Main content

The complete history of the Mighty Magpies

4 July 1903 | Round 10

  • St Kilda
  • vs.
  • Collingwood

Junction Oval (Away)

  • 2.4 (16)

    • QT 10.1

    • QT 20.3

    • QT 30.3

    • QT 42.4

  • -

  • 5.11 (41)

    • QT 13.2

    • QT 24.3

    • QT 35.9

    • QT 45.11

Match Report


Though on the scores St, Kilda would appear to have been pretty soundly beaten on Saturday, they played a much better game than the points show, and their faults were mainly with the forwards, though in saying that a large measure of credit must also be given to Collingwood‘s staunch defence.

Repeatedly, St. Kilda forced it through to their forward lines, only to find the Collingwood backs rushing it out to the centre again. There was some waiting at the outset while Lady Turner hoisted a new flag which St. Kilda’s friends had given them, but the attendance was not neatly so large as anticipated, for it required a rare enthusiasm to face the bitter equals that were blowing off the foam-crested bay.

Although Collingwood played the stronger game all through, the St. Kilda hand exchanges were very smart, and, considering the drawbacks, there was an excellent exhibition of kicking, the long punts covering a lot of ground. Collingwood handled the ball to much greater advantage, played to each other with greater accuracy, and at the end of the quarter were leading by 20 points to 1.

There was not much damage done either way in the second quarter, but during that term St. Kilda realised fully the weakness of their forwards, and on the general play should have done much better. In the third quarter Collingwood put on another 12 points, while St. Kilda never shifted. They made a fine effort in the last quarter, however, when Cumberland and Barwick set the side a grand example. Had they shown such form in the first quarter the result might have been different, but it was too late to do more than prove that St. Kilda had not been just to themselves at the outset.

In contrast to the weakness of St. Kilda’s forwards was the strength of Collingwood‘s backs, though the one thing was probably a natural consequence of the other. It is always the same little group of men who win games for Collingwood – Pannam, Condon, Peers, Monahan, Rowell, and Lockwood. The others are good, but not at all phenomenal. Pannam was probably their best on Saturday, and Condon, considering that he was so bad with a cold that he wished to stand out, played, it remarkably good game. A. Leach played his very best game in their luck on Saturday, and Drohan and Dummett were highly capable.

One has to go to the other side, however, to find they player of the match, for Cumberland once again did splendidly, though in the last quarter the un-thing Barwick wan ahead of him and playing desperately hard. Both had to take many hard knocks, but their football was not in the least affected by it. Trevillian also did first rate in the ruck. Onion was the only one of their centre men who more than held his own. Dowding and Stanlake were the best of an indifferent lot of forwards, and in the back lines Powell and Balme figured to advantage. Hogan is never suited by a wet day and slippery ball, but some of his dishes were most effective. Another player seen to advantage was M’Leod.

1903 ‘FOOTBALL.’, The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 – 1957), 6 July, p. 9, viewed 31 July, 2015,

Team Stats

  • # Guernsey
  • GL Goals
  • B Behinds
  • K Kicks
  • H Handballs
  • D Disposals
  • M Marks
  • HO Hit Outs
  • FF Frees For
  • FA Frees Against
  • T Tackles
Provide feedback Ask the Experts