Review Round 10: Collingwood 50-41 Sydney

[Capital Magpie]

This is a review of yesterdays game, not about the future, I'm critical (constructively I might add) about our current form.

FWIW I haven't criticized the Bears game and see potential for Daics's future.

The team toughing out with 1 rotation is absolutely mandatory, a given, as it should be.

If you're happy with our performance last night then you're an easy supporter to please. Wouldn't be surprised if you view gf losses as a success, they're not they're failures.

Never said I was happy with our performance, but I did say it's not all doom and gloom and I can see some positives in our narrow, ugly win.

I won't dignify your GF reference with a response.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I'll suggest one for you to consider, although I would prefer not to call individual posters out. But seeing as you've asked, how about post 173 in this thread?

"Enjoy the win? Apart from Daicos’ goal, there is nothing to enjoy about that game.

Why do supporters need to become sheep and accept the status quo which goes on year after year without question?

I bet you like everyone want this team to succeed. Sure, teams have form slumps, periods where nothing goes right, and if it’s a rare occurrence then you can accept it. However to have this happen all too often for almost a decade bar one which was an outlier should not be allowed to continue. That means it’s a systematic issue at play whether it’s players or the coaching staff.

If you want mediocrity then so be it. I and others don’t. We have every right to criticise those that play and coach if this is the crap they continue to dish up time after time without fail".

That post seems the very opposite of constructive criticism. Constructive suggests building something up, i.e. balancing negatives with positives. The opposite is destructive, tearing things down. The quoted post minimises the positives, highlights and exaggerates the negatives and then draws a long bow in suggesting that anyone who disagrees is no more than a sheep, blindly following the club's line. And that we had a flukily lucky season in 2018, whereas in the decade around that the team has been rubbish. Nope, very little in the way of constructive criticism there.

That's one example but I'm sure I could point out others.

Um no, that post (which I read the original) is not detrimental criticism, that post is correct.

The only enjoyment was Daics's goal, the rest of the game we were poor - even given our effort.

That post did not minimise what was a great goal.

Calling posters sheep is not criticism of the team or coaches. Accepting last nights performance as an all round positive is not correct, you can boil it and dissect, turn it upside down or inside out the fact is we continued poor form - very poor form.

The 'crap' we dish up week in week out lately is harsh BUT not incorrect is it. Certainly not deconstructive.

2018 was on the back of a great tactical game style, not so much personnel, that team then was certainly not talent laden like the other 3 teams in the top 4. We punched above our weight personnel wise. Blunt reality.

 

[Capital Magpie]

Um no, that post (which I read the original) is not detrimental criticism, that post is correct.

The only enjoyment was Daics's goal, the rest of the game we were poor - even given our effort.

That post did not minimise what was a great goal.

Calling posters sheep is not criticism of the team or coaches. Accepting last nights performance as an all round positive is not correct, you can boil it and dissect, turn it upside down or inside out the fact is we continued poor form - very poor form.

The 'crap' we dish up week in week out lately is harsh BUT not incorrect is it. Certainly not deconstructive.

2018 was on the back of a great tactical game style, not so much personnel, that team then was certainly not talent laden like the other 3 teams in the top 4. We punched above our weight personnel wise. Blunt reality.

You spin it how you want mate, and see what you want to see, but I do not agree.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Never said I was happy with our performance, but I did say it's not all doom and gloom and I can see some positives in our narrow, ugly win.

I won't dignify your GF reference with a response.

Doom and gloom? You view critical posts as doom and gloom. Ok then by that logic ANY post that is not 'happy' with poor performance win as 'nonconstructive'

As far as your last sentence, that's fine. Does not detract from the fact that a gf loss is a loss, i:e NOT successful, that can't be argued.

 

[Carringbush2010]

You spin it how you want mate, and see what you want to see, but I do not agree.

It's not 'spinning' anything, what happened is what happened - in other words fact. We were poor - fact.

You can spin it anyway you want to hide from reality if you like, but that won't change reality, no amount of spin will.

 

[Bramax]

Put another zero on it and players like him will think twice.

Absolutely. $5000 is more commensurate with a players earnings.

 

[Capital Magpie]

It's not 'spinning' anything, what happened is what happened - in other words fact. We were poor - fact.

You can spin it anyway you want to hide from reality if you like, but that won't change reality, no amount of spin will.

You seem like one of those posters who equates having the last word with winning the debate. If so, no doubt you'll reply to this.

 

[Capital Magpie]

Doom and gloom? You view critical posts as doom and gloom. Ok then by that logic ANY post that is not 'happy' with poor performance win as 'nonconstructive'

As far as your last sentence, that's fine. Does not detract from the fact that a gf loss is a loss, i:e NOT successful, that can't be argued.

See post 357

 

[Carringbush2010]

You seem like one of those posters who equates having the last word with winning the debate. If so, no doubt you'll reply to this.

Nice try but totally off topic. Try staying on topic.

 

[Anzacday]

having the last word with winning the debate.

Is that you Mrs Anzac?

 

[Capital Magpie]

Nice try but totally off topic. Try staying on topic.

As Mike Williamson in 1966 famously said: "I tipped this!"

 

[No SPIN]

Um no, that post (which I read the original) is not detrimental criticism, that post is correct.

The only enjoyment was Daics's goal, the rest of the game we were poor - even given our effort.

That post did not minimise what was a great goal.

Calling posters sheep is not criticism of the team or coaches. Accepting last nights performance as an all round positive is not correct, you can boil it and dissect, turn it upside down or inside out the fact is we continued poor form - very poor form.

The 'crap' we dish up week in week out lately is harsh BUT not incorrect is it. Certainly not deconstructive.

2018 was on the back of a great tactical game style, not so much personnel, that team then was certainly not talent laden like the other 3 teams in the top 4. We punched above our weight personnel wise. Blunt reality.

It is disingenuous of you to imply there is nothing wrong with that post - which is full venom, hyperbole distortions and untruths.
CB if you believe it meets the standards as fair criticism, then many here would say you have very low standards.

 

[Carringbush2010]

As Mike Williamson in 1966 famously said: "I tipped this!"

Irrelevant again, got anything on subject?

 

[Carringbush2010]

It is disingenuous of you to imply there is nothing wrong with that post - which is full venom, hyperbole distortions and untruths.
CB if you believe it meets the standards as fair criticism, then many here would say you have very low standards.

I'll agree that post was blunt, but there was not anything untruthful.

There was nothing hyperbolic in it either, that's just how you view it.

If blunt is detrimental criticism (which I'm sure the players and coaches wouldn't read anyway) then ANY criticism is detrimental.

 

[Capital Magpie]

Irrelevant again, got anything on subject?

Umm not irrelevant at all. Just making the point that you would want to have the last word in your mistaken belief that that makes you the "winner". Too subtle for you?
And your response to my points of view amounts to "no, it's not black, it's white", so I'm refraining from flogging a dead horse.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Saw this on the Swans board

rampe had the same boots apparently

Probably gives him better grip when climbing up the goalpost

 

[Carringbush2010]

Umm not irrelevant at all. Just making the point that you would want to have the last word in your mistaken belief that that makes you the "winner". Too subtle for you?
And your response to my points of view amounts to "no, it's not black, it's white", so I'm refraining from flogging a dead horse.

Your skewed view of me 'having to win an argument by having the last word' has absolutely zero to with the thread.

It's not about me 'winning' anything, it's about the review of the game last night. Try staying on topic or don't, flog your dead horse if you wish. We're done here.

 

[Capital Magpie]

Your skewed view of me 'having to win an argument by having the last word' has absolutely zero to with the thread.

It's not about me 'winning' anything, it's about the review of the game last night. Try staying on topic or don't, flog your dead horse if you wish. We're done here.

Whatever

 

[No SPIN]

I'll agree that post was blunt, but there was not anything untruthful.

There was nothing hyperbolic in it either, that's just how you view it.

If blunt is detrimental criticism (which I'm sure the players and coaches wouldn't read anyway) then ANY criticism is detrimental.

ok - at least we’re in agreement. It is detrimental criticism which is what you would not accept in your post #352 above.

 

[Jen2310]

You'd think we'd lost judging by comments

Accept the win and move on.

The 2nd half of the game was great. Much better in how we want to play. Better kicks going into I50, and paying off. I've no doubt this will give them the confidence going into the next game, and going forward.

Noble's game was fantastic.
Daics was fantastic. Can't stop watching his goal. Brillant.

Adams had his best game in weeks, was so good.

 

[Carringbush2010]

ok - at least we’re in agreement. It is detrimental criticism which is what you would not accept in your post #352 above.

My post in reply to you? The detrimental criticism that I think you're referring to i:e the post used as an example?

If so that criticism was directed at other posters, not the team which I've already explained. Which in any case any criticism on here which is directed at the team it's likely they wouldn't read anyway so I'm not sure what the issue.

In any case, none of this really relevant. What is relevant is that we were poor in review, now that is not detrimental criticism.

 

[No SPIN]

My post in reply to you? The detrimental criticism that I think you're referring to i:e the post used as an example?

If so that criticism was directed at other posters, not the team which I've already explained. Which in any case any criticism on here which is directed at the team it's likely they wouldn't read anyway so I'm not sure what the issue.

In any case, none of this really relevant. What is relevant is that we were poor in review, now that is not detrimental criticism.

Just read your post numbered # 352 - what I was referring to is pretty clear.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Just read your post numbered # 352 - what I was referring to is pretty clear.

Like I said any nonconstructive criticism in the post we're referring to was not directed at the team. Not sure what you're on about here.

Anyway it's not relevant to the thread.

 

[Sea fog]

You spin it how you want mate, and see what you want to see, but I do not agree.

I think that we were almost on a par with Richmond but they went out and got Lynch and have found a few others now, while we got Beams and went backwards.

 

[Capital Magpie]

I think that we were almost on a par with Richmond but they went out and got Lynch and have found a few others now, while we got Beams and went backwards.

Yep I think that's a fair assessment, but I was posting about finding a few positives from our win against Sydney and lamenting the unnecessary focus on all that's wrong with the club.