Who is the best side in the comp on their day?

[KissStephanie]

Collingwood seem to have had a lot of off days against Hawthorn, going back 30 years - why is this?

There is no doubt that Hawthorn has been the better team over that period of time as their six premierships would suggest to Collingwood's two premierships in the same period, so you're actually supporting my opinion. Collingwood has still beaten Hawthorn 96 times, and lost only 56 times in history though, and I was actually referring to the current teams.

Interesting to hear your view on whether Brown quietened Riewoldt in GF2 or Riewoldt had a off day?

There is absolutely no doubt that Riewoldt had an off day. What was the go with him staring into Ross Lyon's eyes with with his arm around him and with clenched teeth during the national anthem as if he was going to take the match on and destroy any opponent?

He looked like a dill, just as he did when Heath Shaw smothered his fresh-air goal. He is a big softie, and once that happened, he turned to water, and didn't have what it takes to meet the challenge when things weren't going well. That said, Nathan Brown was very good as well, particularly as he was playing injured.

I think she was talking about the current Collingwood lineup

That's right AG, I was.

 

[The Exorcist]

Which is the best side in the comp on their day will surely change throughout the season, depending on which team is playing the best at that period. It's rare that a club plays awesome football for a full season

Clearly, this was Collingwood in the last part of the season. Everything was going right for them, their players were firing and they were playing very confident, well thought out football, ie. in the last 10 weeks it would be fair to say that if they lost a game then it was probably because they had an off day given the form they were in

This could be a completely different answer 6 weeks into the 2011 season.

 

[gravy1]

Both St Kilda and Collingwood played a very negating style of gameplan during 2010 and I would have thought that if they played to the best of their potential (Collingwood in PF and GF2) then that would necessarily make the opposition play at a much lower than optimum level.
So IMO the question that needs to be answered is:-
'Which Team, playing at their best, would win?'
becasue some teams playing at 'their best' make the opposition play poorly.

My biased opinion is that St Kilda, playing at its optimum would certainly win (see the second half of GF1)
Its gameplan has been built around 'strangling' the opposition out of the game and the 2009 H&A season showed (20-2) that gamestyle to be superior to anything that they came up against.
For Saints fans it's a shame that the GF was played in such shocking conditions and that many players didn't perform to their best or they would surely have won the premiership that season.

Interesting point you raise about St Kilda's gameplan being designed to "strangle" opposition. I agree with you completely, but add that Collingwood is exactly the same.

So then you gotta ask, who, at their best, plays this style better? You say St Kilda, but I actually think Collingwood. If you look at the whole 2010 season, only nine points separated St Kilda and Collingwood's total against points for the season (St Kilda - 1910, Coll - 1919), clearly the two most defensive outfits in the league. The difference then is that Collingwood don't compromise their attacking gamestyle as much as St Kilda do in order to service this predominantly defensive play.

You cite the second half of GF1 (in which Coll only scored two goals) as the example, but I could just as easily give the first half of GF2 as an example (St Kilda only scored one goal). Clearly inaccurate kicking comes into it as well, but the key point is that both teams are able to effectively nullify opposition scoring.

 

[doppleganger]

Collingwood seem to have had a lot of off days against Hawthorn, going back 30 years - why is this?

Hawthorn supporters again have to try and stipulate that what happened in the 80s is somewhat relevant to today.

Gee I wonder Y, perhaps that is because it was their golden period.....no sh1t that they would have a good record against almost all teams in the 80s.

The last 5 it is Hawthorn 4 - Collingwood 1
The last 10 it is Hawthorn 5 - Collingwood 5
The last 20 it is Hawthorn 11 - Collingwood 9

Seriously is this really such an owning??

Overall it is Collingwood 94 - Hawthorn 56

 

[Amber Guzzler]

The Hawthorn example would have some back up if you didnt have a shocking record against Hawthorn with Buddy playing.

Ever heard of a guy called Chris Tarrent? I don't think Buddy's going to be a problem for us this year.

 

[KissStephanie]

Honestly, I hope Collingwood's coaching panel of 2011 believe this sort of tripe.

Tripe? What on earth makes you think it is tripe? Please elaborate. Are you actually disputing that Collingwood's best team is better than Hawthorn's best team, considering that is all I basically had said?

Collingwood lost only four matches and won the premiership by nine goals in 2010. Hawthorn on the other hand has won only 21 times in their past 45 matches, which isn't very good at all. I'm sure Collingwood's coaching panel is aware of that, but also aware that most teams can beat any team, if they don't play well.

 

[Mister Magic]

Interesting point you raise about St Kilda's gameplan being designed to "strangle" opposition. I agree with you completely, but add that Collingwood is exactly the same.

So then you gotta ask, who, at their best, plays this style better? You say St Kilda, but I actually think Collingwood. If you look at the whole 2010 season, only nine points separated St Kilda and Collingwood's total against points for the season (St Kilda - 1910, Coll - 1919), clearly the two most defensive outfits in the league. The difference then is that Collingwood don't compromise their attacking gamestyle as much as St Kilda do in order to service this predominantly defensive play.

You cite the second half of GF1 (in which Coll only scored two goals) as the example, but I could just as easily give the first half of GF2 as an example (St Kilda only scored one goal). Clearly inaccurate kicking comes into it as well, but the key point is that both teams are able to effectively nullify opposition scoring.

Yes they are which makes many of the posts (primarily by a horde of Magpie supporters) quite funny.
Both teams 'strangle' adn therefore do not allow their opposition to play 'at their best'. This concept seems to be hard to grasp.

In your statistics about points against during the season I wonder how Collingwood would have gone had they ;missed' Swan for a major part of the season?
St Kilda's efforts without Riewoldt were, IMO, unbelievable. It was a testament to their gameplan that after an initial 'wobbliness' they managed to cntinue to play their 'style' and managed to finish top 4.
It also explains why their 'attacking' was so well down on 2009, when they were clearly the best team over the H&A season.

You and I will continue to view the 2 GFs through different biased eyes and come up with diametrically opposite views.
As somebody else pointed out in an earlier post, Collingwood were brilliant in the first half of GF1 but you certainly couldn't say they were playing at 'their best' in the second half. - St Kilda didn't allow them to.
The exact opposite can be said about St Kilda.
They were terrible in the first half because Collingwood didn't allow them to play at 'their best', but were fantastic in the second half.


As for the notion that Riewoldt is 'soft' and' somehow that is the reason he played poorly in GF 2, I'll pose this question.
Is there a team in the AFL that if they had the opportunity wouldn't take him?
I would humbly suggest that there isn't another team that wouldn't jump at the opportunity.

 

[Bardo State]

Tripe? What on earth makes you think it is tripe? Please elaborate. Are you actually disputing that Collingwood's best team is better than Hawthorn's best team, considering that is all I basically had said?

Collingwood lost only four matches and won the premiership by nine goals in 2010. Hawthorn on the other hand has won only 21 times in their past 45 matches, which isn't very good at all. I'm sure Collingwood's coaching panel is aware of that, but also aware that most teams can beat any team, if they don't play well.

Yeah, It's not like you said our best couldn't beat any team.

I think the main reason for Hawks supporters to be confident is not just that 11-3 part of the season after we got back some important personel and changed our gameplan. It's the way we played against the top 4 teams. You may make excuses like "oh there was nothing in it for us" and we may say "well we were missing our most important player". But it's not just the Collingwood game. We also proved that we can match it with geelong, the dogs and the saints. Please tell me how we managed those games.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

Yeah, It's not like you said our best couldn't beat any team.

I think the main reason for Hawks supporters to be confident is not just that 11-3 part of the season after we got back some important personel and changed our gameplan. It's the way we played against the top 4 teams. You may make excuses like "oh there was nothing in it for us" and we may say "well we were missing our most important player". But it's not just the Collingwood game. We also proved that we can match it with geelong, the dogs and the saints. Please tell me how we managed those games.

We beat all three of those teams by a 10+ goal margin, so what makes you think they're a measuring stick?

 

[Bardo State]

Maybe because the Collingwood game apparently didn't count, so those matches are the next best things.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

Maybe because the Collingwood game apparently didn't count, so those matches are the next best things.

The first one counted. The one we smacked you silly in.

 

[Bardo State]

We had a pathetic gameplan and one ruckman. It's not just a coincidence we went from 7 straight losses to going 11-3.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

We had a pathetic gameplan and one ruckman. It's not just a coincidence we went from 7 straight losses to going 11-3.

And it's no coincidence that in R22, when Collingwood didn't need to win, they didn't seem to be trying as hard or playing as well as they were in the following weeks. If you think Collingwood were putting in 100% in R22, then you've got rocks in you head.

 

[Bardo State]

What you posted had nothing to do with what you quoted.

 

[sainter35]

Yes they are which makes many of the posts (primarily by a horde of Magpie supporters) quite funny.
Both teams 'strangle' adn therefore do not allow their opposition to play 'at their best'. This concept seems to be hard to grasp.

In your statistics about points against during the season I wonder how Collingwood would have gone had they ;missed' Swan for a major part of the season?
St Kilda's efforts without Riewoldt were, IMO, unbelievable. It was a testament to their gameplan that after an initial 'wobbliness' they managed to cntinue to play their 'style' and managed to finish top 4.
It also explains why their 'attacking' was so well down on 2009, when they were clearly the best team over the H&A season.

You and I will continue to view the 2 GFs through different biased eyes and come up with diametrically opposite views.
As somebody else pointed out in an earlier post, Collingwood were brilliant in the first half of GF1 but you certainly couldn't say they were playing at 'their best' in the second half. - St Kilda didn't allow them to.
The exact opposite can be said about St Kilda.
They were terrible in the first half because Collingwood didn't allow them to play at 'their best', but were fantastic in the second half.


As for the notion that Riewoldt is 'soft' and' somehow that is the reason he played poorly in GF 2, I'll pose this question.
Is there a team in the AFL that if they had the opportunity wouldn't take him?
I would humbly suggest that there isn't another team that wouldn't jump at the opportunity.

Great post Magic - you make much to much sense for this joint......miss you over at Saintsational....

Only dropkicks (and Kiss@ssSteph) fail to acknowledge that they'd be first in line in for a swap of Nick Riewoldt for C Joke from Pies.

That said, let em troll - who gives a toss? we got him, he's a star and many forget he's well and truly got many years left to destroly opposition sides (Pie fans forget quickly the 5 goal monstering he gave them in finals not that long ago....the Dogs remember....he only got off the leash second half against them both Prelims and sunk em both times....)

I laugh my @ss off at Pie fans all excited cause Shaw managed a smother in a GF on Roo when the ball was hardly entering our fwd 50.....here's a tip, won't be the last time Riewoldt gets a ball smothered to stop him kicking a goal.........but just as long as he's getting plenty of the footy that close to goal.....I'll wager he'll kick more than get smothered....and if that happens....no side will beat us.

Gun. But alas, in 2011 he won't be the best Saint (won't need to be). That will be Goddard who can do it all anywhere.....and to think clowns were pretending Hodge was his equal as a utility......what a laugh....

 

[Amber Guzzler]

What you posted had nothing to do with what you quoted.

It did, but it might require more of an open mind to see the link

 

[Amber Guzzler]

Great post Magic - you make much to much sense for this joint......miss you over at Saintsational....

Only dropkicks (and Kiss@ssSteph) fail to acknowledge that they'd be first in line in for a swap of Nick Riewoldt for C Joke from Pies.

That said, let em troll - who gives a toss? we got him, he's a star and many forget he's well and truly got many years left to destroly opposition sides (Pie fans forget quickly the 5 goal monstering he gave them in finals not that long ago....the Dogs remember....he only got off the leash second half against them both Prelims and sunk em both times....)

I laugh my @ss off at Pie fans all excited cause Shaw managed a smother in a GF on Roo when the ball was hardly entering our fwd 50.....here's a tip, won't be the last time Riewoldt gets a ball smothered to stop him kicking a goal.........but just as long as he's getting plenty of the footy that close to goal.....I'll wager he'll kick more than get smothered....and if that happens....no side will beat us.

Gun. But alas, in 2011 he won't be the best Saint (won't need to be). That will be Goddard who can do it all anywhere.....and to think clowns were pretending Hodge was his equal as a utility......what a laugh....

But that's just the thing, isn't it. On that occasion he wasn't getting plenty of the ball near goal, and neither were any other saints players. In fact, if I remember correctly, the qtr had gone for about 20 mins and that was the first time you even looked like scoring. That's what made it so funny.

 

[Mister Magic]

But that's just the thing, isn't it. On that occasion he wasn't getting plenty of the ball near goal, and neither were any other saints players. In fact, if I remember correctly, the qtr had gone for about 20 mins and that was the first time you even looked like scoring. That's what made it so funny.

So would you take him at Collingwood in a direct swap for Cloke?

 

[Rioli magic]

Hawthorn supporters again have to try and stipulate that what happened in the 80s is somewhat relevant to today.


The last 5 it is Hawthorn 4 - Collingwood 1

Seriously is this really such an owning??

Last 6:

Hawthorn 15.5.95 def Collingwood 12.15.87
Hawthorn 24.10.154 def Collingwood 13.11.89
Hawthorn 17.14.116 def Collingwood 8.14.62
Hawthorn 18.13.121 def Collingwood 11.10.76
Collingwood 17.21.123 def Hawthorn 8.11.59
Hawthorn 15.8.98 def Collingwood 13.17.95

Would have to be coming close to an owning?

 

[gravy1]

Yes they are which makes many of the posts (primarily by a horde of Magpie supporters) quite funny.
Both teams 'strangle' adn therefore do not allow their opposition to play 'at their best'. This concept seems to be hard to grasp.

In your statistics about points against during the season I wonder how Collingwood would have gone had they ;missed' Swan for a major part of the season?
St Kilda's efforts without Riewoldt were, IMO, unbelievable. It was a testament to their gameplan that after an initial 'wobbliness' they managed to cntinue to play their 'style' and managed to finish top 4.
It also explains why their 'attacking' was so well down on 2009, when they were clearly the best team over the H&A season.

You and I will continue to view the 2 GFs through different biased eyes and come up with diametrically opposite views.
As somebody else pointed out in an earlier post, Collingwood were brilliant in the first half of GF1 but you certainly couldn't say they were playing at 'their best' in the second half. - St Kilda didn't allow them to.
The exact opposite can be said about St Kilda.
They were terrible in the first half because Collingwood didn't allow them to play at 'their best', but were fantastic in the second half.


As for the notion that Riewoldt is 'soft' and' somehow that is the reason he played poorly in GF 2, I'll pose this question.
Is there a team in the AFL that if they had the opportunity wouldn't take him?
I would humbly suggest that there isn't another team that wouldn't jump at the opportunity.

Agree with you completely. And as you point out, GF1 is actually the best example out there of how when a defensive team plays at their best, by definition their opposition does not (Coll first half, StK second half). I can't think of any St Kilda - Collingwood game in the past 2+ years in which both teams were at their best at the same time.

As for Riewoldt, he's clearly a champion and as good as any captain in the league.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

So would you take him at Collingwood in a direct swap for Cloke?

Nope. When Cloke reaches his age, he'll have achieved a lot more. In fact, some might say he's already done that.

 

[Mister Magic]

Nope. When Cloke reaches his age, he'll have achieved a lot more. In fact, some might say he's already done that.

And there we have it in a nutshell - in 2 successive posts we see the best/worst of Collingwood supporters.
One who is able to understand (and admit to themselves) that there is life outside of the Westpac Centre and the other who, seems incapable of doing that.

How does one debate with another poster who seriously believes that Cloke is a 'better bet' than Riewoldt?

It's akin to me making the statement that Dal Santo is better than Swan.

 

[jonbe54]

And there we have it in a nutshell - in 2 successive posts we see the best/worst of Collingwood supporters.
One who is able to understand (and admit to themselves) that there is life outside of the Westpac Centre and the other who, seems incapable of doing that.

How does one debate with another poster who seriously believes that Cloke is a 'better bet' than Riewoldt?

It's akin to me making the statement that Dal Santo is better than Swan.

Or akin to StKilda supporters who insist that Milne's bounce cost them the Grand Final and obstinately refuse to admit that Johnno's bounce that went sideways and ended up in Milne's arms was just as unlucky and would have cost them the Grand final if it had gone the other way.

 

[TownleyTime]

How does one debate with another poster who seriously believes that Cloke is a 'better bet' than Riewoldt

Riewoldt is the better player but Cloke is the better fit for our gameplan. Cloke does the grunt work and brings our copious amount of flankers into our system.

Riewoldt on the other hand draws and attracts the ball, if he fails, St. Kilda fail. He doesn't complement other flankers like Cloke does at Collingwood.

That is underselling Cloke though. He is close to the best contested mark in the entire game, what lets him down is his kicking.

 

[Amber Guzzler]

And there we have it in a nutshell - in 2 successive posts we see the best/worst of Collingwood supporters.
One who is able to understand (and admit to themselves) that there is life outside of the Westpac Centre and the other who, seems incapable of doing that.

How does one debate with another poster who seriously believes that Cloke is a 'better bet' than Riewoldt?

It's akin to me making the statement that Dal Santo is better than Swan.

Don't get your panties in a twist. Riewoldt may very well be the best CHF in the league, but Cloke is part of the best team in the league. There's no guarantee that swapping Cloke for Riewoldt would make that team any better.