SA Footy

FINAL SCORES @ ELIZABETH:

Central - 7.8 = 50

Glenelg - 3.7 = 25


Central by 25 points...


Goal Kickers:

Central - D.Havelberg 4, J.Gunston, E.Sansbury, S.Dutschke 1

Glenelg - T.Grima, R.Kirkby, A.Lally 1

thanks to Big Phil for the above stats

the result is of no real surpirse I dont think

shocking conditions, but I think centrals were desperate to get the win to get a week off to help get some of the older bodies a break before getting stuck into the finals.

centrals are on track for another premiership

well done to the dogs

far too good

http://sanfl.championdata.com/matches/1 ... match.html

# Name K H Di M Tk FF FA Ho Cl I50 R50 G B
22 A.Hayes 11 13 24 6 4 3 2 8 6 2 4 0 0
15 L.Spurr 12 9 21 4 5 2 2 0 1 3 5 0 0
10 K.Jenner 15 5 20 1 3 0 0 0 2 5 2 0 1
5 I.Callinan 10 8 18 1 5 2 1 1 0 6 0 0 1
12 E.Sansbury 14 4 18 2 7 0 1 0 0 1 2 1 1
2 J.Boyd 12 4 16 1 2 0 1 0 3 2 2 0 0
21 C.Gowans 9 7 16 1 4 4 5 0 3 4 0 0 0
27 D.Schell 12 2 14 5 2 1 2 1 1 3 3 0 0
35 R.Williams 10 4 14 1 1 1 0 3 3 0 0 0 0
16 P.Thomas 11 2 13 2 4 1 2 1 2 4 1 0 0
29 J.Gunston 7 4 11 2 1 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 1
28 J.Gowans 8 2 10 2 5 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0
40 D.Havelberg 8 2 10 4 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 4 1
3 H.Lawry 8 2 10 4 1 0 2 3 0 0 1 0 0
18 J.Mackenzie 7 3 10 0 4 1 3 20 3 0 0 0 0
30 J.Sutherland 6 4 10 4 0 2 2 15 3 1 2 0 0
11 T.Goodrem 8 1 9 0 6 1 2 0 2 1 1 0 1
37 Y.Sibenaler 7 2 9 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 0
31 C.Musolino 7 1 8 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 2 0 0
13 S.Dutschke 4 2 6 3 4 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1
41 C.Reichert 4 1 5 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0
- Team/Rushed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
- CEND 190 82 272 44 62 22 32 54 33 41 30 7 8

- GLEN 179 83 262 32 42 32 22 53 36 32 32 3 7
# Name K H Di M Tk FF FA Ho Cl I50 R50 G B
6 L.Panozzo 15 12 27 4 0 0 0 0 3 1 10 0 0
8 J.Carr 17 5 22 2 8 4 2 2 7 2 1 0 1
5 K.Tenace 14 5 19 1 4 2 1 0 2 4 0 0 0
3 B.Kane 12 5 17 4 1 3 0 0 2 2 1 0 1
23 B.Murphy 10 7 17 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 4 0 0
14 T.Allen 10 6 16 1 3 4 1 0 3 2 1 0 1
9 T.Cranston 7 8 15 0 0 1 4 26 6 2 2 0 0
1 T.Grima 12 2 14 3 1 4 2 1 1 2 0 1 1
31 J.Kellock 6 7 13 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 0
17 M.Ruwoldt 10 3 13 1 3 3 0 5 2 2 1 0 1
26 R.Kirkby 9 3 12 3 2 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
15 S.Rudolph 12 0 12 3 1 1 1 2 2 3 0 0 0
30 C.Kane 5 5 10 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
47 P.Adlington 5 4 9 1 3 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 0
32 A.Lally 7 2 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
16 W.Mills 9 0 9 2 2 1 2 0 1 1 3 0 0
10 M.Bode 5 3 8 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 0
2 A.Grima 7 1 8 1 2 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 1
4 D.Kirk 4 2 6 1 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 0 0
48 W.McGinty 1 2 3 0 5 0 4 6 0 2 0 0 0
34 B.Mules 2 1 3 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
- Team/Rushed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
- GLEN 179 83 262 32 42 32 22 53 36 32 32 3 7
- CEND 190 82 272 44 62 22 32 54 33 41 30 7 8

The " Big Test " to see where we are, and if we have improved against the best in the comp. The answer ( and I know the weather was bad ), but nothing I feel has changed. I am happy to go into the finals series sitting second. Finishing top the past two years didn't achieve anything, but what can you say about Centrals. We can beat any team in the comp bar them. They are just class personified ! The work gets done when needed the most. Sturt can beat them, Norwood can beat them, but we are truly bedazzled by them everytime. We never seem to learn anything when we play them ?

Just gutted, and the word of injuries to Bode and Mules has just sealed a s***house day !

Huge game for Glenelg today.
Roy Laird has timed his bid for another flag to perfection, Central need the week off , looks like same old same old.

interesting free kick stat - the home crowd certainly knew all about it

7.8 to 3.7 eh? Pretty freaky.

Big big concerns for the Bays with Bode, Mules, Tenace and Rudolph looking to have serious injuries.

Cruel luck if thats the case.

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:interesting free kick stat - the home crowd certainly knew all about it

And watch Norwood and Sturt tomorrow to get the same treatment as Glenelg did today in the free kick count.

spell_check wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:interesting free kick stat - the home crowd certainly knew all about it

And watch Norwood and Sturt tomorrow to get the same treatment as Glenelg did today in the free kick count.

so west and the eagles should both win then

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:

spell_check wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:interesting free kick stat - the home crowd certainly knew all about it

And watch Norwood and Sturt tomorrow to get the same treatment as Glenelg did today in the free kick count.

so west and the eagles should both win then

I'm sure the SANFL would prefer that not to happen. Would take a dent in the crowds.

Centrals jumped out of the blocks with a goal within the first minute. From there the game became a dour struggle in the horrendous conditions but Centrals were able to adapt to the conditions the most by playing some brilliant wet weather football. Glenelg not only struggled to adapt to conditions, but preferred to simply play for free kicks, resulting in all of their goals coming from dubious free kicks. Glenelgs paltry 3.7 (or 0.7 if you take the umpire out) is the lowest score conceeded by Centrals (previous lowest 4.4 against the Eagles in the 2004 GF).

Congratulations to the Dogs, winning the minor premiership and a well deserved week off (which will be vital after playing in today's conditions).

and I couldnt believe that centrals supporters during the week were trying to play down there chances of winning this game

they won like the favourites they were

What was the free kick count ?

Now let the finals series begin. Some of the old dogs are gonna need more than a week off. Must have bruised elbows and knuckles about now

GO YOU DOGGIES!!!!!!

I don't think the result means anything as the conditions were the worst ive ever seen and it was a complete lottery out there. I wouldn't think this has any true reflection on where the dogs and bays sit in relation to each other. Havelberg's first quarter set the match up for us but i just love the way my club fight's when something is on the line. To all you Sturt and Norwood supporters who love to chirp up about the imminent demise of the dogs - YOU HAVE TO BEAT US WHEN IT MATTERS. We will not roll over!

Haven't felt this pumped all year, it must be September....... See ya in the 2nd semi!

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:and I couldnt believe that centrals supporters during the week were trying to play down there chances of winning this game

they won like the favourites they were

That probably says more about you than us

Brucetiki wrote: Glenelgs paltry 3.7 (or 0.7 if you take the umpire out) is the lowest score conceeded by Centrals (previous lowest 4.4 against the Eagles in the 2004 GF).

I think you'll find a few of those behinds could be chalked up to the men in white also.......

You Dogs supporters........

The dogs were miles too good today. Even spent quite some time looking the more likely team to score into that gale. Just too clean in the conditions and far too tough inside for the bays. The tougher the conditions got, the tougher the dogs got and the more the dogs started to pull away.

BOG for mine was Havelberg by miles. 4 marks and goals in those conditions from a key forward. Game was filled with great pieces of play by the dogs. Glenelg just can't come up to scratch in tough games with the dogs. Doesn't bode well for finals. And if Glenelg are nursing some sore bodies after that it will make it just that little tougher next week.

I'm not going to comment on whether the umpires were good or bad but a worry for Glenelg would be they kicked 3 goals from frees and nothing from play or marks. Reliance on free kick goals is unhealthy IMHO. If we don't thump the ball over the line, fall in Kirkby's back and, well I don't know what happened for the third, seemed to me Glenelg player (Ruwoldt?) pushed a centrals player over and got a free and 25. The dogs just tidy up that (and dry conditions will help) and Glenelg don't kick a goal.

So basically, even though it was only 4 goals it felt like a total dominance for most of the day. Conditions and a few cheap goals might cover it up a little, which from Glenelg's perspective might be dangerous.