Banter Geelong V Richmond - GO!
- Thread starter Wosh
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Banter threads are not to be taken too seriously. Have fun. Let others have fun.
Lol. You still don't get it.
Geelong plays 9 & now 10 games per season at a ground almost every opponent won't put much work into because it is not worth their while, 98% of their matches are played at venues nothing like KP. This makes winning there a lot easier for Geelong. Over time they have learned to put the minimum possible effort into KP game preparation, meaning they can put more focus into their other games than other clubs can. Which improves their overall h&a record at all venues.
As we can clearly see, this ceases to be a factor at finals time because opposition teams do put the work into preparing for the venue given the stakes.
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
The funniest part about this stat, whatever it is you think it proves, is that I’m only talking about a period dating back to 2011.
A period in which we are the only Victorian team with our own home ground. And in that period, I’ve literally given you blow by blow accounts of where we have beaten numerous other finals - mostly top four - sides on the grounds that they all share, during a period where theoretically we are the MOST advantaged because we are the ONLY Victorian team with our own home ground - and during that period we are routinely disproving the ground theory by beating those sides in home and away matches.
It’s during this period where the gap should be MOST highlighted by defeats to those same teams during home and away games as well as finals.
But it isn’t.
Your theory is bullshit mate and you haven’t got a leg to stand on.
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Oh so now teams don’t try and win games: they throw them. The difference between top four and 5-8, or top 8 bottom 10 doesn’t matter
I agree.
Then if Tigers don't belong in the group with 4 flags, Geelong doesn't belong in the group with 5 flags, and Hawthorn is clearly the best performed team in the AFL era & we don't want to hear a peep out of Cats supporters about being the best club in modern times until they match that.
Lol either your team have been shyte finals tankers for most of the last 60 years, or they are thrown into the home & away seasons by certain factors.
If I say Geelong are pissweak in finals you say they weren't that good.
If I say you weren't that good you say we were good we just didn't do well in finals.
It is hilarious.
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Lol either your team have been shyte finals tankers for most of the last 60 years, or they are thrown into the home & away seasons by certain factors.
If I say Geelong are pissweak in finals you say they weren't that good.
If I say you weren't that good you say we were good we just didn't do well in finals.
It is hilarious.
We have been pissweak in finals at times. We’ve played some really ordinary football.
Just off the top of my head straight out:
- the North Melbourne game against a pretty mediocre opponent we went 6-7 goals down before we started playing. Hawkins almost won us the game but it was too late.
- Sydney blew us off the park in the opening quarter in one game.
- the first QF against your mob. We scraped for the first half and made it a dog shit ugly scrap before class prevailed and you just smacked us.
- the same year we didn’t even turn up against Adelaide.
- the final against Collingwood where we chanced not playing a specialist ruckman against Grundy at his peak.
- the Melbourne final I mentioned that was square at three quarter time and we didn’t kick a goal after that.
- two finals against Richmond that we led comfortably and then had no answer to Martin
- Fremantle blew us away on our own home field, and another time at the MCG.
We’ve played a heap of shit finals.
Answer the question:
Why does our ground shape matter in some games away and not others.
It’s not hard but you seem to keep dodging it.
I give you an answer. I keep saying pretty clearly, we have been soundly outplayed in many finals, sometimes because the opposition has simply been a tier above us, other times because they’ve played to their normal standard and we’ve just been dogshit
You keep avoiding the question.
Why do we beat all these other finalists away from KP regularly if we rely on KP to beat everyone.
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
And no before you get yourself into a tizz I’m not saying those finals defeats to YOUR team were a result of us being shit or choking and that Richmond just had to turn up - you clearly were better than us not just on the night but in those seasons I’m simply pointing out that in those matches there were stages where our opposition lifted to a certain standard and we either couldn’t lift accordingly or sank without trace
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Port are 4-5 AT THE ADELAIDE OVAL in finals.
But their overall record is 87-51 since they started playing there.
So in games not only at the ground but exclusively as the HIGHER RANKED finals team (remember, your data is not limited to Geelong being the higher ranked team where we are expected to win, it’s just when we make the top four or some other shit), they have a negative win loss record, against lower ranked teams, during a period when they have a 63 per cent win rate there. How can this be?
Do they accidentally train at the wrong ground during these weeks? Does the curator mark the ground east-west instead of north-south or something? What is going on here?!?! It’s crazy!!!
But their overall record is 87-51 since they started playing there.
So in games not only at the ground but exclusively as the HIGHER RANKED finals team (remember, your data is not limited to Geelong being the higher ranked team where we are expected to win, it’s just when we make the top four or some other shit), they have a negative win loss record, against lower ranked teams, during a period when they have a 63 per cent win rate there. How can this be?
Do they accidentally train at the wrong ground during these weeks? Does the curator mark the ground east-west instead of north-south or something? What is going on here?!?! It’s crazy!!!
You are asking me to answer for an argument I am not making.
My argument is your home ground is worth around net +1 wins to Geelong per home & away season. That is a substantial advantage.
I have already shown the 2 biggest HGA's in the modern era are Geelong & the Adelaide Oval. Not coincidentally the 2 longest narrowest grounds.
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
You have not been able to mount any meaningful proof of this whatsoever.
All you have done is speculate.
You’ve ignored each of these factors:
- who we play there. So the fact that of course if we are halfway decent we will win most of our games there as we host interstate teams and underperforming Melbourne teams. Seasons where St Kilda, the Dogs, North, or Melbourne are ‘Better’ than us and the so called ‘unfair’ dimensions bring them back to ‘our’ level are the only years where you could point to us getting some sort of advantage if there is one. How many times has that happened? When the bigger Melbourne clubs DO play us there, it’s because they are in a poor patch.
- as i have pointed out numerous times, if it was that big an advantage, we wouldn’t be able to continually beat those teams at THEIR home in one game that same season and then lose at the same venue later. Why is it a factor in one game and not the next. If your theory is true, you should have an answer. You don’t.
- I just gave you a straight up example of another club, port Adelaide, who have a 60 per cent win rate over a huge sample size at their home ground, yet have regularly failed there in finals, ALWAYS, as the higher ranked side. Why? Your theory is that because of our ‘unfair’ extra wins, our ranking is not a true reflection of where we should be, based on our finals win loss record - in seasons you’ve handpicked I might add, and that we our finals record is based on the fact that our wins are venue related, not quality related. Well what are Port’s wins and losses based on? Why is it not ok for us to lose games to teams ranked above us from time to time but Port can lose to teams ranked below them…. At their ACTUAL home? Could it be that they’ve just played poorly?
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Well no they aren’t. The modern era includes Subiaco which was narrower than Adelaide. Keep going though.
Thanks for proving my point for me. Both Perth clubs have big winning records at Subiaco.
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Oh wow, I wonder why that is
Next you’ll tell me the bulldogs have a winning record at the western oval, the tigers have a winning record at the mcg , st Kilda had a winning record at Moorabbin etc.
Stunning stuff
Well it’s clear what the solution is, isn’t it.
Move every team to punt road until you stop your f**king moaning
Tiger 1920
Rookie
- Nov 30, 2024
- 26
- 16
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #8,491
What is that, conspiracy football league?
Tiger 1920
Rookie
- Nov 30, 2024
- 26
- 16
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #8,492
They were, but only one team was emasculated, or had their 1 wood taken away, to allow 17 other teams to move the ball quicker against them, which 1 team can lay claim to that?
You don't have to take my word for it, take Hocking's word for it, less pressure in the game was the way Geelong coach Hocking got Geelong to move the ball quicker after 2020.
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Grow balls
Tiger 1920
Rookie
- Nov 30, 2024
- 26
- 16
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #8,494
Who, the teams that couldn't move the ball quick enough for Hocking's liking before the rule change that prompted quicker ball movement? But that's the point of less pressure in the game, so they didn't have to "grow balls."
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
We were the next best performed team in the competition under the previous rules and twice led the best team of the era at half time in the prelim and grand finals we met them in buddy. Not like we were battling to push into the 8 or something.
Sorry to break it to you but most eunuchs have more balls than you. Accept that they made a rule change, something that happens all the time, and deal with it.
Did other teams not man the mark before the stand rule?
My memory might be failing me but I’d swear I saw players from teams other than Richmond manning the mark.
It was quite a common thing, along with kicking, hand-passing, bouncing, running and jumping.
Kids were taught it at AusKick.
My memory might be failing me but I’d swear I saw players from teams other than Richmond manning the mark.
It was quite a common thing, along with kicking, hand-passing, bouncing, running and jumping.
Kids were taught it at AusKick.
Tiger 1920
Rookie
- Nov 30, 2024
- 26
- 16
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #8,497
Why would I say you were battling to push into the 8 when you weren't?
Like you just said, Richmond was the best team of the era, but after 2020 we couldn't play our way anymore, this to me was a shame, and it was because of Geelong.
I had to go check what a eunuch was, and they can't have more balls than me. But why do my balls even matter when I wasn't playing AFL when teams needed to be prompted into moving the ball quicker, which was achieved by taking some pressure out of the game? Surely it's more suitable to say those players had no balls that couldn't move the ball quickly when put under pressure? Richmond was known for its quick ball movement.
Richmond's quick ball movement from '17 to '20 came off the back of our pressure and turnover game, all the teams struggled to move the ball quickly against the Tigers in those days.
Of course they did.
You did. But the fact is the rule change was brought in to prompt quicker ball movement, this was achieved by making it so one player on the field cannot participate in the game.
Also, you gotta remember that the Tigers were known for our quick ball movement before the stand rule, Geelong wasn't.
Funny stuff
But the fact is that Geelong couldn't move the ball quick enough for Hocking's liking when Geelong's only option was to match Richmond pressure for pressure over 4 quarters.
From being able to beat Geelong when they knock a player out, to losing to Geelong by 3pts when they knock a player out, and that because of a stupid rule change.
- May 5, 2016
- 47,216
- 52,846
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Why would I say you were battling to push into the 8 when you weren't?
Like you just said, Richmond was the best team of the era, but after 2020 we couldn't play our way anymore, this to me was a shame, and it was because of Geelong.
I had to go check what a eunuch was, and they can't have more balls than me. But why do my balls even matter when I wasn't playing AFL when teams needed to be prompted into moving the ball quicker, which was achieved by taking some pressure out of the game? Surely it's more suitable to say those players had no balls that couldn't move the ball quickly when put under pressure? Richmond was known for its quick ball movement.
Richmond's quick ball movement from '17 to '20 came off the back of our pressure and turnover game, all the teams struggled to move the ball quickly against the Tigers in those days.
Of course they did.
You did. But the fact is the rule change was brought in to prompt quicker ball movement, this was achieved by making it so one player on the field cannot participate in the game.
Also, you gotta remember that the Tigers were known for our quick ball movement before the stand rule, Geelong wasn't.
Funny stuff
But the fact is that Geelong couldn't move the ball quick enough for Hocking's liking when Geelong's only option was to match Richmond pressure for pressure over 4 quarters.
From being able to beat Geelong when they knock a player out, to losing to Geelong by 3pts when they knock a player out, and that because of a stupid rule change.
Grow balls
Why would I say you were battling to push into the 8 when you weren't?
Like you just said, Richmond was the best team of the era, but after 2020 we couldn't play our way anymore, this to me was a shame, and it was because of Geelong.
I had to go check what a eunuch was, and they can't have more balls than me. But why do my balls even matter when I wasn't playing AFL when teams needed to be prompted into moving the ball quicker, which was achieved by taking some pressure out of the game? Surely it's more suitable to say those players had no balls that couldn't move the ball quickly when put under pressure? Richmond was known for its quick ball movement.
Richmond's quick ball movement from '17 to '20 came off the back of our pressure and turnover game, all the teams struggled to move the ball quickly against the Tigers in those days.
Of course they did.
You did. But the fact is the rule change was brought in to prompt quicker ball movement, this was achieved by making it so one player on the field cannot participate in the game.
Also, you gotta remember that the Tigers were known for our quick ball movement before the stand rule, Geelong wasn't.
Funny stuff
But the fact is that Geelong couldn't move the ball quick enough for Hocking's liking when Geelong's only option was to match Richmond pressure for pressure over 4 quarters.
From being able to beat Geelong when they knock a player out, to losing to Geelong by 3pts when they knock a player out, and that because of a stupid rule change.
What’s this about knocking a player out? That doesn’t sound very fair. I sure hope the scoundrel got his comeuppance!
