Toast Round 4 = Collingwood 77-72 Hawthorn

[brysie]

That’s a good question. I’m not sure who started the trend towards big bodied mids or whether they just thought let’s get rid of the small blokes and play two ruck rovers. Probably a bit of natural selection in there as well.

One player who I think seemed to start the trend of bigger mids was Koutoufides - he was 193cm and capable of playing all over the ground.

 

[FromTheBoundaryLine]

He was very big though at 195cm.

I think really only Bont has come close to that size and even then he is only 192cm.

Pendles and Fyfe are 190cm mids but small compared to Cripps, to date he really was one out of the box and the 90s Kouta 191cm.

You’re right that Cripps is a bit out of the box size wise. My recollection is that when those 190 cm mids became common it signalled a bit of a change as there were lots of comments. But they are my recollections which are not renowned for accuracy these days. There’s probably just more players across all positions in that 6 foot and over range these days. As a short arse rover I have at times lamented the disappearance of shorter players so I have a bit of bias embedded. Considering the current midfield combos throughout the competition though things may not have changed as much as I thought. Interesting to ponder.

 

[Mollythedolly]

There’s dishonourable wins the same way there’s honourable losses. You’re kidding yourself if you think we should be sunshine and rainbows on the back of that performance.

Has anyone actually been suggesting sunshine and rainbows? I just checked the AFL ladder and we got the 4 points. Our history against the Hawks isn’t flash so I’ll take that, especially at AO. Doesn’t mean there aren’t concerns.

 

[sr36]

Ginnivan stuck it right up us tonight. You could see the frustration on the face of every defender who played on him.

Thankfully TGG's story of unbecoming behaviour in the change rooms hasn't come out yet.

 

[Mollythedolly]

I am a huge supporter of Mason but he hasn’t hit the scoreboard in five games. The cupboard is seemingly entirely bare for alternatives. I’d like to see what comes of playing Moore in his old forward/ruck role.

As average as our defence has been, I think we have the pieces there to cover Moore’s utilisation elsewhere, particularly given Darcy has been average at best down there anyway. Dean or Markov possibilities to come in, and Howe as the main loose interceptor. It’s the only solution I’m seeing to our lack of tall options in attack.

Cox doesn’t seem to be spending a lot of time forward which probably mitigates his scoreboard impact.

 

[Mollythedolly]

Our season rides on our next 3 games. Must win at least 2 to remain in the hunt. Top 2 is probably gone. Top 4 looking unlikely at this stage but a long way to go.

I think what we're seeing is how even the comp is. Sides like GWS, Melbourne and Geelong have improved 5-10 % and we've dropped off significantly. We look a long way off those 3 at this stage of the season.

By the same token, we can’t crystal ball how the seasons of sides playing well will progress. It’s a long season and every team will experience some form fluctuations. Look at our end to the 2023 H&A season.

 

[Mollythedolly]

12 wouldn't guarantee it - took 12 and a half last year - the first year of a 23 game season.

13 would probably get you there.

14 would guarantee it.

Exactly. Doggies had 12 wins last year and finished 9th. Comp is becoming more even so 14 wins gives you the safety net.

 

[Mollythedolly]

If correct it's great that our pressure was rated elite but it's also worrying isn't it that it only resulted in a narrow win against the youngest side of the round and one presumably heading for a bottom 4 finish?

Throw in that De Goey, Mitchell and the Daicii found plenty of the pill and you've got to believe we still have some serious disconnect going on out on the ground.

I’m assuming that was a game high rating because we were below average at 1 stage during the game in one of the illustrations on screen.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

By the same token, we can’t crystal ball how the seasons of sides playing well will progress. It’s a long season and every team will experience some form fluctuations. Look at our end to the 2023 H&A season.

Exactly.. Swans aren't looking as unbeatable as they did in the first few rounds. Dee's looked unbeatable in the first 10 rounds of 22. Carlton have been a different team in each half of the last few seasons. Can Giants keep this form up all year?

We seemed to time our loads & run perfectly last year.

Who knows how this year will go. People calling it now look as silly as those who wrote us off last year.

 

[loki04]

When it's replicated today - it's more by chance than intentional like it was in that era.

Recently, we've had good mids ranging from traditional rover height like Prestia to Cripps in height, but who plays there is based on what they can do rather than meeting the specific height requirements for the role - like it used to be.

In retrospect, rather than trying to find a short arsed bloke as good as Platten we should have just got Millane to bully the crap out of him. It worked in the end though as we did find Francis.

Yes but they are grooming bigger mids from young now, Bont for example his numbers were in the teens most weeks in juniours but they allowed for that development due to a mix of attributes including size.

If ability was truly all that mattered you would find teams having midget brigades yet we don't. They have 1 maybe 2 in the smaller ranges the rest are medium to large mids.

 

[Gone Critical]

Did they really run with this on the News? Did they not watch the replay closely enough to see that Bruzzy should have gotten the free? Or has the AFL decided that Ginni is a cash cow in terms of clicks and looking to fire up free kick controversies for a while?

Jack Ginnivan refused a free kick despite being taken high

The controversial Hawthorn forward appears to have been hard done-by again.

7news.com.au

No,thats 100% Ginnys free. As they run back both have eyes for the ball but Maynard reaches out with his left and initially finds Ginnivans R shoulder then drapes his arm around his neck. Throughout that time Ginnivan is only eyes for the ball and has not reached at all for Maynard. 100% you cant scrag someone around the neck in a marking contest. Ginnys free. Below is a photo that pretty clearly shows it.

2nd photo shows the moment before when Bruzzy reaches out to find Ginnivan

 

[sr36]

No,thats 100% Ginnys free. As they run back both have eyes for the ball but Maynard reaches out with his left and initially finds Ginnivans R shoulder then drapes his arm around his neck. Throughout that time Ginnivan is only eyes for the ball and has not reached at all for Maynard. 100% you cant scrag someone around the neck in a marking contest. Ginnys free. Below is a photo that pretty clearly shows it.

2nd photo shows the moment before when Bruzzy reaches out to find Ginnivan

View attachment 1954868


View attachment 1954871

He's a good actor. Maynard reaches for and makes contact with his shoulder in your bottom pic - standard. Ginni drops done so there's incidental high contact caused by Jack. Pic 2. Not a free. What happens next is Ginni hooks Maynard's other arm with his right arm and pulls him to ground on top of him. Free to Maynard, but brilliantly disguised so it looks like a free to Jack.

 

[CPH12]

Our strength in the past 2 years has been our rebound off half back, with a very settled and aggressive defence. Moore, Howe, Murphy, Maynard, quaynor, is bloody elite.
Unfortunately this year, Murphy ain't there, and the others aren't intercepting the way they did previously. Particularly evident with Moore who is spoiling many high balls he would of flown for last year, but down on confidence right now.
Without that chaos and bounce off half back, it relies on our forward and midfield which aren't elite and based on pressure.
Plenty of time to turn it around, but our point of difference is that our backline are elite interceptors so we will need them to rediscover their mojo to have a run at it this season.

 

[nahnah]

No,thats 100% Ginnys free. As they run back both have eyes for the ball but Maynard reaches out with his left and initially finds Ginnivans R shoulder then drapes his arm around his neck. Throughout that time Ginnivan is only eyes for the ball and has not reached at all for Maynard. 100% you cant scrag someone around the neck in a marking contest. Ginnys free. Below is a photo that pretty clearly shows it.

2nd photo shows the moment before when Bruzzy reaches out to find Ginnivan

View attachment 1954868


View attachment 1954871

Agree its a free kick, Doc

 

[Gone Critical]

Everyone that played for Collingwood was six foot then

Actually the Collingwood 6 footer wasn't 6 foot

 

[Gone Critical]

He's a good actor. Maynard reaches for and makes contact with his shoulder in your bottom pic - standard. Ginni drops done so there's incidental high contact caused by Jack. Pic 2. Not a free. What happens next is Ginni hooks Maynard's other arm with his right arm and pulls him to ground on top of him. Free to Maynard, but brilliantly disguised so it looks like a free to Jack.

No way, you just cant reach out and drape your arm over your opponents shoulder in a marking contest. Yeah Ginnivan does hook his arm but thats after the event and its Maynards momentum and pulling on Ginnivans shoulder/neck that takes them to ground. To me thats very clear cut. You just cant go around someones neck in a contest like this. its maynard that initiates and gives a clear free away well before Ginnivan hooks his arm. Here is a more complete sequence.

 

[Gone Critical]

 

[sr36]

No way, you just cant reach out and drape your arm over your opponents shoulder in a marking contest. Yeah Ginnivan does hook his arm but thats after the event and its Maynards momentum and pulling on Ginnivans shoulder/neck that takes them to ground. To me thats very clear cut. You just cant go around someones neck in a contest like this. its maynard that initiates and gives a clear free away well before Ginnivan hooks his arm. Here is a more complete sequence.View attachment 1954963View attachment 1954964

View attachment 1954965

View attachment 1954986

He's not over the shoulder in those picks - Ginni did what Ginni does, felt an arm on his arm and dropped to make it high. It's Ginnivan dropping down that makes the arm contact him high. In that earlier photo you posted, look how low Ginnivan has dropped to get that arm go over his shoulder. He then gives away a blatant free. I say blatant, but it's actually really hard to see that it's Ginni that pulls Maynard to ground, but he does. He grabs his arm and rolls his whole weight down bringing Maynard down. It was actually Maynard who got up appealing for the free - as he got dragged by his arm to the ground in a marking contest. And it's them going to ground that had the commentators carrying on, not the early incidental contact.

 

[Mollythedolly]

View attachment 1954992
View attachment 1954993
View attachment 1954994
View attachment 1954996

As SR posted though. Maynard wasn't draped over Ginnivan's shoulder until Ginnivan lowered himself under Maynards outstretched arm and causing the contact to drift high. Just a different method than lifting the arm to draw a high free.

 

[Gone Critical]

Remember when rover was considered a position where you had to be really short. And that period when we were desperate for a proper really short rover like Platten. Francis came along and we were ecstatic that he was a 170cm short arse - not an over-sized bloke who was too big for rover.

When did it stop? When did they realise that rather than trying to find someone to get lower than Platten they could play Paddy Cripps on him and just push him out of the way to pick up the ball?

I'm a touch taller at 182cm and I was never named as rover, always Ruck Rover. There was even a rule that you had to be a bit taller to be a ruck rover

I'm pretty sure it continued well into the 90's. I can't really remember when it started changing but heaven forbid if you were taller than about 175cm and dared call yourself a rover, you were a ruck rover and that's it

When it's replicated today - it's more by chance than intentional like it was in that era.

Recently, we've had good mids ranging from traditional rover height like Prestia to Cripps in height, but who plays there is based on what they can do rather than meeting the specific height requirements for the role - like it used to be.

In retrospect, rather than trying to find a short arsed bloke as good as Platten we should have just got Millane to bully the crap out of him. It worked in the end though as we did find Francis.

The Ruck Rover was a bigger player than the Rover or Centremen, really a hybrid between a ruck and a rover. A tough workhorse, sorry to say Manic, but not overly skilled often. Serge Silvagni would have been the quintessential RR.

For centre and rover there was little difference in size it was more a difference is style and skillset. There wasn't any overwhelming desire for a rover to be very short. When I grew up with 1st footy memories from the mid 60's the dominant rovers of the era would be Matthews 178cm, 86kg, Bartlett 177 cm, Garry Wilson 179 cm, Wayne Richardson 179cm. They were all considered big rovers. Thet were stars.

Centremen were more likely to be beautiful kicks and very creative. They stayed "on ball" all day but only went between HB and HF. many a rover would tell a centre to get out of the forward line if they strayed to far. Ian Stewart a great example.

Rovers were almost all out attackers, they could go all over the ground but often neglected anywhere beyond half back. They were goal kickers and would often kick big bags. Got lots of possessions, tried to take the game on and would only handball as a very last option.

The 2nd rover spent most time in the forward pocket looking for goals and occasionally going "on ball " to give the 1st rover a rest. Hungry for goals

The 2nd RR started HFF or sometimes HBF and was even more dour than the 1st RR.

 

[Gone Critical]

There were of short rovers, often taking the role of the 2nd rover. I think of "Wee Georgie" Bissett 168cm, Paul Callery 165cm, Brad Gotch 166cm and Libba 163cm. Often the short rovers thrived on being tough although Bissett was also very skilled.

He lost the Brownlow by 1 vote in 1969 after being reported in a match during the year where he was subsequently found not guilty. Meant he got no votes that day after getting 30 possessions (which is close to 40 in the modern game) and kicking 6 goals. He had his last 2 seasons at Collingwood but did win the goal kicking at the Dogs 5x times. That illustrates what goal kickers rovers were, likewise Lethals 900+

These positional roles were clearcut through the 80's into the 90's but changed to more general on ballers mid 9os to early 200s. I think if you look at some of the all time great rovers you see size was mainly a virtue. Listing Brownlow medallists post the mid 90s you can also place those who would have been rovers v centremen fairly clearly.

Triple Brownlows

Bunton 179 cm rover
Reynolds 179 cm rover
Skilton 171 cm rover
Stewart 180cm


Other star rovers
Crimmo 173 cm ( he and Lethal , unusually, shared 1st rover duties)
Platten 170 cm
Francis 171cm

More recent mids with Brownlows

GAJ 182 cm Rover
Swan 185 cm Rover
Pendles 191 cm Centreman
Cousins 179cm Rover
Woey 185 cm centreman
Harvey 181 cm Centreman
Williams 176 cm centreman

 

[Gone Critical]

He's not over the shoulder in those picks - Ginni did what Ginni does, felt an arm on his arm and dropped to make it high. It's Ginnivan dropping down that makes the arm contact him high. In that earlier photo you posted, look how low Ginnivan has dropped to get that arm go over his shoulder. He then gives away a blatant free. I say blatant, but it's actually really hard to see that it's Ginni that pulls Maynard to ground, but he does. He grabs his arm and rolls his whole weight down bringing Maynard down. It was actually Maynard who got up appealing for the free - as he got dragged by his arm to the ground in a marking contest. And it's them going to ground that had the commentators carrying on, not the early incidental contact.

We will have to disagree. Ginny has ducked far too often but he didnt here. He may have moved down a fraction and then rose again while attempting to mark but that was a natural reaction. Biomechanics would say its pretty hard to run backwards and then prop to mark without using your knees and the cushioning cartilage in them to brace. Try and do that yourself without any dip. Well before that happens anyway Maynards arm is immediately on the shoulder and then neck. You just cant do that.

 

[sr36]

We will have to disagree. Ginny has ducked far too often but he didnt here. He may have moved down a fraction and then rose again while attempting to mark but that was a natural reaction. Biomechanics would say its pretty hard to run backwards and then prop to mark without using your knees and the cushioning cartilage in them to brace. Try and do that yourself without any dip. Well before that happens anyway Maynards arm is immediately on the shoulder and then neck. You just cant do that.

He'd already propped. He dropped when he felt contact on his arm and made it high. And he didn't rise again, he then grabbed Maynard's other arm and rolled him to ground to make it look like Maynard had pulled him down.

He was barely playing footy on the weekend. He was just trying to trick the umpire into giving him frees. The one he got in the last was complete rubbish. He was holding Maynard's jumper trying to make it look like Maynard was holding his arm. Umpire got sucked in.

He'll be back to no free kick Jack within the month, as it's complete rubbish the way he's playing.

 

[manicpie]

The Ruck Rover was a bigger player than the Rover or Centremen, really a hybrid between a ruck and a rover. A tough workhorse, sorry to say Manic, but not overly skilled often. Serge Silvagni would have been the quintessential RR.

For centre and rover there was little difference in size it was more a difference is style and skillset. There wasn't any overwhelming desire for a rover to be very short. When I grew up with 1st footy memories from the mid 60's the dominant rovers of the era would be Matthews 178cm, 86kg, Bartlett 177 cm, Garry Wilson 179 cm, Wayne Richardson 179cm. They were all considered big rovers. Thet were stars.

Centremen were more likely to be beautiful kicks and very creative. They stayed "on ball" all day but only went between HB and HF. many a rover would tell a centre to get out of the forward line if they strayed to far. Ian Stewart a great example.

Rovers were almost all out attackers, they could go all over the ground but often neglected anywhere beyond half back. They were goal kickers and would often kick big bags. Got lots of possessions, tried to take the game on and would only handball as a very last option.

The 2nd rover spent most time in the forward pocket looking for goals and occasionally going "on ball " to give the 1st rover a rest. Hungry for goals

The 2nd RR started HFF or sometimes HBF and was even more dour than the 1st RR.

This sums it up beautifully.

 

[slugger01]

Actually the Collingwood 6 footer wasn't 6 foot

I know.. Hence the emoji. I am 5'10". and i was taller than many of the players that were listed as 6 foot.
I think they had a measuring tape stuck on the wall (like we do for kids), but it started at 6 foot.
Anybody shorter was listed at the minimum..