Notes from the game: 2014 Round 10 West Coast Eagles

Who needs Luna Park? The Footy Bogan gets another roller-coaster ride.

Team                    Q1      Q2      Q3      Q4      Final 
Collingwood Magpies     5.0     7.3     11.4    17.7    109
West Coast Eagles       5.2     9.5     11.10   15.11   101 

Within two minutes of playing time, Collingwood had kicked two goals. The Footy Bogan remarked to his companion that, at this rate, we'd kick 100 goals. The companion was preoccupied with his pint-sized companion but still managed a good-natured snort of derision.

I didn't notice it at the game, but in replay, for the second shot, it looks like Pendlebury measures the distance between Goldsack's current position and where Goldsack can go to improve the angle to a nicety, drops the ball on his boot and delivers a precise pass for a mark. We know he's the Time Magician, but this is beyond elite, an assist with triple twist and pike.

The Eagles kicked the next 3 goals and Collingwood found itself behind. Roller coaster. Blair kicked an amazing banana goal on the run. Both Dermott and I observed, using different words (his better), that individual heroics may defy the odds, and excite the crowd, but won't deliver reliable results. The lead see-sawed for the rest of the quarter. Roller coaster. The Eagles had most of the play, but failed to capitalise. Collingwood found an unprecedented accuracy, kicking 5 goals straight to go into the break a couple of points down.

In the stands, we did not notice that our Brown twin had gone down to the rooms for medical assistance. He never returned - roller coaster; Young was on from the start of quarter 2.

The Pies kicked 2.3 (goals to Macaffer and Blair) in the second quarter while the Eagles made most of the running. It was frustrating for the fans in the stands to watch. The Eagles kept finding space, and the cry went out to man up. But also Collingwood disposal when they ran forward past the centre was generally abysmal. The Eagles led by 14 points at half time.

Collingwood started the second half just like the first kicking two quick goals. Roller coaster. Soon after, Frost was out of the game. Roller coaster. Collingwood had run out of tall defenders and was a man down on the bench. Goldsack had already been swung into defence to play on Kennedy. Toovey was keeping Darling quiet, but now Maxwell had to play on the resting ruckman, a literally tall order. It may be that the difficulty worked to Collingwood's advantage. The Eagles had been pretty good at delivering accurately into the forward line. Perhaps they thought they could win easily in the air. They began bombing the ball indiscriminately into the forward line. Collingwood was under enormous pressure, but absorbed it successfully. Roller coaster.

During the replay, Brereton confirms, not for the first time, what an insightful commentator he is.

Pendlebury's kick into F50 over Witts's head was another butchered forward thrust. Nevertheless, the Pies scrambled 2 more goals for the quarter (to the Eagles' 2) to be down by 6 points at the last change.

The game started as a shoot-out early; then the scoring rate slowed. Roller coaster. In the final quarter, 10 goals were kicked, 6-4 in our favour.

At times, both sides butchered the ball. Roller coaster. Perhaps the difference was that Collingwood's butchery did not register on the scoreboard while the Eagles racked up behinds.

Much of the night, Collingwood players refused an obvious short pass and ended up turning the ball over.

If the game itself was a roller coaster, the last quarter took it to new heights. Collingwood kicked a couple of behinds, inching closer to West Coast. Then the Pies kicked two unanswered goals (Elliott and Pendles). We breathed a sigh of relief. But soon, the Eagles got one back; and then another - to regain the lead. Players were noticeably tired; fatigue became a factor. Beams kick truly on the left from a congested left forward area. Once again the Pies held a small lead.

Pendlebury also personified the roller coaster, kicking a goal and taking a timely mark on the wing, in between, delivering into the forward line a shocker that favoured the opposition.

Cloke took a mark, one of his few possessions for the night. Behind. Then some Elliot heroics produced another Elliot goal. If there was one player who starred on the night it was Elliot, even if he failed to hold mark of the year. Blair was hot when he had the ball, kicking three goals; but he was also absent for long periods (exacerbated by the fact that we were down one player). Roller coaster.

The Eagles kicked the next to bring the difference back to 3 points. Grundy took a mark at 50, getting hit high. He was given 50 and kicked the goal. With less than 3 minutes on the clock, Elliott (again!) pounced on the ball and kicked on his left. He may have been having a shot, but the ball landed in Cloke's arms 15m out on a slight angle. Any fair-minded observer would have to say Cloke's opponent was incredibly stiff. Cloke had 6 disposals for the night, 3 marks. His goal sealed it for the Pies.

But there was yet one more throw of the dice: the Eagles managed another goal to give them a sniff. It was not to be; Collingwood closed up shop and saw out the clock.

It was an exciting game. There were isolated patches of good footy; there were heroics that had the fans out of their seats; and there were lots of frustrating errors. We can be kind and suggest that these were caused by the pressure. But if there was a reason for the win, it was perhaps that the Pies were prepared to work extra hard to cover their fallen.

It's said that good teams find a way to win. On this day Collingwood certainly did. I hope that it indicates that the Pies are a good team.

Strategy: playing the interchange wing

This is a bit of a digression.

In the third quarter, Collingwood was coming out of defence. Cripps had missed, scoring a behind; Goldsack kicked to Elliott, just outside 50, right on the boundary. Elliott kicked a perfectly weighted pass in front of Beams's lead - only to see it intercepted by Shuey coming off the bench.

So, I've mentioned in previous posts (perhaps last year in relation to Shaw), that it is desirable for the defence to be predictable (especially to each other); but, by the same token, unpredictability (up to a point) is an advantage in offence. Following that principle, what we might want from the defence (appropriating a term from the IT world), is The Principle of Least Surprise. Accordingly, when we come out of defence, we should choose the wing opposite the interchange bench.

Sure, playing the interchange wing we might gain an advantage if one of our players comes off the interchange bench. But until the ball passes the centre line, we are defending (we're in the defensive half). And defence is about playing the percentages and safety first. We will experience less surprise if we avoid the interchange wing.

Obviously we can't always take the "safe" wing. We would be too predictable. But we could instill in the players' minds the idea that when they are coming out of defence past the interchange wing, players should avoid passing to leads moving laterally towards the boundary; and players should avoid leading towards the interchange bench.

Such rules are not there to constrain our players. Rather they are guides.

There was a time when it was a hanging offence to kick across the defensive goal. Now it is sometimes used to good effect to switch play. However, there is an element of risk; not all players are equally adept at assessing risk.

Just something to think about.

The wrap

[With apologies to Tevye.] On the one hand, we won. On the other hand, we played really badly for long periods, especially in the second quarter. On the other hand, the win was under duress once both our tall defenders were out of the game with injuries. On the other hand, who had West Coast beaten? No one - WB, Demons, Saints, GWS. They lost to Carlton! On the other hand, the defence stood up really well.

On the other hand, Cloke is still playing badly. In this game, not just Cloke. Collingwood had far too many passengers: Cloke, White (6 disposals each, 2 tackles to Cloke, none to White), Witts, Grundy (9 hitouts each; Cox and Naitanui shared 47 pretty equally), Frost, Brown (not their fault; Brown had zero for every stat, Frost a couple of disposals, a single mark, a single tackle and 3 frees against). Arguably, we could add Blair: he went missing for large parts of the game; however, he was our top goal scorer.

Toovey also had 6 disposals - excusable: he's a defender - plus 9 tackles. Goldsack had 11 tackles

Our forwards kicked 7 goals (Elliott 2, White, Cloke, Witts, Goldsack, Fasolo - the last 3 were all playing as forwards when they kicked their goals); our midfield kicked 10 (Blair 3, Beams 2). I think the Eagles went 9-6.

On the other hand, to beat any team with 6 passengers indicates a gutsy win.

We have 3 winnable games before we take on Hawthorn - but we were expected to account for West Coast fairly easily. We need to get the team operating as a team, with contributors on every line.


Sources:

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_match_statistics?mid=5834