Nice to see young Tom Fields get his chance ...he can clearly roost the footy...can he play the game??? Lot of responsibility on the HBF with their quick half forwards...read Edwards...fingers crossed...Good Luck Boy
I agree. The lad doesn't just kick well, he links up well and often gets a lot of the ball. He is a bit dubious against a strong marking option, especially a really big one. He doesn't just bomb the ball, but hits chests at 50+ m with a quick kick, not a thing that spends 2 centuries in the air.
Last round was ordinary in a lot of ways, but we were very brave and could have won the game with better kicking and some good luck. I was afraid we would have few voters, but that does not seem to be the case at all. This time last year only 7 people voted and they were not happy. This time, we had 16 voters. The rating was lower: after all, we lost. However, the rating (7.77) represented a C-, which compares well to our efforts earlier in the season. Thank you to everyone who spent the time to vote.
The Votes: Round 14: Carlton vs. Western Bulldogs Tuohy, Zach 357 Murphy, Marc 233 Armfield, Dennis 129 Graham, Nick 121 Jamison, Michael 119 Buckley, Dylan 61 Cripps, Patrick 51 Bell, Tom 41 White, Simon 22 Simpson, Kade 19 Curnow, Edward 5 Holman, Nick 5 Everitt, Andrejs 2
There wasn't a big spread of votes this time. Almost everyone had Tuohy as our best. 3rd, 4th and 5th ratings were very close. It is the first time this season, and I think the 1st time ever, that Zac Tuohy was our BOG. An impressive effort.
The Progressive Votes: 1793 - Cripps, Patrick (0) 1764 - Murphy, Marc (0) 1451 - Bell, Tom (0) 1369 - Docherty, Sam (0) 1010 - Simpson, Kade (0) 872 - Judd, Chris (0) 672 - Tuohy, Zach (0) 613 - Curnow, Edward (0) 549 - Everitt, Andrejs (0) 468 - Armfield, Dennis (0) 445 - Wood, Cameron (0) 401 - Henderson, Lachie (0) 337 - White, Simon (0) 337 - Rowe, Sam (0) 325 - Casboult, Levi (0) 286 - Carrazzo, Andrew (0) 250 - Graham, Nick (0) 163 - Gibbs, Bryce (0) 137 - Kreuzer, Matthew (0) 125 - Yarran, Chris (0) 122 - Tutt, Jason (0) 119 - Jamison, Michael (0) 118 - Buckley, Dylan (0) 89 - Menzel, Troy (0) 87 - Walker, Andrew (0) 14 - Byrne, Ciaran (0) 12 - Jones, Liam (0) 10 - Holman, Nick (0) 9 - Dick, Matthew (0) 5 - Jaksch, Kristian (0) 4 - Boekhorst, Blaine (0) 3 - Warnock, Robert (0) 2 - Ellard, David (0)
It is very close at the top at the moment between Cripps and Murphy, with only a handful of votes separating them out. Bell and Docherty remain in 3rd and 4th spots. We still have a lot of very good players who are well down the leader board. Hopefully that can change as the season progresses.
B:Byrne Jaksch McGuinness HB: Johnston Rowe Wilkinson C:Viojo Dick Russell HF: Bransgrove Jones Boekhorst F:Watson Foster Johnson R: Aurrichio Whiley Walsh Int: Wilson Kilpatrick Ballard Cattapan Soncin Smith Strachan Armitage Mattingly*
Richmond
B: Kruse Gale Barlow HB: Aarts Wall Wynne C: Arnot Thomas Menadue HF: McQualter Lennon McDonough F: McBean McKenzie Astbury R: Soldo Cachia Knights Int: Mcfarlane Dunkley Mellington* Scott Gleeson L. Conca Rippon Clay Mugavin
Very good to see Byrne finally named. Given the way they have not played him when he was expected to play, he is probably fit enough to really play. We have at least 3 guys who are not yet good wet weather players: Jones, Watson and Smith. Of those, Smith may some day be reasonable in the wet, but I wouldn't argue for it at this point.
Good news for a change: we are on TV this Saturday from 1200 to 1500 on Channel 7. About time! The game is set for Cramer St and the forecast is about as ordinary as it could get.
Maric is out, which will help us hugely. Cotchin got off: I am not sure how. Schultz got nothing. Gibbs must be thinking what we all are: we were screwed.
I don't think that the gameplan would make any difference. Watson doesn't work hard enough and doesn't have the attributes to be a KPP (and that's a complete turnaround from my opinion at the start of the season). He is a bit like Jones really.
Rowe was recruited as a key forward but I don't think that he can read the play well enough to be a success as a forward. He is a lot better as a defender because his opponent gets him to the right spots . . . most of the time.
I really would give Watson a chance under our present game plan. It is working more effectively, so one can never know. I doubt he is going to make it at this point, because you are right: he doesn't work hard enough. But I would give him a chance and not just one week.
Rowe wasn't THAT bad a forward, in the SANFL. He also did his share of ruck work. He was found wanting in that role at AFL level, and he wasn't the first under that game style either. His first half season in defence was a shocker, but he has improved in that role hugely. By the start of 2014 you worried about the fumbles, but not about how he played the game. By the end of 2014 he was our best tall defender. He still needs to improve as he tends to fumbles too often: taking his eyes off the ball? Reaction time not quite right? Whatever.
Rowe appears willing to do the hard yards to make it. Watson hasn't been so far. Jones is the interesting question. He has demonstrated that he can be very handy, but his best and his worst are too far apart and his worst is on display most of the time. We have given him a 3 year contract: that is a serious error in judgment. Don't know what we can do about that.
Back to back 6 days breaks with both games at Etihad, there will be a lot of sore boys. I really hope they don't play Cripps, give the kid a chance - would be horrified if they play him sore and he rips the ligament completely and needs an ankle reco
I hate playing partly fit players. I don't think we need to risk Cripps: we are not going to play finals. But I seem to be in the minority with that opinion. I guess the medical staff will determine that issue. Hopefully.
As for Richmond, they have a couple of guys who should be suspended. However, as they do not wear Blue guernseys that is unlikely to occur. We have lost guys for 1 or 2 weeks with similar incidents, but .... Maric could argue the same way: he should go, but will he? I am not worried about it. If we are to play well against them, I'd rather beat their ones, not their twos. And I would like to make an impression against the guys who did well against us last time, even though we shut down most of their better players.
If Henderson wants to go, there would be little opposition, but he'll probably stay because he can't pack mark to save his life and he plays one reasonable game, and goes missing in the rest And the other clubs know it!!!
I thought you were agreeing to a comment about Watto but then I read the bit about playing "one reasonable game" and re-read the previous comment.
BTW - I agree about Hendo - he is not much of a contested mark when opponents are trying to spoil him but he can take some contested marks.
Hendo took more contested marks at CHB. He usually had the composure to punch in situation here he wasn't sure of the result. Up forward he is the one who has to take the grabs and that doesn't happen as much as he would want. That is why we have Levi, but he doesn't have the body work or the ability to read the play like Hendo does.
Team: C Bad kicking is bad football and we kicked very poorly. Especially for goal. I thought the umpiring was incredible. I don’t think I have ever seen such a performance. We had 5 frees for the night in general play and 3 on the fulls. I find that illogical.
Votes: [2.5] Tuohy [2] Murphy [1.5] Armfield [1.5] Jamison [1.5] Bell [1.5] Buckley [1] Graham [1] Curnow [1] Simpson [0.5] Cripps [0.5] White [0.5] Everitt
Explanations: [2.5] Tuohy: Brilliant for most of the night. Took marks in defence and kicked much better than most. A really good game. [2] Murphy: Not as good as last week, but probably our most effective midfielder. [1.5] Armfield: Armfield played one of his best games. He took marks that he hasn’t tried to for years. If he had kicked straight he would have won us the game. [1.5] Jamison: Destroyed the Dogs forwards. [1.5] Bell: Solid game with some nice bursts through the packs. [1.5] Buckley: Excellent inn defence with his run and carry. His defensive work was much improved and his goal was one of the best of the year. [1] Graham: Stepping up nicely. [1] Curnow: Good at getting it and making it harder for his opponents to get it. [1] Simpson: Except for his kicking, which was much below par, his game was excellent. [0.5] Cripps: Deserved more votes, but his output went down when he was injured. [0.5] White: Very good in defence. [0.5] Everitt: When he went off our forward line stopped functioning. He took a couple of great marks and was really showing the Dogs that they made a mistake.
Honourable Mentions: Yarran: Almost vote worthy. Kreuzer: Brilliant early, but was well beaten after half time. Ran out of gas and couldn’t find the ball in the air. Wood: Tried his guts out and took some great marks. However, his influence waned to almost nothing after half time. Henderson: Worked hard.
Other Comments: [1] Umpiring: We really need to complain about this. This was just so bad that English doesn’t have a word to describe it adequately. Poorer than the Greek Economy. [2] I also find it incredible that Stringer was named in their best players with 10 possessions. The 3 goals hurt, but otherwise he was thrashed. He got half of his possessions in the period he was in the middle of the ground and provided zero as a forward, but for a 5 minute burst. His various opponents [3] Kicking for goal: that was just so bad.
Cripps and Everitt must be doubtful, and they are huge losses if they don't come up. Rowe should be right to return and Gibbs is available. As for the rest, who knows?
