Toast Round 15 = Collingwood 82-80 Adelaide

JOELY · Jun 25, 2023

unplugged said:
So is Bruzzy injured or not? I'd be leaning towards no?

Copped the rib but also landed on the right unstrapped shoulder. But was shaking hands with right hand which goes against what one poster said.

Without knowing, I'm also leaning towards no. If he's injured I'm thinking rib, because Macrae in the press conference mentioned him possibly being just winded, but we would see on Tuesday. Sounds like he'll have some scans to make sure. Did they show him clutching his shoulder on the telecast? I kept an eye on him at the game and he just seemed to be lying there in pain for a while before walking to the bench bent over, no shoulder grabbing.

Bianconeri · Jun 25, 2023

Mollythedolly said:
That was Witts' 1st game back after his finger injury. He was played as a KPF for most of that game, giving Grundy an occasional chop out. He is not now nor was he then a KPF. Buckley's frustration, if that was even the match, was just as likely in being forced into that situation due to Moore and Cloke being unavailable, leaving Witts and Jessie White as our only options. And we got spanked by Melbourne. But don't let your desperation to make it something more than that get in the way of the truth.

Cloke was dropped for that game
For Witts

Timmy from Thomastown · Jun 25, 2023

unplugged said:
I reckon if I got hit high and had a bloodied mouth inside 50 I'd be asking the umpire why they didn't call anything as well

Only if you don’t know the rules…. It was incidental contact of two players chasing the same ball..

I reckon fly wouldn’t be too impressed if Darcy Moore started whinging to the umpire after the game had finished. Not a good look.

barrackers · Jun 25, 2023

unplugged said:
So is Bruzzy injured or not? I'd be leaning towards no?

Copped the rib but also landed on the right unstrapped shoulder. But was shaking hands with right hand which goes against what one poster said.

McRae confirmed he came off hurt, but initial thoughts are he was winded or similar rather than injured.

barrackers · Jun 25, 2023

soreplums said:
Cameron and Crisp

Johnson had enough pace and space to run much closer to goal and a make a certainty of it too. Instead his pass was slightly long and bounced out of bounds.

Aussie pie · Jun 25, 2023

Maggie5 said:
I was a big fan of Witts and always had him ahead of Grundy but I thought that despite Witt's form, Grundy was always the preferred option by Buckley and the selection committee.

This part was true.

Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley has taken to Twitter to concede that he overstepped the mark during a fiery boundary line exchange with ruckman Jarrod Witts.

A furious Buckley grabbed Witts by the jumper and gesticulated fiercely during the third quarter of his side's 29-point loss to Hawthorn at the MCG on Saturday afternoon.

Can we not mention the B name on here after playing a SA team as I get PTSD of the worst game of football ever against PA at the G. That was when I lost the plot with B and his moronic game plan.

Edit: I forgot about that even worse game v Richmond after covid, the nil all draw.

Mollythedolly · Jun 25, 2023

Timmy from Thomastown said:
2016 preseason aside, Grundy was miles ahead of Witts in 2015 in all stats. In fact Collingwood offered him the opportunity to return to his home state and play for the giants…. But he opted to stick out his contract and ended up at the suns instead a year later. There’s no guarantee he would had passed Grundy even if he’d been selected in round one 2016. It’s fanciful to imply that.

They were both specialist first rucks with limiteD kpp ability. Very long odds of them suceeding in the same 22 despite many goes at it in 2015. It’s a shame but something had to give and at the time Grundy was the far superior player.

GWS actually asked for Witts as part of the Treloar trade is my recollection. Witts declined, opting to back himself. Did enough over the preseason to get the ruck position ahead of Grundy for R1. I agree, most thought both very good 1st ruck prospects. My posting on the subject was based purely on the hyperbolic claim Grundy was “streets ahead”. He never was. I’ll leave it there.

Timmy from Thomastown · Jun 25, 2023

Mollythedolly said:
GWS actually asked for Witts as part of the Treloar trade is my recollection. Witts declined, opting to back himself. Did enough over the preseason to get the ruck position ahead of Grundy for R1. I agree, most thought both very good 1st ruck prospects. My posting on the subject was based purely on the hyperbolic claim Grundy was “streets ahead”. He never was. I’ll leave it there.

Grundy was always streets ahead of Witts at around that time.

danielnajdek · Jun 25, 2023

HFF said:
The Crows fans talking about umpiring decisions…
They were +10 in round 7 against us in what was the worst game of umpiring …so much so they had to come out and issue a statement after getting slammed by all and sundry.

So they can’t beat us when they get the umps, can’t beat us when it goes against them …yet they’re salty.

It’s a crazy world out there.

Also they are complaining about that "missed free" in the last 10 seconds. About 15 seconds before that Markov should've got a free for too high.

Mollythedolly · Jun 25, 2023

No SPIN said:
A controlled media performer like Buckley, does not publicly man handle a player, in the absence of a prolonged period of frustration that ultimately boils over.

It’s that simple.

Buckley didn’t rate Witts - and preferred Grundy.

When Grundy was winning AA honours I don’t recall you or anyone else suggesting the club made the wrong call.

No spin? What a crock. All spin. Now you pretend to know the mind of Nathan Buckley. I look forward to you posting the link to the audio grab or article where he’s ever said he didn’t rate Witts.

Mollythedolly · Jun 25, 2023

Timmy from Thomastown said:
Grundy was always streets ahead of Witts at around that time.

No he wasn’t, they just couldn’t play in the same team. Witts was always going to take time to develop after he was drafted in 2011, but he was AFL ready by 2015 & 16. He was dominating VFL in his last couple of years at Collingwood. Terms like “miles ahead” and “streets ahead” are the territory of Grundy v Tim English circa 2018 & 2019. Witts v Grundy 1st head to head post Witts trade in 2017:

Grundy - 16 disposals, 2 marks, 4 clearances, 2 tackles, 42 hitouts, 5 clangers, 3 turnovers, 3 score involvements, 9 PAs
Witts - 16 disposals, 3 marks, 4 clearances, 4 tackles, 42 hitouts, 2 clangers, 2 turnovers, 6 score involvements, 15 PAs

Hardly reflective of either “streets” or “miles” ahead..

Swooper18 · Jun 25, 2023

The Melbourne Cricket Ground played host to a pulsating, tense and fluctuating contest between Collingwood and Adelaide, where the Magpies held on by 2 points. The first term was a quarter of two halves where Adelaide had all the play but did not convert, before the Woods hit back to take a slender lead of 5 points at the first change. Despite leading by 34 points during time-on in the second term, and eventually leading by 27 points at half time, the third quarter saw the Crows blitz the Pies on the scoreboard with 7 unanswered goals during the quarter, which saw Adelaide lead by 13 points at three quarter time. Collingwood hit back hard in trademark fashion to come from behind once again and pull off another miraculous victory by 2 points in a cliffhanger against the resurgent Crows, who have been gallant in defeat against Collingwood recently. The last four matches that Collingwood have won against Adelaide have been by an aggregate margin of 13 points, and have not lost to the Crows since 2016.

Collingwood won their statistical categories from sources such as disposals by +3 (369 - 366), kicks were won by +6 (215 - 209), uncontested possessions were up by +10 (227 - 217), while hit-outs were won by +5 (40 - 35), clearances had a margin of +5 (41 - 36), and stoppage clearances had a differential of +8 (31 - 23) and Tackles Inside 50 had a gap of +1 (9 - 8). Adelaide won their key indicators through handballs by +3 (157 - 154), contested possessions were won by +3 (137 - 134), intercept possessions had a margin of +6 (68 - 62), turnovers were -8 (61 - 69), and centre clearances had an advantage of +3 (13 - 10). Tackles were up by +6 (70 - 64), while intercept marks were claimed by +6 (68 - 62), Marks Inside 50 went Adelaide's way by +6 (16 - 10), and +8 for Inside 50s (57 - 49). Both sides were split in marks (87 each), uncontested marks (76 apiece), and contested marks (all square at 11).

Nick Daicos (37 disposals @ 73%, 375 metres gained, 14 contested possessions, 23 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 13 kicks, 24 handballs, 2 marks, 5 tackles, 1 goal assist, 9 score involvements, 8 clearances, 2 centre clearances, 6 stoppage clearances, 3 Inside 50s & 1 goal) was predominantly in the midfield for the entire game, and was highly prolific with his handpasses linking up transition and scoring chains, while his clearance work was very good. Nick's hunger to win the contested ball and tackling, combined with composed foot skills were also notable features.

Josh Daicos (33 disposals @ 82%, 604 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 25 uncontested possessions, 5 intercept possessions, 18 kicks, 15 handballs, 6 handballs, 1 goal assist, 7 score involvements, 6 clearances, 6 stoppage clearances, 6 Inside 50s, 3 Rebound 50s & 1 goal)returned to his best after the bye and was chiefly responsible for igniting Collingwood into action with the team's opening goal, while remaining proactive around stoppages which gave his team territory and opportunities to score up forward. Josh was the conduit between the arcs on the wing that would work his way towards the half-back flank to take marks and maintain possession. Josh was also prominent across half-forward with his ball-winning ability having an influence on the outcome of the contest.

Tom Mitchell (27 disposals @ 56%, 302 metres gained, 10 contested possessions, 17 uncontested possessions, 11 kicks, 16 handballs, 5 marks, 7 tackles, 6 score involvements, 3 clearances, 2 centre clearances, 5 Inside 50s & 1 goal) played his role well by winning his own ball beneath packs, kicked long to a contest when there was nothing on, and contributed to ball movement that resulted in scoring shots.

Scott Pendlebury (24 disposals @ 62%, 493 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 16 uncontested possessions, 2 intercept possessions, 15 kicks, 9 handballs, 3 tackles, 5 score involvements, 3 clearances, 2 centre clearances & 7 Inside 50s) accumulated possessions and produced territory, but skill errors let him down, especially when he was under pressure.

Darcy Cameron (19 disposals @ 63%, 170 metres gained, 29 hit-outs, 10 contested possessions, 9 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 9 kicks, 10 handballs, 3 marks, 5 tackles, 5 score involvements, 6 clearances, 2 centre clearances & 4 stoppage clearances) provided adequate service to his teammates at stoppages around the ground, won his own ball in the middle to clear congestion, and contributed on both sides of the contest by winning the contested ball, while finding space and separation on the outside to keep the ball moving.

Jack Crisp (14 disposals @ 71%, 356 metres gained, 5 contested possessions, 9 uncontested possessions, 7 kicks, 7 handballs, 2 marks, 3 tackles, 6 score involvements, 3 clearances, 3 stoppage clearances & 2 Rebound 50s) produced and provided plenty of territory, and stayed active and busy in scoring chains.

Brayden Maynard (27 disposals @ 59%, 481 metres gained, 7 contested possessions, 20 uncontested possessions, 10 intercept possessions, 20 kicks, 7 handballs, 6 marks, 2 score involvements & 7 Rebound 50s) won a lot of possessions, but had his effectiveness blunted when Adelaide set up for his long kicks that would go to a contest, and none of Maynard's teammates were able to mark it or bring the ball to ground for Collingwood's running game to emerge from congestion.

Jeremy Howe (20 disposals @ 80%, 478 metres gained, 4 contested possessions, 16 uncontested possessions, 6 intercept possessions, 14 kicks, 6 handballs, 8 marks, 2 score involvements & 9 Rebound 50s) made an impressionable return to AFL football where his ball use was accurate, while having confidence to go for his marks which he took with aplomb, and gave stabilised and controlled territory further afield from the last line of defence when cool heads were required.

Isaac Quaynor (15 disposals @ 87%, 375 metres gained, 7 contested possessions, 8 uncontested possessions, 9 intercept possessions, 12 kicks, 3 handballs, 8 marks, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements & 6 Rebound 50s) had a highly composed game amongst all of the chaos around him. Quaynor held his nerve to take crucial marks at the right time, while allowing teammates to complete marks from most of his kicks to maintain possession.

Darcy Moore (15 disposals @ 87%, 328 metres gained, 2 contested possessions, 13 uncontested possessions, 6 intercept possessions, 13 kicks, 2 handballs, 7 marks, 5 score involvements & 4 Rebound 50s) showed poise with his ball use, while completing his marks safely and securely.

John Noble (14 disposals @ 86%, 283 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 12 kicks, 2 handballs, 4 marks, 5 tackles, 2 score involvements, 2 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 3 Inside 50s & 3 Rebound 50s) kept his ball use very simple, while Noble was able to nail his tackles, especially his final play on the Shane Warne Stand wing, where he slowed Adelaide down with that tackle that brought his team more time and numbers to defend the lead.

Oleg Markov (11 disposals @ 91%, 115 metres gained, 5 contested possessions, 6 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 7 kicks, 4 handballs, 7 marks, 3 tackles, 2 score involvements & 3 Rebound 50s) played very well by taking marks at the right time and disposed of the footy effectively.

Nathan Murphy (7 disposals @ 86%, 3 contested possessions, 4 uncontested possessions, 6 intercept possessions, 5 kicks, 2 handballs, 5 marks, 2 score involvements & 3 Rebound 50s) backed in his supreme and fearless approach in marking contests where he either outmarked his opponent or halved marking contests where he would spoil the ball out of bounds or down to ground level and rely on his teammates to gather the footy.

Taylor Adams (20 disposals @ 75%, 276 metres gained, 7 contested possessions, 13 uncontested possessions, 9 kicks, 11 handballs, 3 marks, 5 tackles, 2 Tackles Inside 50, 6 score involvements, 3 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 3 Inside 50s & 1 goal) got involved as a high half-forward that was able to win the ball in general play, while putting significant pressure on with numerous tackles executed to keep the ball in the front half, while Adams was able to maintain the team's hot streak in the second term with a set shot he was able to kick truly, despite the review.

Pat Lipinski (20 disposals @ 55%, 370 metres gained, 9 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 11 kicks, 9 handballs, 3 marks, 3 tackles, 1 goal assist, 5 score involvements & 5 Inside 50s) accumulated possessions up forward, but was not able to be highly effective under the heat and pressure the Crows were offering.

Will Hoskin-Elliott (11 disposals @ 54%, 194 metres gained, 4 contested possessions, 7 uncontested possessions, 6 kicks, 5 handballs, 4 marks, 3 tackles, 4 score involvements, 3 clearances, 3 stoppage clearances, 3 Rebound 50s & 1 goal) played a pivotal role in the last quarter where he snapped Collingwood's last goal on his left foot (non-preferred foot), and got the Magpies out of initial danger with a rebounding kick that reached the wing from the back pocket. Two key moments that contributed towards team success, of which they did.

Mason Cox (10 disposals @ 80%, 150 metres gained, 11 hit-outs, 9 contested possessions, 5 kicks, 5 handballs, 2 marks, 2 tackles, 1 goal assist, 6 score involvements, 2 clearances, 3 Inside 50s & 2 goals) burst to life in the final term with two telling goals that gave his team impetus in their belief to come from behind and win against all odds.

Jamie Elliott (10 disposals @ 60%, 5 contested possessions, 5 uncontested possessions, 8 kicks, 2 handballs, 5 marks, 4 Marks Inside 50, 4 tackles, 4 Tackles Inside 50, 5 score involvements & 2 goals) turned it on in the second term with two goals, while he provided a marking option and applied numerous tackles.

Harvey Harrison (9 disposals @ 67%, 200 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 6 uncontested possessions, 5 kicks, 4 handballs, 3 marks, 2 tackles, 2 Tackles Inside 50, 1 goal assist, 5 score involvements, 3 Inside 50s & 1 goal) kicked the all-important first goal of the final term to start Collingwood's resurgence, while Harrison was able to lay tackles and give his teammates opportunities up forward to score goals.

Bobby Hill (9 disposals @ 67%, 156 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 6 uncontested possessions, 6 kicks, 3 handballs, 2 tackles, 2 score involvements, 2 Inside 50s & 1 goal) showed his trademark speed back towards goal, and followed up the spillage off Ash Johnson's hands to rove and snap a well-desrved goal.

Collingwood's next game will be against Gold Coast on July 1 at Heritage Bank Stadium. The aim for Collingwood is to put four quarters together and be ruthless for the entire game. Achieve this, and the Magpies will burn the Suns as the sun sets below the sky and horizon on the Gold Coast.

3rdMan · Jun 25, 2023

Timmy from Thomastown said:
Grundy was always streets ahead of Witts at around that time.

Agree (though "streets" would be debatable at certain stages). This is why we looked at moving Witts the year before trading to the Suns. Witts started the next season but that wasn't preferring him over Grundy, just that he was more ready to go.

We knew Witts was good, we also knew he and Grundy couldn't work together and Grundy was simply better. We would have liked to keep Witts as backup but he obviously wouldn't want that.

It was fairly unanimous among fans that Witts would be a good first ruck and the deal with the Suns was garbage, but that's what happens when a player isn't getting a lot of games. It was also mostly agreed that Grundy was the better player, there was no outcry that he was kept over Witts. The decision to play Grundy ahead of Witts was correct at the time and proved correct in retrospect, particularly for our game plan. Grundy has had the better career.

Finnishpie · Jun 25, 2023

Mollythedolly said:
GWS actually asked for Witts as part of the Treloar trade is my recollection. Witts declined, opting to back himself. Did enough over the preseason to get the ruck position ahead of Grundy for R1. I agree, most thought both very good 1st ruck prospects. My posting on the subject was based purely on the hyperbolic claim Grundy was “streets ahead”. He never was. I’ll leave it there.

I remember posters here writing that Witts was a spud and would never be anything.

Finnishpie · Jun 25, 2023

Mollythedolly said:
GWS actually asked for Witts as part of the Treloar trade is my recollection. Witts declined, opting to back himself. Did enough over the preseason to get the ruck position ahead of Grundy for R1. I agree, most thought both very good 1st ruck prospects. My posting on the subject was based purely on the hyperbolic claim Grundy was “streets ahead”. He never was. I’ll leave it there.

Agree though

Mollythedolly · Jun 26, 2023

No SPIN said:
Yes - but you were comfortable we made the right choice when Grundy was winning AA’s like all supporters.

Witts was but a distant memory.

Making the right choice doesn’t put Grundy “streets ahead” of Witts. I was very sad to see Witts depart, but it was either him or Grundy, 1 was contracted for 2017, the other wasn’t, one asked for a trade (at least both Brisbane and Gold Coast chased him), the other didn’t. It was an easy choice. Especially when we still had Cox on the list who was also starting to realize senior potential.

Mollythedolly · Jun 26, 2023

Finnishpie said:
I remember posters here writing that Witts was a spud and would never be anything.

Was a massive divide in opinion on BF over Witts v Grundy, but most of the posters whose opinions are worth considering all rated them both very strong prospects.

Mateyman · Jun 26, 2023

How is Grundy vs Witts still happening...

3rdMan · Jun 26, 2023

Mateyman said:
How is Grundy vs Witts still happening...

You missed the news that we've invented a time machine and can go back and change this decision?

On this game, thought Cameron did well in the ruck against a good opponent. Best game since his return from injury. Wish he'd fix his goal kicking though. Neither Witts or Grundy played.

KinderSmock · Jun 26, 2023

Would there be as much certainty that Grundy was better if Witts played for a top eight team?

Maggie5 · Jun 26, 2023

Black_White said:
And that’s why Buckley wasn’t a particularly good coach.

Disagree anyway let's not get into this and derail thread further.

Black_White said:
Look at how Fly deals with players down on form, or have made a mistake that’s cost us.

Actually I think he did make mistakes in the Melbourne game and not sure why he held back NDaicos for 8 minutes in the first quarter.

Don't think he is a fan of making in game positional changes.

Maggie5 · Jun 26, 2023

3rdMan said:
You missed the news that we've invented a time machine and can go back and change this decision?

On this game, thought Cameron did well in the ruck against a good opponent. Best game since his return from injury. Wish he'd fix his goal kicking though. Neither Witts or Grundy played.

Gee I must watch replay as I thought Cox in the ruck in the last quarter was more important for us than Cameron.

I don't like it when Cameron tries to body the other ruck it was very obvious in the Melbourne game against good rucks.

BEEG · Jun 26, 2023

Apex36 said:
Straw man.

I was very vocal about the value of Witts when he left. Told GC supporters he’d play round 1 for them and was laughed at. There were a few on this board at the time who could see what Witts was becoming, and a lot of loud mouths who couldn’t.

Yep he just had be the number 1 ruck, plenty said it when traded.

Cousin of Daicos · Jun 26, 2023

Staggered to see so many Adelaide supporters on Twitter complaining about the umpiring costing them this game. Like seriously?

After what transpired in the first game we played them?

Elliott’s high on Dawson was so ridiculously fast that you NEEDED slow motion to even see it so you can understand the umps not seeing it in the heat of the moment.

But let’s all conveniently ignore the open throw from Rankin that even led to Tex’s goal. Or Markov being kneed in the head right in front of the ump. Or Mitchell having a Crows player land in his back.

They missed a LOT of frees in that final two minutes and most of the missed frees were Collingwood ones. But yes, let’s focus on the ONE that should have gone to Adelaide that was faster than a hummingbirds wings and needed ultra slow mo to even been seen by human eyes.

The only reason people even thought there was a free there was because Dawson reacted.

unplugged · Jun 26, 2023

Just on the topic of rucks... I'm shocked to see ROB only had one more mark than DC. Otherwise it looks like Cameron actually played a better game on paper. I got very nervous seeing a few contests in their forward half. Almost felt like we had him better controlled last time with Frampton!

Toast Round 15 = Collingwood 82-80 Adelaide

Norm Smith Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

TheBrownDog

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Premiership Player

Norm Smith Medallist

TheBrownDog

Brownlow Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

All Australian

Attachments

Club Legend

Norm Smith Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Club Legend

Premiership Player

Moderator

Moderator

Hall of Famer

HEY MAGPIE ARMY!

Brownlow Medallist

Toast Round 15 = Collingwood 82-80 Adelaide

Similar threads

Log In or Create New Account