Carlton Supporters Club

Quote from: age on March 28, 2014, 10:34:46 am

94% efficiency does not back that up.   Was good by foot and slick with his hands.   Broke the lines more times than i can remember.   Loved his game.  has the mongrel of his old man.

Really, you believe that stat?

The kid only had 18 possessions, 94% of 18 is 16.92.

Do you believe he only missed a target or bombed to a contest once?

I loved his game, but 94% from 18 possessions at AFL level, the kid would be on the front page as the next Gary Ablett (Jnr).

Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on March 28, 2014, 09:12:41 am

Quote from: Baggers on March 28, 2014, 08:29:39 am

Encouraging is that we can, as a group, eventually find the minerals to apply legitimate pressure and actually play some very good footy.

There was no pressure applied it was an open game that hinged on turnovers.

There was a period in the first qtr where we were delivering it to Tiggers players with surgeon like precision. I am certain when we had the ball, they just stood around and waited patiently for us to hand it over to them. It was embarrassing. Eliminate those turnovers and I am sure the game would have been different. Richmond are so overrated, top 4 my a hole.

Quote from: Thryleon on March 28, 2014, 10:03:59 am

Make no mistakes, we are a pretty ordinary outfit, with some patchwork players balancing out our ability to play a mix of talls and smalls, but we showed much more effort, ticker, workrate, and application than I have been able to be proud of over the last 14 years.  It wasnt about us being front runners last night either, it was simply grinding out contest after contest, and challenging and scrapping for each and every opportunity we could, and by the end of it, we had blokes getting off the leash and getting into dangerous positions, with some good ball use to get it to them.

There was no scrapping, it was an open game all night, we had to get our chance eventually, and we forked it up. No heart, Richmond are just useless.

Quote from: LP on March 28, 2014, 10:42:18 am

Quote from: age on March 28, 2014, 10:34:46 am

94% efficiency does not back that up.   Was good by foot and slick with his hands.   Broke the lines more times than i can remember.   Loved his game.  has the mongrel of his old man.

Really, you believe that stat?

The kid only had 18 possessions, 94% of 18 is 16.92.

Do you believe he only missed a target or bombed to a contest once?

I loved his game, but 94% from 18 possessions at AFL level, the kid would be on the front page as the next Gary Ablett (Jnr).

Even if he was 70%, that's well above AFL standard. The kid destroyed them, he reminded me of Yarran the way he took the game on. His disposal was excellent.

Spot on Agey, the kid is a star.

Was Buckley good enough to earn a rising star nod? He is just eligible. "To be eligible to be nominated for the award, a player must be younger than 21 years of age on 1 January of the award year and have played 10 or fewer senior games before the beginning of the season."

Was Buckley good enough to earn a rising star nod? He is just eligible. "To be eligible to be nominated for the award, a player must be younger than 21 years of age on 1 January of the award year and have played 10 or fewer senior games before the beginning of the season."

Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on March 28, 2014, 11:15:06 am

Spot on Agey, the kid is a star.

He did play well, I am not disputing that, but 94% really?

If you go by the CD stats they also list Curnow as best on ground!

The stats are at best rubbery assessments bent to suit the circumstance.

One thing I will say is how exciting it was to have another young gun out there. That's the only thing that really gets me going ATM.

It's more of a guideline as opposed to an exact science but the 94% does suggest he was great with ball in hand. i didn't notice any issues. I'm not willing to sit through that crap again and confirm.