning any final away from home let alone against the best team of quite some time. You had a chance to give Brisbane some competition and never at any stage looked in their class. If you don't think finals are different than home matches during the season then you really don't understand why you lost at all.
FWIW I think Port gained a lot from the 2002 finals and will be pretty formidable next year. Also FWIW I think they to learn their lessons the hard way. A winning culture or not, in another competition or not, they just were not ready. Of course that is speculation just like yours but at least the results back mine up.
Originally posted by MarkT
rubbish. Adelaide I have some sympathy for. Port were completely uunaffected. Absolutley irrelevant. If they were menatlly or physically affected by that contract during a H&A match in those circumstances then they really are not Port Adelaide and never will be. In fact they will never be an AFL team while that is the case.
Originally posted by MarkT
Or losing to opponents who played better. sounds strange I know but Collingwood beat two South Australian teams. There must have been some conspiracy!
Originally posted by dreamkillers
Possibly as if we had won the game against Collingwood it would have meant a weeks break that a few players needed.........I believe it was the Round 22 game that was our biggest killer.
Originally posted by afc9798
Thanks for your decisive analysis Eddie Fulo****. Ayres started slowly, but has continually moved the club upwards and will continue to do so. I am extremely happy that he has re-signed as coach and that he'll be around to continue to make people such as you eat their words. Most journos and opposition supporters had the Crows either scaping into the eight and some had us as low as 14th last year. Not a bad return from a bunch of also rans I would have thought. Don't let reality creep into your assesments though, as this would deprive us of another village idiot.
Originally posted by adey115
Port did not get screwed by the MCG rule. Port screwed themselves by losing to Collingwood in the first week of the finals. To blame a hard rnd 22 match with 'everything riding on it' (and thus blaming the MCG prelim final rule) is a crock.
They didn't played their prelim final in Adelaide because they lost to Collingwood, not because they beat the Lions.
In that rnd 22 game with 'everything riding on it', Brisbane lost. Did playing a tough game the week before upset the way they performed the week after - no.....
Originally posted by RIPPER_46
True to a point.
But the point I am tring to make is thatbecause of the MCG Contract they did not have the luxury of "cruising" to the finals A LA Magpies
RD 19
Hawthorn 1.4 7.9 12.12 15.15 (105)
Collingwood 3.3 9.5 10.9 14.13 (97)
RD 20
Essendon 6.3 10.6 14.10 19.12 (126)
Collingwood 2.2 4.4 8.8 10.11 (71)
RD 21
Collingwood 1.1 4.6 8.8 11.11 (77)
St Kilda 1.6 5.7 9.10 9.12 (66)
RD 22
Collingwood 2.4 6.6 9.12 10.13 (73)
Western Bulldogs 4.3 6.5 11.7 17.12 (114)
Also Brisbane played adelaide coming of a Perth Game with a%day break after travel.
MCG Contract certainly helped.
I can't beleive I'm Sticking up for SA sides
Originally posted by RIPPER_46
True to a point.
But the point I am tring to make is thatbecause of the MCG Contract they did not have the luxury of "cruising" to the finals A LA Magpies
RD 19
Hawthorn 1.4 7.9 12.12 15.15 (105)
Collingwood 3.3 9.5 10.9 14.13 (97)
RD 20
Essendon 6.3 10.6 14.10 19.12 (126)
Collingwood 2.2 4.4 8.8 10.11 (71)
RD 21
Collingwood 1.1 4.6 8.8 11.11 (77)
St Kilda 1.6 5.7 9.10 9.12 (66)
RD 22
Collingwood 2.4 6.6 9.12 10.13 (73)
Western Bulldogs 4.3 6.5 11.7 17.12 (114)
Also Brisbane played adelaide coming of a Perth Game with a%day break after travel.
MCG Contract certainly helped.
I can't beleive I'm Sticking up for SA sides
Originally posted by topjars
Who is hurtin the most ?
1. Mick Malthouse because the Pies got the wobbles again in a granny that was nearly in the bag
[/I]
by Falchoon
Williams should be hurting because his setting up for the finals and his surly demeanour seemed to cost Port at the most inopportune time of the year. I would say that if he doesn't make the Granny this year he will be gone, and surely there'd be some coaches licking their lips over the prospect of handling that list