As far as why I did it, I was curious because my perception of his game was very different from others. Many on the main review thread and here were singing his praises. I thought he was more in the “drop immediately” bracket. That’s a pretty big disconnect.
I said to HAP that if I watched it again I would record Gleeson’s involvements, I think on the Saturday. I then decided I would re-watch the game Sunday night, so I did what I said I would do and recorded Gleeson’s involvements. Frankly, I didn’t realise quite how onerous that process would be. It’s damn fiddly and time consuming! But I’d said I’d do it and I did.
Obviously some like CameronClayton think Gleeson had a good game. I saw it pretty differently. Some of the comments are open to interpretation. For example:
- I say Gleeson should have been able to block Wingard or slow him down before the third goal. I know HAP believes a lucky bounce did Gleeson in.
- I say Gleeson got beaten by Gray in the marking contest on the wing, with Gray turning his body and protecting the fall, only for Gray to fail to hold the mark. Others may disagree. Certainly Gray thought he should have been given a free (either for the contest or the subsequent tackle).
- Similarly, with that one that Wingard contested with Gleeson that went over the back and was cleared by McKenna, Gary and the umpire disagreed on if Gleeson held Wingard post mark or not. So there are two opinions. I thought it could have been paid as easily as not.
Different opinions are possible. But I’m feeling reasonably comfortable in my view he had an absolutely rubbish game, and that I’m not being unduly unfair on him. Most concerning, was that a number of the things that went wrong (e.g. being wrong footed and out-muscled) are a bit endemic in his game.