It was a game that had just about everything. It could be seen as Collingwood's revenge for the game a few years ago which was "stolen" by Zaharakis in the dying seconds.
Collingwood failed to kick a goal in the first quarter. The Collingwood members around me grew quiet. Mischievously, the Bogan suggested to his neighbour that perhaps the ground was tilted downward slightly in the direction Essendon were kicking.
Even though the Pies were getting a bath in the first quarter, I was heartened by the ferocious tackling. Often two players tackled the ball carrier and on at least one occasion there were three. In fairness, both sides tackled ferociously all day; I think it is part of what made it such a great contest.
The Bombers kicked the first of the second quarter to take a 37-point lead. In the stands, I should have been desolate, but the game was eerily reminiscent of the previous week's clash between the Bombers and the Saints, one of the few non-Collingwood games I have ever bothered to download. It's the only non-Collingwood game this year that I've watched from beginning to end; I couldn't resist the schadenfreude.
Team Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Final Essendon Bombers 5.0 5.2 7.7 9.11 65 St Kilda Saints 1.6 4.8 8.11 11.15 81 Collingwood Magpies 0.3 6.5 9.7 12.11 83 Essendon Bombers 5.4 6.5 6.7 8.12 60
The Anzac Day game wasn't a mirror of the St Kilda game, but the parallels were there: Essendon flew out of the blocks kicking 5 goals to not-a-lot in the first quarter; scores were dead-set level at half time; Essendon managed a goal-less quarter through the middle of the game; when the game was in the balance in the final quarter, Essendon was outscored 3 goals to 2; the final scores were similar. The Anzac Day game was a bit more extreme: in nearly an hour, Essendon scored a mere 3 behinds; for the first time, there were two goal-less quarters in an Anzac Day game.
My insouciance of the first quarter was strikingly absent in the last - especially after the Merretts kicked the first 2 goals. I kept watching the clock and the score, prepared to settle for any sort of victory, no matter how ugly. I felt we had come too far and worked too hard to not come away with the bickies. Had I known that not only had Fasolo been subbed out - apparently with a foot injury - but also an injured Young would sit out the last quarter on the bench, my anxiety would have gone through the roof.
There are unsubstantiated rumours floating around, claims that Essendon players were injected with illegal substances (but not by Demetriou). Of course I don't believe a word of it, but anyone who did might formulate the theory that as the drugs gradually exit the players' bodies their stamina is pari passu draining away. Their tanks are now down to a single quarter of football.
But enough of this scurrilous nonsense.
Once again, it was an even team effort; nevertheless there were some standouts.
Sidebottom was instrumental in getting the Pies back into the game with his three second-quarter goals. Beams had a team high 32 disposals. Pendlebury's performance was compromised: he set up a lot of plays, but he also missed two gettable goals.
Swan, in kicking a third of the team's goals, probably deserved his Anzac Day medal for sheer effectiveness, but he missed several other shots and was well down on his expected disposal count. However he looked markedly better than the proppy version of the previous week. I forgot that he also had glandular fever in the off season.
Goldsack (10) and Beams (9) were the tackle kings. Elliott was everywhere, helping out in defence and kicking an important last-quarter goal.
Josh Thomas managed 16 disposals in less than a half of footy.
Langdon gets a lot of the ball, his defensive play is excellent, but some of his choices and disposals make this fan want to tear his hair out. Handpassing to the top of the goal square in the last quarter was really dumb, a potential catastrophe averted when Sidebottom fisted the ball through for a behind.
I thought Grundy was hopeless at centre bounces and well beaten, but he made up for it with his performance around the ground. He tackled fiercely, marked strongly and kicked the last goal of the match, a beautiful long straight kick after a strong contested mark - completing a 60-point turnaround.
Macaffer (on Watson) did another creditable job.
A good barometer of how well Collingwood is travelling is that its 5 elite midfielders were its 5 top disposers: Beams, Pendlebury, Swan, Sidebottom and Ball.
The year's looking up.
Evolution
[This could have been a separate post, but I'm not sure I have a lot to say.]
There's been a lot of newspaper space devoted to the state of the game. The key phrases seem to be mauling packs, chip kicks and spectacle. Perhaps I've got it wrong, misunderstood the argument. Sheedy is involved, so something is likely to happen.
Here's The Footy Bogan's view: leave it alone.
Perhaps it's just my imagination; perhaps I'm dreaming. But it seems to me the current AFL administration - the Demetriou reign, if you will - has been more interventionist than previous regimes. And not just more interventionist; this regime seems to be quick to act; knee-jerk reactions (with the emphasis on jerk).
Hawthorn hand-balled behinds in one grand final; the following year there was a new rule. One grand final does not a summer make! The new rule hasn't really changed anything on-field. In the stands, you get the idiots ignorantly baying for more blood. If you think footballers are stupid - well, they are intellectual giants compared to Collingwood supporters. I take as a given that they are one-eyed; but must it follow that they are inane?
But I digress.
In this, The Footy Bogan is a Darwinian: the game will evolve of it's own accord. The best coaches will re-invent. Hawthorn won a premiership with Clarko's Cluster, but where is it now? Consigned to the trash can of history. Roos had a basket case of a team at Sydney back when Buckley still played footy: he move all his players into defence. It didn't really work; after a while he changed his game plan (and presumably acquired some better players) - and won a premiership and lost a premiership in adjacent years. (It might have been the opposite order. Sydney won 2005; West Coast won the other.)
This constant fiddling with the rules just confuses everyone.
Sources:
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_match_statistics?mid=5802
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/
Dear Mr TFB
ReplyDeleteI was able to attend the Anzac Day match yesterday. What a game! It is in no danger if it continues to be as nail biting as this one was. You are correct when you say that the best course of action is to leave the rules of the game alone. If anything, the rules should be made more definite with explanations and videos made available on what is acceptable to the umpires and what isn’t. It would certainly help the lot of the umpires. By the way, wasn’t it interesting to see the replay of Cloke’s touched shot at goal.
Razor Ray lived up to his reputation, but on reflection the umpiring in general was favorable to the Pies. We also now know what is acceptable for the Macaffering of opposition players. (It should be in the Macquarie Dictionary next year).
If the defining quality of winning an Anzac Day footy medal was “inspirational play”, it was certainly given to the right player.
It is interesting to see how the various sections of a winning football team are slowly falling into place. Two ruckmen. A second tall forward. The Buckley game plan. For me, the best is seeing the backline players melding – despite 3 or sometimes more being newbies, one returning after a year off after an ACL and the General making a mockery of his critics.
I am overseas from next weekend for a few weeks so I will need your expert in depth observations.
Floreat pica.
M