Rock and a Hard Place

[Beej]

I'm tired of hearing the injuries excuse.

As the players say, "control the controllable". Injures while unlucky are not controllable.

Fact remains, when the game was there to be won, we lacked the composure, the nerve, the bottle to take our opportunities. That's how I saw it.

We still haven't won a premiership and we let yet another good year and another grand final amount to nothing.

All the excuses in the world are absolutely no consolation and reading CURLY posting "the guys did everything to tie that game, and you expect them to back it up?" is a slap in the face to ALL supporters.

What kind of happy-clapping, mediocrity-accepting support is that?

Jesus wept.

[aussierules0k]

[CURLY]

I'm tired of hearing the injuries excuse.

As the players say, "control the controllable". Injures while unlucky are not controllable.

Fact remains, when the game was there to be won, we lacked the composure, the nerve, the bottle to take our opportunities. That's how I saw it.

We still haven't won a premiership and we let yet another good year and another grand final amount to nothing.

All the excuses in the world are absolutely no consolation and reading CURLY posting "the guys did everything to tie that game, and you expect them to back it up?" is a slap in the face to ALL supporters.

What kind of happy-clapping, mediocrity-accepting support is that?

Jesus wept.

I will put most of the bulls*** your coming out with as anger and venting. If tou cant look at the bigger picture and see what unfolded like I said you are a clown. You dont appreciate the effort it took Dal, Gram and Kosi just to play in the first Grand Final. You have no idea clearly. Backing up after a jab in normal game is hard enough let alone after a Grand fInal.

[SainterK]

As I said to someone yesterday, Rd 13 is the only game I can remember for awhile, that all 22 players contributed.

Sad, but I can never recall a final where it wasn't neccessary for some individual brilliance to drag the side over the line?

Evenness was the buzz word out of Collingwood this year, we actually had it while Roo was gone, maybe the word that Roo was the only way we could win a GF penetrated the bubble?

[aussierules0k]

[meher baba]

Too many excuses for Lyon on this forum IMO, not to mention the drivel written by his mentor Paul Roos.

Lyon is a terrific coach: one of the best going around ATM (I, unlike many on here, have always rated Malthouse ahead of Lyon, and possibly Eade as well, but not by much in either case).

But the GF replay was a pretty poor coaching effort.

Lyon has never been much of a match day coach IMO: he works on the basis of deeply considered strategies and structures which he drills incessantly into the players. He doesn't seem to be terribly prone to sudden intuitiions during games. or even - as we saw on Saturday - between games.

It was bleeding obvious (or, at least, it was to me and the other armchair fans I was talking to in the days leading up to the game) that we needed to do something a bit different at the start of the replay: to somehow try to throw the Pies off their game.

The obvious thing for me would have been an extra forward target to put more pressure on the Pies backline: the engine room for their attack. When I read the rumours about Stanley coming in, I really hoped they were true: he is quick enough to keep up with the Pies' dangerous backline runners and he is also some sort of a threat with the ball in his hands.. A risk sure, but - for reasons I'll explain in a minute - it was the sort of risk I think we needed to take.

Instead, we got Eddy playing on Maxwell. As someone said on another thread, Eddy provides no significant attacking threat. He is also small and slight, so he was never likely to give too much trouble to Maxmell. As things turned out, he got injured and quickly became irrelevant.

Worse still, for much of the first half Schneider seemed to be stuck in the backlnie or the back of midfield, taking even more pressure off the Pies' backline. The result was that the Pies' running backline cut us to ribbons and we were quickly out of the game.

As things quickly began to sour, all Lyon had up his sleeve was the same trick he used in the first GF: moving Gilbert forward.

What the game reminded me of was some of the bad losses in 2007-08 or the PF in 2009: games in which I felt we gradually got pushed further and further back until we found it almost impossible to get out of our defensive 50. And, unlike the 2009 PF, we had no Raph Clarke to make a courageous, evasive run out of the backline. So, instead, we went back to chipping it around.

And here's the rub: I suspect that, like (it would seem) most posters on this forum, Lyon came away from the first GF with the wrong message. I reckon he believed that our second half comeback showed that we had gotten Collingwood's measure and that we would retain this edge in the replay.

I for one never saw the drawn game that way. I thought that, once we got a couple of goals back after half time, the Pies got the shakes in the same way we did in the second half of the 2009 GF. But that was a salvation that was only going to be available to us once.

Yes, our team was battered and bruised and needing a break after the first final. The Pies would presumably felt much the same.

Malthouse's response was to make a positive (and, perhaps, crucial) change, taking out a goal sneak and bringing in yet another guy who could move the ball quickly and accurately out of the backline.

Our response was simply to replace Gardi like for like. We needed to be more adventurous. Sure, the likes of Geary, Armo and Stanley hadn't played for a while, but they were all worth a try. Armo could have played instead of Jones in the middle with Jones moving back to replace Baker (who really should have been dropped after the first GF), Stanley for McEvoy, with Kosi going into the ruck, and Geary for Eddy.

These suggested changes highlight three areas of great weakness: Kosi up forward (I think the first GF showed conclusively that his future lies in the ruck or nowhere), Jones as a fully-fledged midfielder (rather than a pure tagger, which is the only role he can play at AFL level IMO) and Eddy anywhere on an AFL field (he is not an AFL standard player).

Ross, simply make those three fixes for Rd 1 2011 and, if Raph is fit again (please God), bring him in for Dempster, and how much better is the lineup looking already?

As I have said on another thread, if we lineup for Rd 1 next year with Eddy and Dempster in the starting 22 and the likes of Armo and Geary in the emergencies, I'm going to go back to feeling like I want Lyon to go.

[SainterK]

Dempster had a very good finals series MB, I for one have enjoyed watching him blossom into an integral part of our lineup.

I am coming to terms that the reality was, that St Kilda didn't choke, Collingwood very well nearly did the week previous.

[meher baba]

Dempster had a very good finals series MB, I for one have enjoyed watching him blossom into an integral part of our lineup.

I am coming to terms that the reality was, that St Kilda didn't choke, Collingwood very well nearly did the week previous.

Dempster was quite good against the Cats and Dogs and serviceable in the first GF, but he had a poor game on Saturday, letting his man get away from him on a number of occasions: although, to be fair, it was bloody hard for our defenders to try to stop the tsunami coming at them.

I just don't think Dempster has the capacity to do enough with the ball in his hands to cut it in contemporary AFL. Lyon loves him because he is totally drilled at playing the style of football that Lyon and Roos developed at the Swans and Lyon carried over (with some modifications) to us. Dempster is also immensely fit and has enormous stamina.

But, look at the way the Pies played. They didn't have a single player who wasn't more skilled than Dempster (and Eddy and Jones) with the ball in his hands: even Jolly!!

That's the future of AFL for mine, not the dour defensive stuff that we play.

[Con Gorozidis]

im a big fan of grammy. But the fact is he played on one leg. He should not have played. A gammy groin is a gammy groin. You cant ignore it. Should have played Miles as a replacement.

[SainterK]

Dempster had a very good finals series MB, I for one have enjoyed watching him blossom into an integral part of our lineup.

I am coming to terms that the reality was, that St Kilda didn't choke, Collingwood very well nearly did the week previous.

Dempster was quite good against the Cats and Dogs and serviceable in the first GF, but he had a poor game on Saturday, letting his man get away from him on a number of occasions: although, to be fair, it was bloody hard for our defenders to try to stop the tsunami coming at them.

I just don't think Dempster has the capacity to do enough with the ball in his hands to cut it in contemporary AFL. Lyon loves him because he is totally drilled at playing the style of football that Lyon and Roos developed at the Swans and Lyon carried over (with some modifications) to us. Dempster is also immensely fit and has enormous stamina.

But, look at the way the Pies played. They didn't have a single player who wasn't more skilled than Dempster (and Eddy and Jones) with the ball in his hands: even Jolly!!

That's the future of AFL for mine, not the dour defensive stuff that we play.

To be fair, he rolled his ankle in GF1....I just think he has the potential to be a best 22 player.

He is just starting to show signs of his form before his LTI, we need someone to be groomed to take over from Baker.

[Beej]

I'm tired of hearing the injuries excuse.

As the players say, "control the controllable". Injures while unlucky are not controllable.

Fact remains, when the game was there to be won, we lacked the composure, the nerve, the bottle to take our opportunities. That's how I saw it.

We still haven't won a premiership and we let yet another good year and another grand final amount to nothing.

All the excuses in the world are absolutely no consolation and reading CURLY posting "the guys did everything to tie that game, and you expect them to back it up?" is a slap in the face to ALL supporters.

What kind of happy-clapping, mediocrity-accepting support is that?

Jesus wept.

I will put most of the bulls*** your coming out with as anger and venting. If tou cant look at the bigger picture and see what unfolded like I said you are a clown. You dont appreciate the effort it took Dal, Gram and Kosi just to play in the first Grand Final. You have no idea clearly. Backing up after a jab in normal game is hard enough let alone after a Grand fInal.

Injuries, sore-bodies, we were tired, you can't expect them to back up after a jab.

All your excuses are making you out to be a terrible loser and it's embarrassing. You're willing to blame everything else on losing a GF yet you're willing to excuse the only people who had any influence on the contest.

Be a man, cop it on the chin. We weren't good enough. When the heat was on, we hid. The occasion was too much for us.

Not only did we miss countless opportunities in front of goal, but we were directly responsible for more than half of Collingwood's score by coughing up possession time and time again leading to goals.

It was as woeful a grand final performance as you will ever see.

No excuse in the world is going to make up for the fact we've failed to deliver on the big stage yet again.

Not taking anything away from the Pies, they were very good, but we couldn't have made it any easier for them.

[meher baba]

Dempster had a very good finals series MB, I for one have enjoyed watching him blossom into an integral part of our lineup.

I am coming to terms that the reality was, that St Kilda didn't choke, Collingwood very well nearly did the week previous.

Dempster was quite good against the Cats and Dogs and serviceable in the first GF, but he had a poor game on Saturday, letting his man get away from him on a number of occasions: although, to be fair, it was bloody hard for our defenders to try to stop the tsunami coming at them.

I just don't think Dempster has the capacity to do enough with the ball in his hands to cut it in contemporary AFL. Lyon loves him because he is totally drilled at playing the style of football that Lyon and Roos developed at the Swans and Lyon carried over (with some modifications) to us. Dempster is also immensely fit and has enormous stamina.

But, look at the way the Pies played. They didn't have a single player who wasn't more skilled than Dempster (and Eddy and Jones) with the ball in his hands: even Jolly!!

That's the future of AFL for mine, not the dour defensive stuff that we play.

To be fair, he rolled his ankle in GF1....I just think he has the potential to be a best 22 player.

He is just starting to show signs of his form before his LTI, we need someone to be groomed to take over from Baker.

Look, I'm not totally against him. He is a far better proposition than Eddy (who, I'm sad to say, is not an AFL quality player IMO).

Before his injury in 2008, Dempster's disposal by foot was pretty good and he could kick the ball a long way. But, even back then (and, before that, at the Swans), he never seemed to be able to get his hands on contested ball: he prefers (or is unable to do any better than) to punch the ball away from his opponent.

And his overhead skills have always been more or less non-existent (far worse, for example, than Baker's).

I reckoh he's worth hanging onto for a few more years, but I would hope his future role would be more as a backup than as an automatic first choice.

[Con Gorozidis]

Too many excuses for Lyon on this forum IMO, not to mention the drivel written by his mentor Paul Roos.

Lyon is a terrific coach: one of the best going around ATM (I, unlike many on here, have always rated Malthouse ahead of Lyon, and possibly Eade as well, but not by much in either case).

But the GF replay was a pretty poor coaching effort.

Lyon has never been much of a match day coach IMO: he works on the basis of deeply considered strategies and structures which he drills incessantly into the players. He doesn't seem to be terribly prone to sudden intuitiions during games. or even - as we saw on Saturday - between games.

It was bleeding obvious (or, at least, it was to me and the other armchair fans I was talking to in the days leading up to the game) that we needed to do something a bit different at the start of the replay: to somehow try to throw the Pies off their game.

The obvious thing for me would have been an extra forward target to put more pressure on the Pies backline: the engine room for their attack. When I read the rumours about Stanley coming in, I really hoped they were true: he is quick enough to keep up with the Pies' dangerous backline runners and he is also some sort of a threat with the ball in his hands.. A risk sure, but - for reasons I'll explain in a minute - it was the sort of risk I think we needed to take.

Instead, we got Eddy playing on Maxwell. As someone said on another thread, Eddy provides no significant attacking threat. He is also small and slight, so he was never likely to give too much trouble to Maxmell. As things turned out, he got injured and quickly became irrelevant.

Worse still, for much of the first half Schneider seemed to be stuck in the backlnie or the back of midfield, taking even more pressure off the Pies' backline. The result was that the Pies' running backline cut us to ribbons and we were quickly out of the game.

As things quickly began to sour, all Lyon had up his sleeve was the same trick he used in the first GF: moving Gilbert forward.

What the game reminded me of was some of the bad losses in 2007-08 or the PF in 2009: games in which I felt we gradually got pushed further and further back until we found it almost impossible to get out of our defensive 50. And, unlike the 2009 PF, we had no Raph Clarke to make a courageous, evasive run out of the backline. So, instead, we went back to chipping it around.

And here's the rub: I suspect that, like (it would seem) most posters on this forum, Lyon came away from the first GF with the wrong message. I reckon he believed that our second half comeback showed that we had gotten Collingwood's measure and that we would retain this edge in the replay.

I for one never saw the drawn game that way. I thought that, once we got a couple of goals back after half time, the Pies got the shakes in the same way we did in the second half of the 2009 GF. But that was a salvation that was only going to be available to us once.

Yes, our team was battered and bruised and needing a break after the first final. The Pies would presumably felt much the same.

Malthouse's response was to make a positive (and, perhaps, crucial) change, taking out a goal sneak and bringing in yet another guy who could move the ball quickly and accurately out of the backline.

Our response was simply to replace Gardi like for like. We needed to be more adventurous. Sure, the likes of Geary, Armo and Stanley hadn't played for a while, but they were all worth a try. Armo could have played instead of Jones in the middle with Jones moving back to replace Baker (who really should have been dropped after the first GF), Stanley for McEvoy, with Kosi going into the ruck, and Geary for Eddy.

These suggested changes highlight three areas of great weakness: Kosi up forward (I think the first GF showed conclusively that his future lies in the ruck or nowhere), Jones as a fully-fledged midfielder (rather than a pure tagger, which is the only role he can play at AFL level IMO) and Eddy anywhere on an AFL field (he is not an AFL standard player).

Ross, simply make those three fixes for Rd 1 2011 and, if Raph is fit again (please God), bring him in for Dempster, and how much better is the lineup looking already?

As I have said on another thread, if we lineup for Rd 1 next year with Eddy and Dempster in the starting 22 and the likes of Armo and Geary in the emergencies, I'm going to go back to feeling like I want Lyon to go.

Post of the day. Im with you 100%. No Raph was exaccerbated by Grams injury - so no real run and dash and noone (apart from bj) willing to actuay take on a pies defender. When u wont take them on it emboldens them. They grew in belief. And we kept getting driven back and back and back. With Gram injured in GF1 we had no choice but to play Miles in GF 2 and hope he played a Grammy kind of role.

[Thinline]

I'm tired of hearing the injuries excuse.

As the players say, "control the controllable". Injures while unlucky are not controllable.

Fact remains, when the game was there to be won, we lacked the composure, the nerve, the bottle to take our opportunities. That's how I saw it.

We still haven't won a premiership and we let yet another good year and another grand final amount to nothing.

All the excuses in the world are absolutely no consolation and reading CURLY posting "the guys did everything to tie that game, and you expect them to back it up?" is a slap in the face to ALL supporters.

What kind of happy-clapping, mediocrity-accepting support is that?

Jesus wept.

I will put most of the bulls*** your coming out with as anger and venting. If tou cant look at the bigger picture and see what unfolded like I said you are a clown. You dont appreciate the effort it took Dal, Gram and Kosi just to play in the first Grand Final. You have no idea clearly. Backing up after a jab in normal game is hard enough let alone after a Grand fInal.

Injuries, sore-bodies, we were tired, you can't expect them to back up after a jab.

All your excuses are making you out to be a terrible loser and it's embarrassing. You're willing to blame everything else on losing a GF yet you're willing to excuse the only people who had any influence on the contest.

Be a man, cop it on the chin. We weren't good enough. When the heat was on, we hid. The occasion was too much for us.

Not only did we miss countless opportunities in front of goal, but we were directly responsible for more than half of Collingwood's score by coughing up possession time and time again leading to goals.

It was as woeful a grand final performance as you will ever see.

No excuse in the world is going to make up for the fact we've failed to deliver on the big stage yet again.

Personally I believe we delivered a fantastic effort in 2 out of 3. Two I believe . '09 was an awesome effort let down by execution. '10 Mk 1 was an extraordinary effort let down by the shape of the bloody ball. '10 Mk 2 was a lamentable effort, but in the context of how it panned out and what we were up against, probably unsurprising.

If you want to vent, go and vent. But all you are doing is disrespecting better opposition and potting the courage, commitment and will of our players from of all places your keyboard and that is kind of lame.

[Beej]

I'm tired of hearing the injuries excuse.

As the players say, "control the controllable". Injures while unlucky are not controllable.

Fact remains, when the game was there to be won, we lacked the composure, the nerve, the bottle to take our opportunities. That's how I saw it.

We still haven't won a premiership and we let yet another good year and another grand final amount to nothing.

All the excuses in the world are absolutely no consolation and reading CURLY posting "the guys did everything to tie that game, and you expect them to back it up?" is a slap in the face to ALL supporters.

What kind of happy-clapping, mediocrity-accepting support is that?

Jesus wept.

I will put most of the bulls*** your coming out with as anger and venting. If tou cant look at the bigger picture and see what unfolded like I said you are a clown. You dont appreciate the effort it took Dal, Gram and Kosi just to play in the first Grand Final. You have no idea clearly. Backing up after a jab in normal game is hard enough let alone after a Grand fInal.

Injuries, sore-bodies, we were tired, you can't expect them to back up after a jab.

All your excuses are making you out to be a terrible loser and it's embarrassing. You're willing to blame everything else on losing a GF yet you're willing to excuse the only people who had any influence on the contest.

Be a man, cop it on the chin. We weren't good enough. When the heat was on, we hid. The occasion was too much for us.

Not only did we miss countless opportunities in front of goal, but we were directly responsible for more than half of Collingwood's score by coughing up possession time and time again leading to goals.

It was as woeful a grand final performance as you will ever see.

No excuse in the world is going to make up for the fact we've failed to deliver on the big stage yet again.

Personally I believe we delivered a fantastic effort in 2 out of 3. Two I believe . '09 was an awesome effort let down by execution. '10 Mk 1 was an extraordinary effort let down by the shape of the bloody ball. '10 Mk 2 was a lamentable effort, but in the context of how it panned out and what we were up against, probably unsurprising.

If you want to vent, go and vent. But all you are doing is disrespecting better opposition and potting the courage, commitment and will of our players from of all places your keyboard and that is kind of lame.

Why are we blaming the shape of the ball? Does it make it easier for people to get over a loss if you believe it's due to bad luck?

Ross asked Milne after the first game if he could've got to it and Milne said no chance.

IMO we're extremely lucky the footy bounced in for a point to force the replay because there were a few Collingwood players just out of picture who may have got there first had it bounced their way.

Not doubting their courage, commitment or will.

I'm doubting whether the club is good enough to deliver when the pressure is its greatest.

How could any supporter not have those doubts?

[Thinline]

Roo's coulda rolled on...

Milne's coulda popped into his arms or done a Leigh Brown...

Sometimes luck is the difference. Undeniable.

[dragit]

I think it's hard to estimate what it takes to play the biggest game of your life - 2 weeks in a row.
Would we have won if Stanley, Armitage, Geary and Steven had replaced the injured and poor - Kosi, Eddy, Gram and Dal?
I don't think so…
We put everything into the first one, understandably thinking there was no tomorrow, the Pies played at their absolute best the next week and we couldn't. I was in pieces watching it but I'm philosophical in that I believe that no personal or game style changes could have changed the result last week.
We had one pinched off us last year, but failed to pinch one ourselves this year. We certainly don't have the best list or facilities in the comp, and although I don't always enjoy the way we play, Ross Lyon is getting the absolute most out of what he's got on hand.
We were so close last year, yet Lyon was bold at the trade table, yes it failed, yet we drew a GF against an unbelievable outfit. I'm sure he will go hard again this week, for every good recycled player you land there at least 2 duds.
If there is a footy god - he can blow me!

[Beej]

Roo's coulda rolled on...

Milne's coulda popped into his arms or done a Leigh Brown...

Sometimes luck is the difference. Undeniable.

Granted, but...

Roo's could have also bounced up allowing Maxwell to gather and clear.

Lenny Hayes' kick could've gone straight out of bounds as it looked like it was originally headed before it bounced on its point taking Ben Johnson, who was in front of Milne, completely out of the equation.

Who's on the receiving end of the bad luck when you look at it that way?

[Thinline]

Roo's coulda rolled on...

Milne's coulda popped into his arms or done a Leigh Brown...

Sometimes luck is the difference. Undeniable.

Granted, but...

Roo's could have also bounced up allowing Maxwell to gather and clear.

Lenny Hayes' kick could've gone straight out of bounds as it looked like it was originally headed before it bounced on its point taking Ben Johnson, who was in front of Milne, completely out of the equation.

Who's on the receiving end of the bad luck when you look at it that way?

And Breen's coulda done a Warney in 66.

My point is this: both occurred when we were dominating the game. We were creating chances. It's not like they were random events. We were making our luck. Still, wasn't enough. Sometimes you need luck to be rewarded for effort.

[Beej]

Roo's coulda rolled on...

Milne's coulda popped into his arms or done a Leigh Brown...

Sometimes luck is the difference. Undeniable.

Granted, but...

Roo's could have also bounced up allowing Maxwell to gather and clear.

Lenny Hayes' kick could've gone straight out of bounds as it looked like it was originally headed before it bounced on its point taking Ben Johnson, who was in front of Milne, completely out of the equation.

Who's on the receiving end of the bad luck when you look at it that way?

And Breen's coulda done a Warney in 66.

My point is this: both occurred when we were dominating the game. We were creating chances. It's not like they were random events. We were making our luck. Still, wasn't enough. Sometimes you need luck to be rewarded for effort.

No doubt but luck is completely out of their control so it's silly to worry about it.

I prefer to look at things like Farren Ray giving away a 50 or Brett Peake turning it over while entering 50, both resulting in Collingwood goals, as the difference rather than blaming the bounce of the ball. But that's just me.

Both those incidents were controllable.

[CURLY]

Roo's coulda rolled on...

Milne's coulda popped into his arms or done a Leigh Brown...

Sometimes luck is the difference. Undeniable.

Granted, but...

Roo's could have also bounced up allowing Maxwell to gather and clear.

Lenny Hayes' kick could've gone straight out of bounds as it looked like it was originally headed before it bounced on its point taking Ben Johnson, who was in front of Milne, completely out of the equation.

Who's on the receiving end of the bad luck when you look at it that way?

And Breen's coulda done a Warney in 66.

My point is this: both occurred when we were dominating the game. We were creating chances. It's not like they were random events. We were making our luck. Still, wasn't enough. Sometimes you need luck to be rewarded for effort.

No doubt but luck is completely out of their control so it's silly to worry about it.

I prefer to look at things like Farren Ray giving away a 50 or Brett Peake turning it over while entering 50, both resulting in Collingwood goals, as the difference rather than blaming the bounce of the ball. But that's just me.

Both those incidents were controllable.

Were asked to accept these things but at same time cant accept our players being spent?????

[gringo]

We just have to get the best available talent, see where we are at this season and go for it.

This is probably our last chance at a flag in the next 2 seasons. See what we have got coming through but not if they don't perform, anyones spot should be lost if form doesn't warrant it.

The game plan will evolve to become more attacking to combat the pies and the copiers.

We will be up again and should have a little more luck fall our way.

[Beej]

Roo's coulda rolled on...

Milne's coulda popped into his arms or done a Leigh Brown...

Sometimes luck is the difference. Undeniable.

Granted, but...

Roo's could have also bounced up allowing Maxwell to gather and clear.

Lenny Hayes' kick could've gone straight out of bounds as it looked like it was originally headed before it bounced on its point taking Ben Johnson, who was in front of Milne, completely out of the equation.

Who's on the receiving end of the bad luck when you look at it that way?

And Breen's coulda done a Warney in 66.

My point is this: both occurred when we were dominating the game. We were creating chances. It's not like they were random events. We were making our luck. Still, wasn't enough. Sometimes you need luck to be rewarded for effort.

No doubt but luck is completely out of their control so it's silly to worry about it.

I prefer to look at things like Farren Ray giving away a 50 or Brett Peake turning it over while entering 50, both resulting in Collingwood goals, as the difference rather than blaming the bounce of the ball. But that's just me.

Both those incidents were controllable.

Were asked to accept these things but at same time cant accept our players being spent?????

LOL Why are you doing this?

You know for a fact our players were more buggered than Collingwood's, do you?

Can I see the medical reports that you obviously have access to?

All our boys are sore and tired and playing with jabs yet the Pies, with the same break, are magically fit and firing.

Have I just imagined Maxwell wearing strapping on his knee for the last month? Didak's shoulder hasn't been sore at all and Pendlebury didn't hurt his back in GF1? Collingwood were 100% and absolutely at full-strength were they?

I hate to rain on your parade CURLY, but there's a good chance both teams were spent.

Keep your sorry excuses coming though.

[CURLY]

Roo's coulda rolled on...

Milne's coulda popped into his arms or done a Leigh Brown...

Sometimes luck is the difference. Undeniable.

Granted, but...

Roo's could have also bounced up allowing Maxwell to gather and clear.

Lenny Hayes' kick could've gone straight out of bounds as it looked like it was originally headed before it bounced on its point taking Ben Johnson, who was in front of Milne, completely out of the equation.

Who's on the receiving end of the bad luck when you look at it that way?

And Breen's coulda done a Warney in 66.

My point is this: both occurred when we were dominating the game. We were creating chances. It's not like they were random events. We were making our luck. Still, wasn't enough. Sometimes you need luck to be rewarded for effort.

No doubt but luck is completely out of their control so it's silly to worry about it.

I prefer to look at things like Farren Ray giving away a 50 or Brett Peake turning it over while entering 50, both resulting in Collingwood goals, as the difference rather than blaming the bounce of the ball. But that's just me.

Both those incidents were controllable.

Were asked to accept these things but at same time cant accept our players being spent?????

LOL Why are you doing this?

You know for a fact our players were more buggered than Collingwood's, do you?

Can I see the medical reports that you obviously have access to?

All our boys are sore and tired and playing with jabs yet the Pies, with the same break, are magically fit and firing.

Have I just imagined Maxwell wearing strapping on his knee for the last month? Didak's shoulder hasn't been sore at all and Pendlebury didn't hurt his back in GF1? Collingwood were 100% and absolutely at full-strength were they?

I hate to rain on your parade CURLY, but there's a good chance both teams were spent.

Keep your sorry excuses coming though.

Did you not watch the game? Gram Fisher Eddy all gone by half time. Dal Kosi Jones and Bakes all going in at less than 100%.

We know of Didak and Im sure Collingwood and Eddie would be pushing it in all our faces if they were carrying injuries. FFS Eddie made a comment that most blokes would miss 12 monthes off work with Didaks injury. Was our first choice ruckmen playing? I know your pissed but look at the big picture we were spent at half time.

Im still waiting for you to come up with any solutions to any of the problems Ross faced. But then again judging by most of your comments football is somthing you struggle with.

[Beej]

Roo's coulda rolled on...

Milne's coulda popped into his arms or done a Leigh Brown...

Sometimes luck is the difference. Undeniable.

Granted, but...

Roo's could have also bounced up allowing Maxwell to gather and clear.

Lenny Hayes' kick could've gone straight out of bounds as it looked like it was originally headed before it bounced on its point taking Ben Johnson, who was in front of Milne, completely out of the equation.

Who's on the receiving end of the bad luck when you look at it that way?

And Breen's coulda done a Warney in 66.

My point is this: both occurred when we were dominating the game. We were creating chances. It's not like they were random events. We were making our luck. Still, wasn't enough. Sometimes you need luck to be rewarded for effort.

No doubt but luck is completely out of their control so it's silly to worry about it.

I prefer to look at things like Farren Ray giving away a 50 or Brett Peake turning it over while entering 50, both resulting in Collingwood goals, as the difference rather than blaming the bounce of the ball. But that's just me.

Both those incidents were controllable.

Were asked to accept these things but at same time cant accept our players being spent?????

LOL Why are you doing this?

You know for a fact our players were more buggered than Collingwood's, do you?

Can I see the medical reports that you obviously have access to?

All our boys are sore and tired and playing with jabs yet the Pies, with the same break, are magically fit and firing.

Have I just imagined Maxwell wearing strapping on his knee for the last month? Didak's shoulder hasn't been sore at all and Pendlebury didn't hurt his back in GF1? Collingwood were 100% and absolutely at full-strength were they?

I hate to rain on your parade CURLY, but there's a good chance both teams were spent.

Keep your sorry excuses coming though.

Did you not watch the game? Gram Fisher Eddy all gone by half time. Dal Kosi Jones and Bakes all going in at less than 100%.

We know of Didak and Im sure Collingwood and Eddie would be pushing it in all our faces if they were carrying injuries. FFS Eddie made a comment that most blokes would miss 12 monthes off work with Didaks injury. Was our first choice ruckmen playing? I know your pissed but look at the big picture we were spent at half time.

Im still waiting for you to come up with any solutions to any of the problems Ross faced. But then again judging by most of your comments football is somthing you struggle with.

The amount of players who went in at less than 100% would probably surprise you.

Once again, you have no proof of anything. Ross laughed off claims Jones had an broken foot and Dal was apparently moving freely at training according to those who went.

Either way, if you think players are 100% at this time of year you're living in fantasy. Both teams had to deal with knocks.

I don't remember Fisher being gone by half-time, I read he left the field in the third. But I'll give you that anyway, you probably need the extra excuse to convince yourself that we're really the better team.

Tell me this. How do the tired/sore bodies of Jones and Dal prevent the rest of the 22 from playing at a decent level?

Is the entire side instructed to self-destruct when we receive an injury?

I'd like to hear more excuses for why we lost seeing that being out-played by an opposition who stood up to the pressure of a GF better than we did is obviously complete crap.

We've heard injuries and bad bounces. What else have you got?

What about the weather? The amount of cloud cover maybe? The angle of the sun perhaps favored the Collingwood forwards?