glenelg v central

[Jimmy]

gee, not even 1 bloody minute!!!! probably 30 seconds!!!

thanks tassie!!!!!

btw, had a great night down at nelson blue, a new kiwi place down at the sea port. plenty of coopers and tooheys!!!

very nice scenery too, and good FISHING!!!!

[LBT]

Talked it up...... Quotes such as "centrals wont win by 100 points"
and "tigers will be competitive". sounds pretty accurate to me...exactly as it panned out.....tools.

[mighty_tiger_79]

i think the umps did a good job for the bays, in helping not get smashed!!!!!!!! the % may come in handy later in the season.

[Jimmy]

here you go bays fans!!!

theri, i dont think some talked it up, **** they all did!!!!!!



gee, you cant even beat centrals, pfft!

Go back and re-read ALL the posts....

tassie, i tried answering your pm, but it wouldnt let me, but ill answer it here, its all good mate, just a bit of fishing and a little fun. trust me, i hate losing when you think you will win, even tho you didnt expect to win today, it still feels crappy. just giving as good as we got.

play on.

[mighty_tiger_79]

here you go bays fans!!!

theri, i dont think some talked it up, **** they all did!!!!!!


gee, you cant even beat centrals, pfft!

Go back and re-read ALL the posts....

tassie, i tried answering your pm, but it wouldnt let me, but ill answer it here, its all good mate, just a bit of fishing and a little fun. trust me, i hate losing when you think you will win, even tho you didnt expect to win today, it still feels crappy. just giving as good as we got.

play on.

excuse me, but i dont think i talked it up, in fact i think i posted on here that i thought the doggies would win between 1-20. and if it wasnt for the umps the doggies would have won by 60

[am Bays]

Mate I didn't expect to win, I was hopeful/confident of winning if we put in a four quarter effort but Centrals are a good team so to expect a win today IMO was unrealistic.

FWIW to have 22 scoring shots to 19 shows we had a fair bit of the ball and had our chances. However, with the more behinds than goals scores demonstrates our scoring shots would have been under a fair bit of pressure and from lower percentage areas compared to Centrals who probaly through their better skill were able to move the ball more effciently than we were into scoring areas to more effective scoring shots.

All in all the game turned out as I expected we gave it a good go and pushed them but the benchmark team of the competition came through at the end to win by 2-4 goals.

IF, and its a big if, we produce that same effort for the rest of the year we will play finals footy as there are arguably 4-5 other sides apart from us who we will beat if we produce that same sort of effort every game from here on end.

Not saying we will because having watched Glenelg over the past 15 years the consistancy (lack there of) of that sort of effort has been our biggest failing as a club

[stampy]

you cannot afford to give a great side like them a 5 goal start, pure and simple, i have mixed feelings, even we got as close as we did i cant help but feel they were just purring and ready to stop us should we get seriously close, on paper it shows we had more scoring shots and at a guess more inside 50s but we coughed the ball up way too much for my liking, quite simply we have a way to go to consider ourselves premiership contenders but today is a start - we need to learn from this loss and put the legs away next week. Feel majorly disappointed at the mo but maybe a consolation is that we won the ressies, come to think of it i am still devo. Well done to the cdfc you are the benchmark of the competition, as for wankers thudding or whatever, pisspoor, pathetic, get a life and be positive about your own club, and by the way NOT ANY STAGE THIS WEEK HAS ANY GLENELG SUPPORTER CRAPPED ON HOW WE WERE GONNA KNOCK THE DOGS OFF!!!!! GOT IT STUPID!?

[SnappyTom]

Mate I didn't expect to win, I was hopeful/confident of winning if we put in a four quarter effort but Centrals are a good team so to expect a win today IMO was unrealistic.

FWIW to have 22 scoring shots to 19 shows we had a fair bit of the ball and had our chances. However, with the more behinds than goals scores demonstrates our scoring shots would have been under a fair bit of pressure and from lower percentage areas compared to Centrals who probaly through their better skill were able to move the ball more effciently than we were into scoring areas to more effective scoring shots.

All in all the game turned out as I expected we gave it a good go and pushed them but the benchmark team of the competition came through at the end to win by 2-4 goals.

IF, and its a big if, we produce that same effort for the rest of the year we will play finals footy as there are arguably 4-5 other sides apart from us who we will beat if we produce that same sort of effort every game from here on end.

Not saying we will because having watched Glenelg over the past 15 years the consistancy (lack there of) of that sort of effort has been our biggest failing as a club

12 of your shots came from 'inside 50' as a result of free kicks and/or after a 25m penalty.
Glenelg just didn't take those gifts...

[Dutchy]

good honest effort by the Bays....for the Skirt fans there was no one saying we would beat the Dogs.

Many of the misses were from set shots....I believe neither team brought their "A" game today, Glenelgs skills were poor all day but endeavour was great....6 goals to 1 in the first 1/4 and then to beat them for the rest of the day was encouraging and I reckon they went inside 50 4-5 times in the whole last 1/4...Centrals are definately beatable

and yes Central flooded, but thats their right

Hinge was excellent and would get a call up to the Crows in front of Douglas on todays effort

god knows where all the Dogs fans were today....75/25 in favour of the Bays, still a good atmosphere apart from the end to enders giving the finger to Glenelg fans after EVERY goal...WTF is up with that!!!!

[stampy]

the only time this year i have seen supporters from a club have security following them dutchy, nothing more needs to be said an indightment on a great football side

[brent]

Not saying we will because having watched Glenelg over the past 15 years the consistancy (lack there of) of that sort of effort has been our biggest failing as a club

couldn't have said it better... who knows which GFC will rock up next week?

[giffo]

Umpiring was totally bewildering. Players getting pinged for holding the ball yet the tackle was illegal, i.e; too high. Packs over the ball, sometimes holding , sometimes a balls up . Don't anyone complain about the condition of Elizabeth Oval after seeing the mud pit in the middle at the Bay today. Highlight of the day goes to Schell yet again with another high flying mark

[am Bays]

Umpiring was totally bewildering. Players getting pinged for holding the ball yet the tackle was illegal, i.e; too high. Packs over the ball, sometimes holding , sometimes a balls up . Don't anyone complain about the condition of Elizabeth Oval after seeing the mud pit in the middle at the Bay today. Highlight of the day goes to Schell yet again with another high flying mark

Well if there weren't four games played on it in two days.....

[bayman]

Umpiring was totally bewildering. Players getting pinged for holding the ball yet the tackle was illegal, i.e; too high. Packs over the ball, sometimes holding , sometimes a balls up . Don't anyone complain about the condition of Elizabeth Oval after seeing the mud pit in the middle at the Bay today. Highlight of the day goes to Schell yet again with another high flying mark

schells' mark was very good & not far from where i was, i'd think that mules' mark was equally as good & was in the same area as schells, as for the mud pit that is because of the cricket pitches in the middle of the ground, now do they play cricket at the elizabeth oval ?

[Pseudo]

FWIW to have 22 scoring shots to 19 shows we had a fair bit of the ball and had our chances. However, with the more behinds than goals scores demonstrates our scoring shots would have been under a fair bit of pressure and from lower percentage areas compared to Centrals who probaly through their better skill were able to move the ball more effciently than we were into scoring areas to more effective scoring shots.

Herrumph. More than a few of those behinds were from shots under no pressure at all. Bays had their share of the play but weren't able to finish it off.

Central is a class act. I was particularly impressed with the way the 'dogs consistently switched the play across the ground without effort; something the Bays have struggled to all season.

IF, and its a big if, we produce that same effort for the rest of the year we will play finals footy as there are arguably 4-5 other sides apart from us who we will beat if we produce that same sort of effort every game from here on end.

Not saying we will because having watched Glenelg over the past 15 years the consistancy (lack there of) of that sort of effort has been our biggest failing as a club

Agreed. Both paragraphs.

[Pseudo]

12 of your shots came from 'inside 50' as a result of free kicks and/or after a 25m penalty.
Glenelg just didn't take those gifts...

Fair point. I reckon 4 of Central's goals were the direct result of dodgy calls. Not having a go at Central or the umpires, quite the opposite: I admire that Central was able to make the most of what was given to them. The Bays were also gifted a few shots on goal but managed to muck most of them up.

[Pseudo]

the only time this year i have seen supporters from a club have security following them dutchy, nothing more needs to be said an indightment on a great football side

Interesting. I thought there was noticeably more Weslo staff at the ground today. (FWIW - just means more of the pussies to stand back and watch if any real trouble did start). Not that any was necessary, the crowd was in good spirit and the banter healthy.

[PhilH]

Anyone know the crowd figure at Tigerland today ?

[Hondo]

Skirt fans

[am Bays]

FWIW to have 22 scoring shots to 19 shows we had a fair bit of the ball and had our chances. However, with the more behinds than goals scores demonstrates our scoring shots would have been under a fair bit of pressure and from lower percentage areas compared to Centrals who probaly through their better skill were able to move the ball more effciently than we were into scoring areas to more effective scoring shots.

Herrumph. More than a few of those behinds were from shots under no pressure at all. Bays had their share of the play but weren't able to finish it off.

My comment was an assumption based on looking at the final scores on a computer 365 km away from the action. I bow to your better judgement as someone who was there....

As I expected Centrals polish and experience showed through though