His good can be very good, like last night.
His bad is downright fkn awful.
The problem is we never know which one we’re getting week-to-week.
1 Like
I think getting a full game tends to help.
3 Likes
Depends which boots he puts on
2 Likes
I guess at the core I am a hater.
I really don’t want to see him in the side because I just think his contribution is too uneven, unpredictable and not trustworthy enough and for someone at this point in is career he should be more consistent. He tries hard but is his own worst enemy.
I thought he was very very ordinary in the first half.
But no one can deny that he performed very well in the second and did some really good/imporatnt stuff.
I guess the one good thing about Nick, unlike complete duds, he can produce some high quality output at important moments, and we need him to do that more often.
But on balance today was a big tick, congratulations Nick.
1 Like
What did he do in the first half that put you off ?
1 Like
I just watched it back, and to be fair he wasn’t as average as I thought.
I guess I have a bit of bias where Nick is concerned, and tend choose to see the things that support my way of thinking and ignore others.
At times I think his Tackling technique, goes in high and very grabby with arms completely be ineffective
He sometimes seems to lack situational awareness in d50 ie GWS 4th goal, showed no urgency to try to get back to the square was just jogging around in space although in fairness probably couldn’t have had an impact but woul be nice if he had a go, you never know which way the ball is going to bounce.
I also thought he was caught Waltzing back in d50 and paid no attention to cogniglio, when he received a pass from Whitfield I think.
Also I think he was lucky not to give away a 50 with a stupid throw the ball back to Whitfield.
I also think a couple of times he got caught in possession which was not to be unexpected, in the circumstances, but in my opinion, other than for speed, he has zero evasiveness, no shimmy shimmy slide sideways about him, so is easy to predict what he is going to do by oppo. If he doesn’t have space his effectiveness is pretty limited.
But other than that I did see that he did a few good things.
Laid a couple of good tackles, despite my observation above, and his field kicking was pretty good.
He also used his speed to good advantage to get back and receive to get us out of trouble.
But therein the problem lies a bit I think in defence, he is happy to use that speed to get into positions to,receive, I am not sure he displays the awareness and agression to use that speed to close down the oppo in our d50 by going in and making the hard play.
1 Like
Ok, I think if he gets some continuity with full game time and plays within his abilities he will be of value to the team and I think we got a bit of a taste of that last night.
Regarding playing within your ability, It’s something that Brad seems to have instilled in to a number of players and it’s definitely paying off.
I think he’s very useful depth.
6 Likes
Sounds like 60% of the match day thread.
6 Likes
Heppell.
He had a very good game. I’m not sure why Blitzers are saying his first half was bad; is the pass bar never being beaten? Hind did exactly what you want from your 24-26th player on the list. Came in and played a role. Too many Blitzers focus on a mistake here and there. Hind is no world beater, but he’s solid depth who combines some potent weapons with some areas of weakness. His versatility makes him always a viable option as the sub.
3 Likes
I hear what you are saying, and I don’t know what it is, Zerk had it too.
They have their strengths … but always look like a dumb mistake waiting to happen.
I would just like to,see them wipe that from their CV, and become dependable and reliable and a stupid mistake be out of character, rather that … you know ….
There you go it happened again
1 Like
Zerk has been playing quality football for two to three years. If he was playing with McKay he’d be a rock right now.
2 Likes
Agree to disagree
Didn’t like his selection against GWS for Duursma. Happy that his inclusion was actually very correct! Played his role really well.
1 Like
While l thought Hind’s second half was excellent, it was only after watching the replay that l saw how influential he was also in the first half. He got involved in the play very early on and stayed switched on, as in he didn’t go missing or become ineffectual as he sometimes can. Just as importantly he had zero brain fades.
1 Like
We are fortunate that we have Heppell who was able to perform to a fairly good standard on a wing opposed to Kelly. Imagine having the depth to play Josh Kelly on a wing(!)
Hind
Setterfield
Shiel
Laverde
All excellent depth players. That standard of depth is exactly what you want
7 Likes
It makes you reflect on the fact that not all that long ago guys like Brayden Ham was toggling between starting wingman and being our go to depth.
7 Likes
Yeah when you go back to, say, 2021 and look at some of the names playing most games, and how little experience some of the players who are still around had, it’s possible that more has changed than just mindset.
1 Like
Sounds harsh but he’s going to have to play at that level to get a game going forwards, because you have Ridley, Reid, Tsatas and even Shiel and Setterfield competing for a few spots it makes performance important, which is good for everyone.