We fear NO ONE!!!

[Andre]

Originally posted by Porthos
Collingwood could be quite dangerous if their tall forwards have learnt how to mark and goal. Buckley out doesn't make that big a difference.

The more interesting one to me is what are Collingwood's tall defenders like ? ie. if the weather is going to be fine Friday night will the Power try and stretch the Pies defence for height like we did the Lions or will we go for a more conventional forward line with another small forward ?

Having the extra tall could force the Pies to sacrifice one of Tarrant, Frasier or Rocca in the backlines reducing their scoring options. Though with Kingsley back I'd expect Brogan to be dropped and have the more traditional forward structure.

André

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by Andre


The more interesting one to me is what are Collingwood's tall defenders like ? ie. if the weather is going to be fine Friday night will the Power try and stretch the Pies defence for height like we did the Lions or will we go for a more conventional forward line with another small forward ?

Collingwood have three quality tall defenders - Wakelin Clement and Prestigiacomo. Also McKee plays mainly in the back half and Richardson may be in the team as well.

 

[Portia]

The only real weakness with Collingwood's talls is that they're all specialists. Rocca or Tarrant at half back, or Prestigiacomo and Wakelin coming down for a goal, would be near unheard of.

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by Porthos
The only real weakness with Collingwood's talls is that they're all specialists. Rocca or Tarrant at half back, or Prestigiacomo and Wakelin coming down for a goal, would be near unheard of.

yup.

Thats why Molloy is so important to the Pies.

 

[Cyclops]

Its a good tactic to go the tall forward line vs Brisbane-thats how we beat them too. We have a bit more height and flexibility down back.

Where you guys have the edge is obviously the ruck. Big strong ruckman really give us trouble, and may give your runners the edge.

We'll look to rove Primus' taps and rebound some goals from our elastic defence. It should be quite a game.

 

[King Crow]

And no one fears you.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Andre
The more interesting one to me is what are Collingwood's tall defenders like ? ie. if the weather is going to be fine Friday night will the Power try and stretch the Pies defence for height like we did the Lions or will we go for a more conventional forward line with another small forward ?

You can put anyone up forward if Primus dictates the game from the middle. Our tall backs are pretty good but anyone struggles if the ball comes straight from the centre in a matter of seconds like it has recently.

In general we have had trouble with small forwards not talls though. Tall/medium options down back include Presti, Wakelin, Richarson, Clement, Cloke, Molloy. Smalls are a problem. Burns is a gun but needed elsewhere. Johnson is handy but has been beaten. Lockyer hasn't been back much this year. Basically that's it apart from midfielders sent down back to provide run from half back.

IMO the whole game depends on McKee. If Primus kills him we won't win. If McKee breaks even we may win. If McKee beats Primus we WILL win (get good odds on that though).

 

[Portia]

The latest strategy against Primus has been running in and jumping very early, which generally means taps can't be directed by the player winning the tap.

It negates Primus, but not the midfielders, as West Coast saw. If you reckon you can tag them, its a strategy that can work.

 

[manmountain]

They may not fear us but we will stick kick their @rse by 10 -15 goals. You got done by the lowly Bulldogs and amost the Saints, what chance do you think you have against the most successful Australian Rules football club?

Really? How many VFL/AFL premierships have you won? That SANFL rubbish doesn't count for diddly-squat in the AFL - win a final first buddy.

FWIW I think you guys will win - but give up leaning on that SANFL record - second rate football compared to VFL.

 

[MagpieJoel]

Originally posted by Eago77


Collingwood are also not burdened with having anything that resembles a decent team.

Oh yeah, must mean we got to fourth place by default.

Mind you we have beaten two of the teams above us, and came within a whisker of the other. That was the same team!!

Moron.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Porthos
The latest strategy against Primus has been running in and jumping very early, which generally means taps can't be directed by the player winning the tap.

It negates Primus, but not the midfielders, as West Coast saw. If you reckon you can tag them, its a strategy that can work.

Tagging is not a problem and if that were the answer Steinfort would be included. I hope not though. Jumping early is a good theory if you feet leave the ground. McKee can't jump. That is why he has to play a negating role. That's not good enough against real class like Primus or Darcy.

 

[Zombie]

Originally posted by manmountain


Really? How many VFL/AFL premierships have you won? That SANFL rubbish doesn't count for diddly-squat in the AFL - win a final first buddy.

FWIW I think you guys will win - but give up leaning on that SANFL record - second rate football compared to VFL.

Port Adelaide is the most successful Aussie Rules football club period. All this coming from a guy whos club hasn't made a final in nearly a decade and hasn't been successful in over 50 years.

We are seeing now how good Victorian football is, 1, 2 and 3!

 

[Cyclops]

In defence of McKee (...did I really just type that?), he adapted well against Darcy in the Footscray game and actually broke even in the third quarter.

Mckee is a reactive player, who does actually show some positional nous. He rucks a bit like Monky used to, looking to "wet blanket" his opponent at centre bounces (ie clog the jump and muffle the tap) and "octopus" them at the "stop plays". Unlike Monky he doesn't "belt" them in the "head" in the "packs".

Primus will beat Stunner on Friday, but its a question of by how much. I reckon Steve can slow him down enough to give our midfielders a shot.

We have decent taggers in Licca Johnson and McGough. All of those blokes can get the ball as well, but they can't kick for peanuts (well OK Licca has improved a bit). Burns and Lockyer man up and deliver, so they should form the core of our starting 4 in Bucks presumed absence. O'Bree Didak and the Davises are non-defensve deliverers who can rotate into the midfield, so we have the firepower to tag, match and even outplay Port in the running department.

Both defenses are underrated, despite great performances this year. Ours has blown out to fourth best, and yours is easily the best, but neither gets a big rap. Is Wakelin a big loss? I would have thought Port have the flexibility and spare big men to cover him.

Porthos is right about our big forwards. If Fraser, Tarrant and Rocca all turn on at once, Port is out of there. That is unlikely to happen, but they are all "unstoppable" in form. The only Port forward in that category is Tredrea, but he's switched on every week.

Zombie I don't know about Port being the best Aussie rules club. The Anchorage Eskimoes won 283 straight flags in the Kamchatcka and Irkutsk district league (that was before Inner Mongolia joined the comp of course), so you'd have to consider them a monty.

Anyway aren't Primus and Voss Victorians?

 

[mic59]

Originally posted by Cyclops
Zombie I don't know about Port being the best Aussie rules club. The Anchorage Eskimoes won 283 straight flags in the Kamchatcka and Irkutsk district league (that was before Inner Mongolia joined the comp of course), so you'd have to consider them a monty.

I'm sick of ignorant Vics and Cows trying to pretend that Ports SANFL premierships don't mean a thing. Ask any Victorian player who played SA before the AFL and they'll tell you SA weren't a pushover. Sure, Victoria won more of the games. But remember that in the State of Origin concept SA were at least equal. And most of the earlier games weren't State of Origin, we didn't have access to the players who had gone over to Victoria. Now that the AFL has started and SA and WA are not much more than feeder leagues and dumping grounds premierships are a bit Mickey Mouse. But the ones Port won pre-1991, and there were plenty, were against strong opposition.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Zombie
Port Adelaide is the most successful Aussie Rules football club period. All this coming from a guy whos club hasn't made a final in nearly a decade and hasn't been successful in over 50 years.

We are seeing now how good Victorian football is, 1, 2 and 3!

That's a pretty ignorant post an so many levels.

 

[Mr Q]

Re: Re: Re: We fear NO ONE!!!

Originally posted by MarkT

We have an unblemished record in intraclub matches. Except that one game where the unpie crusified both our sides.

Being an unpie what did you expect?

 

[Zombie]

Originally posted by MarkT

That's a pretty ignorant post an so many levels.

How is it ignorant?

The AFL acknowledges Port Adelaide as the most successful Aussie Rules club in the nation.

Collingwood have not been successful over the last 50 years

How many Victorian teams are in the top 3?

 

[Macca19]

Originally posted by Cyclops
Porthos is right about our big forwards. If Fraser, Tarrant and Rocca all turn on at once, Port is out of there. That is unlikely to happen, but they are all "unstoppable" in form. The only Port forward in that category is Tredrea, but he's switched on every week.

Dew?
Shaun Burgoyne?
Chad Cornes?

 

[Squeak]

Originally posted by Macca19


Dew?
Shaun Burgoyne?
Chad Cornes?

Big forwards?

Cornes maybe, but he's a flanker at heart.

 

[Zombie]

Originally posted by Squeak


Big forwards?

Cornes maybe, but he's a flanker at heart.

As opposed to Tarrant? Cornes is a better mark than Tarrant. If you count your ruckman then you have to count Primus aswell who is better in the forward lines than Fraser is. So that leaves Rocca who Tredrea is much better than.

So

Tredrea > Rocca
Cornes > Tarrant
Primus > Fraser

How do you figure you have better tall forwards???

 

[Cyclops]

A hooked fish wrote:

Tredrea > Rocca
OK no doubt here, although Rocca is more flexible-he can ruck for about 12 seconds each quarter. 15-0

Cornes > Tarrant
Umm what? Please don't embarrass yourself. 15 all.

Cornes is a better mark than Tarrant
I get it, you're trying to make a fool of yourself. 15-30

Primus > Fraser
Nitwit. Primus a forward? Tell us about your backup ruckmen Burgoyne and Wanganeen. 15-40.

Anyway, tell us how Port beat the Masai Bulls in the 1802 Sub Saharan lightening Premiership. GAME.

 

[mic59]

Originally posted by MagpieJoel


Oh yeah, must mean we got to fourth place by default.

Mind you we have beaten two of the teams above us, and came within a whisker of the other. That was the same team!!

Yeah, that was in rounds 8,9 and 14.
And since round 14? Played 8, won 3, lost 5. Beat Carlton, St. Kilda and Richmond. Lost to Geelong, West Coast, Hawthorn, Essendon and Western Bulldogs. And 7 of those games were at the MCG.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Zombie
How is it ignorant?

The AFL acknowledges Port Adelaide as the most successful Aussie Rules club in the nation.

Collingwood have not been successful over the last 50 years

How many Victorian teams are in the top 3?

Your definition of PA's success is based on premierships in the SANFL. It takes no account of any relativities. Without wanting to get into the obvious arguments, relativity is important.

Collinwood have won two premierships since you draw your irrelevant and arbitary line. They have also played in many Grand Finals and had various other achievments which I can't be bothered debating. If you define sucess as nothing but winning the premiership then Collingwood have been about as successful as half the comp or more. If you widen the definition then they are more successful. You can use any definition you like, don't bother me.

Yes no Vic. teams in the top 3 this year, right now, so far. Hardly Earth shatterring stuff. Apart from that, there are a few more Vic. clubs than there are non Vic clubs and they operate under different conditions. Some of them, in fact are operating while bankrupt. Without getting iinto why that is so, it impacts their ability to get to the top and stay there. Apart from that, two of the non Vic. teams are ex Vic. teams or something resembling that and contain more Vic. players than non Vic. players.


Anyway, I had no intention of enterring a Vic. v Non Vic. or VFL v SANFL debate but I just found your comment more ignorant than those you complain about.

 

[Squeak]

Originally posted by mic59


Yeah, that was in rounds 8,9 and 14.
And since round 14? Played 8, won 3, lost 5. Beat Carlton, St. Kilda and Richmond. Lost to Geelong, West Coast, Hawthorn, Essendon and Western Bulldogs. And 7 of those games were at the MCG.

100% true.

So why is it people are saying Collingwood don't deserve to be 4th? People are saying we don't have enough talent, when obviously it's merely a case of very poor form.

 

[Port1978]

Originally posted by Squeak


100% true.

So why is it people are saying Collingwood don't deserve to be 4th? People are saying we don't have enough talent, when obviously it's merely a case of very poor form.

Dunno why people would be saying Collingwood don't deserve to finish 4th......that's where they've finished.....& all teams deserve to finish wherever they finish.......(am I actually making any sense??)