How come you only turn up when we lose?
And why are there 3 player’s threads you haven’t posted in yet today?
2 Likes
It took too long for Worsfold to make the switch back to defence, it was clear from very early on that Hooker wasn’t working forward.
He was essentially one out as a marking target inside 50, which was always gonna make it difficult for him.
Does any one know what his sleeve was for?
2 Likes
Should never have went forward in the first place.
Lost all structure down back and not surprised we got smashed.
There wasn’t really much other option once Smack pulled out.
3 Likes
Him being back or forward doesn’t change that in the slightest. The midfield were the problem and our back were getting reamed by ball movement. Our structure was lost because of the midfield not because of Hooker forward.
5 Likes
Hooksy looks like he is being held together by sticky-tape, Bruce Reid style.
I kinda feel that if we didn’t have so many injuries to big guys, he’d be sitting out at the moment.
12 Likes
He’s COOKED
1 Like
When your back is that of an 80 year old man and you’re playing solely to get the team over the line because you’re riddled with injuries, you can’t expect the poor dude to move.
He’s heart is bigger than Phar Laps. He’d be on the sidelines if we had talks as spares
Hartley is too defensive as a defender and should never be matched up with Ambrose.
Hartley should have played forward and Hooker stay back.
So you reckon the too defensive guy should have played forward?
4 Likes
At least we would have been sturdy down back.
Today we were terrible forward and back.
The way Hooksy is moving, I don’t reckon he’d have had much affect either end today.
That I can agree with.
He looks shot at the moment.
Hurley has been a huge loss.
Despite Blitz hating him.
Blitz hates everyone, … and everything at one time or another.
1 Like
Exactly. Our tall backs did fine. Out of 19 goals only 4 came from their talls. And they kicked (I believe) 14 goals from set shots, so they weren’t crumbing it either. The run of their smalls and our midfield (lack of) pressure killed us.
Up forward, those of us calling for Hooker forward weren’t saying instead of Smack, we were saying in addition to. Hooker had the same issues Smack has had with entry by our mids and double teaming. But fundamentally their small backs worked harder. Hooker brought it to ground plenty of times only for Port to have spare backs collect the crumbs and waltz it out. That wasn’t Hooker’s fault.
I’d also note that when he went back we only kicked one more goal for the game.
3 Likes
Disagree.
Both Hurley and Hooker win the ball by intercepting, whether that’s in the air or in the ground which allows our half backs the confidence to run off their men.
With Hartley and Ambrose you are getting two stoppers that are mostly used to halve the contest and stop the or opposing player. Hartley in particular just brings the ball to ground which keeps ports small players in the contest.
Interceptions are not only the best form of defence but also the start of your attacking play.
Gleeson has a shocker also which didn’t help.
1 Like
Without Redmond Port scores would have been much higher sand should have been.
They thrashed us pretty much all over the ground.
I give stringer and possibly Merrett pass and that’s about it.
We allowed Port 8 goals that were started from our f50. That’s a ridiculously high amount.
We were easy to play against.
3 Likes
I assumed it was some sort of fashion statement, like a half-baked Madonna tribute or something.
Then, when he put that set shot out on the full, I was convinced he’d gone the whole hog and started wearing a Madonna style eye patch as well.
Really? Stringer was no where for most of the game with only a couple of patches and Zerrett was a turnover merchant who not once stopped his opponent.
I am going to be harsher, none of the senior team get a pass mark.
3 Likes