hahaha…yeah, I’ve had the same thing. It really is annoying at the footy when that happens. Some people go on and farkin on about our players you just have wonder why the fark they are there. You can take it from opposing supporters, because you can give it back - but when it’s your own - what the fark do you do?
3 Likes
Try to…ummm…educate them?
Straight Razor?? 
1 Like
So, are we ready to call Hooker back a failure and move him back forward? Please?
Sure, he’s shutting down a player. And he’s a calm head down back. And that is it. He’s not clunking. He’s not driving rebound. He’s doing what Dea is being criticised for and shutting a player out. Which is fine. I’m a HUGE fan of defenders defending.
Except we’ve got this huge frigging hole in the forward line that is Hooker shaped. His absence has hurt our small forwards and forced secondary tall forwards as the main men. Rance last week (with help by us not manning defenders up) and Andrews this week dominated the air. Our goal tally is way down. We have no real tall structure. Look at our inefficiency turning attacks into goals this week. Last year we were one of the best.
I said all along the issue wasn’t that Hooker wouldn’t be good back. It was that we could replace him down back with less of a loss than we could up forward. Well, Hartley and Francis dominated at VFL level. And with Hooker not clunking, even Hartley would have similar impact.
While up forward we’re forcing McKernan and Brown (and before that Stewart) to lead the clunking. Not very well.
Move him forward. And let the forward line work again!
6 Likes
I think the failure comes from the weird decision that he has to be locked into either end of the ground.
He’s capable at either end, and he adds value to the team at either end. The question becomes of course, which end of the ground does he add more value?
That’s different every week, sometimes it’s different within a game. So why don’t we use him that way? Yesterday, we bombed long into our forwards who didn’t look like taking a contested mark, while Hooker was minding… Who, McStay? Mitch Brown could’ve easily handled McStay, while Hooker would have made our forward line look very different. And it’s not like the switch would have been a stretch for them, they both started the year playing up the other end.
I haven’t seen that much of Port this year, just a couple of games including the one against us live. But from what I saw, they use Justin Westoff in a way that I reckon we should use Hooker. Sometimes he’s the loose / interceptor in the backline, sometimes he’s creating a tough matchup forward. (sometimes he rucks, too, but I wouldn’t suggest that here.) It can often depend on how a game / quarter / ten minute period is going.
Hooker’s versatility and ability to adapt are assets that we just don’t seem to exploit enough, imo.
8 Likes
If pressure is applied further up the ground then the backman look like millionaires.
Hooker was very good I thought.
1 Like
Yep, and McGovern didn’t… for a similar reason.
2 Likes
Took a lot of intercept marks last night. Was a good game in defence, apart from one or two brain explosions.
2 Likes
Give it back to them as well. Hooker has been outstanding.
2 Likes
This guy is a star.
1 Like
Killed Brown. Would be AA if he played the whole year back
2 Likes
I’m interested in how people saw this yesterday.
The bottom line is, he kept the best Forward in the game to 2 goals in a shoutout. And he killed him one on one, like he does everyone. (He is the best aerial contested player in the game imo)
But… He had a lot of help - maybe a bit too much help - from Hurley, Ambrose and in particular Dea, who saved Hooker’s butt a number of times by plugging the space in front of Brown.
The midfield pressure was also sufficient enough that Brown never got too many lace out balls to lead straight at. And on the few occasions that he did, he seemed to make 40m on Cale in the blink of an eye.
So, as I’m as big of a fan of Hooker as anybody, and particularly as a defender, I’m interested how others saw his game yesterday. (And not in the context of ‘forward or back,’ just this particular game.)
Because I think he was very fortunate to only concede 2 goals.
2 Likes
Brown is near on the best tall forward in the Comp right now, certainly the most consistent even if not the most mercurial or explosive. But he’s a one trick pony. He’s quick off the mark and on the lead is almost impossible to spoil out in front. Yesterday we did a good job of denying him that trick by filling space in front of him and forcing slower/pressured entries. We were fortunate that he also missed some opportunities he would otherwise have taken. Pretty good result though and I thought Hooker played him pretty well mostly.
2 Likes
his numbers stack up in spite of spending the 1st month in the forward half. good chance for AA.
I see it as a massive positive.
Our defence and others should be working as a team to stop the most dangerous forwards. There may be an argument that there was too much focus allowing wood and Cunnington to get easy goals, but that’s downplaying that those two players are pretty good too.
5 years ago we relied on our best players to overcome the deficiencies of others to win. Hooker, Hurley and Watson would win games by themselves.
This new look bombers is slowly but surely moving towards a team ethos which is very pleasing. Work as a team to both stop our opponents best players but also play to our own strengths and weaknesses.
I know your comment is probably directed more at does Hooker need too much help. But a team effort to stop the games best forward is ok by me. Especially considering the intercept ability of Gleeson, Francis and Ridley to add to the back 6 next year.
6 Likes
Settle down, Brown is a very average forward and will not be in the team when Daniher gets back.
3 Likes
Assumes sarcastica…
1 Like
Oh, I certainly didn’t see it as a negative. I just felt we put a great deal of focus into specifically stopping Brown kicking goals, which makes Hooker’s individual game look a bit better than it was.
I’m watching the replay now, and I reckon every first quarter goal North got was a result of us going overkill on Brown.
But Hooker has also done some big defensive efforts too.
2 Likes
Yep agree that they had too much of a focus. That was probably the teams instructions though.
One of the most pleasing things yesterday was there was obvious changes to be made after the first quarter. Too much space in Nths forward line. Goldys dominance. Higgins and Cunnington getting off the chain. After quarter time we addressed all of them.
1 Like
I know, right?
It’s quite something.
2 Likes