Autopsy Pies win one for the ages!!

[DaVe86]

Terrific win. I thought our intensity was better from the get go, and we were clearly playing with more attack. But I thought we were well off our game in a number of areas such as clearances, contested footy, and forward pressure. I honestly thought the Eagles were going to blow us away eventually. The only thing keeping us in it was how efficient we were going forward and we were also nailing our shots.

But once we took ascendency around stoppages and clearances, they had no chance. We ultimately beat them up in every area in the last quarter, which is a huge effort considering our injuries and youth in the side, and the fact we have Maynard on Darling out of necessity.

Grundy was huge in the last quarter as well, I think Naitanui was struggling and missed large chunks of the last qtr which helped. But Grundy took full control in the ruck.

 

[Quicky]

Terrific win. I thought our intensity was better from the get go, and we were clearly playing with more attack. But I thought we were well off our game in a number of areas such as clearances, contested footy, and forward pressure. I honestly thought the Eagles were going to blow us away eventually. The only thing keeping us in it was how efficient we were going forward and we were also nailing our shots.

But once we took ascendency around stoppages and clearances, they had no chance. We ultimately beat them up in every area in the last quarter, which is a huge effort considering our injuries and youth in the side, and the fact we have Maynard on Darling out of necessity.

Grundy was huge in the last quarter as well, I think Naitanui was struggling and missed large chunks of the last qtr which helped. But Grundy took full control in the ruck.

Naitanui is only playing 50% game time since returning. They're carefully managing his loads. I reckon they'd have been desperate to get him on but he just isn't ready for it.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Terrific win. I thought our intensity was better from the get go, and we were clearly playing with more attack. But I thought we were well off our game in a number of areas such as clearances, contested footy, and forward pressure. I honestly thought the Eagles were going to blow us away eventually. The only thing keeping us in it was how efficient we were going forward and we were also nailing our shots.

But once we took ascendency around stoppages and clearances, they had no chance. We ultimately beat them up in every area in the last quarter, which is a huge effort considering our injuries and youth in the side, and the fact we have Maynard on Darling out of necessity.

Grundy was huge in the last quarter as well, I think Naitanui was struggling and missed large chunks of the last qtr which helped. But Grundy took full control in the ruck.

Like your summation.

Just unsure on the contested stuff, I thought that was the difference with us being far more fierce in tackling and contested possession. (And De Goey being such a boss.)

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Agreed, we had white backs from the start. Wish we’d go back permanently to them

St Kilda actually have a legitimate beef with us changing to the black backs

One of my hobby horses. (Have a few of those eg Jock McHale was the best coach in the last century.)

To me it’s a visual thing, the white back with black numbers are much much easier to see and watch (both live and on TV).

I’m amazed we’ve stuck to what we use for home games. I’ve always thought it was an Ed idea and hence won’t change back. But that could be me reading way too much into it.

 

[foreigner]

I just read Robbo's The Tackle column. One of his dislikes was our blocks against the likes of Barrass.

As far as I could see/remember, this was just standard blocks; a forward doing a screen for another forward. No holds, etc. You see this sort of forward craft even in country footy reserves games!

Maybe I have to go and watch it again...

To be honest I only read the column expecting to see Pendles in the "Likes" section for playing a half with a broken finger.

Did he talk about the push in the back, chopping of arms that is never paid against Cox? Surely, we'd have to respond to nullify that and it worked. Talking of blocks, we continue to glorify one in the last gf. Suck it up Robbo

 

[Saintly Viewed]

There was a push in the back to Roughead which resulted in a WC goal.

 

[DaVe86]

Like your summation.

Just unsure on the contested stuff, I thought that was the difference with us being far more fierce in tackling and contested possession. (And De Goey being such a boss.)

What I meant was that we were off our game for about 2 and a half quarters in terms of clearances and also it was too easy for West Coast to exit defence.

Then from mid way through the 3rd quarter onwards, we took control. So the fact we were able to make the most of our entries early in the game when we were getting outplayed was super important.

 

[TW Sherrin]

I just read Robbo's The Tackle column. One of his dislikes was our blocks against the likes of Barrass.

As far as I could see/remember, this was just standard blocks; a forward doing a screen for another forward. No holds, etc. You see this sort of forward craft even in country footy reserves games!

Maybe I have to go and watch it again...

To be honest I only read the column expecting to see Pendles in the "Likes" section for playing a half with a broken finger.

there were a couple of subtle blocks. A clever block or nudge from Cox in the last quarter to allow Mihocek to mark and goal. There was down the other end I think by Mayne which was less subtle and definitely a free they missed. not sure if either were on Barras.

did the p1sshead mention Degoey's missed free 30m out from goal in the last 3 minutes when he was belted in the head? I doubt it.

 

[TW Sherrin]

What I meant was that we were off our game for about 2 and a half quarters in terms of clearances and also it was too easy for West Coast to exit defence.

Then from mid way through the 3rd quarter onwards, we took control. So the fact we were able to make the most of our entries early in the game when we were getting outplayed was super important.

wce prey on turnovers and we were giving them way too many in the first half.

 

[jonbe54]

wce prey on turnovers and we were giving them way too many in the first half.

Yes like hyena's waiting for the old or unfit to fall - quite literally - they put enough grunts in to force a hot contest and have a couple hunting the bobbling ball slipping out of the pack.

Worse yet though they are masters at time wasting when the opposition win the ball - knocking him down, tripping over him or their own feet if necessary, having one of their own team mates run into them or across the line they need to return the ball to their opponent, asking the umpire questions and even for clarification of their answers. They have a myriad of ways to slow the game down when not in possession and have obviously been carefully coached to produce the desired result.

 

[Markfs]

I just read Robbo's The Tackle column. One of his dislikes was our blocks against the likes of Barrass.

As far as I could see/remember, this was just standard blocks; a forward doing a screen for another forward. No holds, etc. You see this sort of forward craft even in country footy reserves games!

Maybe I have to go and watch it again...

To be honest I only read the column expecting to see Pendles in the "Likes" section for playing a half with a broken finger.

There was a few murmurs from the media about this. Evidently it's fair game for defenders to work together to block the forward but it's not fair game for forwards to do the same. I think everyone would love to go to the good old days when everyone used to fly to take the mark - even the defenders.

Which reminds me of a comment from a beagle supporter phoning in to Mick Malthouse on Perth ABC sportstalk on saturday. He said that the Collingwood defenders were punching the ball in marking contests and it shouldnt be allowed. Mick knows where his bread is buttered these days and Perth radio listeners would give him the flick if he didnt agree with their every whinge. In the end, he said "well defenders are allowed to punch the ball away from forwards."

 

[Carringbush2010]

What I meant was that we were off our game for about 2 and a half quarters in terms of clearances and also it was too easy for West Coast to exit defence.

Then from mid way through the 3rd quarter onwards, we took control. So the fact we were able to make the most of our entries early in the game when we were getting outplayed was super important.

2 and half quarters? Try the whole season, that was the first time this season I've witnessed the Pies actually suffocate the opposition - that is the brand that will bring us the cup.

You're also not paying credit to the opposition, they were v good in clearances themselves and have been for the best part of the year. On face value they look like a bruise free transition team, granted their transition footy is excellent they're not known as a contested team but they are and have been for the best part of the season.

 

[DinoSoar]

I just read Robbo's The Tackle column. One of his dislikes was our blocks against the likes of Barrass.

As far as I could see/remember, this was just standard blocks; a forward doing a screen for another forward. No holds, etc. You see this sort of forward craft even in country footy reserves games!

Maybe I have to go and watch it again...

To be honest I only read the column expecting to see Pendles in the "Likes" section for playing a half with a broken finger.

Did he dislike the mother of all blocks put on Maynard last September that gave WCE the mark and leading to the winning goal for the premiership?!? Hmmm, crickets ...

Robbo is an irrelevant tool. What, our forwards should just let WCE defenders do as they please without having to earn their possessions? Smart and clever play by our guys to stay within the rules but negate WCE’s key strength.

 

[Anzacday]

There was a few murmurs from the media about this. Evidently it's fair game for defenders to work together to block the forward but it's not fair game for forwards to do the same.

Tell them to watch the footage the of our games when Darcy is being blocked.
Bunch of sooks.
Robbo being his typical anti Bucks/Pies self.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Worse yet though they are masters at time wasting when the opposition win the ball - knocking him down, tripping over him or their own feet if necessary, having one of their own team mates run into them or across the line they need to return the ball to their opponent, asking the umpire questions and even for clarification of their answers. They have a myriad of ways to slow the game down when not in possession and have obviously been carefully coached to produce the desired result.

This x 1,000. Infuriating to watch because once again, you know we wouldn’t get away with the same thing.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Tell them to watch the footage the of our games when Darcy is being blocked.
Bunch of sooks.
Robbo being his typical anti Bucks/Pies self.

Key point.
He is very anti Buckley.

And his anti Collingwood stance is built on old prejudices of our team.
His nasty comments about Fasolo at training was designed to his world view everything is fair game when knocking Collingwood.

 

[Thatsmyname]

Key point.
He is very anti Buckley.

And his anti Collingwood stance is built on old prejudices of our team.
His nasty comments about Fasolo at training was designed to his world view everything is fair game when knocking Collingwood.

Buckley made a fool of him on 360 (not difficult) the fat **** has never forgiven him

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Buckley made a fool of him on 360 (not difficult) the fat **** has never forgiven him

True.

He does have a lower threshold of integrity.

 

[Pie eyed]

Buckley made a fool of him on 360 (not difficult) the fat **** has never forgiven him

True, although making a fool of him is eminently simple.
He does it to himself, even when no-one is there.
He asks himself stupid questions aloud, sometimes several times, before he blurts out his stupid answer.
He reasons aloud like child. Sometimes I think he does not realise anyone can hear him.
It gives you a window into his mental issues though.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

True, although making a fool of him is eminently simple.
He does it to himself, even when no-one is there.
He asks himself stupid questions aloud, sometimes several times, before he blurts out his stupid answer.
He reasons aloud like child. Sometimes I think he does not realise anyone can hear him.
It gives you a window into his mental issues though.

That and he’s a tosspot.

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

I just read Robbo's The Tackle column. One of his dislikes was our blocks against the likes of Barrass.

As far as I could see/remember, this was just standard blocks; a forward doing a screen for another forward. No holds, etc. You see this sort of forward craft even in country footy reserves games!

Maybe I have to go and watch it again...

To be honest I only read the column expecting to see Pendles in the "Likes" section for playing a half with a broken finger.

**** Robbo. Silly bastard must have missed Kennedy's work in the goal square when darling took the mark on the goal line. The commentators were saying we were poorly organised when really, Kennedy was great at getting rid of Roughead and WHE.

 

[unplugged]

fu** Robbo. Silly bastard must have missed Kennedy's work in the goal square when darling took the mark on the goal line. The commentators were saying we were poorly organised when really, Kennedy was great at getting rid of Roughead and WHE.

I did notice that at the time actually. Kennedy had no intention of marking the ball.

 

[Billy Bob65]

Congratulations on the win.

Here are the midfield frequency stats from the game. If you haven't seen one of these posts before, this is an overall summary of how often your players were lining up as one of the 5 mids at bounces.

Overall Summary - 27 Bounces

Phillips 25 (24w, 1i)
Treloar 22
de Goey 22
Sidebottom 19 (16w, 3i)
Crisp 18 (1w)
Sier 15
Pendlebury 11 (10w, 1i)
Crocker 3 wing

Rucks:
Grundy 23
Cox 4

Centre Clearances (as per Champion Data/AFL.com.au
Grundy 3
Cox 2
de Goey 2
Treloar 2
Sidebottom 2
Sier 1
Pendlebury 1

1st Half - 20

Phillips 18 (17w, 1i)
Treloar 16
de Goey 16
Crisp 15
Sidebottom 14 (12w, 2i)
Pendlebury 9 (8w, 1i)
Sier 9
Crocker 3 wing

Grundy 18
Cox 2

Final Term - 3

Phillips 3 wing
Treloar 3
de Goey 3
Sidebottom 2 wing
Sier 2
Crisp 1
Pendlebury 1 wing

Cox 2
Grundy 1

Notes:
- First time Pendlebury has finished outside the top 6 mids in an analysed game since Rd 21, 2016. He only had 2 starts after 1/4 time
- Most starts for Crisp in an analysed game since Rd 23, 2016. This was his first analysed game start in a year, his first inside start since Rd 21, 2017 and his first top 6 finish since Rd 9, 2017
- A week after not being utilised in Q4 at all and registering a career low for starts, Sier's attendances bounced back to normal.

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

I did notice that at the time actually. Kennedy had no intention of marking the ball.

Was very good play and a good example of how commentators dig their heels in when they're wrong rather than admit that they stuffed up.
They were calling Collingwood blocks whenever they occurred.
Robbo's intention would be to try to influence the umpire's focus in those marking contests. Don't be surprised if we get called for it a few times in the next game.

 

[Hairydawg]

Naitanui is only playing 50% game time since returning. They're carefully managing his loads. I reckon they'd have been desperate to get him on but he just isn't ready for it.

The commentators must have mentioned the 50% game time thing 6 times. As it turns out, he was injured and they still kept him out as much as possible, and i reckon if he wasn’t injured they would have let him play it out. He almost took a match winning grab deep into the last quarter.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app