10-08-2023, 12:31 AM
(10-07-2023, 11:39 AM)DJC link Wrote:I’m not sure that Pitto and the King would be selected ahead of Cox and Cameron but Collingwood won the premiership with two genuine, lumbering rucks and two key forwards. Admittedly, one of the key forwards was a bit of a decoy because their first choice KPF was injured.
Of course, both of Collingwood’s rucks are a threat when they go forward. Neither managed a goal in the GF, but they demand a decent defender.
The idea that we’re unbalanced with two rucks and two tall forwards doesn’t stack up, particularly since the alternative is two tall forwards, one ruck and a third tall forward/undersized ruck.
That’s not to say that Brisbane model - one outstanding ruckman backed up by one of their two tall forwards - isn’t effective. It worked quite well against us, but there were other factors at play. However, it wasn’t effective against Collingwood.
I don’t understand the reasoning behind some of our team selections but I do understand that the reasoning behind those decisions is based on more and much better information than I have, as well as far superior footy understanding and knowledge. Games of footy aren’t lost by the MC. They’re lost because the players aren’t good enough or they’re not at their best, or the gameplan is flawed or not executed well enough.
I'm not sure brisbane muffed their selections.
There's lots of points being made by lots of people, but brisbane lost the grand final because they too had a few players that failed to put in a good shift. Hipwood was rubbish, and Berry played a very poor ultimately match costing grand final, and simply those two having a bad game vs a good one may have been a bigger factor in winning amd losing than any other factor.
Collingwood didn't have a dud player on the day. That's why they won.
"everything you know is wrong"
Paul Hewson
Paul Hewson

