Bombertalk

Leaving Wojinski out was a horrible mistake... What the f*** was Bomber thinking???

They didnt seem to have the physical presence they had last year.

Varcoe is the softest footballer in that team, and should not have been played. Should not be playing AFL.

Kelly was disgraceful as was Stokes

Mooney cost them the game and Harley going off f***** them up.


Not playing Wojinski was a terrible call.

surely you are having a lend of us Filth?

21-1, 5 wins better than the second placed side, reigning premier, almost had the greatest season ever. got done today partly because they missed their chances, partly because Hawthorn played very well.

if this was any football (soccer) league in the world they would have been crowned champions some 8 weeks ago.

they will be very disappointed. dont be surprised if they are minor premiers again next year.

and as for your comment about Ablett - way off the mark. He was absolutely brilliant today - the most determined Cat by a mile. The poor bugger had so many passengers (see Varcoe, Stokes etc) - there was no way he could carry them over the line by himself.

Man, I thought McLaren was bad for us, but he just totally screwed the Hawks in the GF. He did just about everything he could to keep the Pussies in the game. Good on the Dawks for winning regardless.

What a crushing blow for the Pussies. They called us underachievers for only wining one GF in 00, but this defeat today is much worse. How would you feel winning 42 of your last 44 games, and then falling over for the really BIG one?? No excuses - the Cats had no real injury problems (unlike us in 01), and were playing against a team that had three players (Croad, Buddy and Hodge) carrying some significant injuries. Geelong will be a very sad town tonight!

The better team on the day won. Hawthorn took their chances while Geelong did not, The Hawks seemed to want it more.

I agree with Filth. Legspeed cost Geelong as well as a poorly performing forward line. One of the problems I thought was that as Mooney was incapable of playing as a big key forward, the Cats didn't have a get out of jail card to play when the pressure was great in the midfield. They couldn't just bomb it long to the goal square and were looking for pin point passes all day.

By the way who won MMM's worst on ground award? I have a bet with a mate that it was Stokes.

Don't buy the theory at all.

They had 9 more scoring shots, almost 20 more inside 50s, dominated both the hitouts and clearances. Purely and simply, they fluffed it. Reminds me a bit of the dreaded 99 preliminary final. You can't rubbish a team as having a major deficiency when they've been the standout for the last 2 seasons, just because they fluffed one match, albeit the GF.

jimmyc1985 wrote:Don't buy the theory at all.

They had 9 more scoring shots, almost 20 more inside 50s, dominated both the hitouts and clearances. Purely and simply, they fluffed it. Reminds me a bit of the dreaded 99 preliminary final. You can't rubbish a team as having a major deficiency when they've been the standout for the last 2 seasons, just because they fluffed one match, albeit the GF.

Correct. Yes, there were a lot of rushed behinds, but Chapman, Ottens, and Mooney (x2) had simple shots in the first half that they missed. Had the scored them, instead of being 3 points behind at half time, they would have been 17 points up and it's almost game over.

They simply got the yips.

PS Ablett was f*cking brilliant. I can't believe you people!

Ossie wrote:

jimmyc1985 wrote:Don't buy the theory at all.

They had 9 more scoring shots, almost 20 more inside 50s, dominated both the hitouts and clearances. Purely and simply, they fluffed it. Reminds me a bit of the dreaded 99 preliminary final. You can't rubbish a team as having a major deficiency when they've been the standout for the last 2 seasons, just because they fluffed one match, albeit the GF.

Correct. Yes, there were a lot of rushed behinds, but Chapman, Ottens, and Mooney (x2) had simple shots in the first half that they missed. Had the scored them, instead of being 3 points behind at half time, they would have been 17 points up and it's almost game over.

They simply got the yips.

PS Ablett was f*cking brilliant. I can't believe you people!

Absolutely correct Ossie.

Some other observations:
The cats over possessed the ball - particularly in the 2nd half and Hawthorn kept coming for them - just as the filth did in their only other loss this year. If they had moved the ball quicker into their forward line they could have opened Hawthorn up, but the opposite happened.

Varcoe and Mooney should be in disgrace - a more insipid performance from 2 players you could not see. If Bomba is serious, a message should be sent and Varcoe should be put on the trade table (not that too many will be lining up to take him). Tom Hawkins should be told to toughten up and get AFL fit because Mooney's place should be there for the taking.

Kelly and Stokes were poor - looks like the season has been too long for them and average players always perform better in greast sides - geelong wasn't great yesterday - so they looked average. Wojo should have played and Milburn should be told to hang em up.

Hawthorn will be unbearable and difficult to beat next year - I can't see Geelong beating them again for a while and on this year's efforts, there are no other obvious challengers.

Ablett brilliant - I dont think so.

Yes he got the ball, yes he ran with it BUT honestly have a look at what he actually did with the possessions. I dare say that 80% of his possessions resulted in turn overs. He didnt hit targets by hand or foot. Cyril Rioli with only 11 possessions had more of an impact because all of his possessions were quality which resulted in a positive for Hawthorn.

No Filth, i read, reflected upon and comprehended your post, thought about its content, and disagreed with it.

Filthy wrote:Neither of you obviously read my post and have gone off at a tangent to what I was talking about....quick movement of the ball by quick players ending in a long kick vs possession game with quick movement of the ball by hand or foot.

Not really. Despite everything you say, had they kicked straight in the second and third quarters, it would have been all over about 15 mins into the third term.

They certainly had enough of the footy, enough inside 50s and enough shots at goal to win the game.

Filthy wrote:Agree to disagree chaps!

No. I prefer to fight like schoolchildren.

MH_Bomber wrote:Ablett brilliant - I dont think so.

Yes he got the ball, yes he ran with it BUT honestly have a look at what he actually did with the possessions. I dare say that 80% of his possessions resulted in turn overs. He didnt hit targets by hand or foot. Cyril Rioli with only 11 possessions had more of an impact because all of his possessions were quality which resulted in a positive for Hawthorn.

He came second in the Norm Smith so I along with a lot of so called experts disagree with you...

Ablett kept them in the game for 3 and a half quarters!

MH_Bomber wrote:Ablett brilliant - I dont think so.

Yes he got the ball, yes he ran with it BUT honestly have a look at what he actually did with the possessions. I dare say that 80% of his possessions resulted in turn overs. He didnt hit targets by hand or foot.

I saw your post in the other thread about your husband's health scare - i hope he's on the mend, by the way - and how you missed the game as a result.

But seriously, i hope you haven't seen the replay (or failing that, you're baiting), because if you have seen the replay yet still managed to come to the conclusion that 80% of Ablett's possessions resulted in turnovers and he didn't hit targets by hand or foot, it is my sombre duty to inform you that your ability to objectively analyse a game of AFL is almost non-existent.

He is on the mend thanks Jimmy and you dont have to be sombre cant we just agree to disagree. Honestly I dont think my thoughts were coloured by the stressful time we had. Please have an objective look at what he did with his possessions. Many fell short of their target resulting in turn overs or putting Cats players under pressure.

Leigh Matthews didnt give him a vote so he obviously saw Abletts performance in the same light I did - flashy yes - best on ground no. I have seen him play much better games this year and always hit targets.

Even after my prognostications about Geelong and umpiring I still did want them win because of Essendon's history with Hawthorn so my thoughts are not inspired by an anti Geelong axe to grind.

I can't agree to disagree because you're factually wrong.

You asked me to take an objective look at his performance? My god, i sincerely hope you're being sarcastic. You stated that 80% of his disposals resulted in turnovers and he didn't hit targets by either hand or foot. The fact is that his disposal efficiency was 85%, which puts him easily in the better half of both teams' efficiency ratings. The fact is that he had only 3 clangers from 34 disposals. The fact is that he had 5 tackles, 8 contested possessions, 8 clearances (most on ground by a mile), 8 inside 50s (most on ground by a mile) and 2 goals. The fact is that Ablett busted his balls, played a f****** brilliant match, and was the major reason why the Cats were still a chance going into the last quarter.

Leigh Matthews? Bullshit. Ex-Hawthorn, biased thug. Couldn't give a droplet of shit about his thoughts. Personally, i'd place more stock in the comments of the coach of the player in question, Mark Thompson, who said of Ablett's performance:

http://afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tabi ... wsId=68394

"Gary Ablett's performance was sensational. He looked like he just wanted to win so much," Thompson said.

"I wish he had a few friends in that same frame of mind.

"I was thinking about it, to be honest, at the end of the game. Like everybody, I was wondering who they would give it to, because I thought Gary may have been up there in the voting somewhere."

Watched the game ... thought that many of the cats, if they were racehorses, should have benn sent to the stewards for dope testing... yes they were slow, but quite quite simply...

They lacked heart!!!!!

The Dawks wanted it more ... and had the capacity to dig deep. The cats appeared to be professionals who as a collective couldn't give a stuff (yeah we know that Aabblett shed tears ... but who else did???).

Also - Geelong's forward structure was shot. IMO they missed Nathan Abblett (B grader at best - but you need someone to hold structure when you have a midfield based goal attack) and Tomahawk hasn't stepped up this year.

Cynical speculative side of me wonders is the Cats may be interested in a CJ (along with Melb and the Doggies)

Cheers - STI

Ablett was F****** heroic on Saturday. Fact. And for the life of me, I can't understand where people's hatred of him comes from. He seems like a good bloke, always conducts himself well in public, and is a fair ball player on the field. Can't fault him.

Staggy wrote:Ablett was F****** heroic on Saturday. Fact. And for the life of me, I can't understand where people's hatred of him comes from. He seems like a good bloke, always conducts himself well in public, and is a fair ball player on the field. Can't fault him.

His old man is a cnt Staggy.... This is the only reason I can think of

I agree with you totally.. .He is a superstar and plays the game tough and fair without the Buddy 'look at me I am awesome' Franklin bullshit attitude.

Hodge was good and tough and brave but most of his possessions were from floating around the backline free... Ablett earned almost every single one of his touches and would have been Norm Smith by a mile had the pussies won