Patrick Dangerfield had a bigger say on Geelong beating Collingwood than the umpires did. So did the uppity Bailey Smith.
Collingwood also had a bigger say on Geelong beating Collingwood than the umpires did. The umpires had a bit of a say, but they didn’t decide it.
Bobby Hill’s chase-down tackle on Shaun Mannagh.Credit: Fox Footy
So we’ll tick through these contentious last-quarter moments.
The decision on Lachie Schultz’s shot at goal was an imprecise system working as it does – imprecisely. The kick, when seen live, didn’t appear to have been touched, but the goal umpire, or at the very least the boundary umpire, was sure that it had been. The replay vision was blurry, pixelated and inconclusive, so there was no way of confirming or rejecting the umpire’s call. The correct decision was made to throw it back to the umpires and call a behind.
The free kick for tripping from the rundown tackle by Bobby Hill looked wrong at the time, felt wrong on replay, and still feels wrong now.
Both of Hill’s hands started around Shaun Mannagh’s hips and slid down to his knees. The spirit and letter of the law said that Mannagh had enjoyed ample time to dispose of the ball when he was legally tackled. Yes, there is an element of theatre in the moment, as everyone in the nearly full stadium could see what was about to happen except Mannagh, and that added to the sense of the right decision being to reward the rundown.
But the rule, too, said the tackle should be rewarded.
The rules of the game only reference a legal tackle as being between the shoulders and the knees and make no mention of starting or ending positions. Logically, just as a tackle that starts legally around the upper arms and goes over the shoulder is a head-high free, a tackle that starts at the hips and goes low could, or should, be deemed a trip.
But this didn’t. I thought it slid to the knee, not below it, and a legal tackle allows for thighs/knees to be wrapped up. The AFL will doubtless agree this was a correct decision, because that is what they do, but in the overwhelming majority of occasions, that sort of moment has been deemed holding the ball.
Jack Crisp’s miss after the siren.Credit: Fox Footy
David King observed that 14 of the last 17 frees paid in the game were for Geelong and the umpiring had a massive impact on the result. It was a game decided by three points, so there’s an argument for that. But the Magpies had massive impact on the result going against them. So, too, did Dangerfield.
Collingwood hit the post twice, and missed several other set shots in the match from 40 metres out. Of course Jack Crisp most directly – crisply? – had the chance to change the result.
Darcy Moore gifted Ollie Henry a goal with a ball he inexplicably chose to tunnel-ball blindly, rather than paddle forwards for a rushed behind. Dan Houston centred a ball to a one-on-four, which unsurprisingly was turned over, and Geelong took the ball into an empty forward line. The Magpies’ inability to defend kick-ins and concede coast-to-coast scores happened often enough to be a trend.
Collingwood lost this game because when they were 20 points up and in complete control, they could not get that extra one to two goals clear of Geelong to kill the game. That was when some of those aforementioned misses at goal came, and they were consequential in the end.
Geelong dominated this clash for about 30 minutes in total, but in that period they were in total control and scored with an efficiency that Collingwood could not match during their longer period of dominance.
That final three minutes of the match, when Collingwood could have won it back, will gall them because it was in that frantic period they found an urgency in their ball movement that had been missing for the second half.
This was four points blown by Collingwood, four points rescued by Geelong.
The Cats get around their in-form skipper during their thrilling clash with the Magpies.Credit: AFL Photos
This was Danger time
Patrick Dangerfield was a more significant reason that Geelong won this game.
He is the same player but different – slightly slimmer, definitely fitter than last year after a proper pre-season, and in a role as a forward that best suits his twilight.
The new look suits you, Patrick. He had 13 touches, 10 contested possessions, a goal and five score involvements in the last quarter alone. He is averaging two goals per game this year – his best return across his 18 seasons.
It was the second time in successive games his last quarters have been played with such authority. Dangerfield had a presence that turned the moments in that quarter. He is playing with an authority as much as muscularity, and with an understanding now of how less is more in his game. The restriction of his game to mere cameos on the ball lends itself to the explosiveness in his game.
Dangerfield’s game as a counterpoint to that of Jordan De Goey could not have been stronger. The Magpies’ match winner, who has similar physical attributes to Dangerfield, albeit without the speed, had no impact on Collingwood’s game. He looks sore and underdone, which is not uncommon territory for him through his career. He has seldom been fully fit and never played every game in a season.
Craig McRae admitted that, with a five-day break before playing in Perth, he will manage players and that the team’s emergencies didn’t play VFL. It would be surprising if De Goey made the flight west. He looks like he needs an extended break and a training block. Playing when half-fit is not working well. Scott Pendlebury would also be doubtful to fly. Brody Mihocek would have been earmarked for a rest this game, with Charlie West to make his debut. But Mihocek was their best player on Saturday night, which might complicate the planning.
Bailey gets the Bulldog bird
Bailey Smith was cheeky, but right. He upset the Bulldogs with his jab at his old club, but he also had a point – a full MCG, or a demolished ground in Ballarat?
As it was, 4800 people went to watch the Bulldogs destroy Port Adelaide. The ground could only fit about 8000 anyway. The sad thing is they deserved 10 times the crowd at the ground, and on TV. In fact, that’s true of most weeks watching this Bulldogs team.
Their deal to sell games to Ballarat should have been shelved while the ground was demolished. It’s counterproductive for the club and the game when you can only fit 8000 in, and you present the game in that way.
The Dogs are a seriously good team, a genuine flag contender, and they deserve better than playing in front of rubble at a country oval. It makes them look small, while their football is expansive and grand. This team is playing an extremely watchable style of game, which ironically is being watched by too few – no one at the game, and it was on Saturday, so it didn’t have any free-to-air TV coverage either.
Forget about the TDK Cup – the Blues just need the W
The storyline this week will be about Tom De Koning playing against the club that has offered him the sort of contract that would turn anyone saintly.
Carlton winning or losing to St Kilda will be likely to have far less bearing on De Koning’s decision than the extra $3.5 million over seven years the Saints are offering (that’s $3.5m on top of the million-plus he’ll get if he stays or goes).
Tom De Koning is a man in demand.Credit: AFL Photos
But Carlton losing to St Kilda will be terribly consequential for what lies ahead for the club. There is more at stake for Carlton this week than the Saints, who didn’t enter the season with the sort of bullishness Carlton did.
Carlton lose and they go to 3-6 in the win-loss column, adrift of the eight and proving that last week’s win over Geelong flattered to deceive. Again.
When the Blues lose contested possession and clearances, they lose the game. That is not uncommon in footy but some teams – Geelong, for instance – who lose those stats regularly have a game built around exploiting pressure and the turnover game. The Blues don’t.
Carlton were smashed by Adelaide in clearances (16 to six out of the middle) and most lamentably managed only 36 inside 50s for the match. A team with Harry McKay and Charlie Curnow offered them the ball less than 10 times a quarter.
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
