Well done young man
Congratulations Charlie 🏅
Congratulations Charlie 🏅
👍
First time in 120 odd years that there are back to back Coleman medallists from the same club that are not the same player.
Let's see if we can make it 3 in a row!
..and an almost guaranteed All Australian.
..and an almost guaranteed All Australian.
.......which will mean how many now??
Great effort by Charlie.
Could legit have Charlie, Cripps, Saad or Doc all in AA and miss the finals. That would be a first surely. 3 AA and no finals
Could legit have Charlie, Cripps, Saad or Doc all in AA and miss the finals. That would be a first surely. 3 AA and no finals
Don't forget Weitering.
He was a lock before he got injured.
Don't forget Weitering.
He was a lock before he got injured.
Nope Weitering is no chance. Failed to get in last year and had a much better year. May will get FB again imo
Nope Weitering is no chance. Failed to get in last year and had a much better year. May will get FB again imo
Wonder if TDK's brother is a sneaky chance.....
Wonder if TDK's brother is a sneaky chance.....
More than a sneaky chance EB.
Yep, well done on staying true, and backing yourself in with your ability. You deserve all you get with your hard work.
I know it won't be popular, but I can't get over the possibility of this guy turning into a forward Kouta clone, and yes, before you all shout me down, yes I know how important he is up forward, but he could be simply next level in my opinion - just my 0.000002c worth.
Yep, well done on staying true, and backing yourself in with your ability. You deserve all you get with your hard work.
I know it won't be popular, but I can't get over the possibility of this guy turning into a forward Kouta clone, and yes, before you all shout me down, yes I know how important he is up forward, but he could be simply next level in my opinion - just my 0.000002c worth.
I think midfield bursts are not out of the question
How about he stick to converting easy enough chances to score.
Hes kicked 3.9 in the last two games.
This is supposed to be a congratulatory thread... so congratulations Charlie. :)
(But I think he only goes about 75% a lot of the time.)
Both forwards need to stop looking so laconic.
Each set shot for goal should be like it is their one and only chance not like they are at training and having 100 shots at goal.
This effort is one of the most outstanding in the whole competition - from where he was at the end of last year to winning a Coleman is mind-boggling.
How I wish he had kicked just one more.....
The round the corner improves Harry's kicking, not sure it improves Charlie's?
How about he stick to converting easy enough chances to score.
Hes kicked 3.9 in the last two games.
Yes, I cannot quite recall all of them, but I think over the last five games, there have been at least three instances of 2.5 or 1.4 type results. If I remember correctly, Collingwood, Melbourne and St Kilda games.
How about he stick to converting easy enough chances to score.
Hes kicked 3.9 in the last two games.
Next year, Ill take Charlie's 64.42 from this year and H's 58.33 from last year every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
Next year, Ill take Charlie's 64.42 from this year and H's 58.33 from last year every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
I was responding to the idea of turning him into a midfielder
I was responding to the idea of turning him into a midfielder
Ok sorry about that, I was pointing out that Charlie and H are the least of our problems that caused our capitulation.
Great efforts from BigH and Charlie in consecutive years, congratulations.
Yet our forward setup is an obvious problem, I get that ball use entering our F50 is also a problem, but regardless we generated 50% more I50s than the Filth and was 25% worse at creating a scoring opportunity.
That's wasted effort, which means turnovers, and we don't have a team with enough run in it's tank to tolerate that sort of poor efficiency in the F50. That is a deadly combination, Mids and HBFs stop trying to hit high value risky targets when the chance of success is so low, because they are the ones that get hurt going the other way.
It's no good saying Charlie and BigH suffer from poor F50 entries, because outside of Cripps( 10 ) and Doc( 8 ) it was Charlie( 7 ) with the next most I50 attempts. As for Disposal Efficiency, Charlie was 2nd worst on the list on the day, the only bloke worse was Newnes and he didn't get a stat because he never got on the ground! It's a bit laughable to claim we need Charlie in the Mid rotation! Charlie is a marking target with terrific aerobic capcity.
Ok sorry about that, I was pointing out that Charlie and H are the least of our problems that caused our capitulation.
No worries, and as true as that might be, the two big forwards went missing went it counted in plenty of circumstances this year.
Charlie's game against Collingwood was the type that causes the sort of reason we needed an 8 goal quarter to get into a winning position.
Charlie's style is also one of the reasons why 8 goal quarters happen.
its a bit of a pickle, because you dont want to over coach these types, and after his horror run of the last few years, you definately need to give him a bit of leeway.
Thing is, I singled him out for his early, and late efforts in the game. His more than any were real momentum swingers and I know he would love to have a few of those moments again. Particularly that one early that got out the back and he swung a boot at a loose ball rather than running onto it, and taking his kick and scoring the goal instead of a point in the 1st quarter.
That last posession to no one in particular, not even a marking target was another that he would want to have again.
Great efforts from BigH and Charlie in consecutive years, congratulations.
Yet our forward setup is an obvious problem, I get that ball use entering our F50 is also a problem, but regardless we generated 50% more I50s than the Filth and was 25% worse at creating a scoring opportunity.
That's wasted effort, which means turnovers, and we don't have a team with enough run in it's tank to tolerate that sort of poor efficiency in the F50. That is a deadly combination, Mids and HBFs stop trying to hit high value risky targets when the chance of success is so low, because they are the ones that get hurt going the other way.
It's no good saying Charlie and BigH suffer from poor F50 entries, because outside of Cripps( 10 ) and Doc( 8 ) it was Charlie( 7 ) with the next most I50 attempts. As for Disposal Efficiency, Charlie was 2nd worst on the list on the day, the only bloke worse was Newnes and he didn't get a stat because he never got on the ground! It's a bit laughable to claim we need Charlie in the Mid rotation! Charlie is a marking target with terrific aerobic capcity.
I have no idea what you are attempting to say after the bold.
But i think this stat sums it up that we very much suffered from poor F50 entries.
I50s
Carlton - 65
Collingwood - 44
Thats basically 50% more chances of a mark.
M150
Carlton - 11
Collingwood - 9
Thats only a 22% increase in MI50.
Now either their backs are elite, or our forwards are crap.
Given 2 of our marking forwards have won coleman medals in the last 2 years, i don't think its on them.
So if the lack of marks from an increased inside 50 count is NOT from poor entries, then please explain.
I have no idea what you are attempting to say after the bold.
Both Charlie and BigH missed wide open targets inside F50 from marks outside F50, and both chose poor options more than once, sure that is the oddity for them to be marking up the field, but the wider problem isn't just one for the onballers to consider.
If you want to talk the talk, you have to walk the walk. For example Fev would demand pinpoint disposal, but the odd time he was found marking outside of range, I know it wasn't very often, he would usually find a target inside F50 mostly motivated by the desire to run forward and become a reciprocal recipient! ;D
^^
Fev was never really marking out of range. Stayed within 60 metres of goal, and was a chance to slot it from there.
Both Charlie and BigH missed wide open targets inside F50 from marks outside F50, and both chose poor options more than once, sure that is the oddity for them to be marking up the field, but the wider problem isn't just one for the onballers to consider.
If you want to talk the talk, you have to walk the walk. For example Fev would demand pinpoint disposal, but the odd time he was found marking outside of range, I know it wasn't very often, he would usually find a target inside F50 mostly motivated by the desire to run forward and become a reciprocal recipient! ;D
So they made some bad decisions, so did just about everyone else.
We had 21 more inside 50's than the opposition.
Even without Charlies 7, and Harry's 1, we still had 13 more inside 50's.
Whichever way you wanna slice it, our mids failed to hit targets inside 50.
Have a look through the stat sheet, we basically dominated the game except for a couple stats.
Hitouts (23-43) (Hitouts to advantage though (13-14) we dominate clearances 47-33)
and
R50's. (32-55)
and
Intercept marks (17-23)
Surprising stat was tackles inside forward 50 (15-3).
Put it all together and it showed that our pressure I50 was greater, because the ball was on the ground and in dispute because we couldn't hit a target. They were able to clear it because despite our pressure, the ball was not to our advantage.
By the same token, they didn't need to have the same kind of pressure because they put the ball to their advantage more often and were able to score easier despite less I50's.
The last goal is a classic example of this. Doesn't always have to lead to marks, just to their advantage.