Cam Hooke’s Collingwood Life: Grand Final Review – Pies Premiers!

 

Congratulations to us all. When you listen to our Coach and our Captain, they are at pains to emphasise our importance – the Magpie Army. Well done to all of us.

 

In a truly great game, with the lead changing on 10 occasions, where neither team got further ahead than 13 Points and where the final result was a margin of four Points, providing the evidence.  Well done to all.

 

Go Pies.

 

Grand Final

 

Collingwood 12.18.90 defeated Brisbane Lions 13.8.86.

 

Goals scored by Q:

 

• Q1       4 (us) / 3 (them). We scored two goals early to which they responded but eventually achieving a 10-Point lead at the first break. What was evident (again) was that we had a substantial domination in time forward and Inside 50s without the domination on the scoreboard;
• Q2       5 / 6. They put three goals on early in the Quarter establishing a 13-Point lead that we countered but reducing our lead at HT to six Points;
• Q3       1 / 2. This Quarter was a slog for the first half with goals scored by each team late in the Quarter. Our lead? Reduced, again, to four Points;
• Q4       2 / 2. Same as Q3 with the very clear focus on us to ‘manage’ the game at the death; and
• Total    12 / 13. And we Won even though they scored more goals.

 

Match Report – www.afl.com.au/afl/matches/5888#match-report.

 

Coach’s Interview – www.afl.com.au/video/1047247/full-post-match-gf-magpies?videoId=1047247&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1696066208001.

 

With Bobby Hill. Interestingly, he emphasised that the Pies are a family club. And the focus on ‘managing moments’. And in answering a question following the Murphy incident he noted the ‘Grand Final story’ as it can relate to McStay, Noble, Adams, and others.

 

Rooms – A few comments from inside the rooms – www.afl.com.au/video/1047378/gf-footy-feed-daicos-ginni-and-more-in-pies-rooms?videoId=1047378&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1696076154001.

 

The Grand Final numbers?

 

Measure	Statistics	Remarks
Disposals	340 / 308	As I’ve said previously, I usually don’t usually rate this number. What it can show, even with similar numbers, is the difference in the style of play. It seems to show that we were the ones slowing down the game at times.
Hit Outs	50 / 32	This number surprised me though I did think Cox did well.
Clearances	38 / 44	This number surprised me because it highlights the BL midfield success.
from Centre	10 / 14	Some dominance out of the Centre.
from Stoppages	28 / 30	Close enough around the ground.
Inside 50s	57 / 43	This really surprised me. Absolutely critical. This, usually, reflects a match-winning comparison but here was substantially different to the Clearance comparison. Perhaps, our use of drive out of the Backline, rather than a reliance on drive out of the Centre was an influence.
Goals scored	12 / 13	Usually follows on from Inside 50s and DE Inside 50.
Scoring Shots	31 / 21	This is usually a reflection of the Clearances and Inside 50s. In this case it fairly represents the Inside 50s; not the Clearances. Imagine what these numbers might have looked like with a key Forward target?
Disposal Efficiency	75.9% / 72.1%	Not significant, though I note our position. Next is critical.
DE Inside 50	52.6% / 51.2%	This really surprised me though it is pretty obvious that both sides had periods of success. Our Q1 DE was appalling. Our Q4 DE was excellent, particularly in the way we shut down their attack towards the end.
Marks	95 / 89	Relates to “keep’ens off” attitude of domination through small kicks (UCP) and marks at various times trying to slow the game down. Not a huge difference.
Marks Inside 50	12 / 5	Contributes to our DE Inside 50.
Tackles	73 / 53
Tackles Inside 50	13 / 6	Contributes to our DE Inside 50.
Players with DE > 80 %	9 / 8	No significant distinction.
Tackles	73 / 53	Important. Combined, this would indicate the pressure inflicted by each team was pretty similar across the game. However, as you watched it, it became clear that domination was for specific periods.
Contested Possessions	122 / 122
1 %’ers	48 / 51
Uncontested Possessions	213 / 173	Relates to “keep’ens off” attitude to game.
Free Kicks	16 / 22	Whatever. I really don’t like the 50m penalty, so often a guaranteed goal.

Best: 

The AFL website identifies our Best as Hill, N.Daicos, Crisp, Howe, Mitchell and Pendles. Don’t disagree with any of the inclusions but would have added J.Daicos (17 Disposals admittedly @ 58.8% DE, 2 Clearances, 3 Contested Possessions, 2 Intercept Possessions and 468 metres Gained) and Sidebottom (20 D @ 75.0% DE, 7 Tackles, 3 Clearances, 3 IP, 6 CP, 7 Score Involvement and  403 mG. Go towww.afl.com.au/news/1045030 to check the commentator’s view on each team members performance – Best include Crisp, N.Daicos, Hill, Mitchell and Pendlebury.

 

Injury? Murphy – concussion (again). Longer-term impact?

 

Lessons?

 

• Our appreciation always to the Magpie Army there or away – supporters as well as Members. Their influence is quite extraordinary and is fairly acknowledged by the Coach, the Captain and the team. With such a restricted number of Pies’ fans able to get seats in the GF seating allocation, they certainly still made a lot of noise. Really impressed with the numbers at the AIA Centre.
• Great application throughout by all, particularly the final 2-minutes of the game. Well done by some of the more experienced players setting that up.
• Solid Midfield and Backline performance. I would still like to see Noble back in the Backline. I thought Noble might have been a very useful player to better limit their small Forwards. What happened was Maynard playing very deep once Murphy went off. Howe, also, seriously stood up in defence.
• Forwards were okay given the attention of competition-leading defenders. Still emphasise concurrent leading and passage of the ball inside the 50.
• Kick-ins still need work. Time is the issue here. We need to have worked out how/where the kick-in is going to go. It is, currently, too slow.
• What a performance by Pendlebury and Mitchell – age has not wearied them – rock solid in the Centre.

 

Your views on the game?

 

Reporting? Reports please? From those who watch it on TV as well as those lucky enough to attend. C’mon, there’s a couple of Reports outstanding that I know of. If you were there, report pls?

 

Then?

 

Next year. What about it? Which teams do you consider will be competitive? I would include Hawthorn and Richmond plus, unfortunately, Carlton.

This my last email for the year. It has been fun. My special thanks to those who have contributed, sometimes direct to me, not to all.

Have a think about where we go from here? I think we have an excellent List that could be further enhanced in a number of area:

• Key defensive player, subject to Murphy’s condition, able to shut down those key Forwards;

• Key Forward. Some questions exist in the current structure, particularly as it may have an influence on our scoring;

• Ruck. Noting I do not have the numbers of ‘Hit-Outs to Advantage’, it is clear our Midfield could benefit from this; and

• Game plan. I reinforce the need to establish better ‘kick-in’ options.

I think there is every chance that we could now establish a Football Club dynasty not dissimilar to Richmond and Hawthorn a few years back and the Brisbane Lions back at the turn of the millennium, noting what they did to us, twice.

Your thoughts?

 

Believe always. Go Pies.

 

Cam

 

To return to the www.footyalmanac.com.au  home page click HERE

 

Our writers are independent contributors. The opinions expressed in their articles are their own. They are not the views, nor do they reflect the views, of Malarkey Publications.

 

Do you enjoy the Almanac concept?
And want to ensure it continues in its current form, and better? To help keep things ticking over please consider making your own contribution.

 

Become an Almanac (annual) member – CLICK HERE