Murphy's fractured cheekbone was more serious than I thought:
Quote
Murphy and Hodge had their eyes firmly fixed on the ball at Etihad Stadium in round 12 when the heavy clash forced Murphy from the field with concussion and a fractured cheekbone. He was taken to hospital and expected to miss up to a month.
The incident could not have come at a worse time for the tough midfielder, for he had just had 31 disposals against Essendon and rediscovered his groove. This came on top of a restrictive right knee, operated on over summer, which has reduced him to one training session a week.
Surgery to repair the cheekbone meant he was unable to eat properly, living on what he said on Monday was a diet of protein shakes and mushy food.
As the surgery was in a delicate spot, he could not lift weights, for fear it would affect the alignment of his jaw.
OK, yes I think MM would be frustrated with Mitch at times, as we all can be and I would think they have probably discussed it between the two of them. I think MM's remarks at the presser would not have come as a great surprise to Mitch and he didn't say anything new about him - my point is that Mitch is a big enough boy to cope with that, which I'm sure he does.
Agree,
I suspect he will be traded though
Why?
Is there someone better able to perform the role that Robbo does? Is any other team interested enough in Robbo to countenance trading for him? If so, do they have a player we want?
I suspect that the answer to all three questions is no.
Interestingly, the only other player I can think of who gave away a goal in similar circumstances was Adam Goodes. I wonder if he thought that he would be traded
I wouldn't read too much into Robbo's comments Tex. He probably thought that being traded or delisted was the worst thing that could happen to him; not an unreasonable scenario regardless of anything the coach may have said before or after the event.
I'd prefer to have DOA around than not. He rarely provides us with too much insight, but the times that he does its worth its weight in gold.
I like Andrew, and love it when he is up and about and is playing well, but the game against Richmond yesterday was not one of his best.
Its fair enough for his dad to get defensive, but Walker has had a very good season, and DOA should be proud of him. Hopefully he is able to tighten up his defensive play a bit, as I dont see why he should get worse when playing closer to the goal square, but thats another story. I think our backline as a whole failed to keep the match ups to our advantage by allowing Jamo to run up the ground with Riewoldt. When he goes, we should be switching opponents accordingly, so Jamo is left on Edwards (win for us) and Walker up the ground with Riewoldt can only help us especially if Walker is able to get to the ball first.
I tend to agree Thry. However, I have a feeling that Malthouse knows full well that Walker, Simpson, Yarran, Tuohy, Armfield, Gibbs, etc are not dour defenders and will give away goals. I think it is more a calculated risk that the run they provide out of the backline will provide more scoring opportunities for us and will tempt the opposition to use more defensive forwards.
I also think that Edwards was a particularly difficult match-up for Tuohy, McInnes and Walker, and Simon White would have been better suited to matching his strength and marking.
One of the more interesting moments in the game was the half time walk off. Robertson REALLY gave Bell a serve, something he richly deserved. Bell didn't like it and rather than accepting the criticism, stupidly responded.
I suspect more was said in the rooms, but Tom needs to shut up, work on his weaknesses and play with far more awareness of what's around him rather than assuming he has the time on his side when looking for downfield options.
Good way to improve a young player is to berate them at half time coming off the field...not.
Robbo needs to get his own house in order and learn the rules...
I didn't see that at the ground but just watched it on the replay. Judd had a few quiet words with Bell, then Robbo had a chat with him. I'm no lip reader but the body language suggested that Bell was asking for advice rather than responding to a bake. I'm sure Judd would have pulled Robbo up if he was berating Bell.
Bit harsh DJC reckon 206 did alright and was very important in the clearances, which basically saw us kick the comeback goals in the third. One of Maric's goal was from Robbo's brain fade not because he did anything special.
Kreuzer looked injured but still managed to do his job (admittedly limited). Vickery was not influential with his 14 disposals and apart from the two goals hardly call him damaging on the day, actually never seen him damage an opposition - bit like Grigg.
Understand what you're saying about the around the ground stuff, but finals footy sees alot of stoppages and I thought we had the advantage there. Agree with you though that our rucks didn't pants theirs but happy to call it even and maybe the spoils go to the victors
That's a fair assessment Goat. Our blokes' hitouts created plenty of opportunities for our midfielders and I guess that was a key factor in the outcome. However, they both need to do more around the ground; a few contested marks, or even uncontested marks, would be nice. Of course, Mumford and Pyke don't normally rack up possessions.
‘‘I just had to try competing. I am not the most gifted footballer going around, I am not lightning quick, I don’t have too any great attributes. I just had to keep working and I got some reward which was great.’’
Not sure we have had a sweeter moment in recent years than Garlett intercepting the ball in the last qtr, hurdling the Richmond player and then being in the clear... pretty sure every Carlton supporter was up on their feet as soon as he got the ball, and he still had about 60 m to run. I had to sit down before he kicked it as i was about to pass out.
We lucky to be in the game at qtr time, unlucky not to be closer at half time, finally we started to get our hands on the ball in the 2nd half and the game started to flow our way.
Absolutely epic day. Swan St was absolutely pumping pre-game. Biggest non-GF crowd i think i've been at, let's face it Richmond are good for football... and they are great for Carlton.
The teams that one on the weekend had the dominant rucks.
We pantsed Richmond in the ruck.
Are you sure LR?
Warnock had four more hitouts than Maric. Warnock kicked one goal to Maric's two. Maric had 16 disposals, took two marks, had six clearances and laid three tackles. Warnock had six disposals, no marks, no clearances and one tackle.
Kreuzer had 13 more hitouts than Vickery. However, Vickery kicked two goals, took six marks, had 14 disposals and two clearances. Kreuzer had four disposals and one clearance. Kreuzer did stick four tackles, as did Vickery.
Our rucks may have won more hitouts (and far more than usual were directed to our players) but they were ineffectual around the ground.
I reckon Wanock has put on some muscle and getting more aggressive and confident...
Warnock is pushing out Kreuzer or Hampson. One of the other 2 might not be at the club too much longer.
I think a reality check is in order here Mantis
Warnock got lots of hitouts, kicked a ripper goal, dished out a couple of bumps, and got thoroughly pantsed by Maric. Kreuzer got lots of hitouts too, did some heavy work, saved quite a few goals with great spoils, and got thoroughly pantsed by Maric.
I think Kreuzer is still ahead of Warnock by virtue of his ability to be more than just a tap ruckman. Warnock is an exceptional tap ruckman but is limited by his inability to go forward or win the ball around the ground. Hampson is, in my view, a better tap ruckman than the other two and is more versatile than Warnock. His inability to play out a season is a drawback but the other two aren't that much better. In fact, retaining all three on our list is probably the best way to ensure that we have at least one specialist ruckman available.
Bells kicking wasn't great at all but he found the ball when others couldn't and moved fast for a big kid in the second half. Needs work but is what we need.
It's why, for all the frustration at times, players like Bell and Robbo are so important in tough finals.
We learnt how important Waite and Betts are too and why I'd be happy to pay the latter good $$$$
Yes, his presence is good and i acknowledge as much, but if he is only a 50-50 chance of finding a teammate when he has the ball, what is the point?
If we remove him from the game today....every time he actually got the ball, we say it was a 50-50 contest instead...what have we lost? What we have lost is another player who is more capable of finding a teammate when they get it.
re Menzel...didn't get much of a chance to get into the game re Walker...6 R50's, 3 1%ers, 14 touches @ 78.6%. Not a great game, but better than bell. re McInness...at least he found a teammate 4 / 5 times he got the ball. =2nd in 1%ers (with 6) showed he was putting in in the backline too. re Tuohy...13 touches @ 69%. Did what was required without dominating.
Sorry, but next week swap Bell and McLean and lets go to Sydney.
Its not about Bell winning the ball every tim either its about Bell blocking or getting his body in the way and preventing an opposing player getting the footy.....Bell and Robbo did the dirty work today and deserve full credit regardless of clangars etc.....you ask Daniel Jackson, Trent Cotchin if they like having Bells big frame coming their way or in Jacksons case looking over your shoulder which he did a couple of times. Against Sydney both Murphy and Gibbs will be tagged heavily and will need some big bodies in the scrum to help them out......
