18 September 2009

Preliminary Final 1: Saints vs Bulldogs

No time to explain where the Wrap has been for the last few months, I probably couldn't give you a coherent or logical answer myself. Suffice it to say that work has played a role in ensuring that, while I've been in close proximity to a keyboard at all stages, getting to write about footy hasn't been on the cards. Still, let's leap ahead, ignoring the Dons' magnificent rise and fall, the Blues' similar rise from the depth, the Western Derby match that seemed intent on proving that they play by different rules out west, and last week's match between Adelaide and Collingwood that wasn't over until it was over...and even then, there were doubts. To the prelims!

Somehow, we ended up with a game between the AFL's most loveable losers, the Saints and Dogs. In a combined history of nearly 200 years (keeping in mind that the Dogs entered the comp a quarter century after the Saints), they have won a grand total of two flags between them. The Dogs, in fact, have appeared just twice on the final weekend in September, while the Saints have at least appeared five times (in 1997, 1971, 1966 (for the win), 1965 and 1913 (the one nobody remembers, they lost to Fitzroy of all teams). A game between the two teams could only result in a win for all of the neutrals, but also a sad sense of loss. Sad that a game between the two sides had to result in a loser, but at least the hardcore supporters of the two sides have decades of preparation for such an event.

To put the reader in the frame of mind that I was in when I rocked up at Eastlakes to take in the big game, I should let you in on the email that I received three hours before the game. Keeping in mind that I am one of the nation's great army of dedicated public servants, I'm sure that you will enjoy, as I did, an email from the Minister's office that began with the line: "The Minister is going to be doing Laurie Oakes on Sunday morning". There's a fantastic mental image to go into the weekend with! Is there a winner there, any more than in the Saints-Dogs game? Sure, politics is a tough game, but dear, oh dear! Can't imagine Paul Bongiorno going to the same extent for a story, somehow, I think that Jim Waley might have let it go through to the keeper too!

With my head still spinning, I showed up at Eastlakes for the big game, only to find that the only available seat was in the middle of the Ascot Vale over 35s side on their end of season trip. They kindly allowed me to sit with them, with only the odd "Hey poofter! What's with the tie!" comment to go on with. I suppose rocking up in the suit direct from work to a game between a working class side and a bohemian outfit pretty much ranked such a welcome. But keeping in mind that I've also been turned away from Eastlakes this season for sporting a pair of trackydacks, it's a tough ask to get the dress code exactly right. Must try harder.

To the game- you won't see a tougher, more hard fought encounter if you watch a million seasons. Not since the 1996 preliminary between the Dons and the Swans can there have been a game where every time the ball hit the ground the heart of every supporter would leap to their throat in quite the same manner. The Dogs leapt from their kennel in the manner of a particularly swift greyhound, but failed to capitalise in any effective manner in the opening half.
Everyone expected a Saints push in the third, and it duly followed, but they didn't manage to establish a winning break. The final quarter was agony for everyone watching, the Ascot Vale crew (who were pretty much all for the Dogs) were spewing profanities left, right and centre as the quarter went on. And nobody copped more invective than the umpire who decided that a 50 metre boot in the direction of the Dogs goal that wandered across the boundary line somehow warranted a Saints free that ultimately led to a goal for St Kilda that pretty much ensured the final margin- Saints into the granny, the Dogs yet again denied. Hard to argue that St Kilda, after a 20-2 home and away season, don't deserve to be on the last weekend, but gee, when will the Dogs' moment arrive?

One more prelim to go, and tomorrow we'll find out who the Saints will tackle next week. On Sunday morning we'll know the result of Geelong vs Collingwood, and also the result of the winner of the Minister vs Laurie Oakes encounter. I know which battle I'm going to enjoy watching more! Barring some sort of calamity, we'll have the Cats-Pies result up on Sunday, and be back for the GF the week after. Thanks for keeping the faith, see you back soon!

2 comments:

Alison said...

Oh dear, that was a truly unfortunate choice of words in the e-mail!

Ascot Vale?! Not the Melbourne one presumably, I can't see them picking Canberra as the prime away trip venue. Also not exactly a working class suburb any more, what with the multi-million dollar mansions (and drug dealers).

Can't say I'm sad that the Saints made it through (I know a 10 and an 8 year old who would have been devastated had they choked at this point...) but I feel for the Doggies. Next year.

Anonymous said...

We were going for the Doggies here. Boo.
Then we were going for Collingwood, on Joe's behalf.
Boo!

Any time a team I support would like to win would be fabulous.

Also, I would like to scrub my brain after that email!