Grand Final predictions

[Big Al]

Does anyone remember which umpire awarded the first free kicK?

Our old mate - McClaren

[573v30]

Our old mate - McClaren

If the Hawks lost, McClaren would've been beaten up in the parking lot.

IMO, Ablett should've won the Norm Smith.

[ShockOfHair]

I thought the result opened up the competition for 2009 by showing that Geelong are not invincible.

The so called experts in the media who had Geelong as the best team of all time got it wrong again. It is very hard to go back to back, and we only missed by that much.

In 2009 Harley, Scarlett and Milburn are all 30+. Nothing stays the same in this comp so for the Swans in 2009 hope springs eternal once again.

I thought Stokes, Lonergan, Taylor, Kelly, Blake and Varcoe were pretty ordinary for the Cats.

Stokes didn't like the hard stuff, Lonergan was spent at Q time, Taylor fumbled all game and was out of his depth, Kelly was pretty soft and found it too hot in the kitchen, Blake had a bit of the "Chambers" and really was awful and Varcoe almost seemed stage struck and made a couple of horrible turnovers.

Chapman was ineffective and you would have to question his match fitness with so much time out of the game in the last 6 weeks.

Harley is clearly the leader and when he went off so did Geelong.

Hodge best on the ground? I thought he got a lot of stats in the last Q so it will be interesting to analyse the papers tomorrow. Ablett had 34 possessions and for mine played 4 solid quarters but of course they wouldn't give the NS medal to a losing player, well they did in 2005 which just goes to show "what's in a name". Ablett worked his backside off to keep them in the game.

Now Johnson, he also had 34 stats but most were very ineffective and Hawthorn constantly pushed him wide to the boundary and upfield. On Johnson, I can't believe a player would stage for so many frees in a GF.

Hawthorn on the other hand had a very even team effort and I couldn't see one passenger for them.

Pretty spot on Nico. A lot of Geelong players were ordinary, quite probably because of Hawk pressure and possibly as Bomber said, because of all the outside pressures on them.

Agree on Johnson - I couldn't believe his stats -- they certainly didn't count for much. I think Hodge was a worthy winner especially for the first half effort when the pressure was really on. Ablett was sensational in the second half - not just his skills but his intensity. Maybe a bit stiff not to win the NS.

You're right about the age. Geelong's best 22 is about the same age as the Swans (around 26 years; Swans is about 26 1/2 years).

I thought it was a great game of footy to watch. As well as Hodge and Ablett, great individual performances from Rioli, Williams, Bateman, Scarlett, and cameos from Dew, Franklin, (Q1) Mooney.

From the parochial Swans' POV, once more it's been shown how hard it is to go two in a row.

And good to see experts proved wrong. The 'greatest team' idea was always a ridiculous one. Bring on 2009.

[Matt79]

Does anyone remember which umpire awarded the first free kicK?

Although McClaran was the controlling umpire in the centre square when the first free kick was paid, he did not give the free kick. Vozzo paid the free kick, must have had a different view but you can clearly hear Vozzo's voice issuing the free kick and then McClaren's voice after that. I have rewatched the start and it is definitely Vozzo who gave the first kick.

[NMWBloods]

Hawthorn's pressure was good (witness the number of tackles) but I think it was them under massive pressure in the first half particularly. Geelong were in total control from late in the first quarter until early in the third, and Hawthorn were very much on the defensive. Geelong simply couldn't kick goals. There weren't just the behinds, there were also the ones missing everything and also all the ones where they didn't even get a shot off because they stuffed it up at half forward when a goal was there for the taking. I think most of these were unforced errors by Geelong, often by trying to be too clever. I don't think it was cockiness or pressure, just one of those days where things didn't click. They probably expected that eventually it would and I think they still would have beaten most teams in the comp yesterday. However, you can't sustain that sort of domination for no reward all day in a GF and Hawthorn's burst of goals in the middle of the third qtr won the game.

[Robbo]

How on Earth did those maggots get the AFL GF. Would have to be some of the worst umpiring I've seen at any level of footy. Blatant favouritism towards Geelong.

[NMWBloods]

Would have to be some of the worst umpiring I've seen at any level of footy. Blatant favouritism towards Geelong.

Typical RWO comment.

[Triple B]

Typical RWO comment.

What was your take on the umpiring ???

[Robbo]

Typical RWO comment.

Watch the game and tell me if you disagree.

[NMWBloods]

I disagree with both the comment "some of the worst umpiring I've seen at any level of footy" and the comment "Blatant favouritism towards Geelong." They're the sort of comments on RWO nearly every week (and BF for the matter too). It's amazing how the umpiring is nearly always crap with respect to the team you prefer.

[Robbo]

Mate think about it.

-Geelong getting a down field free kick resulting in a goal when it clearly shouldn't of been down field.

-Buddy "throwing" Scarlett to the ground when Scarlett clearly just fell over. Free kick given to Geelong.

-Chapman given a free kick at the top of the goal square when he apparently had his arms chopped. He kicked a goal. The replay revealed a fair contest. And don't forget how Brad Johnson didn't get a free kick for something similar in the prelim AGAINST Geelong.

-Stokes not gettng pinged for holding the ball when he was gang tackled.

That's all I can remember at this stage but there was a few more shockers too.

[NMWBloods]

Mate think about it.

-Geelong getting a down field free kick resulting in a goal when it clearly shouldn't of been down field.

That was an error.

-Buddy "throwing" Scarlett to the ground when Scarlett clearly just fell over. Free kick given to Geelong.

Franklin has the most free kicks against for the year - he does that every week. You think Scarlett fell over, the umpires think it was a free.

-Chapman given a free kick at the top of the goal square when he apparently had his arms chopped. He kicked a goal. The replay revealed a fair contest.

It happened right in front of us - we were a few rows back from the boundary line and Chapman clearly looked to be taken across the back of the head. as well as his arms chopped.

-Stokes not gettng pinged for holding the ball when he was gang tackled.

He had half a step before being tackled - no prior opportunity.

Despite the constant whinging about umpires, in 34 years of watching football I've rarely seen a game actually decided by umpiring. It's swings and roundabouts in most cases. What about the free to Osborne against Hunt that started the avalanche of Hawthorn goals in the third? Hunt clearly was into Osborne's side when on the ground but it was called in the back. Some poor decisions were made, they always are. But it wasn't neither shocking nor biased. The free kick count was not horribly lopsided, particularly when you consider how much of the ball Geelong had early in the game when they received a lot of their free kicks and when you consider 9 of the 29 free kicks came from Franklin (most in comp) and Mitchell (well beaten and frustrated).

[Triple B]

I disagree with both the comment "some of the worst umpiring I've seen at any level of footy" and the comment "Blatant favouritism towards Geelong." They're the sort of comments on RWO nearly every week (and BF for the matter too). It's amazing how the umpiring is nearly always crap with respect to the team you prefer.

I went into the game leaning towards wanting a Geelong win, but I believe the umpiring was VERY ordinary and certainly Geelong got the rub of the green.

It mightn't have been the worst ever, but poor all the same.

Robbo didn't help his arguments by including the Chapman free, he was clearly hit in the head and it was a free every day of the week.

However, you'll find Stokes had more than half a step, but he clearly tried to take them on and break the tackle rather than disposing, free kick.

As for Franklin, you seem to be falling into the trap that the umpires fall into with Buddy, BBBH, Richo and Fev to name 4 who rarely get the frees they deserve and frequently give away frees that would be called play-on if 'lesser' names and reputations were involved. Scarlett fell over, pure and simple. Poor decision. Same with Roughead, nudged Taylor (?) under the ball, in the side and fairly. Poor decision.

[Robbo]

I went into the game leaning towards wanting a Geelong win, but I believe the umpiring was VERY ordinary and certainly Geelong got the rub of the green.

It mightn't have been the worst ever, but poor all the same.

Robbo didn't help his arguments by including the Chapman free, he was clearly hit in the head and it was a free every day of the week.

However, you'll find Stokes had a little more than half a step, but he clearly tried to take them on and break the tackle rather than disposing, free kick.

As for Franklin, you seem to be falling into the trap that the umpires fall into with Buddy, BBBH, Richo and Fev to name 4 who rarely get the frees they deserve and frequently give away frees that would be called play-on if 'lesser' names and reputations were involved. Scarlett fell over, pure and simple. Poor decision. Same with Roughead, nudged Taylor (?) under the ball, in the side and fairly. Poor decision.

It wasn't last week. And what made the call even worse is that it was so friggin late. It was a good 3 seconds after the incident.

[Robbo]

He had half a step before being tackled - no prior opportunity

He tried to break the tackles. That's prior opportunity.