Post Match. Cats down Pies . All comments, please.

Match previews, reviews, reports and discussion.

Moderator: bbmods

Post Reply
User avatar
PyreneesPie
Posts: 4592
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 1:49 pm
Has liked: 66 times

Post by PyreneesPie »

Magpietothemax wrote:The "Believers" keep referring to the 'unfounded assumptions" of those who criticise the game plan of Bux. Their constant refrain is: how do the critics purport to know what the game plan is? Therefore, Bux and his entourage can never be rationally blamed for the current unacceptable onfield performances. For all we know, Bux and his associates have an appropriate game plan, it is merely that our players are incapable of executing it.
It never occurs to them that such a thing as empirical evidence exists in the real world. While no one here is privy to what Bux actually is saying to our team at the Lexus Centre, we can observe the onfield results and make hypotheses and deductions based on this. Historically, this was how scientific knowledge developed. The defenders of Bux have never explained what their insight is as to why it is not Bux's gameplan which is destroying the potential attacking energy of our team. Their only argument is that the critics of the game plan have never actually heard what message Bux delivers to the team. This is equivalent to the argument that you cannot understand the role of the Sun in the solar system unless you have actually been there.
The way to gather undisputable empirical evidence is to collect data from controlled situations, in which only one factor is permitted to vary. All other factors must remain constant in order to properly evaluate the effect of the nominated factor. Try doing that in a game of AFL footy.
User avatar
Pies4shaw
Posts: 34762
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:14 pm
Has liked: 103 times
Been liked: 118 times

Post by Pies4shaw »

Piesnchess wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:Spoken like a man who had the very good sense not to watch the match. You couldn't possibly be saying that if you'd seen any of it.
.... i listened on the radio, genius for your info.
Q.E.D. :lol:
User avatar
Gerry Cooper
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 7:49 am
Has liked: 150 times
Been liked: 39 times

Post by Gerry Cooper »

watt price tully wrote:
58pie wrote:Heratior Lumumba has set us back 10 years
Should be under the jokes thread. BTW I think you might be referring to Heretier.
Not it was Heratior, not Heretier. It was all his fault! Heratior!
We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.�
watt price tully
Posts: 20842
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:14 pm

Post by watt price tully »

Gerry Cooper wrote:
watt price tully wrote:
58pie wrote:Heratior Lumumba has set us back 10 years
Should be under the jokes thread. BTW I think you might be referring to Heretier.
Not it was Heratior, not Heretier. It was all his fault! Heratior!
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
Pies2016
Posts: 6775
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 11:03 am
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 105 times

Post by Pies2016 »

joemamone@gmail.com wrote:I have had enough of reading how Buckley's plan is not working. I have listened to his post game interviews numerous times. I have heard him say he wants the team to play on, but it is very difficult when you have inept forwards who refuse to lead. This refusal to lead generally has its genesis in one's doubt about his ability to beat his opponent. Hence, players upfield are forced to go sideways and or backwards as they try to retain possession. As Jonathan Brown said "I do not believe that any couch would instruct his players to kick sideways and backwards"- to paraphrase.

I am also amazed how those on this site purport to know what instructions were given to the players unless of course they were present at Buckley's address to the players.

I suspect that the placard on the side of the ground imploring players to take the game on was a desperate attempt to remind the players what they were probably instructed form the outset. But this again is mere speculation on my behalf.

Finally, had the team kicked some of the gettable goals in the first half, the suggestion that the game plan, which so many appear to be apprised of, could not have been critised.

Well I applaud anyone with the courage to voice a different view point right now.
Funnily enough, a lot of posters were keen to quote Johnathon Brown when he said it was the worst ball movement he had seen in last 18 months. And yet no one bothered to add that Brown also said this wouldn’t be Buckley’s instruction. There isn’t a coach alive who would preach slow ball movement but for some reason the players aren’t displaying a desire to move the ball quickly. Maybe it’s the messaging ( clearly the coaches fault ) or maybe it’s the players. I dont know because as you said, I don’t sit on the meetings.
What I do know is that one of the qualities of being a good team is your ability to slow down down an oppositions ball movement.
In our case, we have a very ordinary list profile that is made up of a few past their peak guns and kids that are no where near ready and that’s hardly conducive to slowing down the momentum of any of the good teams going around. Conversely, we struggle to move the quickly because most oppositions have a better 22 than us right now . It could potentially be that simple. Having said that, Buckley has a responsibility for the list profile we currently have at hand.
Im not fussed if Buckley stays or goes ( although a change of assistants is required as a very minimum ) but for anyone to think he plans to move the ball as slow as humanly possible so as the opposition can set up, is ridiculous.
Today was 3rd vs 16th. That says enough to me on today’s outcome.
User avatar
Magpietothemax
Posts: 7988
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 11:05 pm
Has liked: 9 times
Been liked: 15 times

Post by Magpietothemax »

PyreneesPie wrote:
Magpietothemax wrote:The "Believers" keep referring to the 'unfounded assumptions" of those who criticise the game plan of Bux. Their constant refrain is: how do the critics purport to know what the game plan is? Therefore, Bux and his entourage can never be rationally blamed for the current unacceptable onfield performances. For all we know, Bux and his associates have an appropriate game plan, it is merely that our players are incapable of executing it.
It never occurs to them that such a thing as empirical evidence exists in the real world. While no one here is privy to what Bux actually is saying to our team at the Lexus Centre, we can observe the onfield results and make hypotheses and deductions based on this. Historically, this was how scientific knowledge developed. The defenders of Bux have never explained what their insight is as to why it is not Bux's gameplan which is destroying the potential attacking energy of our team. Their only argument is that the critics of the game plan have never actually heard what message Bux delivers to the team. This is equivalent to the argument that you cannot understand the role of the Sun in the solar system unless you have actually been there.
The way to gather undisputable empirical evidence is to collect data from controlled situations, in which only one factor is permitted to vary. All other factors must remain constant in order to properly evaluate the effect of the nominated factor. Try doing that in a game of AFL footy.
Dear PP, we have many years of empirical data, most specifically as Jonathan Brown repeatedly emphasized today, 18 months. If what you are saying is correct, then we might as well just throw our hands in the air and give up. According to your argument, it will be impossible ever to make a scientific assessment of the data.
Free Julian Assange!!
Ice in the veins
User avatar
Gerry Cooper
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 7:49 am
Has liked: 150 times
Been liked: 39 times

Post by Gerry Cooper »

Piesnchess wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:
Piesnchess wrote:

Cats were not complacent, they would have loved to have belted us for their percentage. The ageiing Cats smashed the Tigers by 11 goals i will take a ten point loss against this power house forward line anyday,, and our kids were great give them some credit, that might be an idea. :o
Spoken like a man who had the very good sense not to watch the match. You couldn't possibly be saying that if you'd seen any of it.


For a so called moderator u have a mighty big mouth, really, i listened on the radio, genius for your info. So i guess a team full of kids against an ancient hardened team, that belted the Tigers by 11 goals, but lost by only ten points is worse than the side that got belted ? yeh brilliant logic that is, whatever. Im proud of our kids, even if ur not. Dont bother replying, im done with so much negative shit on here an your a prime example, mr Moderator. :roll: :o
What does dear Nathan's book say about the situation the team finds itself in this year? :lol: :lol: :lol:
We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.�
User avatar
RudeBoy
Posts: 22088
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:08 pm
Been liked: 88 times

Post by RudeBoy »

joemamone@gmail.com wrote:I have had enough of reading how Buckley's plan is not working. I have listened to his post game interviews numerous times. I have heard him say he wants the team to play on, but it is very difficult when you have inept forwards who refuse to lead. This refusal to lead generally has its genesis in one's doubt about his ability to beat his opponent. Hence, players upfield are forced to go sideways and or backwards as they try to retain possession. As Jonathan Brown said "I do not believe that any couch would instruct his players to kick sideways and backwards"- to paraphrase.

I am also amazed how those on this site purport to know what instructions were given to the players unless of course they were present at Buckley's address to the players.

I suspect that the placard on the side of the ground imploring players to take the game on was a desperate attempt to remind the players what they were probably instructed form the outset. But this again is mere speculation on my behalf.

Finally, had the team kicked some of the gettable goals in the first half, the suggestion that the game plan, which so many appear to be apprised of, could not have been critised.
Well said.
User avatar
PyreneesPie
Posts: 4592
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 1:49 pm
Has liked: 66 times

Post by PyreneesPie »

Pies2016 wrote:

Well I applaud anyone with the courage to voice a different view point right now.
Funnily enough, a lot of posters were keen to quote Johnathon Brown when he said it was the worst ball movement he had seen in last 18 months. And yet no one bothered to add that Brown also said this wouldn’t be Buckley’s instruction. There isn’t a coach alive who would preach slow ball movement but for some reason the players aren’t displaying a desire to move the ball quickly. Maybe it’s the messaging ( clearly the coaches fault ) or maybe it’s the players. I dont know because as you said, I don’t sit on the meetings.
What I do know is that one of the qualities of being a good team is your ability to slow down down an oppositions ball movement.
In our case, we have a very ordinary list profile that is made up of a few past their peak guns and kids that are no where near ready and that’s hardly conducive to slowing down the momentum of any of the good teams going around. Conversely, we struggle to move the quickly because most oppositions have a better 22 than us right now . It could potentially be that simple. Having said that, Buckley has a responsibility for the list profile we currently have at hand.
Im not fussed if Buckley stays or goes ( although a change of assistants is required as a very minimum ) but for anyone to think he plans to move the ball as slow as humanly possible so as the opposition can set up, is ridiculous.
Today was 3rd vs 16th. That says enough to me on today’s outcome.
Wow What a balanced, sensible, logical post. A pleasure to read it.
User avatar
magpieazza
Posts: 2305
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Griffith N.S.W

Post by magpieazza »

Theres a bit of everything happening at Collingwood, its like a perfect storm.

Board unrest, injuries to players, mis management of the salary cap, mis management of the player squad ie huge gap in age between the young ones and the older players ) and a defensive possession minded game plan which is hard to execute given the woeful kicking skills of the players, ( so is it the game plan or the shitty kickers in our team ..to put it bluntly? ) also keeping in mind we are rarely blown out of the water and are within a few goals in literally every game

Dont think we can solely point the finger at Bux but he is partly to blame.
Who knows what he could do with a bunch of players with more skills and talent ?

I wouldnt be horrified if he stayed one more year but I would implement a succession plan with a new bunch of assistant coaches around him ready to take the top job when Bux steps down. Of course if he got remarkable results next year and had full support of the players he could go beyond another year, as unlikely as it appears atm.

I dont like mediocrity but imo the players are still playing for Bux, and imo I dont think Bux is bad as a coach as some make him out to be.
Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero.
User avatar
Magpietothemax
Posts: 7988
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 11:05 pm
Has liked: 9 times
Been liked: 15 times

Post by Magpietothemax »

Pies2016 wrote:

Well I applaud anyone with the courage to voice a different view point right now.
Funnily enough, a lot of posters were keen to quote Johnathon Brown when he said it was the worst ball movement he had seen in last 18 months. And yet no one bothered to add that Brown also said this wouldn’t be Buckley’s instruction. There isn’t a coach alive who would preach slow ball movement but for some reason the players aren’t displaying a desire to move the ball quickly. Maybe it’s the messaging ( clearly the coaches fault ) or maybe it’s the players. I dont know because as you said, I don’t sit on the meetings.
What I do know is that one of the qualities of being a good team is your ability to slow down down an oppositions ball movement.
In our case, we have a very ordinary list profile that is made up of a few past their peak guns and kids that are no where near ready and that’s hardly conducive to slowing down the momentum of any of the good teams going around. Conversely, we struggle to move the quickly because most oppositions have a better 22 than us right now . It could potentially be that simple. Having said that, Buckley has a responsibility for the list profile we currently have at hand.
Im not fussed if Buckley stays or goes ( although a change of assistants is required as a very minimum ) but for anyone to think he plans to move the ball as slow as humanly possible so as the opposition can set up, is ridiculous.
Today was 3rd vs 16th. That says enough to me on today’s outcome.
agree P2016. He had courage to post this opinion. it is very much against the flow. I also applaud the rational way he did it...refusing to abuse or denigrate other posters.
However, I believe you are looking at this ahistorically and simplistically. Bux of course would not be explicitly saying: "At all costs, move the ball slowly and sideways". To pose the issue in that way indicates its absurdity. However, what this overlooks is an entire legacy of a possession at all costs mindset, which has been ingrained into our playing group for an extended period of time. It is entirely logical, based on empirical evidence, to think that bux prefers possession and control of the ball over rapid movement. then of course, psychological factors come into play. Losses, discouragement, lack of confidence, can transform the coach's intentions into something else: a very negative and stultifying method of play, which we are seeing played out on the field.
Free Julian Assange!!
Ice in the veins
Pep
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:18 pm

Post by Pep »

Dp
User avatar
think positive
Posts: 40200
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:33 pm
Location: somewhere
Has liked: 240 times
Been liked: 90 times

Post by think positive »

Pies4shaw wrote:
doriswilgus wrote:Apparently there’s a mid season draft during the week,and we are interested in two players,Callow a marking beast from Tassie,currently starring in the SANFL,and Stengle,who has had off field issues,admittedly,but is a talented and quick small forward.I would say that we should draft them both without hesitation and put them in the team next week,They would be a significant improvement on what we’ve got on the forward line at the moment.
Can we make deposits, or is it withdrawals only?

Hehehe love it


And yes Doris sign them up!
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
PeterD35
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 9:45 am

Post by PeterD35 »

Piesnchess wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:
Piesnchess wrote:

Cats were not complacent, they would have loved to have belted us for their percentage. The ageiing Cats smashed the Tigers by 11 goals i will take a ten point loss against this power house forward line anyday,, and our kids were great give them some credit, that might be an idea. :o
Spoken like a man who had the very good sense not to watch the match. You couldn't possibly be saying that if you'd seen any of it.


For a so called moderator u have a mighty big mouth, really, i listened on the radio, genius for your info. So i guess a team full of kids against an ancient hardened team, that belted the Tigers by 11 goals, but lost by only ten points is worse than the side that got belted ? yeh brilliant logic that is, whatever. Im proud of our kids, even if ur not. Dont bother replying, im done with so much negative shit on here an your a prime example, mr Moderator. :roll: :o
You said you were done last week in the Port posting after you said how mature you are.
PeterD35
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 9:45 am

Post by PeterD35 »

Piesnchess wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:
Piesnchess wrote:

Cats were not complacent, they would have loved to have belted us for their percentage. The ageiing Cats smashed the Tigers by 11 goals i will take a ten point loss against this power house forward line anyday,, and our kids were great give them some credit, that might be an idea. :o
Spoken like a man who had the very good sense not to watch the match. You couldn't possibly be saying that if you'd seen any of it.


For a so called moderator u have a mighty big mouth, really, i listened on the radio, genius for your info. So i guess a team full of kids against an ancient hardened team, that belted the Tigers by 11 goals, but lost by only ten points is worse than the side that got belted ? yeh brilliant logic that is, whatever. Im proud of our kids, even if ur not. Dont bother replying, im done with so much negative shit on here an your a prime example, mr Moderator. :roll: :o
You said you were done last week in the Port posting after you said how mature you are.
Post Reply