It is the morning after and we were ordinary. I wasn't starting off this thread last night after I drove back - I wasn't trusting the train after last week! In some ways we were back to the Malthouse days, but.... Time to mark our guys on a night where we showed that we really lack skill. Here it is. Poor out your feelings. We'll see how many want to vote this time around.
Remember: [1] At least 3 players need to get a mention. [2] No more than 10 votes for any one player. [3] Give a rating of team performance. It can be anywhere from A+ to F. [4] Votes must add up to 15.
Well, after last night's debacle there is plenty of chance for promotion for anyone willing to step up. We do have a much better side on the park this week, but looking at us last night and we seem to have forgotten how to win in harsh conditions. Anyone going today, my hat is off to you.
Poor shots from Smith, Clarke & Voges, gave their wickets away. Smith & Clarke obviously trying to target Ali (which is a good move.....if they really put pressure on his bowling, can the Poms afford to play him as a specialist # 8 ?), but they just gifted him two wickets instead !
And yes....for the life of me, on a ground this size why the heck would you have Johnson 3/4 the way to the boundary ?......with these bats anything even half hit will carry over his head.
Watson & Haddin, your turn now. Need another 150.
Looks like their plans and egos got in the road of sensible thinking. Giving away wickets is always a sin, but especially on the flat pitch.
So, what is Yarran's problem this year? Someone said they knew what 'ails' him....?
I wish I knew. His form has been reasonable, but not outstanding. He has been brought close to goal as often as the opposition can manage it: it reduces his effectiveness.
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.