Hawthorn is the only team that destroyed us in 2013. We usually do well with inside 50's,though usually not as efficient as we should be. The Hawks beat us on this count by about 20 or 25. The number one aim is to get a similar amount of inside 50 entries.
How did they look this weekend? I didn't see them play...
Ordinary. Still won comfortably though. We can beat them but need to bring our A+ game.
Roughhead will rest easier with him out, but we would have been a good chance for two finals games if not for all last years BS. Appeal the decision on this basis and take them to court when they say no I say. Do you think we could get an urgent hearing ?IN: MELKSHAM
I dont care he's suspended.
Who on earth would call for Hardingham's omission.
He would have been in the club's best 10 players on the night.
Crazy talk.
I for one would like to know who else could have spent a half performing an effective forward role and then shifted onto Thomas, a speedy marking player who was on fire, in a crucial shut down role. Some of Hardy's critics might enlighten me.
On Hardingham, he directly coughed up 3 goals. That is fact. As aforementioned this kept North in touch. He is a super competitor and versatile. Could kill us in a final or big game though...
On Hardingham, he directly coughed up 3 goals. That is fact. As aforementioned this kept North in touch. He is a super competitor and versatile. Could kill us in a final or big game though...
This is bull****, I watched the replay today and 2 of his 3 errors we recovered the ball straight back. So your fact is wrong.
On Hardingham, he directly coughed up 3 goals. That is fact. As aforementioned this kept North in touch. He is a super competitor and versatile. Could kill us in a final or big game though...
This is bull****, I watched the replay today and 2 of his 3 errors we recovered the ball straight back. So your fact is wrong.
Rubbish.
Who on earth would call for Hardingham's omission.
He would have been in the club's best 10 players on the night.
Crazy talk.
I for one would like to know who else could have spent a half performing an effective forward role and then shifted onto Thomas, a speedy marking player who was on fire, in a crucial shut down role. Some of Hardy's critics might enlighten me.
Hardingham played one of his better games. Nine marks is a solid effort, but I don't think he would be in our top ten. The criticism goes towards his kicking. He caused more turn overs than anyone that resulted in goals.
The wheel turns in this game, and I suspect it is about to turn this coming Friday night.
Yes, yes, I am fully aware how comprehensively they have dismantled us the last 3 meetings, and that Buddy didn’t play in 2 of those.
We have not been able to handle their slick and precise ball movement (particularly by foot).
Last years disappointment can be partly explained by the players meeting earlier in the week with that c*nt Finnis, even though we were actually playing for top spot that night.
The clashes in '11/'12 were at a time when we were beginning to faulter badly, through injury/fitness & confidence.
Playing them early this year will prove a godsend.
We have a few out, but they have many more.
Like all other recent seasons, it looks like we are primed at the start of the year.
Most players looked sharp the other night.
Stants was a fraction below his base output, but that’s OK, he may cash in this week.
I wasn’t too concerned with Hibberd.Was beaten by a guy who should have been AA last year, who is in red hot form.
Still thought he did some good work for us.
The midfield is purring, and we bat very deep.
Most of those who rest forward are capable of kicking multiple goals (Watson, Goddard, Zaharakis, Howlett).
Given the inability ATM to play 2 genuine rucks, therefore have a resting ruckman, I think the balance is perfect with Hardy and Ambrose complimenting the 2 talls in Daniher and Carlisle.
Going to be difficult for the Hawks to plan against our forwardline.
Chappy probably already has them a little spooked.
They’d want to have a decent opponent for Watson and Goddard when they are resting down there.
I wonder if they will punt on Birchall to take Daniher, and try to run off him.
Gibson would have been reasonably comfortable playing on Hurley.Now, he’ll probably have to play on a genuine marking player in the 200cm Carlisle.He’ll be giving away 11cm, and considerable reach.Good luck pretty boy !
It appears that neither Stratton or Shoenmakers will be ready, so probably Spangher or one of the kids will be promoted for our game.
In our defence, I like the generally agreed match up of Hooker on Roughy, Fletch on the resting ruck, and Hurley following Gunstan up the ground.
Bags on Breust is a no brainer, and possibly Pig on Rioli.
We won’t make the same mistake of last year.Hocking will go to Mitchell (not Isaac Smith).
They will have some sort of run with player for Watson, and one of Zaharakis/Stanton.
Zaka was most impressive the other night with his movement.For this reason, I believe he will get some attention.Which means Stants has to get on his bike and get 30+(and snag 1 or 2).Something he has done many times against the Hawks.
IMO, Winderlich will come in for Zerrett as the SUB.
A full game in the 2’s won’t harm Zac, and Winders experience could be telling late in the 3rd qtr and last.
Gleeson will play, I reckon.
He was impressive and whilst Dempsey is out, we could use another HB with speed and smarts.
Look… I’m a realist.If the Hawks come to play, and are in tip top form, they may be too good.
However, it is imperative that we close the gap against them.
I can live with a 3-4 goal margin.If it blows out to 7, i’ll be very disappointed.
We can win this week.
For all the reasons I have listed above.
2 and zip leading into the Carlscum game (who could be 0-2).
Make it happen footy Gods !
On Hardingham, he directly coughed up 3 goals. That is fact. As aforementioned this kept North in touch. He is a super competitor and versatile. Could kill us in a final or big game though...
This is bull****, I watched the replay today and 2 of his 3 errors we recovered the ball straight back. So your fact is wrong.
Rubbish.
like your predictions about us not being a chance against North?
I highly doubt they would put Birchall on Daniher because if the ball is kicked anywhere near Daniher where he can get a hand to it, Daniher will mark it, plain and simple. He has excellent hands does Daniher.
Birchall wouldn’t get the chance to run off him as he would already have been beaten in the contest.
The key to beating the Hawks is to spread the forward line so that they can’t help one another and effect each contest.
This is a lot harder said than done however as their midfield is so good at running back and filling in holes.
We need to move the ball quickly and effectively which will require a lot of focus and composure. I think we can match it with the big boys this year, it is just a matter of doing it now.
It'll never happen and probably shouldn't for the good of developing a structure in the team, but if that structure was already sound, this would be the week to play hurley forward.
Hooker will get Roughy and Fletch can play off a resting ruckman but Hurley isn't a great matchup for anyone this week.
Pears is a better matchup against Gunston and Hurley as third tall would seriously ■■■■ with the Hawks.
That said I'll repeat I doubt it will happen, and it's probably better to keep Hurley in his designated role for a while before ■■■■■■■ with things.
I'll be interested to see how the defense matches up. Hurley isn't quick enough for Gunston and Gunston will run Fletch all over the field. Hibberd can cover Gunston but that leaves us with an extra tall and a lot of running for Hibberd still coming back off a hamstring
Agree with Marty. Hardingham twice screwed up trying to centre the ball. One went straight down for a goal, but the other didn't. So I don't know which other two goals your talking about. Would hate to know what you thought of Hibberds game.Rubbish.This is bull****, I watched the replay today and 2 of his 3 errors we recovered the ball straight back. So your fact is wrong.On Hardingham, he directly coughed up 3 goals. That is fact. As aforementioned this kept North in touch. He is a super competitor and versatile. Could kill us in a final or big game though...
Hardingham is a good tryer and seems a reasonable bloke but he is a bad kick and as such won't ever make it into our best 22. Don't make excuses for it and say kick xyz is his "bad kick". Don't think we are not trying to groom his replacement ASAP. I actually would sign him on a 5 year contract as a terrific depth backman (I say that as an expression, you know what I mean), but for me he needs to be replaced quickly.
Gibson under report
Anyone see it? What are the odds? Would love him to get rubbed out if for nothing else but the fact that he is my most hated player in the AFL along with Buddy
Depth backman? No thanks.Hardingham is a good tryer and seems a reasonable bloke but he is a bad kick and as such won't ever make it into our best 22. Don't make excuses for it and say kick xyz is his "bad kick". Don't think we are not trying to groom his replacement ASAP. I actually would sign him on a 5 year contract as a terrific depth backman (I say that as an expression, you know what I mean), but for me he needs to be replaced quickly.
I reckon Ambrose is gonna skittle their crappy backline with Lake out and the crumbers will have a field day. We just need to keep it down there.
No it's not. He can kick though, but it's the short kick off no forward movement that he regularly shanks low and to his left. That kick should be deleted from his repertoire.
The guy can not kick.Who on earth would call for Hardingham's omission.
He would have been in the club's best 10 players on the night.
Crazy talk.
I am a fan of his but his kicking cost us two goals. That's not acceptable