Prelim 1 *** Spoilers ***

[Xie Shan]

Wow. I felt for the Dogs players at the end, they gave it absolutely everything they had but if you don't kick the goals in this game then it's hard to win. I don't blame the Saints for showing emotion after the game -- when you've lost 3 preliminary finals in 5 seasons you're entitled to celebrate when you finally win one.

Geelong or Collingwood? Hmm, tough one. Putting aside your like/dislike/sheer hatred of either team, when St. Kilda played Geelong a few weeks ago it was one of the best games I've seen and I'd love to see them play again just for the spectacle, but a Saints-Magpies GF would be intriguing to watch too, though it won't be free-flowing it will be a tough, high-pressure game.

[goswannie14]

Nick Riewoldt is just a freaking colussus.

That would have to be the most unbelievable personal performance that I've seen from a player in a final since Goodes' career-defining 2003 PF vs Port Adelaide.

And a sensational game, where both teams ran themselves into the ground, to boot.

PS That game is going to be used as Exhibit A for the Dogs recruiting Hall.

You are taking the piss aren't you. If not for the maggots, the Bullies would be playing in the GF next week. Reiwoldt is the new Lloyd of the comp.....diver.

[AnnieH]

Great game. I'm glad the ainters got up. They've had a great season and deserve to be there. It's just a pity they had to play the doggies.

Michael Gardiner looks like a villiage person.

As for tonights game ... who cares? I'll be happy either way - Mooney or Maltmouth crying will do me!!

[i'm-uninformed2]

Before the telecast began, Dennis sent his condolences to him, so he must have lost someone close to him.

His father

[RogueSwan]

...The Dogs lack of a tall, strong marking forward was the difference between defeat and victory. They need Hall badly.

Nah, they just didn't convert when they had the chance. They were the highest scoring team (I think) all year and lost by just over one goal in the PF. I think they are doing pretty good.

[ScottH]

57 I50's to 40 and they lose.

They need Hall.
I thought the dogs were the better team in the night, just didn't convert their chances, and don't have any BIG guns to win the game for them.

I felt very disappointed, as if the swans had lost last night.

[Lucky Knickers]

Poor doggies. That's all the teams I like out. Now it's a matter of the lesser of several evils and I'm just not which team I like the least so I guess it is StK for me now for Swans connection.

[hot potato]

Good contest, it was the first game I've watched in a heck of a long time in which I had no emotion for the result, just sat back and enjoyed the footy.
The free to Riewoldt at the start of the third quarter in such a low scoring hard contest was pretty soft and would certainly not have been paid to any other Forward, esp Hall.
HP

[Doctor]

Before the telecast began, Dennis sent his condolences to him, so he must have lost someone close to him.

Fair enough. Like his style or not, you don't wish that on anyone so commiserations to him and his family.

[cruiser]

Nah, they just didn't convert when they had the chance. They were the highest scoring team (I think) all year and lost by just over one goal in the PF. I think they are doing pretty good.

But that's just it. They lost a PF again and had Hall been there, they would probably be playing in the GF. The GF window wont be open for them for much longer and they need to make the most of that opportunity while they can. I would almost put money on Hall playing for them next year.

Its like us in 2006. If bloody Hawthorn had traded Everitt to us at the end of 05, we'd probably be enjoying the memory of back to back premierships. One good experienced KPP can be the difference.

[dimelb]

... The free to Riewoldt at the start of the third quarter in such a low scoring hard contest was pretty soft and would certainly not have been paid to any other Forward, esp Hall.HP

It was there, and under the new emphasis on the rule it should have been paid, just as it should have been against Staker. Players like Riewoldt and Hall have a hard enough task without having to wear that behind-the-play crap.

[Xie Shan]

It was there, and under the new emphasis on the rule it should have been paid, just as it should have been against Staker.

Agree that it's a free kick under the new rule interpretation, and that Riewoldt should be entitled to the protection that Hall didn't get when it comes to the behind-the-play-stuff, but the issue is (IMO) whether we want that to be a free kick. I think the rules committee needs to think carefully about some of these rule interpretations and whether the punishment really fits the crime with a few of these, especially for something that happens all the time during a game, because what it does is put unnecessary pressure on the umpires to get it right, especially at a critical stage in the game.

Oh, and I'm with SimonH, Riewoldt was sensational.