Why are Collingwood supporters such bad losers?

[vealesy]

Chappys on tonight isnt he?

 

[speaknoevil]

1. Our lack of a good ruckman - Without Brad Ottens you guys would struggle and we would more than likely dominate you in the clearances.

Nice post beez, but i think that one is a bit of a stretch. Winning hitouts, even if Jolly dominated, doesn't necessarily directly lead to domination of clearances, just look at Freo and Sandilands. Not only that, but the Geelong midfield is arguably of higher quality that the Collingwood one, although you may dispute that, but nevertheless, it's still a very hopeful and very speculative call.

What I find interesting about all this is looking at the replay no one has really mentioned the simple fact that Mackie standing nearby doesnt react to Pendlebury waltzing away from the stoppage and Varcoe only goes at him half hearted without laying a glove on him. Why? Cos the whistle went. Geelong's defence had been stellar all night and our work at the stoppages was very good too. IF the play was let on, the talking point of the decision would be how unfair this rule is to the opposing side who has no idea how to react. Geelong kept Collingwood to 9 goals and you took most of your chances during the game unlike us who squandered many of ours. To see a goal like that without any real opposition because of a flawed advantage rule in a game Collingwood deserved to lose anyway is something I am sure you'll all get over fairly quickly; Or not!!

I assume you are talking media etc., as I wrote pretty much exactly that on this thread last night, (see further below).

I understand there's an interesting take on the Pendlebury decision "On The Couch" tonight.

Seems so, I have pasted his article a bit lower down. This is what i wrote on this subject last night (post #40 on page 3):

Exactly. That's my issue with it (both the hype around this decision, and the rule itself). The advantage rule, as it stands, has massive problems. At least 2 Geelong players just stopped when the whistle blew during that incident. Both were in the position to tackle Pendlebury, and neither did due to the whistle. If the whistle never went, I have no doubt Pendlebury would have been tackled, before getting his kick off. Watch it yourself, I've looked at it a number of times, and it seems pretty clear to me.

Similar principle to what happened in the Hawthorn-Saints game today. A Hawthorn player was paid advantage and didn't even know it, was about 25 out and just stopped as he had no idea what to do. By the time he realised he was supposed to be playing on, he missed what should have been a gimme. Play on stood, they got a point, and Hawthorn were dis-advantaged by the rule, not advantaged.

...snip...

All this AFL talk of whether the umpire was right or wrong re the Pendlebury incident is not as relevant as the fact that the AFL have overlooked some massive issues and the rule is IMO, broken in its current state. Of course the AFL themselves just don't admit to making errors so nothing will be done this year.

I doubt the rule will remain as it currently stands (please) next season, but we will see. It would be nice if the test involved whether the whistle caused a change to what would have been the natural flow of the play. If so, then no advantage can be paid, as there is potentially a massive distortion to what would have been the natural outcome (what the rule is supposed to allow, I presume).

Glad to say that Gerard Healy appears to agree with the point I was trying to make. I have included his article on the subject (from Fox Sports) below:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl.../story-e6frf3e3-1226056909009?from=public_rss

A lot of people are showing signs of short-term memory loss because the same folk who were panning the advantage rule last year are back complaining about this season's interpretation pining for the old one.

The problem is it's the same rule in many ways. Another attempt at trying to fix an issue in the game that is unfixable.

The Scott Pendlebury incident late in Friday night's clash between Collingwood and Geelong has brought the rule into sharp focus once more but this is not a new issue.

That decision was an umpire error but delivered the right result. If you look closely at the vision all the players in the vicinity of the contest, with the exception of Pendlebury, stopped when the whistle blows.

From there, you can't hand the Magpies the advantage. The ball needs to go back to ruckman Cameron Wood because play wasn't continuous.

According to the AFL rules committee, the player and not the umpire are deciding if there is an advantage to a team in playing on after a free kick in 2011.

That sounds fine in theory but the umpire is still being asked to adjudicate on whether play is continuous or not which is fundamentally what happened last year.

What's different is that if the player elects to take the advantage and misses a goal for instance it isn't brought back to get a second chance? That remains a good outcome of the change.

Aussie Rules is the only game in the world that orders players to stop on the whistle yet wants to offer advantage if it is there.

The whistle will halt at least some players in a contest which means the game is not taking its natural course.

Adding to the mess is if you have the ball and don't stop on the whistle and the free kick is not to your side, there’s the risk of giving away a 50-metre penalty. It's a harsh punishment for a player who is incorrect in assessing if it's his team's footy or not.

The rules committee are having a bit each way with no advantage allowed from a centre bounce. In doing so they acknowledge the difficulties ruck duels present for this rule but dont apply it to stoppages around the ground. It should apply to all.

Players, commentators and fans can watch a pair of grappling ruckman go at it and hear the whistle go with no idea who is getting the free kick. Again, the game is not taking its natural course and the advantage too often disadvantages the flat-footed players waiting for an indication of the free.

We have experimented with signalling advantage without an accompanying whistle in the NAB Cup of 2003 and it didn't provide the answer. Players said they preferred the certainty of hearing the whistle and the supporters were left confused also.

So, what do we do about it? The football community needs to ask itself if the rule is truly worth the confusion it brings. I would say no.

The time has come at season's end to discard it and just give the free kick to the player who was offended against. It is a basket case rule at the present time as it was in the past which is making a tough job nigh impossible for umpires.

If the death of the advantage rule led to a spate of 'professional free kicks' we already have the remedy at our disposal. Pay a free kick and award a 50-metre penalty as is the case for players dumped unnecessarily after they have disposed of the ball as a penalty for professional free kicks designed to slow play.

Scrapping the rule would end the confusion and give the side who has been handed a free kick clear possession. The team who has conceded the free kick would not be disadvantaged as seriously as they can be at the present time.

Yes, there might be the odd occasion when a side is slowed and misses an otherwise advantage, but that is the best solution to a rule that will never work.

Sadly there is a long time to go in this season before it is changed as no doubt it will be.

I'm posting this before I've heard him speak on 'On the Couch', but I am assuming he will keep the same view. Interesting to see what the other guys on the show say.

emphasis added

 

[Rockford]

So, the alternative for the defending team is to play on as though the whistle hasn't gone. Which then results in a risk of giving away a 50m penalty.

 

[topic97]

Just makes you wonder what was wrong with the ruling last year?
Why not revert back to the way its always been played? Gonna be an even bigger uproar if this costs someone a grand final!!
I had no issues in umpires deciding if there was advantage or not and calling it back if it wasnt.

The AFL do one thing introducing a smaller bench to slow the game down, but then they introduce this play on rule to speed it up.....

 

[TheHonestyPolicy]

A mate of mine also reminded me that late in the third quarter Hawkins gets a free from a ruck contest, we have possession with Corey running away, and the ball was brought back similarly. If the Umps had the interpretation wrong then at least they were consistent on the night.

 

[topic97]

A mate of mine also reminded me that late in the third quarter Hawkins gets a free from a ruck contest, we have possession with Corey running away, and the ball was brought back similarly. If the Umps had the interpretation wrong then at least they were consistent on the night.

Thats a point!!
Also the collision with Toovey should have realistically been paid as a free to Hawkins because Toovey ran straight at him and didnt have eyes for the ball - just happens that unfortunately Hawkins jumped to take the mark and Toovey didnt...

 

[piepower29]

Dejavu, its only May as a mate of mind who barracks for Geelong remind me.Till we meet again, good luck for the rest of the season. We're not all F-----g Feral.

 

[cakewalk_1]

Like 82,000 others I was at the game.

IHO, Collingwood were lucky to be in touch for most of the game to be honest. Geelong should have blown them on the score board early. (Especially if you consider some of the shots that went out the full.)

We lost it in the centre, our attack on the ball was patchy and when it was good we got back in the game.

If the Pendlebury goal was allowed and the Pies won. I, like most realistic supporters would have walked away with very little confidence that we would automatically beat Geelong when we met again.

Both Clubs realise that winning lost of games throughout a year means very little if you don't win the big one. Just ask St.Kilda.

Hopefully next time, both teams will have their full list and we will see who the best team is on the day again.

And perhaps this loss will ground some of the Collingwood supporters who thought we would be undefeated forever.

Well done Geelong you played well on the night. I admire your playing group and what the coach has done this year. It doesn't mean I like losing to you guys though.
See you next time.

 

[bobbycatsfanme]

Collingwood seem to be very good at belting teams and winning em that way but tend to struggle in the close physical type games. I can't quite remember in the past 18 months how many times they have were down by 4 or 5 goals and ran over the top of a quality side. It's gonna be interesting to see how they go again in another one of these very close games. If St Kilda was up and about this year and the game was like that of last Friday's match then you'd almost back in the Saints like they did in the 1st grand final last year.
Hawks have a good chance but they must outscore them in the 1st quarter like we did otherwise it's catch up footy all day.

 

[rizzo]

It has been mentioned here before, but my thoughts are:

It was a line ball call, either way would have been the correct decision. If the pies fans believe it should have been play on, it cost them a GOAL and not the GAME. There was still more than 2 minutes left. Anything could have happened.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Every club has bad losers and winners. I don't see Collingwood as being any different. More of them?

 

[Asty]

Every club has bad losers and winners. I don't see Collingwood as being any different. More of them?

This ^^^^

Also I am not sure that having a go at opposition supporters when you have just beaten them makes you the paragon of supporting a team either.

 

[Cataholic]

So now MM has congratulated Geelong for getting themselves up for the game, but tempered it with a snide back-hander, saying 'we purposely didn't want to make Round 8 the biggest game of the year'.

Sore, ungracious loser. Pure and simple.

 

[Archangel]

I love the fact that WE WON and THEY LOST!...... That's it

 

[Paranoid]

I've said it here before.
I swore 20 years ago I would never go to another Pies game again.

I relented and went to a North game with some mates 10 years ago.
I had no emotional involvement and I still couldn't believe the vitriol


Not sure how long I'll live. Hopefully another 30-40. But never again.


They don't realise how feral their supporter group is because all 70,000 of them are feral. Easily the largest base of ferals in the known universe.
My mate is a bloody good, articulate solicitor and all round nice guy. The nicest guy. And he openly admits he turns feral when the ball is bounced.

Passion will do that! Really though, I don't see that much difference between Collingwood, Geelong, or any other team in the AFL. Supporters will always look for someone to blame for a loss, especially if your team is up the top end of the ladder. If you go to the Brisbane, Adelaide boards you will see they genuinely believe they are crap at the moment. Most of us blame the umpires, use injuries as excuses, etc. We don't like to admit we were outplayed.

 

[Cataholic]

Passion will do that! Really though, I don't see that much difference between Collingwood, Geelong, or any other team in the AFL. Supporters will always look for someone to blame for a loss, especially if your team is up the top end of the ladder. If you go to the Brisbane, Adelaide boards you will see they genuinely believe they are crap at the moment. Most of us blame the umpires, use injuries as excuses, etc. We don't like to admit we were outplayed.

Good post, and I agree with all you say.

We're all passionate supporters, but thankfully the vast majority temper it with good grace, sportsmanship and sensibility.

Unfortunately, each team has it's feral supporters, and we're no different.

I was just a little surprised by the venom in some of the criticism after the game, and disappointed by MM's comments today is all.

As you say though, it is human nature as passionate supporters to apportion blame to everyone but the team.

Let's hope we get as good a contest next time!

 

[The rabbi]

Good post, and I agree with all you say.

We're all passionate supporters, but thankfully the vast majority temper it with good grace, sportsmanship and sensibility.

Unfortunately, each team has it's feral supporters, and we're no different.

I think that there is a difference. Our feral supporters want to neck players after the team has a win against the the former undefeated and reigning Premiership side.

What other team has supporters of that nature?

 

[Cataholic]

I think that there is a difference. Our feral supporters want to neck players after the team has a win against the the former undefeated and reigning Premiership side.

What other team has supporters of that nature?

true lol.......we've enjoyed unbelievable success after 44 years in the wilderness and it's adversely affected the ability of some to be rational.

 

[vealesy]

I'm scared our winning culture has spoiled my ability to accept defeat.

 

[Koki Freelander]

Glad to say that Gerard Healy appears to agree with the point I was trying to make. I have included his article on the subject (from Fox Sports) below:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl.../story-e6frf3e3-1226056909009?from=public_rss

/quote]


I agree with everything you said in principle except I don't think the advantage rule was ever designed in relation to the what the opposition is doing. Indeed, most of the time the advantage rule disadvantages the opposition. For me, if the ball hits the ground then I reckon you must say that it could go either way. But he gathered it on the full. I think the fact that other players are standing around is not relevant. I don't think the ump considers that at least do they? You can imagine what that would mean - if you don't want advantage to be paid, stand around and don't attempt to tackle. But I agree with you that there is something wrong with the rule. I like the idea of American football-style that you can decline the free kick. Play on would be automatic unless the team pulls it up (I know that that is what we theoretically already have).

I think the decision was clearly wrong but it had no impact on the result. Umpiring errors are part of the game and always will be. Collingwood players made front on contact six or so times with no Geelong frees and I think the Pies got two frees that way

 

[Shell]

Question for this week "Why are Carlton supporters such big ****ing whingers?".

 

[Hoffy95]

Question for this week "Why are Carlton supporters such big ****ing whingers?".

They are worse than Collingwood.

Distinct difference is Carlton fans don't know the rules and whinge relentlessly at anything that doesn't go their way. Pies fans are more likely to know when a decision is right or wrong but they will blame a loss entirely on the umpires and completely disregard the performance of their team.

 

[JUBJUB]

Looks like the Collingwood dregs are still taking the loss to Geelong badly

Example #1

Example #2

Example #3

They are such bad losers.I rest my case your Honour

 

[winty]

Looks like the Collingwood dregs are still taking the loss to Geelong badly

Example #1

Example #2

Example #3

They are such bad losers.I rest my case your Honour

I hope the Eagles do a number on them today, coz if they do, the Pies fans will be copping it from all angles.