Notes from the game: 2016 Round 4 Melbourne

Collingwood plays badly again.

Team            Q1      Q2      Q3      Q4      Final
Collingwood     1.2     6.5     8.10    9.13    67
Melbourne       6.2     11.2    14.4    16.6    102 

Greg Chappell once famously said something like, "I'm not batting badly, I just keep getting out." The same can't be said for Collingwood: they keep playing badly; the losses are inevitable. The only surprise this year was their win over Richmond.

Positives

Sidebottom. The guy is all class. He just looked so much more composed than his teammates, even Pendlebury who is carrying an injury. Pendlebury may be brave, but he's not very effective at the moment. I would argue that they should get him fit even if it means dropping him so that if miraculously Collingwood manages to turn its form around, he'll be able to play in a team that stands a chance.

At the moment, we need more Sidebottoms.

The Pies had a purple patch in the second quarter, the only one they won (by a mere 3 points), with Cloke kicking a brace. They managed to claw their way back to within 22 points. But so often they gave back easy goals. Nevertheless, when they did string plays together, they showed glimpses of what might be. Had a couple of kicks found the major opening, perhaps some doubt might have crept into the Demons' minds. But it was not to be. The second half was barely a whimper, Collingwood losing by 8 (26-34).

Grundy was jumping really high for centre bounces (and around the ground), but his timing was mostly dreadful. If he could get the timing right, he'd be awesome. He certainly picked up a heap of possessions around the ground.

Negatives

Too tall a forward line.

That's not intrinsically a problem; however, for Collingwood it is. They assume that with all the guys who can take a big mark, all they need to do is bomb it into F50. Arguably Jeremy Howe is the last person we need in the forward line.

Compare the above with one cameo in the third quarter. It's not often that one's personal director points one's eyes exactly where they ought to go, but this time the Bogan got lucky. The ball's on the outer wing in our possession. it's kicked to just outside 50 where someone takes possession. "Someone" because the Bogan just happens to notice Varcoe near the member's point post. He starts to run past the goals, behind most players towards an opening as the player with the ball spots this play and kicks to the opening - where Varcoe nonchalantly marks, unnoticed and unopposed. (Unfortunately, he missed the regulation goal.) No heroics; no screamer; no fanfare; just simple, basic, unremarkable good footy. Heroics should account for less than 1% of the play. Of course it's delightful to watch Daisy kick a torp from outside 50 and nail it. But that's not the bread and butter of winning footy games; the play of Varcoe and his teammate is (well, when it results in Varcoe kicking the goal).

I get exasperated with the misses but I can forgive them. They are execution errors. The player can practise more; when the team is playing better, the confidence of all players improves. But a kick in hope into F50 offers no hope for improvement. It's just mindless.

Despite all that marking power, when Greenwood kicked credibly to the hot spot, a Melbourne player outmarked Cloke and Moore.

Langdon

So often I read praise of Langdon. Here's Shane Crawford recently:

[Ben Reid] uses the ball so well, as does Tom Langdon most of the time.¹

First, I can't see how anyone can put Ben Reid and Tom Langdon in the same sentence. Second, Langdon uses the ball well most of the time?! Give me a break. Either Crawford means a different Langdon or he's watching different games from me.

Classic Langdon (reprising his kicking-in performances of yore): he marks in the back pocket, decides to kick across goal and finds a Melbourne opponent 3m from goal. He's a serial recidivist. I've said it before: he marks well, but often coughs it up.

Langdon should never be allowed to kick the ball in after a point. Less than 5 minutes into the game, he kicks to himself then miskicks along the ground to an opponent. Fortunately, Oxley tackles well so no damage done. But, please: "most of the time"?!

In the second quarter, he had the ball on the members wing, no pressure, and managed to miss a 30m target by foot.

Mind set

There is a malaise which has a hold of the Pies. They don't make good decisions and they have lost their traditional run and spread. With about 9 minutes left in Q1, Aish takes possession about 35m from the goal he's defending. You can't see too well on the replay, but at the game I was struck by the wrongness of his choice: he turned and kicked backwards to a player even nearer to goal. It was deemed too short by the umpire who called play on. The ball was passed back to Aish, now under more pressure than the first time. The Pies struggled to get it to the wing for a ball-up. And I don't think the Demons were playing all that brilliantly.

Same quarter, about 4 minutes later, Grundy takes a mark on the defensive 50m line. He can go back and take his kick, but he fancies himself; he plays on. He has several choices: he can kick or handpass; he can direct the ball to a player laterally, or another 20m nearer to our goal. If he kicks to the more forward player, the Pies are out and heading for goal. He chooses the lateral player, an opponent coming off the bench intercepts and goals; Collingwood 5 goals down; game over.

A minute and change to play in the first quarter, Howe takes a mark 20m out, some angle. It looks like a regulation, moderately difficult shot for goal. No one said this was Mission Easy. He's a forward, for goodness sake! He elects to handpass to Treloar surrounded by 3 Demons, the moment passes, and the ball ends with Melbourne on the wing. Howe seemed to have no idea how to play with his teammates.

Both Cloke (out on the full) and a few minutes later, Reid had trouble delivering short kicks. The commentators talked about confidence.

Poor form can be contagious. Twice in the second quarter Fasolo missed shots we'd normally expect him to nail.

Darcy Moore had very little impact.

Tactics

Toovey never looked like a good match-up for Watts. Toovey is often asked to punch above his weight and performs admirably, but on this day he looked underdone. Perhaps Langdon (or White, who is pretty quick) would have been a better opponent. Watts finished with 4 goals.

I thought White as a defender was a strange choice as replacement for Goldsack. White didn't trouble the scorers much. It seems that if he is the answer, we ought to be asking different questions.

Nevertheless, if he has been chosen, and Toovey is being towelled up, it might have made sense to give White a run on Watts.

The wrap

Collingwood is now a legitimate candidate for the wooden spoon. As I write, Buckley looks like he's planning personnel changes for the next match, but the problems are with the team, not so much individual players. Changing personnel because you can't get the players "up" for a game isn't going to help. It wreaks of desperation, of a coach without answers.

The only hope is for the players to "click". I wouldn't be putting the house on that possibility.

Sources, Notes, Footnotes, References

[1] Sunday Herald Sun 17 April 2016
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_match_statistics?mid=6206