Daisy ruled out with a cough cough chest infection.
Daisy ruled out with a cough cough chest infection.
Must've spread from his foot? O:-)
It sounds like we're playing a team with not a lot more experience than the Lions did the other night. Now that game didn't go well for the Lions. Hopefully we can show a bit more than they did.
Daisy ruled out with a cough cough chest infection.
Must've spread from his foot? O:-)
Athletes lung???
It sounds like we're playing a team with not a lot more experience than the Lions did the other night. Now that game didn't go well for the Lions. Hopefully we can show a bit more than they did.
Be good for a lot of these kids to experience first hand a hard side like the Kangabies.
It sounds like we're playing a team with not a lot more experience than the Lions did the other night. Now that game didn't go well for the Lions. Hopefully we can show a bit more than they did.
Norf aren't exactly Hawthorn.
It sounds like we're playing a team with not a lot more experience than the Lions did the other night. Now that game didn't go well for the Lions. Hopefully we can show a bit more than they did.
It will be a good opportunity for our young guys to stand up and show some mettle and put their hand up for regular games throughout the season.
Daisy ruled out with a cough cough chest infection.
Already stated he will play the following week against the crows in R2.
Perhaps thats all it is?
You'd think if they had any doubts over his ankle they would've said ages ago that he'd be eased into the season and miss a lot of the pre-season games anyway. The fact they named him in R1 shows he has to be there or thereabouts.
It sounds like we're playing a team with not a lot more experience than the Lions did the other night. Now that game didn't go well for the Lions. Hopefully we can show a bit more than they did.
It will be a good opportunity for our young guys to stand up and show some mettle and put their hand up for regular games throughout the season.
Agreed, there's plenty of experience in the squad still - Waite, Gibbs, Murphy, Yarran, Walker, Everitt, McLean, Curnow, Wood, Warnock, 2E, Army, Robbo, even Lucas and Watto have a few games/seasons under their belts...
Yep, a good test for the newcomers - Cripps, I'm especially keen to see in action.
No question their lists looks stronger but I can't see a Hawks style belting.
Daisy ruled out with a cough cough chest infection.
Must've spread from his foot? O:-)
Should be back for round 5 or 6 ;)
Daisy ruled out with a cough cough chest infection.
Must've spread from his foot? O:-)
Athletes lung???
Yep, an X-ray revealed the problem ;)
(http://eorif.com/AnkleFoot/ImagesAnkleFoot/Foot-obliq.jpg)
Only joking!
Game day!
It's been a while...
Daisy ruled out with a cough cough chest infection.
Must've spread from his foot? O:-)
Athletes lung???
Yep, an X-ray revealed the problem ;)
(http://eorif.com/AnkleFoot/ImagesAnkleFoot/Foot-obliq.jpg)
Only joking!
Wow! No wonder he's coughing... imagine having that stuck in your chest :o
C'mon Blues , happy to be down by 4 goals at 3/4 time to come back and win by a point, just to re-open the scars from last year. >:D
We have that many fringe players and blokes playing for their footballing careers in 2014 that this game will be fantastic for them.
Guys Im talking about include, but are not limited to - Lucas, Buckley, Ellard, Watson, Rowe, Casboult, McInnes, Bootsma, White. Temay can be adde to that group also. Big, big year for these blokes and tonight is as good a time as any to show what they are made of. Are they good enough? Are they hungry enough?
Yep great chance for the fringe players to shine and cement a spot in the side for round 1.
No Blaine Johnson, Tom Temay or Luke Reynolds they've been dropped from the squad. Nick Graham and Armfield to start as subs
Kenny looking good.
Scores please Foxtel watchers!!!
Carlton Reserves 21
Full strength North 15
It's live on SEN.
WHO IS kENNY?
Everitt
Kenny Everrit... Kicked 2 also set up a shot for Waite. Looks big, strong and mobile.
Buckley has been lively in the back half
Kenny has 3... could be the next Warren Ralph.
Gonzo Everitt !!
Rowe ain't the answer at full back
Menzel... very classy.
Kenny Everrit... Kicked 2 also set up a shot for Waite. Looks big, strong and mobile.
And all in the best po-ssible taste!
Watto has done some good stuff. Buckley too, Boots will be lucky to get games this year. Cripps likes a hard ball ball, and Menzel will come of age this year.
February observations so far :D
Blues 57
Roots 36
Carlton Reserves doing well.
Buckley, Watson, Bell, Menzel and Kenny have all done some nice things.
Not sure a Warnock/Wood ruck duo is going to be much fun to watch when the real stuff starts.
I'm enjoying the game thus far. The 2 W's (Watson and Wood) have done ok, as has the big E
stream somewhere guys?
my foxtel man is coming Thursday :(
Watto has done some good stuff. Buckley too, Boots will be lucky to get games this year. Cripps likes a hard ball ball, and Menzel will come of age this year.
February observations so far :D
Blues 57
Roots 36
Get the feeling that Boots card is already marked Goat. We just couldn't find him a trade last year - be surprised if he's still around after this year.
stream somewhere guys?
my foxtel man is coming Thursday :(
Thru, if you e got an ipad go AFL APP and watch it. You may have to subscribe a weekly which will cost you about 5 bucks, or monthly which will cost you about 15 bucks. I just pay the whole year at 89 bucks and gets me access till this time in 2015.
Watto has done some good stuff. Buckley too, Boots will be lucky to get games this year. Cripps likes a hard ball ball, and Menzel will come of age this year.
February observations so far :D
Blues 57
Roots 36
Get the feeling that Boots card is already marked Goat. We just couldn't find him a trade last year - be surprised if he's still around after this year.
Cookie, I agree with you. TBH I'm not enjoying watching him lope around out there
Everitt is picking himself in our best 22.
Menzel will be hard to keep out of it.
Watson has just about cemented himself in the backline and will allow Hendo to play up forward.
Wood is brilliant get for Mick and co at the bargain basement price of a rookie pick and is doing better than i expected.
Buckley is showing pace and agro, only a little bloke, but is a pure footballer.
Some bigger blokes who are not footballers and would not make my best 22 at present are Bell and Robbo. All heart, no skill/brains.
Reckon there will be some pretty decent players on our list who will not be guaranteed a game. Curnow, Cachia, Bell, Robinson, Graham, Cripps, Armfield, Buckley and Lucas are all fighting for 2 spots on the bench by my reckoning.
X2 @ Kruddler
Everitt is picking himself in our best 22.
Menzel will be hard to keep out of it.
Watson has just about cemented himself in the backline and will allow Hendo to play up forward.
Wood is brilliant get for Mick and co at the bargain basement price of a rookie pick and is doing better than i expected.
Buckley is showing pace and agro, only a little bloke, but is a pure footballer.
Some bigger blokes who are not footballers and would not make my best 22 at present are Bell and Robbo. All heart, no skill/brains.
Reckon there will be some pretty decent players on our list who will not be guaranteed a game. Curnow, Cachia, Bell, Robinson, Graham, Cripps, Armfield, Buckley and Lucas are all fighting for 2 spots on the bench by my reckoning.
That's a very good sign Krudds, makes my heart lift!
Nice goal from Bell there Krudds.
Although I think Bell might be ok
But FM that attempt to spoil from Boots was weak
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-02-15/fresh-faces-lift-blues (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-02-15/fresh-faces-lift-blues)
Nice win, more mature bodies were able to mount a comeback at the end of the game for North but I'd like to know how a North defender can wrap up Waite and have another come over the top every time.
Cameron Wood, good insurance can go forward take a grab and kick a goal, just like I said when we rookie him. Good pickup.
Everitt, nice first half read the ball well as a forward and provided a bit of run from back when in space but looked like a stunned mullet a couple of times in traffic. Good pick up.
Dylan Buckley played with real aggression and purpose on a very good opponent and did not look out of place, nice wheels and good kicking.
Troy Menzel played hard and with skill, like what he has to offer.
Tom Bell best game in a navy blue jumper, took the game on when he hard space, offloaded the ball when he didn't.
Matthew Watson - very good down back in the first half, pushed forward in the 3rd quarter and which left Rowe at Full Back.......
Sam Rowe - DUD! bad hands, little awareness and not quick enough.
Robbo - GUN! Better decision making early with fatigue saw a bit of the old Robbo kicks but an improvement on 2013.
As a team I was impressed, tackled well and with purpose, every man was looking to shepperd for team mates and when we got into space we looked very good.
A promising start seeing North was at near full strength and we were missing some serious pieces.
Can I add that I'm sick and tired of this Kangaroo love, they are front runners, sooks and snipers just like their coach was. The commentators were all over North from the first bounce and Cam Mooney hasn't has a nice thing to say about us ever. His comment to Andrew Swallow who he was speaking to the whole game was when your boys run over the top of Carlton in the last, then he had to change what he said, made me sick.
Aye Raydan, can't imaging North will be happy with that effort.
If Walker had kicked that regulation goal midway through the third it would have been 43 points and potentially a blow out.
Our lads will take a lot of confidence from that run today.....
Can I add that I'm sick and tired of this Kangaroo love, they are front runners, sooks and snipers just like their coach was. The commentators were all over North from the first bounce and Cam Mooney hasn't has a nice thing to say about us ever. His comment to Andrew Swallow who he was speaking to the whole game was when your boys run over the top of Carlton in the last, then he had to change what he said, made me sick.
Yep, the SEN guys are North lovers, they were very hard to listen to too - not much brain matter in that group.
BTW I think Walker has done a hammy, again with the North love from Foxtel it wasn't looked at all that hard but when he came off he felft for the back of his leg and didn't look too impressed when he went to the rooms.
Just got back from the game - about 8000 people saw Blues seconds look pretty good for two and a half quarters.
A few observations.
Everett - will play round 1. Is definitely a flanker but boy he adds flexibility. Can take a mark, run, and has good skills.
Bell - will be a superstar if he learn to lower his eyes. Was our second best mid tonight.
McLean - was our best mid.
Cripps - did the tough things. Will take time to adjust to AFL tempo. Don't think he will play rnd 1
Casboult. Took a couple of great grabs and kicking looked a little better. Creates a contest every time he goes for a mark.
Buckley. Has a go but jury well and truly out given his body shape ...
Bootsma. Only if desperate.
Graham. Is Marc Murphy Mk II ... If only he was a little more aware. Think this kid can be really good with more exposure to top level.
Robinson. Always plays like there is no tomorrow. Skills still appalling.
Waite. Ran well. Didn't get the ball.
Yarran. Ordinary first half, better in the second. Played mainly down back. Suspect Mick is keeping him on a special program.
Gibbs. Better in the last quarter when the young guys faded.
Murphy. Great in first half, played forward a lot in 2nd.
Warnock. Will be no. 1 ruck all year. Beat Goldstein.
Wood. Good insurance based on tonight.
Walker. Turned it over a bit. Came off late in game.
Tuohy. Very good. 9-pt goal was a Crocker.
Cachia. Very good. He's ahead of Cripps, but behind Curnow and McLean.
Curnow. One of our best. Gut-running knows no bounds.
Rowe. Think has potential at CHB, or even FB. Probably only in case that a KPD gets injured.
Watson. Has progressed. Definitely will be first-choice CHB. Could be the one player who makes a huge difference to our year.
McInnes. Has the odd brain fade but can't challenge commitment.
Would be in front of White as third tall defender.
Ellard. One of our best in second half. Will play games this year.
Oh, and Menzel is going to be a superstar :)
Great summary thanks Slippery!
Heard some good news about the ability of Everitt. Sounds like a winner, and probably should have considered Tippett by the sounds of things too. I heard he kept Waite away from action.
Heard some good news about the ability of Everitt. Sounds like a winner, and probably should have considered Tippett by the sounds of things too. I heard he kept Waite away from action.
Only the WWE allows more holds than what Tippett did to Waite.
Heard some good news about the ability of Everitt. Sounds like a winner, and probably should have considered Tippett by the sounds of things too. I heard he kept Waite away from action.
Only the WWE allows more holds than what Tippett did to Waite.
Did see the game myself. Getting away with things the umpires should be spotting ? Did Waite play all of his game forward or did he get switched around ? Last but not least, are we really on a winner with Everitt as Elwood has been suggesting ? I'd hate to see him correct, I mean I'd love to see him get one right. ;)
Can I add that I'm sick and tired of this Kangaroo love, they are front runners, sooks and snipers just like their coach was. The commentators were all over North from the first bounce and Cam Mooney hasn't has a nice thing to say about us ever. His comment to Andrew Swallow who he was speaking to the whole game was when your boys run over the top of Carlton in the last, then he had to change what he said, made me sick.
Yep, the SEN guys are North lovers, they were very hard to listen to too - not much brain matter in that group.
Seriously puke-making commentary by a bunch of buffoons - I switched it off and followed the game on the AFL site - will watch the replay when available. Must buy a subscription to AFL TV tomorrow.
My observation after watching the game TWICE. Wood is a replacement for Hampson, by which we've lost nothing but gained a slightly better kick and a better tap to advantage.
And yeah, Menzel will be a star
Good effort considering I thought Gibbs, Muphy, Waite, Robbo and Yarran were all down. Credit to the newbies for their work.
No Judd, Kreuzer, Jammo, Hendo, Simmo, Carrots, Garlett and Thomas (if really fit) makes the North look pretty average.
Maybe better than good?
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-match-report/star-recruits-nick-dal-santo-and-andrejs-everitt-steal-the-show-20140215-32swy.html (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-match-report/star-recruits-nick-dal-santo-and-andrejs-everitt-steal-the-show-20140215-32swy.html)
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-match-report/star-recruits-nick-dal-santo-and-andrejs-everitt-steal-the-show-20140215-32swy.html (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-match-report/star-recruits-nick-dal-santo-and-andrejs-everitt-steal-the-show-20140215-32swy.html)
Even this report is pro North
Standouts for mine were Bell, Everitt and Cripps although not getting that much of it moved really well and seemed to not be a fumbler.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-match-report/star-recruits-nick-dal-santo-and-andrejs-everitt-steal-the-show-20140215-32swy.html (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-match-report/star-recruits-nick-dal-santo-and-andrejs-everitt-steal-the-show-20140215-32swy.html)
Even this report is pro North
You're not kidding. North, blistering, brilliant, Dal Santo walking on water, outrunning and out-possessing Carlton etc. etc. --- BUT, unfortunately losing! Bwahahaha! ::)
Reminder to self...must stop reading this sort of tripe.
I just got back from the game and have a few comments, as usual. This will probably end up as an essay, but.... ;D ;D
[1] Our forward line still needs a lot of work. Had we had a decent key forward on the night, we would have won by 10 goals. Casboult had a shocker, apart from 1 great mark, and Waite worked hard but had little effect on the game.
[2] It really was a practice match. We made a lot of position changes to try things out. For example, Andrew Walker was by far BOG in the first quarter across half back. But after half time he spent a lot of time up forward and had little influence. Similarly, Andreas Everitt kicked 3 early goals, but spent more time in defence on the night. He still did OK, but we lacked that guy to take a grab up forward, especially with the wind. Similarly, we took Tuohy off when he was close to BOG to give other guys a go. If the game was REALLY close, there is no way we would have taken him and Warnock off when we did.
[3] Rowe is a trier, but he is not a key defender. He did OK on Petrie in patches, but he gave very little drive from defence and he was beaten too often. On the other hand, Matty Watson had a great night in defence and really showed a lot. He was outmarked twice, but otherwise really had a good night and gave good drive from defence.
[4] Buckley as a defender: he did more than OK. Until he tired late in the game, he was dynamic in defence and really had the North small forwards under control.
[5] Even when North were doing their best, we were still in control of the game. In the last 10 minutes we had plenty of opportunities to really get the game back to 3 - 4 goals, even against the huge wind. We took our foot off the accelerator: when things got really close, we picked up and got the ball out of the middle, or out of defence and deep into attack.
[6] Frees: We still barely managed half the frees that North got. I was very disappointed in that. They didn't reward our tackles, especially when the man did not dispose of the ball, or took ages (some did 540ยบ and still didn't get pinged).
[7] Cameron Wood actually played pretty well. That scared the sh*t out of me! When last I saw him play, he was most unimpressive. Well, he did remarkably well against a guy who was rated much higher than he was. Goldstein got taps late in the third and early in the last, but both Warnock and Wood were more effective.
Tom Bell best game in a navy blue jumper, took the game on when he hard space, offloaded the ball when he didn't.
Robbo - GUN! Better decision making early with fatigue saw a bit of the old Robbo kicks but an improvement on 2013.
As a team I was impressed, tackled well and with purpose, every man was looking to shepperd for team mates and when we got into space we looked very good.
I can't agree with your critique of these 2 players, but agree that the team worked well. Perhaps partially because those 2 were doing the hard yards and team things. But, i do not want the ball in their hands as they make too many errors with it.
Yes, Bell kicked a good goal and yes he had some breakaway clearances, but almost every time he picked out the north blokes so well i think we have to get his eyes checked.
Robbo made better decisions than he usually would, but better than woeful is not that hard. Still a big worry with the ball in his hands.
Honestly, when you include some blokes who missed out today.....Judd, Carrazzo, Scotland, Simpson and Thomas it is the blokes of the caliber of Curnow, Armfield, Cachia, Lucas, Bell, Robinson, Buckley, Cripps, Graham and Ellard who miss from todays squad. From those players, i think Bell and Robbo are the worst users of the ball. Can we afford to carry them?
I think Bell and Robbo are the worst users of the ball. Can we afford to carry them?
Jeez Krudds you are seriously harsh on Bell. This kid is the #1 player on our list from last season looking to step up. Carrazzo was a horrible user of the ball early days and won a B&F. If MM didn't believe in these two boys I'd expect they would have been traded out last year.
Rating: B
For the team we put on the park, we did pretty well.
Players:[1] Walker: Started like a house on fire and was brilliant in the first quarter and a bit. Then he moved forward and lost influence. Moved around later in the game and got good possessions. Walker had a good game and was one of our best overall.
[2] Menzel: Not enough, but some really good signs. He tackled and chased well, he spent some time on the ball and did enough to look promising and he kicked the ball very well in the conditions. He really looked he can fill some of the void left by Eddie Betts, but he did tire.
[3] Murphy: Very ordinary early, but he picked up as a game went on. He was very good at getting a hand in to ruin the North Melbourne ring a ring a Rosie with their infinite number of handballs.
[4] Gibbs: not a great game. His kicks lacked their usual effect and he just didn't get much of the ball. he spent plenty of time on the wing and was rarely in the centre square.
[7] Buckley: inspired early, especially in the 2nd quarter. he ran hard and did a very good job. Alas, he still ran out of gas. He could find a spot in defence.
[9] Lucas: Not a great game, as he spent considerable time on the bench. He was quite reasonable early.
[10] Watson: An excellent game from the big lad, where he beat a number of opponents and got out marked only twice. He did a lot of work and really gave some drive from defence. A big performer on the night.
[11] Warnock: Had the better of Goldstein for much of the game and managed a lot of taps. Also kept Goldstein from getting any ball at all. (North made a mistake rucking Goldstein for so much of the game. Currie needs the work, but he got little time on the ruck and didn't do much.)
[12] Robinson: very quiet early in the game, but he really got on top after quarter time. Pity his kicks are still unreliable. Robbo had a good game and really stood up when things were tight.
[13] Yarran: Looked more at home in defence and did a pretty good job there for most of the game. Not so good in the 3rd and 4th quarters, but his ability to disrupt the North handball game was crucial.
[14] McLean: Broke had a great game after a fairly quiet start. He got run off a few times, but he managed some really good clearance work.
[16] Cripps: Didn't look out of place and clean with his possessions until the last quarter, where he had a couple of crucial fumbles. He is a big boy. Give him some time and he could be very interesting.
[17] Rowe: Did adequately against Petrie, but he really didn't give much drive. Didn't look like a key defender.
[21] Bootsma: Still too thin, but he did some nice things.
[26] McInnes: Did a good job keeping his man under control for most of the night.
[27] Armfield: Had a really quiet game with very little of the ball. What he did was pretty good, but he really had very little influence on the game and did not have any opportunities to use his pace.
[28] Bell: Not enough yet from Big Tom, but he really did show some dash. When he got the ball, it went our way a long way. His clearances from the middle lead to scoring opportunities. 17 good possessions and 8 strong tackles.
[30] Waite: worked hard but struggled with the wind and didn't have much of an influence. His best work actually well up the ground in the 2nd quarter.
[32] Graham: not a big game. but OK.
[33] Everitt: Had 3 goals early in the game and gave us something to kick to, before moving into defence. He played a solid game and showed he should be a starter for round 1.
[35] Curnow: did a good negative job for most of the game, but got run over somewhat later in the game. 20 possessions.
[36] Wood: When I saw that Wood was picked, I was worried. Wood hadn't done much against top opposition. However, he really pleasantly surprised me. He didn't win all the taps, but he competed well, he took a couple of nice marks and he kicked the winning goal. He also kept his man very quiet
[37] Cachia: like Curnow, he had a negative job and he did it pretty well early. Not so good late after a fair spell on the pine. 10 tackles was very good. Basically, his man got a lot of the ball in the 3rd and early last quarters.
[41] Casboult: had an ordinary game and didn't offer much of a target. He took 1 screamer and kicked a nice goal, but he man just beat him too often and gave North a lot of drive.
[42] Tuohy: did an excellent job when he was on, but was rested for a fair bit of game. His goal was excellent and he really did keep his man down.
[46] Ellard: started very ordinarily and had no impact in the first half at all. After half time he was a different player and kicked a couple of crucial goals.
I think Bell and Robbo are the worst users of the ball. Can we afford to carry them?
Jeez Krudds you are seriously harsh on Bell. This kid is the #1 player on our list from last season looking to step up. Carrazzo was a horrible user of the ball early days and won a B&F. If MM didn't believe in these two boys I'd expect they would have been traded out last year.
Mate, i've got nothing against them and love their attack on the ball. But if they turn the ball over when they get it, what does it matter how tough they are when they don't have it?
Bell, has a lot to like and is still coming on as a young bloke.
Robbo, who everybody loves, needs to take the next step from up and coming kid, to genuinely good player.
Both need to improve their disposal and decision making to step up.
I agree that Carrazzo was a terrible user of the ball and needed to step up to earn his spot in the side, i think it is clear that he did improve his disposal and all around game. Kudos to him for doing that. Until Bell and Robbo do the same, there will be question marks over them. I don't think that is unfair.
As an exercise JK, pick your best 22. See where Bell and Robbo fit into it, if they do, and i reckon you'll have more people than just me pointing out that certain players missing deserve a spot in the best 22. ;)
I think Bell and Robbo are the worst users of the ball. Can we afford to carry them?
I don't know if those two are the worst but IMHO over the last few seasons we have been by far the worst users of the ball in the competition. The stats might not agree, but stats don't tell you where on the ground the errors occur.
For a team that has dominated stoppages and clearances, we have had a very poor overall result primarily due to the bad ball use and poor decision making.
I'll go one step further and link this to that poor player development discussed elsewhere.
I think Bell and Robbo are the worst users of the ball. Can we afford to carry them?
Jeez Krudds you are seriously harsh on Bell. This kid is the #1 player on our list from last season looking to step up. Carrazzo was a horrible user of the ball early days and won a B&F. If MM didn't believe in these two boys I'd expect they would have been traded out last year.
Mate, i've got nothing against them and love their attack on the ball. But if they turn the ball over when they get it, what does it matter how tough they are when they don't have it?
Bell, has a lot to like and is still coming on as a young bloke.
Robbo, who everybody loves, needs to take the next step from up and coming kid, to genuinely good player.
Both need to improve their disposal and decision making to step up.
I agree that Carrazzo was a terrible user of the ball and needed to step up to earn his spot in the side, i think it is clear that he did improve his disposal and all around game. Kudos to him for doing that. Until Bell and Robbo do the same, there will be question marks over them. I don't think that is unfair.
As an exercise JK, pick your best 22. See where Bell and Robbo fit into it, if they do, and i reckon you'll have more people than just me pointing out that certain players missing deserve a spot in the best 22. ;)
I understand what your saying about best 22 Krudds but I like to think we should be thinking about those blokes who shall be stepping out in the next year or two and we are screening their replacements in this comp and their roles when selected in the real deal.
Worth noting...no Hendo or Jamo.
Flabbergasted at the negativity here. :o :o
We fielded a side minus at least 10 straight up starters. The Kangabies were far closer to full strength. The Kangabies had the better of the stats.
We learned so much from this game, as well as winning when all the pundits and some here, thought we would not.
On the negative side, we learned - Lucas is a dud. Bootsma is not far behind.
On the positive side, we saw how much value Everitt will likely bring. We won without 10 'first pick blokes' and non-dominant performances from Murph, Gibbs, Robbo, Waite etc...
On stats alone, we should have lost by about 3-5 goals.
Is there anyone else who'd like acknowledge positive indicators from this first hit-out? Sorry, but I think we did really well in this game and there was much to like about our intensity and endeavour... woops, positive :-X :-X :-X
On the negative side, we learned - Lucas is a dud. Bootsma is not far behind.
I actually thought Boots really worked hard and laid some crucial tackles. His kicking was better than most also.
I do pause to remember the lengthy criticism of Michael Sexton before he became a bona fide legend.
It was a practice match for both teams. Feb form counts for $hit unless you're Melbourne :D
Flabbergasted at the negativity here. :o :o
We fielded a side minus at least 10 straight up starters. The Kangabies were far closer to full strength. The Kangabies had the better of the stats.
We learned so much from this game, as well as winning when all the pundits and some here, thought we would not.
On the negative side, we learned - Lucas is a dud. Bootsma is not far behind.
On the positive side, we saw how much value Everitt will likely bring. We won without 10 'first pick blokes' and non-dominant performances from Murph, Gibbs, Robbo, Waite etc...
On stats alone, we should have lost by about 3-5 goals.
Is there anyone else who'd like acknowledge positive indicators from this first hit-out? Sorry, but I think we did really well in this game and there was much to like about our intensity and endeavour... woops, positive :-X :-X :-X
I dont have a lot to say but ill say this
Our newbies showed promise, we got through the game, no injuries that we know about yet and we are a week closer to the start of the season.
Aside from that winning form is good form and winning culture is also important.
The rest is just details.
I reckon that not only are Bell and Robbo starters in our line up but they're very important to the side adding that hardness and perhaps making the opposition think twice before they go.
I reckon that not only are Bell and Robbo starters in our line up but they're very important to the side adding that hardness and perhaps making the opposition think twice before they go.
^^^^^This x million
Finally we have a couple of players that hurt the oppositio, yes they may turn the ball over a bit, but they offer more positives than negatives.
Have you seen Juddys games from last year? Did some great things but continually hand balls to the other team and no one is complaining about his disposal.
Yes they lack class but would rather them in than someone like Lucas. ::)
I thought we were pretty good for the team that was on paper, at least seven changes to be made to our best side (Henderson, Jamo, Simpson, Carrots, Judd, Jeffy & Kruz). For a strong team (on paper) Norf were terrible, I am sick of the 'experts' banging on about there age.. they always forget to mention that they have a large group of over 30s (who are critical to their team).
Anyway..
My real concern is our inability to win holding the ball decisions, last year I was frustrated week in week out when we would seemingly catch players with the ball only not to be rewarded. Then moments later one of our players picks the ball up in the pack and is pinged. It happened again yesterday, on a couple of occasions, I am not claiming that the umps are deliberately going against us, but we must be doing something wrong. Anyone else?
I reckon that not only are Bell and Robbo starters in our line up but they're very important to the side adding that hardness and perhaps making the opposition think twice before they go.
^^^^^This x million
Finally we have a couple of players that hurt the oppositio, yes they may turn the ball over a bit, but they offer more positives than negatives.
Have you seen Juddys games from last year? Did some great things but continually hand balls to the other team and no one is complaining about his disposal.
Yes they lack class but would rather them in than someone like Lucas. ::)
OK, i've asked a few people to do this and nobody has complied, so i'll do it myself and then maybe you'll see why i've been so 'negative' towards Bell and Robbo.
Best 22...
FB Tuohy Jamison Simpson
HB Walker Watson Everitt
C Gibbs Judd Thomas
HF Yarran Henderson Garlett
FF Kreuzer Waite Menzel
FOLL Warnock Murphy McLean
INT Scotland Carrazzo Curnow
SUB Armfield
EMG Cachia Bell Robinson Lucas Docherty McInness Casboult Graham Cripps
Which of my starters do you guys want to leave out to fit in Bell and Robinson?
Armfield and Curnow are similar players with more runs on the board compared to those two.
Menzel, Yarran and Garlett might be one small too many, but we could do it while Eddie was here and Menzel offers more marking power and ability to play further up the ground so i don't think thats an issue.
So you want to go with only 1 ruckman?
I just can't see, when fully fit, how they will force there way into our best side.
Have to 110% agree with Baggers - a few posts ago.
After a pre-season where we have been written off, and North pumped as genuine top 4 material, personally I'm feeling much more positive.
With many key players out we beat a almost full strength side, with the foot off the gas in the last.
Loved the genuine improvement in players like Bell, Buckley, Menzel and especially Watson. Kenny was a definite plus.
Happiest about the fact there were few passages of play, when we were trying, when North was not harrassed.
At the fall of the ball there were more blues.
We Sheparded - that's new.
So individual performances aside we looked like a better functioning _team_.
With less disposals we won.
We generally made better decisions possibly because they know exactly what was expected of them, which fed into confidence, which helps decision making, then repeat.
Yes, have to agree with Baggers - very positive.
Some very good points there Kruddler, it makes sense and it would be a difficult decision to displace anyone in the side you picked. However, Bell, Robbo and Cachia are probably our 3 best tackling players and I have a feeling that might count hugely in their favour when it comes to team selection. Plus I think Bell and Robbo in particular lift the rest of the team with their wrecking ball style of play.
Some very good points there Kruddler, it makes sense and it would be a difficult decision to displace anyone in the side you picked. However, Bell, Robbo and Cachia are probably our 3 best tackling players and I have a feeling that might count hugely in their favour when it comes to team selection. Plus I think Bell and Robbo in particular lift the rest of the team with their wrecking ball style of play.
Don't get me wrong, i like what they bring to the side, Cachia too (who i think uses the ball better), but you simply can't fit everyone in the side. Obviously there will be some players with injuries which will allow them to get plenty of games, but based on paper alone they don't demand a spot.
Which is a good thing, means we have depth.
But based on form from yesterdays performance, all 3 would be ahead of Armfield!
But based on form from yesterdays performance, all 3 would be ahead of Armfield!
Armfield was the sub at the start of the game, so didn't get the same amount of exposure.
Going by that logic, all 3 would be ahead of Murphy and Gibbs too!
Doesn't quite work that way ;)
OK, i've asked a few people to do this and nobody has complied, so i'll do it myself and then maybe you'll see why i've been so 'negative' towards Bell and Robbo.
Best 22...
FB Tuohy Jamison Simpson
HB Walker Watson Everitt
C Gibbs Judd Thomas
HF Yarran Henderson Garlett
FF Kreuzer Waite Menzel
FOLL Warnock Murphy McLean
INT Scotland Carrazzo Curnow
SUB Armfield
EMG Cachia Bell Robinson Lucas Docherty McInness Casboult Graham Cripps
Which of my starters do you guys want to leave out to fit in Bell and Robinson?
If we have all those players on the park at once it will be a miracle.
Considering Army came in for Thomas there is your first answer. This would be my team.
FB Tuohy Jamison Simpson
HB Walker Watson Yarran
C Gibbs Judd Thomas
HF Robbo Henderson Garlett
FF Kreuzer Waite Everitt
FOLL Warnock Murphy McLean
INT Scotland Carrazzo Curnow
SUB Bell
Didnt impress me yesterday - Lucas, Casboult, McInnes, Graham, Warnock.
Thought Wood was more impressive than Warnock.
Casboult terrible as was Waite but itds the fringe players that I was lookig at.
Graham needs to do more and stop playing 'nice' footy. Top AFL footballers do more so hopefully he improves cos the kid has talent and Ive been a fan since day 1.
Liked Cripps - went and got the footy which is important. His vision and nous were already on show. Very Mick Barlow/Jobe Watson like.
McInnes, cant jump and looks slow. Hopefully improves as he's yoing and a real goer. Bootsma the pick out of those two for mine. Likes Boots last qtr when he took McInnes's role down back. Better mover by far.
Lucas - didnt even know he was playingfor a while. Terrible output. Im expecting more from him. Only game 1 though.
Cachia, Buckley and Bell had rippers. Just impressed which is what they need to do again next week/game.
If we could only get Robinson to handball more that would be good for the team IMHO, his kicking is still far too much hit and miss. His tenacity and hardness, tackling pressure, etc is great but that needs to be tempered with better nous, a cooler head and better kicking IMO.
I'd have Bell over Curnow if Carrazzo was available.
OK, i've asked a few people to do this and nobody has complied, so i'll do it myself and then maybe you'll see why i've been so 'negative' towards Bell and Robbo.
Best 22...
FB Tuohy Jamison Simpson
HB Walker Watson Everitt
C Gibbs Judd Thomas
HF Yarran Henderson Garlett
FF Kreuzer Waite Menzel
FOLL Warnock Murphy McLean
INT Scotland Carrazzo Curnow
SUB Armfield
EMG Cachia Bell Robinson Lucas Docherty McInness Casboult Graham Cripps
Which of my starters do you guys want to leave out to fit in Bell and Robinson?
If we have all those players on the park at once it will be a miracle.
Considering Army came in for Thomas there is your first answer. This would be my team.
FB Tuohy Jamison Simpson
HB Walker Watson Yarran
C Gibbs Judd Thomas
HF Robbo Henderson Garlett
FF Kreuzer Waite Everitt
FOLL Warnock Murphy McLean
INT Scotland Carrazzo Curnow
SUB Bell
Armfield came in for Thomas....so that means he isn't in our best 22? Neither is Scotland, Carrazzo, Simpson.... Don't think you thought that one through.
FWIW, Armfield played every game last season. In fact he has missed just 1 game from the past 50! (R4 vs Ess 2012...boy we needed him then too!)
Last season Bell played 9/24
Robinson played 21/24
Big call putting them ahead of Army...who offers a very similar role, yet more versatility.
Leaving out Menzel is a somewhat easy decision to make as he is still learning the game, but he does add polish as well as hardness up forward.
@Shadesy...
Curnow placed 4th in last years B+F. Hard to drop him on last years form.
Looking at Kruddler and Carrots teams... Perhaps Scotland will be under the most pressure to hold his spot.
Mick has a history of making those calls early.
But based on form from yesterdays performance, all 3 would be ahead of Armfield!
Armfield was the sub at the start of the game, so didn't get the same amount of exposure.
Going by that logic, all 3 would be ahead of Murphy and Gibbs too!
Doesn't quite work that way ;)
That's a ridiculous description of my 'logic' Kruddler.
We're talking about 4 players competing for a spot in our best side as opposed to 2 of of best players!
So it totally does work that way. MM probably would have been happy enough for Murph and Gibbs to get through the game uninjured. The others are fighting for a spot in the side.
[flash=600,400]http://www.youtube.com/v/pvyCWsErRSI[/flash]
Kruddler fighting around the world!
I reckon that not only are Bell and Robbo starters in our line up but they're very important to the side adding that hardness and perhaps making the opposition think twice before they go.
^^^^^This x million
Finally we have a couple of players that hurt the oppositio, yes they may turn the ball over a bit, but they offer more positives than negatives.
Have you seen Juddys games from last year? Did some great things but continually hand balls to the other team and no one is complaining about his disposal.
Yes they lack class but would rather them in than someone like Lucas. ::)
OK, i've asked a few people to do this and nobody has complied, so i'll do it myself and then maybe you'll see why i've been so 'negative' towards Bell and Robbo.
Best 22...
FB Tuohy Jamison Simpson
HB Walker Watson Everitt
C Gibbs Judd Thomas
HF Yarran Henderson Garlett
FF Kreuzer Waite Menzel
FOLL Warnock Murphy McLean
INT Scotland Carrazzo Curnow
SUB Armfield
EMG Cachia Bell Robinson Lucas Docherty McInness Casboult Graham Cripps
Which of my starters do you guys want to leave out to fit in Bell and Robinson?
Armfield and Curnow are similar players with more runs on the board compared to those two.
Menzel, Yarran and Garlett might be one small too many, but we could do it while Eddie was here and Menzel offers more marking power and ability to play further up the ground so i don't think thats an issue.
So you want to go with only 1 ruckman?
I just can't see, when fully fit, how they will force there way into our best side.
Armfield and Scotland would be the two I would replace. Other than that, spot on.
Flabbergasted at the negativity here. :o :o
We fielded a side minus at least 10 straight up starters. The Kangabies were far closer to full strength. The Kangabies had the better of the stats.
We learned so much from this game, as well as winning when all the pundits and some here, thought we would not.
On the negative side, we learned - Lucas is a dud. Bootsma is not far behind.
On the positive side, we saw how much value Everitt will likely bring. We won without 10 'first pick blokes' and non-dominant performances from Murph, Gibbs, Robbo, Waite etc...
On stats alone, we should have lost by about 3-5 goals.
Is there anyone else who'd like acknowledge positive indicators from this first hit-out? Sorry, but I think we did really well in this game and there was much to like about our intensity and endeavour... woops, positive :-X :-X :-X
I thought given who played us, and o played for them, and that we dominated the game for 2 1/2 quarters, that it was a very good result.
The only real disappointments for me was Lucas, Bootsma and Armfield (who didn't get much game time).
Definite improvement in Bell, Rowe, Watson, Buckley, Cripps, Everitt. Not sure what more we could ask for?
Rowe looks fit this year..
Which is nice.
Reckon he'll get at least another year with us.
Armfield came in for Thomas....so that means he isn't in our best 22? Neither is Scotland, Carrazzo, Simpson.... Don't think you thought that one through.
Not hard to figure out. The others weren't ready to go otherwise they would've come in. Army was ready but not initially selected. He then came in as a replacement.
He may have played most games last year but Bell looks to have come on a little and going by that he takes Army's spot IMO.
Given the side we had out compared to the Roos, I was pleasantly surprised. A little painful to watch but for a first serious hit out, what more could you ask for.
Great signs coming from Watson, the key to our season really. Bell I really like and is going to be in our best 22 I feel, Cripps is further advanced than I thought and should be right in the mix also. One pickup off his laces I really liked.
My good feeling regarding Everitt was rewarded, great pickup there Mick. I still feel uneasy with Walker down back, first game of the year and rusty I grant you.
Armfield came in for Thomas....so that means he isn't in our best 22? Neither is Scotland, Carrazzo, Simpson.... Don't think you thought that one through.
Not hard to figure out. The others weren't ready to go otherwise they would've come in. Army was ready but not initially selected. He then came in as a replacement.
He may have played most games last year but Bell looks to have come on a little and going by that he takes Army's spot IMO.
I know what you were implying. I'm suggesting that the players listed have nothing wrong with them and were simply rested for this game...as was Armfield. I think we all know what to expect from the players who did not play, ditto Armfield.
In short, Armfields exclusion from the initial squad says nothing about his ability on the field IMO.
I know it's only the pre season, but I'll offer my 2 bob's worth :
- a few too many easy goals through the corridor - nightmares of seasons past
- giving up that nice 4th quarter lead - ditto
Levi and Sammy Rowe - still not convinced by these guys
McInnes 50/50, but he worries me a bit
Bryce, played as per usual - what he does, he does well, but does he do enough ?
Everitt - if he can keep that up, he'll be a shoe in for recruit of the year
Bell and Robbo, a bit rough skill wise, but it's nice having some size and grunt round the clearances
Menzel - what can I say ? It's love, love love. I'm sure some or most of you have experienced that feeling with certain players - players that you like or that are really skilful, you just relax as soon as they touch the ball ? That's my feeling with Troy - as soon as he touches it, I just smile, sit back and relax knowing he'll do something good or make it count.
OK, i've asked a few people to do this and nobody has complied, so i'll do it myself and then maybe you'll see why i've been so 'negative' towards Bell and Robbo.
Best 22...
FB Tuohy Jamison Simpson
HB Walker Watson Everitt
C Gibbs Judd Thomas
HF Yarran Henderson Garlett
FF Kreuzer Waite Menzel
FOLL Warnock Murphy McLean
INT Scotland Carrazzo Curnow
SUB Armfield
EMG Cachia Bell Robinson Lucas Docherty McInness Casboult Graham Cripps
Which of my starters do you guys want to leave out to fit in Bell and Robinson?
If we have all those players on the park at once it will be a miracle.
Considering Army came in for Thomas there is your first answer. This would be my team.
FB Tuohy Jamison Simpson
HB Walker Watson Yarran
C Gibbs Judd Thomas
HF Robbo Henderson Garlett
FF Kreuzer Waite Everitt
FOLL Warnock Murphy McLean
INT Scotland Carrazzo Curnow
SUB Bell
Armfield came in for Thomas....so that means he isn't in our best 22? Neither is Scotland, Carrazzo, Simpson.... Don't think you thought that one through.
FWIW, Armfield played every game last season. In fact he has missed just 1 game from the past 50! (R4 vs Ess 2012...boy we needed him then too!)
Last season Bell played 9/24
Robinson played 21/24
Big call putting them ahead of Army...who offers a very similar role, yet more versatility.
Leaving out Menzel is a somewhat easy decision to make as he is still learning the game, but he does add polish as well as hardness up forward.
@Shadesy...
Curnow placed 4th in last years B+F. Hard to drop him on last years form.
There's little doubt that Casboult will play in our best 22, with the most likely candidate to give way being Watson at CHB. Or, Waite could play a HF or wing, which would put pressure on Robbo and Scotland.
I'd prefer Henderson at CHB and Casboult at CHF and would like to see Kreuzer rotating through the bench as opposed to resting in the FP.
Casboult will have to show a lot more to be in the best 22.
From what I saw yesterday, he's still a work in progress....
Casboult will have to show a lot more to be in the best 22.
From what I saw yesterday, he's still a work in progress....
Casboult plays when Waite/Henderson/Kreuzer are injured (could be often). Otherwise currently not best 22.
Thanks a sqwillion for the summary of the game, first class!
I was interested in Crashlander's comment
[17] Rowe: Did adequately against Petrie, but he really didn't give much drive. Didn't look like a key defender.
I figure that Pedrie is almost the standard of a good CHF. Do
Adequately against Pedrie and you Pass. It would be great for Carlton if Rowe could step in and manage a key back roll!
What do you think? He tries, he learns and is a quality bloke!
Just watched the replay (finally). Most of the key issues have been covered already so I'll just mention a couple of things that really struck me.
1. Chris Yarran did some excellent defensive stuff. I've never been a fan of his as a defender but I think he really has taken a big step forward if this game is anything to go by. I'll look forward to more of this as the year unfolds.
2. We looked a LOT more poised and full of purpose - OK only the 1st NAB game, but we really looked a lot better in those aspects IMO. Again, let's see how we go forward but I definitely think that our approach looks better.
Krudder, with your team
FB Tuohy Jamison Simpson
HB Walker Watson Everitt
C Gibbs Judd Thomas
HF Yarran Henderson Garlett
FF Kreuzer Waite Menzel
FOLL Warnock Murphy McLean
INT Scotland Carrazzo Curnow
SUB Armfield
EMG Cachia Bell Robinson Lucas Docherty McInness Casboult Graham Cripps
I wonder if there is enough height beside Jamison.
I think we need more height on the HF line as well.
I have this inkling that we should invest inn Casboult becoming a Cloke forward.
With his injury track record, Waite gives us great balance as a Swing Player asset
I'd have Bell over Curnow if Carrazzo was available.
Agree with Kruddler......Curnow is the No 1 tagger now and takes the opposing teams best mid....I think both will line up in rnd 1 vs Port.
Mick likes Bell and wants the bigger bodied players in the seniors and Bell has been red hot so far in both this NAB game and the intra club game.
Carrazzo might have to fight for his spot with Mick keen on youth....
Everything has pretty well been said, I'll just add I thought we still lacked defensive pressure a bit when the ball was coming out of our forward half.
I also thought we lacked a bit of composure going forward and bombed it long to poor options too often.
It's only our 1st practice game, so not too concerned, overall I thought there were more positives to come out of the game than negatives. Plenty to get excited about.
Just 1 more thing, Gibbs, get a hair cut !!!
The key factor in all this may be Carrots. He's missed a heap of footy over the last few years. Will he be the same Carrots that he used to be? if not then the argument regarding who makes way might be answered.
Just 1 more thing, Gibbs, get a hair cut !!!
Was it Gibbs or Manu Fidel out there?
Did we stick to the boundaries?
The key factor in all this may be Carrots. He's missed a heap of footy over the last few years. Will he be the same Carrots that he used to be? if not then the argument regarding who makes way might be answered.
Fair point. It's very hard to come back from missing a lot of footy at that age and Carrots has played not much over the past 2 seasons. It'll be interesting to see of he can regain his old form and if he's given the opportunity in the seniors to do so. I'm not opposed to him playing e few games for the reserves. It may get him back to form a little quicker.
The key factor in all this may be Carrots. He's missed a heap of footy over the last few years. Will he be the same Carrots that he used to be? if not then the argument regarding who makes way might be answered.
Fair point. It's very hard to come back from missing a lot of footy at that age and Carrots has played not much over the past 2 seasons. It'll be interesting to see of he can regain his old form and if he's given the opportunity in the seniors to do so. I'm not opposed to him playing e few games for the reserves. It may get him back to form a little quicker.
My guess though P2C, Is that after about 4 or 5 games he'll get back to playing close to his best. Hopefully he does and is able to sustain good form. We need him there and playing well.
Did we stick to the boundaries?
A lot of bombing it long to a contest. Main reason our disposal count was so low.
It's not pretty and it's ineffective, and we won't beat the better defensive teams with that approach.
The key factor in all this may be Carrots. He's missed a heap of footy over the last few years. Will he be the same Carrots that he used to be? if not then the argument regarding who makes way might be answered.
Fair point. It's very hard to come back from missing a lot of footy at that age and Carrots has played not much over the past 2 seasons. It'll be interesting to see of he can regain his old form and if he's given the opportunity in the seniors to do so. I'm not opposed to him playing e few games for the reserves. It may get him back to form a little quicker.
Fair point?!
I said the same thing 2 weeks ago and you nearly had a stroke!
Did we stick to the boundaries?
A lot of bombing it long to a contest. Main reason our disposal count was so low.
It's not pretty and it's ineffective, and we won't beat the better defensive teams with that approach.
Not the best way to try winning games against any side.
Fair point?!
I said the same thing 2 weeks ago and you nearly had a stroke!
I think Carrots, Waite, Judd, McLean and Scotland are all under the pump in 2014. It won't take much improvement from the kids combined with just a little slip from the older blokes for the old blokes to be well and truly under the pump!
Fair point?!
I said the same thing 2 weeks ago and you nearly had a stroke!
I think Carrots, Waite, Judd, McLean and Scotland are all under the pump in 2014. It won't take much improvement from the kids combined with just a little slip from the older blokes for the old blokes to be well and truly under the pump!
In that group there is a 33 yo, a 31 yo, a couple of 30 yo and
a 27 year old McLean has never looked fitter, probably has never been fitter and is at prime age.
I don't think Waite is under the pump at all.
He was mishandled by Opp yesterday.
I didnt see much of the game, but one thing that was immediately obvious to me was that our guys looked very fit. A few guys looked lighter, and a few guys looked heavier... In a good way. Bootsma, while still on the slight side, has definitely put on a bit of meat around the upper body, looked good for it.
I didnt see much of the game, but one thing that was immediately obvious to me was that our guys looked very fit. A few guys looked lighter, and a few guys looked heavier... In a good way. Bootsma, while still on the slight side, has definitely put on a bit of meat around the upper body, looked good for it.
The o
I don't think Waite is under the pump at all.
He was mishandled by Opp yesterday.
The other thing that stood out was we were sticking a lot more tackles, must have done some serious work on technique over the summer.
Flabbergasted at the negativity here. :o :o
I'm more flabbergasted by that comment to be honest....
The only negativity I can find was for the woefully one-sided, spew-inducing, pro-North broadcast & reporting across all media, along with vatrious posters making some comments here & there about certain player performances as you'd have to expect from ANY game we play.....but for the majority of this thread, it's been pretty positive stuff. Silly comment Baggers.
For a team with just under a third of it's no-brainer, starting lineup out & various other players being trialled in various positions, against the 'flavour-of-the-month' team whose lineup would be very similar on any gameday of 2014.....it was an excellent effort.
Andrejs Everitt will be a star for this Club. For mine, he looks to be the type of player we've been crying out for....not quite tall enough perhaps for a key position, but geez he comes close. Uses the ball well, marks well, can play either end with aplomb or through the middle - we all wanted another Lachie Henderson & I reckon we've now got him in the form of Everitt. Tom Bell is another who will become a star for this Club.....the media had been reporting that Tom had been tearing-up the training track, then he goes & puts on a display like that....brilliant.
Personally, I'm not convinced Waite & Casboult can play in the same forward line: Waite & Henderson/Everitt - yes, Waite & Casboult - I have grave doubts.
Physically, Cripps didn't look out of place, but did far too little for anyone to offer any sort of opinion on him just yet.
Some really good cameos from plenty, whilst a couple of others continued to disappoint.
Thought our tackling was first rate, Dal Santo is still soft as baby poo, Petrie can dish it out (see what i did there) - refer his hit on Watson in the last, but he can't take it when it comes his way - refer McGinnes' hit on Petrie in the 3rd and how did Bell not get a free & Ziebell not get reported for his direct bump to Bell's head as he was bending over to get the ball in the 3rd? WTF!?
Reckon Cam Wood pleasantly surprised a lot of us & I loved the possible reinvention of Buckley (although he did butcher the ball a couple of times). As a couple of others have mentioned, one of our collective bones of contention last year was delivery into our forward line & there were some pretty ordinary periods y'day in this regard. That area simply has to improve.
But overall, a helluva lot more to like than not.....
Bootsma, while still on the slight side, has definitely put on a bit of meat around the upper body, looked good for it.
Does your TV have one of those 'whacky mirror' screens, 'cos he looked absolutely no different physically, except for some new inkwork on his right forearm....possibly to try to make himself look tougher....I'm trying hard to say that with a straight face.....
I don't think Waite is under the pump at all.
He was mishandled by Opp yesterday.
Dont think Waite was too interested and didnt get out of second gear...Tippet did well but Waite wasnt trying that hard either.
Bootsma, while still on the slight side, has definitely put on a bit of meat around the upper body, looked good for it.
Does your TV have one of those 'whacky mirror' screens, 'cos he looked absolutely no different physically, except for some new inkwork on his right forearm....possibly to try to make himself look tougher....I'm trying hard to say that with a straight face.....
X2
I reckon we'll win more games with Bell and Robinson in the 22 than we will if they're out.
Bell and Robinson may butcher the ball more often than our outside players but that goes with the territory. Their hardness and attack on the ball more than makes up for a few poor disposals.
As for who misses out on a spot in the 22 if we're at full strength, Scotland, Carrazzo and Menzel would have to be behind Bell and Robinson.
Of course, it's great that we now have genuine options and competition for spots in the 22.
I think Norf are still just a bunch of scrubbers that try hard. A lot of one paced blue collar types. I thought we looked a class above even with the score line .
I think Norf are still just a bunch of scrubbers that try hard. A lot of one paced blue collar types. I thought we looked a class above even with the score line .
Spot on, from what I saw we easily 'controlled' the game up until the last quarter.....
All this carp in the papers re Dal Santo....meh, glad we didn't go near him, he is not the future.
Speaking of Bell, it's only 1st practice game but what's been noticeable in his last 2 seasons, is that's it's taken him a good part of each season to get his frame into a level of fitness that enables him to play at physical intensity that suites his game style. Seems to have prepared himself well this year, appears ready and able to take it on from get go to o.
Bootsma, while still on the slight side, has definitely put on a bit of meat around the upper body, looked good for it.
Does your TV have one of those 'whacky mirror' screens, 'cos he looked absolutely no different physically, except for some new inkwork on his right forearm....possibly to try to make himself look tougher....I'm trying hard to say that with a straight face.....
Have to agree. Terrible use of the ball as well.
Bootsma, while still on the slight side, has definitely put on a bit of meat around the upper body, looked good for it.
Does your TV have one of those 'whacky mirror' screens, 'cos he looked absolutely no different physically, except for some new inkwork on his right forearm....possibly to try to make himself look tougher....I'm trying hard to say that with a straight face.....
Have to agree. Terrible use of the ball as well.
Also agree. Hard to find positives for Bootsma. When up forward looked completely lost. Looked more at home in defence but even then his kicking disposal was not good. Hard to see who he could keep out of the backline!
The Warnock / Wood contest will be really interesting. Wood needs to improve his rucking, especially around the boundary but as a resting ruckman up forward is far more likely to take marks and convert.
The only way to assess the game is in terms of weighing the positives and negatives. Overall I reckon we had a lot more positives than negatives.
A big team positive was our intent at the contest and our tackling pressure. This has been a huge weakness previously, and we looked much better. Plenty of good signs from some the kids - Cripps didn't look out of place at all, Menzel is pure class, Buckley showed real ferocity in the backline and could provide some cover there, Bell is still improving and has plenty of upside and Cachia is now a very solid midfield backup. Watson played with more intensity and confidence, and Rowe battled hard against a bloke who has destroyed us in the past.
McLean looked superfit, Everitt looks capable of being a great trade, Tuohy looked great and Curnow is now a running machine. Gibbs and Murph got some game time under their belt without getting out of second gear.
Everyone got through without any injury concerns, and it feels like we have better depth and potential in the kids now that the deadwood has been moved on.
The negatives was our ability to control the ball and utilise our clearance strength. To beat the strong defensive teams we need to be much better at moving and controlling the ball. Bootsma, Lucas and Casboult disappointed me - not going to hang them on one performance but their was a lot of 'same old stuff' from all three. Watching Lucas compared to Ryan Bastinac from the same draft brings tears to the eye. Bootsma is a complete mystery to me - his skill level, reading of the play and intensity seem no where near ALF level for mine. Casboult did a couple of nice things but has no consistency in his output.
Oh, and the shockingly inconsistent umpiring against us, especially rewarding good tackles, and the North Melbourne love from all the commentators and media.........
Curnow is now a running machine
Has always been a running machine, now has the mental confidence to back himself and choose the right option.....
Going to be interesting to see how we fit all the mids in the team now i.e. Judd, Carrots, Simmo all 'usually' walk up starts.....
The only way to assess the game is in terms of weighing the positives and negatives. Overall I reckon we had a lot more positives than negatives.
A big team positive was our intent at the contest and our tackling pressure. This has been a huge weakness previously, and we looked much better. Plenty of good signs from some the kids - Cripps didn't look out of place at all, Menzel is pure class, Buckley showed real ferocity in the backline and could provide some cover there, Bell is still improving and has plenty of upside and Cachia is now a very solid midfield backup. Watson played with more intensity and confidence, and Rowe battled hard against a bloke who has destroyed us in the past.
McLean looked superfit, Everitt looks capable of being a great trade, Tuohy looked great and Curnow is now a running machine. Gibbs and Murph got some game time under their belt without getting out of second gear.
Everyone got through without any injury concerns, and it feels like we have better depth and potential in the kids now that the deadwood has been moved on.
The negatives was our ability to control the ball and utilise our clearance strength. To beat the strong defensive teams we need to be much better at moving and controlling the ball. Bootsma, Lucas and Casboult disappointed me - not going to hang them on one performance but their was a lot of 'same old stuff' from all three. Watching Lucas compared to Ryan Bastinac from the same draft brings tears to the eye. Bootsma is a complete mystery to me - his skill level, reading of the play and intensity seem no where near ALF level for mine. Casboult did a couple of nice things but has no consistency in his output.
Oh, and the shockingly inconsistent umpiring against us, especially rewarding good tackles, and the North Melbourne love from all the commentators and media.........
Bootsma's confidence seems shot. He was clearly introverted type from the beginning, but over the last 12 months i reckon he's played as if isolated. Am not suggesting in any way the team has isolated him, rather that he plays as if its a one on one game, when he loses a contest his head drops and you can feel his disappointment. He seems like a good kid, willing to get on with the job. I often find my self wishing he'd let fly with a swear gesture, or a punch his fist into the air, something that represents some raw emotion. He appears to be the embodiment of the clubs once apparent and deliberate chase for the quiet, humble, easily shaped persona. It Frustrates the heck out me at times, but I hope he gets through it.
I agree re Bootsma. I don't want to hang the kid on one game, but he just looks like he doesn't believe, and is scared of making a mistake. He appears hesitant when the ball is in his area and you can almost feel his lack of confidence. There was a huge difference when compared to the way Buckley, Menzel and Cripps all appeared confident and assured when the ball was in their area. They all attacked the ball with aggression and confidence. Watson also appeared to me to be much better in this area also.
Like everyone I hope he gets through it, but I just don't see what his 'weapon' is to succeed at this level. Being tall with long arms isn't enough - you need to also be a great reader of the play, strong with poise under pressure to be a 'one on on'e defender, and you need speed, skill, confidence and good game awareness to be a 'running rebound' defender.
I agree re Bootsma. I don't want to hang the kid on one game.....
You and none of us are, it's the collective of all the games he's played thus far. Yesterday's game was a carbon copy of every game he's played......the outlook isn't good.
Dunno, Bootsma's last qtr was very good IMO. Before not so but I have him ahead of McInnes and White. He needs muscle it must be said but to me his confidence grew in that last qtr when he took McInnes' spot as the 3rd tall. We probably need one of these blokes to take that role, or Giles, to allow both Everitt and Walker to swing between half-back and half-forward and not get dragged back to the last line too much or asked to play as predominately the 3rd tall in defence.
I like the pace and 'reach' on Bootsma and think we can work with him here. He's able to cut off leads with those traits and did so on the weekend. Good leap too just was super-low on confidence (until the last qtr) thus urgency too.
Dunno, Bootsma's last qtr was very good IMO. Before not so but I have him ahead of McInnes and White. He needs muscle it must be said but to me his confidence grew in that last qtr when he took McInnes' spot as the 3rd tall. We probably need one of these blokes to take that role, or Giles, to allow both Everitt and Walker to swing between half-back and half-forward and not get dragged back to the last line too much or asked to play as predominately the 3rd tall in defence.
I like the pace and 'reach' on Bootsma and think we can work with him here. He's able to cut off leads with those traits and did so on the weekend. Good leap too just was super-low on confidence (until the last qtr) thus urgency too.
I desperately hope you are right! But you need to have the ability and confidence to actually win your fair share of 'one on one' battles as the 3rd tall, by either outmarking your opponent, winning a battle of strength, or reading the play better when the ball hits the deck. If the opposition see you as the weak link, they will try to isolate and expose you one on one.
McInnes, White and Bootsma all have their limitations in this role. White has the body strength and is a good mark, but lacks pace, agility and endurance. McInnes is very fearless and hard, but looks raw and can be out positioned against the better opponents. Watson probably has to play a key post, because he would be exposed for pace and agility when the ball hits the ground if play 3rd tall in 1:1's. He looks better and more confident when their are other players around him to mop up.
I reckon Everitt will play this role in our 'best' 22 with everyone available. Strong, fast, tall enough, good skills and backs himself. His flexibility also means he is generally a good reader of the game. I reckon McInnes is second in line, with a fit White maybe third. Based on what I've seen, and on Saturday's showing, Bootsma is still a long way off being a regular AFL standard defender. He needs plenty more upper body strength and a good season building his confidence in the NB's before I would consider him in our best back 6.
Yep he has improvements to make - cannot see McInnes ahead. Looked terrible on the weekend and Bootsma was better - Im talking the last qtr in particular for Boots. White is handy, lacks a yard off the mark but is probably going to give us more both back and forward thus allowing the likes of Everitt and Walker to be freed up a bit. Is he in our best 22? Maybe.
Unfortunately Everitt will have to possibly play 3rd tall but him playing 3rd tall deep is not ideal. Not that strong one on one. He and Walks are better running and moving around. That's their strength.
Yep he has improvements to make - cannot see McInnes ahead. Looked terrible on the weekend and Bootsma was better - Im talking the last qtr in particular for Boots. White is handy, lacks a yard off the mark but is probably going to give us more both back and forward thus allowing the likes of Everitt and Walker to be freed up a bit. Is he in our best 22? Maybe.
Unfortunately Everitt will have to possibly play 3rd tall but him playing 3rd tall deep is not ideal. Not that strong one on one. He and Walks are better running and moving around. That's their strength.
I don't disgaree with anything you've said there. I was also talking about McInnes more generally based on last years end of season form rather than the weekend specifically. He went through a purple patch when he came back from injury late in the H&A rounds, but was very ordinary vs Richmond. I think the feeling was he ran out of steam due to the injury and no preseason, but would be back to his best this year. He didn't do much on the weekend other than run into Petrie, so its hard assess where he is right now in the pecking order, but I do remember MM praising him at the end of last year.
Like you I am a 'maybe' on White - he's a real competitor, tough and uncompromising, which I love. But his lack of agility and speed are however hard to rectify and cover, but he does have versatility to go up forward that McInnes and Bootsma don't yet have. Given how important run out defense is in the modern game, and MM's gameplan, I think he will struggle to be in our best 22.
There is 1 bloke who I reckon is not getting anywhere near enough recognition for his contribution so far, and that is the junkyard dog himself Dean Laidley, he was the epitome of the shinboner spirit at North and he has now brought that with him to the Blues and I reckoned we out Northed North in the way our midfield went about it on Saturday. Laidley deserves a fair bit of credit for that I reckon, and it can only be good for us going forward !!
There is 1 bloke who I reckon is not getting anywhere near enough recognition for his contribution so far, and that is the junkyard dog himself Dean Laidley, he was the epitome of the shinboner spirit at North and he has now brought that with him to the Blues and I reckoned we out Northed North in the way our midfield went about it on Saturday. Laidley deserves a fair bit of credit for that I reckon, and it can only be good for us going forward !!
Really :o You spotted all that from a game of touch footy.
Hard to tell the Laidley impact yet, the deal will be how blokes like Bell and Curnow mature.
Surprised to see Curnow break free on the wing, must have got chilli on his ar5e because he has never run so fast! Maybe the "potential" future father in law is keeping him on edge!
Bootsma, while still on the slight side, has definitely put on a bit of meat around the upper body, looked good for it.
Does your TV have one of those 'whacky mirror' screens, 'cos he looked absolutely no different physically, except for some new inkwork on his right forearm....possibly to try to make himself look tougher....I'm trying hard to say that with a straight face.....
Have to agree. Terrible use of the ball as well.
Also agree. Hard to find positives for Bootsma. When up forward looked completely lost. Looked more at home in defence but even then his kicking disposal was not good. Hard to see who he could keep out of the backline!
The Warnock / Wood contest will be really interesting. Wood needs to improve his rucking, especially around the boundary but as a resting ruckman up forward is far more likely to take marks and convert.
Wood is a rookie though so there's no contest.
Wood is a rookie though so there's no contest.
Wood, assuming he also stays injury free which is not one of his strengths, will be the next player elevated without doubt.
It is only a matter of time.
Wood is a rookie though so there's no contest.
Wood, assuming he also stays injury free which is not one of his strengths, will be the next player elevated without doubt.
It is only a matter of time.
Tend to agree.....you dont have to be too smart to figure out that Wood was a Malthouse inspired selection and Mick will be pushing up for him to be the next promoted IMO.
My preference is for Luke Reynolds who I think can add something different being a goalkicker as I have said before...hope he plays vs the Crows..
I gotta say...Its premature I know, lost of water to pass under the bridge before an assessment can be proclaimed justified, but trading out Hampson in return for a second rounder that was used to land the big E , whilst covering any benefit Hampson may have provided by selecting Wood via the Rookie draft, might end being a master stroke. Its not as if Wood has to remain injury free the whole season, he just has to be on par with Hampson availability wise for us to brake even in that dept. Hamps doesnt have a outstanding injury free history either.
I gotta say...Its premature I know, lost of water to pass under the bridge before an assessment can be proclaimed justified, but trading out Hampson in return for a second rounder that was used to land the big E , whilst covering any benefit Hampson may have provided by selecting Wood via the Rookie draft, might end being a master stroke. Its not as if Wood has to remain injury free the whole season, he just has to be on par with Hampson availability wise for us to brake even in that dept. Hamps doesnt have a outstanding injury free history either.
We used that pick (indirectly) for Docherty? But let's say it was for Andreas...
For me, a lot depends on how Hammer goes at Richmond and if Warnock continues to be a tapping witch's hat.
If Hammer goes well and Everitt/Docherty go well it will probably be seen as a win/win but if Warnock struggles then it will always be a question of whether we made the right trade. Then again, maybe a Warnock trade doesn't get us the pick that lands us Sam....
I gotta say...Its premature I know, lost of water to pass under the bridge before an assessment can be proclaimed justified, but trading out Hampson in return for a second rounder that was used to land the big E , whilst covering any benefit Hampson may have provided by selecting Wood via the Rookie draft, might end being a master stroke. Its not as if Wood has to remain injury free the whole season, he just has to be on par with Hampson availability wise for us to brake even in that dept. Hamps doesnt have a outstanding injury free history either.
We used that pick (indirectly) for Docherty? But let's say it was for Andreas...
For me, a lot depends on how Hammer goes at Richmond and if Warnock continues to be a tapping witch's hat.
If Hammer goes well and Everitt/Docherty go well it will probably be seen as a win/win but if Warnock struggles then it will always be a question of whether we made the right trade. Then again, maybe a Warnock trade doesn't get us the pick that lands us Sam....
A Warnock trade would have been near impossible considering he had about 3 years to go on his contract. Reckon he was never considered. Was always gonna be Hammer, regardless.
What concerns me is that we still kick the ball straight to opp, bomb the ball into our fwdline, only to see the opp run away with the football.Malthouse and co have to change this.1 e.g thouy running through the centre boots it long and commentator says kicked to no one, i want to see space,forwards leading.
What concerns me is that we still kick the ball straight to opp, bomb the ball into our fwdline, only to see the opp run away with the football.Malthouse and co have to change this.1 e.g thouy running through the centre boots it long and commentator says kicked to no one, i want to see space,forwards leading.
It was our first hit out mate... Give the players some time to get back into the swing of things.. ;)
I gotta say...Its premature I know, lost of water to pass under the bridge before an assessment can be proclaimed justified, but trading out Hampson in return for a second rounder that was used to land the big E , whilst covering any benefit Hampson may have provided by selecting Wood via the Rookie draft, might end being a master stroke. Its not as if Wood has to remain injury free the whole season, he just has to be on par with Hampson availability wise for us to brake even in that dept. Hamps doesnt have a outstanding injury free history either.
We used that pick (indirectly) for Docherty? But let's say it was for Andreas...
For me, a lot depends on how Hammer goes at Richmond and if Warnock continues to be a tapping witch's hat.
If Hammer goes well and Everitt/Docherty go well it will probably be seen as a win/win but if Warnock struggles then it will always be a question of whether we made the right trade. Then again, maybe a Warnock trade doesn't get us the pick that lands us Sam....
A Warnock trade would have been near impossible considering he had about 3 years to go on his contract. Reckon he was never considered. Was always gonna be Hammer, regardless.
IMHO a Warnock trade would have been silly.
No matter how good Hammer could have been, he would still be a barely there proposition as opposed to the other two. Warnock and Kreuzer if they are competitive or winning their ruck duals, it will go a long way to winning matches.
I dont think that was ever true of Hammer. The trouble being is that even when he won the ruck dual, it wouldnt necessarily be to our advantage like the other two.
I gotta say...Its premature I know, lost of water to pass under the bridge before an assessment can be proclaimed justified, but trading out Hampson in return for a second rounder that was used to land the big E , whilst covering any benefit Hampson may have provided by selecting Wood via the Rookie draft, might end being a master stroke. Its not as if Wood has to remain injury free the whole season, he just has to be on par with Hampson availability wise for us to brake even in that dept. Hamps doesnt have a outstanding injury free history either.
We used that pick (indirectly) for Docherty? But let's say it was for Andreas...
For me, a lot depends on how Hammer goes at Richmond and if Warnock continues to be a tapping witch's hat.
If Hammer goes well and Everitt/Docherty go well it will probably be seen as a win/win but if Warnock struggles then it will always be a question of whether we made the right trade. Then again, maybe a Warnock trade doesn't get us the pick that lands us Sam....
A Warnock trade would have been near impossible considering he had about 3 years to go on his contract. Reckon he was never considered. Was always gonna be Hammer, regardless.
IMHO a Warnock trade would have been silly.
No matter how good Hammer could have been, he would still be a barely there proposition as opposed to the other two. Warnock and Kreuzer if they are competitive or winning their ruck duals, it will go a long way to winning matches.
I dont think that was ever true of Hammer. The trouble being is that even when he won the ruck dual, it wouldnt necessarily be to our advantage like the other two.
Couldn't agree more.
3 Leos... this being on the same page stuff is getting spooky!!
Bit of an unfair call on hammer. If the other two were left to struggle as go to marking targets (and Hammer is not a forward) they'd probably have a line their them already. His last decent run in the ruck before being injured he was pretty damn good.
@IOT, Ill agree to disagree with you.
Looking solely at his ruck work, he was at best competitive.
Competitive doesnt win you premierships.
Im tired of making excuses for players that will be sometimes players. I was thinking about this on the way to work this morning, and If I were in charge at the Blues, I would put Gibbs negotiations on hold until the end of the season if he knocks back an initial contract offer which is deemed to be fair. It could be a parting of ways that suits both of us as the acquistion and then annual wait for Gibbs to come of age represents exactly why we have taken so long to emerge from mediocrity. We are too afraid to make the hard calls. Moving Hammer on was the first of many that we are required to make.
This all occurred listening to Troy Chaplin on SEN this morning. He was another just going through the motions as a good ordinary AFL footballer and then he moved to Richmond. He had no pressing need to move, but hearing him talk, the move has done him the world of good. Not to mention the opening at Port has allowed others to come in and play his role who might be a bit hungrier and this has also lifted Port. Im not in favour of this occurring En Masse, but in certain situations it might be time. Make an offer, if he asks for time, give him time, and weigh in again later. He is a restricted free agent. If we decide to match any offers, he isnt going anywhere. No point bidding up his price unless absolutely required.
We had two ruckman in excess of requirement: Hammer and Sauce.
Worthies both!
Wood is a great pick up, lots of ability, lots of salary cap!
We know Hammer could break out and be the total winner - but on his injury form, he won't!
We had one more HFF than we needed.
With MickM at the the helm, we have had an exceptional recruiting year!
It seems MickM is impacting on the 2015 plans!!
IMHO a Warnock trade would have been silly.
No matter how good Hammer could have been, he would still be a barely there proposition as opposed to the other two. Warnock and Kreuzer if they are competitive or winning their ruck duals, it will go a long way to winning matches.
I dont think that was ever true of Hammer. The trouble being is that even when he won the ruck dual, it wouldnt necessarily be to our advantage like the other two.
I think you are making yourself feel better about the trade.
You will find plenty of posts here on the forum (Not just mine by the way) that rated Hampson a better ruckmen than you profess. In fact even last season there were plenty of us who watched the NBs who just couldn't not understand why he wasn't getting a game in the 1s ahead of Warnock. At times Warnock spent the majority of time in the NBs sitting on the bench while Hampson and Meese did the bulk of the ruck work. Prior to his late season injury Hampson was in far better ruck form than SpecialK, and was always far better around the ground than Warnock who is basically exceptionally good in a one dimensional center bounce role.
Bit of an unfair call on hammer. If the other two were left to struggle as go to marking targets (and Hammer is not a forward) they'd probably have a line their them already. His last decent run in the ruck before being injured he was pretty damn good.
And here in lies the rub, we traded away a genuine first ruck option and kept a bunch of failing KPPs. For those carrying on about the $avings, not really, as I have had it explained to me Wood qualifies as a 9th year player so he isn't such a great saving as a rookie. The AFLPA do not discriminate between 8 years plus 1 later and 9 years continuous service. Despite being on the rookie list he is earning a very tidy sum, far more than an 18 year old which is in my opinion who we should have been recruiting! This is exactly the situation Collingwood tried on when they wanted to appoint Ben Hudson as a $300K playing(rookie) ruck coach.
@IOT, Ill agree to disagree with you.
Looking solely at his ruck work, he was at best competitive.
Competitive doesnt win you premierships.
Im tired of making excuses for players that will be sometimes players. I was thinking about this on the way to work this morning, and If I were in charge at the Blues, I would put Gibbs negotiations on hold until the end of the season if he knocks back an initial contract offer which is deemed to be fair. It could be a parting of ways that suits both of us as the acquistion and then annual wait for Gibbs to come of age represents exactly why we have taken so long to emerge from mediocrity. We are too afraid to make the hard calls. Moving Hammer on was the first of many that we are required to make.
Yet you continue to support Casboult!!!
^^
Acid's on him too LP.
We can't get rid of them all though. His time will come.
Yep, this is a very big year for Meat and Rowey and they both must be aware that it's deliver or FO. I have a hunch there will be another clean-out at year's end, though not 25 like last year. Probably 12-15.
@IOT, Ill agree to disagree with you.
Looking solely at his ruck work, he was at best competitive.
Competitive doesnt win you premierships.
Im tired of making excuses for players that will be sometimes players. I was thinking about this on the way to work this morning, and If I were in charge at the Blues, I would put Gibbs negotiations on hold until the end of the season if he knocks back an initial contract offer which is deemed to be fair. It could be a parting of ways that suits both of us as the acquistion and then annual wait for Gibbs to come of age represents exactly why we have taken so long to emerge from mediocrity. We are too afraid to make the hard calls. Moving Hammer on was the first of many that we are required to make.
This all occurred listening to Troy Chaplin on SEN this morning. He was another just going through the motions as a good ordinary AFL footballer and then he moved to Richmond. He had no pressing need to move, but hearing him talk, the move has done him the world of good. Not to mention the opening at Port has allowed others to come in and play his role who might be a bit hungrier and this has also lifted Port. Im not in favour of this occurring En Masse, but in certain situations it might be time. Make an offer, if he asks for time, give him time, and weigh in again later. He is a restricted free agent. If we decide to match any offers, he isnt going anywhere. No point bidding up his price unless absolutely required.
Chaplin had a dodgy knee didnt he? and Port didnt want to offer any long term well paid contract for a player they though was risky...
I wouldnt be offering Gibbs a fortune to stay and if he wants to go then fine by me...
@IOT, Ill agree to disagree with you.
Looking solely at his ruck work, he was at best competitive.
Competitive doesnt win you premierships.
Im tired of making excuses for players that will be sometimes players. I was thinking about this on the way to work this morning, and If I were in charge at the Blues, I would put Gibbs negotiations on hold until the end of the season if he knocks back an initial contract offer which is deemed to be fair. It could be a parting of ways that suits both of us as the acquistion and then annual wait for Gibbs to come of age represents exactly why we have taken so long to emerge from mediocrity. We are too afraid to make the hard calls. Moving Hammer on was the first of many that we are required to make.
This all occurred listening to Troy Chaplin on SEN this morning. He was another just going through the motions as a good ordinary AFL footballer and then he moved to Richmond. He had no pressing need to move, but hearing him talk, the move has done him the world of good. Not to mention the opening at Port has allowed others to come in and play his role who might be a bit hungrier and this has also lifted Port. Im not in favour of this occurring En Masse, but in certain situations it might be time. Make an offer, if he asks for time, give him time, and weigh in again later. He is a restricted free agent. If we decide to match any offers, he isnt going anywhere. No point bidding up his price unless absolutely required.
Chaplin had a dodgy knee didnt he? and Port didnt want to offer any long term well paid contract for a player they though was risky...
I wouldnt be offering Gibbs a fortune to stay and if he wants to go then fine by me...
I think there was more to the chaplin story than just an injury.
Yep, this is a very big year for Meat and Rowey and they both must be aware that it's deliver or FO. I have a hunch there will be another clean-out at year's end, though not 25 like last year. Probably 12-15.
You are probably right. There were a number of guys who were not seriously considered for flicking due to their contract situation. This time some of them will go.
IMHO a Warnock trade would have been silly.
No matter how good Hammer could have been, he would still be a barely there proposition as opposed to the other two. Warnock and Kreuzer if they are competitive or winning their ruck duals, it will go a long way to winning matches.
I dont think that was ever true of Hammer. The trouble being is that even when he won the ruck dual, it wouldnt necessarily be to our advantage like the other two.
I think you are making yourself feel better about the trade.
You will find plenty of posts here on the forum (Not just mine by the way) that rated Hampson a better ruckmen than you profess. In fact even last season there were plenty of us who watched the NBs who just couldn't not understand why he wasn't getting a game in the 1s ahead of Warnock. At times Warnock spent the majority of time in the NBs sitting on the bench while Hampson and Meese did the bulk of the ruck work. Prior to his late season injury Hampson was in far better ruck form than SpecialK, and was always far better around the ground than Warnock who is basically exceptionally good in a one dimensional center bounce role.
Bit of an unfair call on hammer. If the other two were left to struggle as go to marking targets (and Hammer is not a forward) they'd probably have a line their them already. His last decent run in the ruck before being injured he was pretty damn good.
And here in lies the rub, we traded away a genuine first ruck option and kept a bunch of failing KPPs. For those carrying on about the $avings, not really, as I have had it explained to me Wood qualifies as a 9th year player so he isn't such a great saving as a rookie. The AFLPA do not discriminate between 8 years plus 1 later and 9 years continuous service. Despite being on the rookie list he is earning a very tidy sum, far more than an 18 year old which is in my opinion who we should have been recruiting! This is exactly the situation Collingwood tried on when they wanted to appoint Ben Hudson as a $300K playing(rookie) ruck coach.
It still hurts doesn't it.
You can always go by a Richmond scarf and go barrack for Hammer. He had 7 years here and didn't bugger all when it was all said and done. At least Casboult's young enough to do something and can actually take a mark up forward, not drop it.
I gave up player worship at 15.
^^
I must be the world's greatest Jim fisherman. ;D ;D ;D
I think I could go fishing in a deep, dark, dead stagnant corner back water of this forum and catch a Jim with only a "Cas......" or an "......oult!!!"
Yep, this is a very big year for Meat and Rowey and they both must be aware that it's deliver or FO. I have a hunch there will be another clean-out at year's end, though not 25 like last year. Probably 12-15.
Only reason any of them survive is if the elder statesmen decide its time to pull the pin and if we have too many that just continue treading water.
One thing is for sure, Cameron Wood has already done enough to make players feel nervous moving forward, and although I wouldnt be making guarantees, if Cachia keeps doing what he is doing a senior list spot is on the cards for him.
I think we have a new topic of discussion forming here actually. Very few are guaranteed of anything moving forward, and I like it.
I was another who was pleasantly surprised by Wood's effort. As said before, he's just got to improve his ruck work. But how good is it to have a ruckman who can take a mark up forward and then kick straight :o Only one game... but...