You can bet that Freo will show up to spank Port if they can help it. If I were them I would want a home final and given the percentage between them and Sydney is small (1.5% difference), they might even be hoping that Sydney get up against Geelong in a tight one, because if they can win by a big enough margin, they might book themselves a home final, especially with Sydney playing vs Hawthorn at the G next friday which will be a huge match and go some way to deciding who finishes where.
If we win and Port lose, then we get to play for our season the following week. To a certain extent, our season is in our own hands and if we are good enough we will get to play finals.
Freo players dropping like flies. Now Ibbotson is out.
Freo might want to be careful about throwing the game as Richmond can take their place in the top 4
Port have been having a great run with the umpires too. Driving me nuts.
Richmond are 10 points behind with 2 games left to play, how can they finish 4th?
I think it actually serves to control what people put into their opinions so support the removal of the rating, even if it was an intersting new addition.
Sometimes we see people making unpopular statements that are condemned by posters and people get de - carma'ed accordingly.
Personally, I dislike the carma for the poster, but would like if changed for the post, as that way you condemn/like the content of what someone was saying without swelling a stupid rating to the poster.
Denimundies as an example ended up with a right rogering in the karma stakes, but much of what he wrote was just offering a different perspective. Credit to him for not changing his posting, and sticking with the same content.
Thank-you for the Jab Watson nickname, if you hear someone screaming;
"Kick it to Jab, kick it to Jab!"
You know it was all your idea!
I cant take the credit unfortunately, I saw it written down some where (possibly on here) and then thought that it was very clever. Thought I would share the love on here anyway!
This is the sort of game that we win straight after a match like the one vs the Tigers. The following week is when the heads swell, the media jump aboard, and just when we hold our destiny in our hands and start giving everyone a glimmer of hope, we lay down and get done by Port with an extremely flat performance.
Okeefe is playing for his career...Bootsma isnt...Okeefe is also more physically developed and we need stronger bodies in the seniors.....we need a good kicking half back flanker with Scotland close to retiring and Gibbs now more likely to be playing further up the ground. Big rewards if Okeefe makes it as a player and Bootsma has time on his side to develop...
I don't think O'Keeffe is tall enough to be a direct swap out for Bootsma, O'Keeffe is more likely to get a run if someone like Tuohy or Armfield went down.
If Crameri plays again O'Keeffe could do a job on him perhaps, but the other forwards O'Keeffe is either too small or too slow.
Having to rotate Waite back to cover for Bootsma being sub'd is not ideal, if we started with O'Keeffe we would already be starting with a very small defensive line up and would lose some of that flexibility. Waite did play better in defense but doesn't look like a defender, that is not his mindset he is more like a taller and slower version of Walker.
Not seeing the weekend game live I did not notice on the replay, but did Bootsma get anytime up forward?
It will be interesting to see how they all go against the EssenScum who I think have a much harder defensive unit than Nthmond!
Boots went forward briefly on the weekend, but failed to impact any contest, nor was it delivered to him particularly well.
Bootsma has struggled all season and I don't understand Malthouse's perseverance with him while others are dropped and/or not given an opportunity. It may be help with development if younger players are given an opportunity and I think the sub provides the best way to do that. Starting Bootsma on Riewoldt was folly, not to mention not giving any respect to one of the premier key forwards.
I'm not sure where Bootsma's career is going; he is not big enough for a key defensive role and, while he is not bad at spoiling, he lacks the judgement and ability to spoil effectively; how many times do his spoils end up with an opposition shot at goal?
I don't really get the comparison with Walls either. I played against Walls at high school and he was too strong for us even though we had a couple of blokes who were his equal in height and weight. Walls was hollow-chested but was big in the thighs and hips while Bootsma is just a skinny kid. Walls was an incredibly courageous player who always took marks under pressure and gave as good as he got.
I'd like to see Bootsma work on his game in the NBs and earn another shot.
Hard to make a judgement on what someone can and cannot do if you dont give them the chance to show you. The reason he might be getting a game might be a variety of reasons including setting standards of what will get you a game in the ones when you are not particularly playing well, and it may be for the benefit of finding out where he needs to improve, or what his limitations might be.
Max Bailey has played 36 games and is 26. Three knee reco's
It all comes down to a question of talent. If ROK can't play then move him on. If you think he can and the Doctors can't see a reason why he can't play a lot of football why would you get rid of him?
difference there is Bailley fills a need.
Cookie, i mean no disrespect with that, however its not being rigid its being realistic. If he filled an obvious need for us or was a one of a kind, then id say perhaps but 186cm and a good left foot is not special enough to persist with him.
Only way he survives is as a senior listed player. Someone else goes for him to stay. As it is there are a few with limited opportunities about to be shown the door, and we are going to get rid of another one to keep O'Keefe.
Sounds to me that ROK should be given a chance to prove he should stay on our list next year. He's been plagued by injury so we need to at least give him one last chance - if we don't we may be hurting ourselves, especially if another club picked him up and he flourished.
This thought process kills me.
If he moves on and becomes a gun elsewhere so be it.
The Hawks cut a top ten key position player after two years on the senior list because they could see the writing on the wall with him.
Rhys O keefe has been unlucky with injury but our last two years have been crap and he hasnt been good enough to get a decent hit out.
Time to move on, and give him the chance for a fresh start. Cachia got that chance and he ended up benefitting. Right now its not helping him nor us to keep him.
I was one of few who called this as a certain victory.
Going with Sheik, its an indictment on our playing group when I can get a feel for when they are going to show up and play, and everyone in the footy world has written them off. Allowing the Tigers to kick half a winning score in a quarter is a further shame and they should enjoy the victory but there were some very hard lessons to learn today.
We lifted for a "grand final". We will more than likely repeat the effort next week, and capitulate entirely the following just when we start building soe momentum. It actually mirrors our in game performances.
Its so predictable. I know this team better than it knows itself.
They actually smashed Hawthorn last year, and they also beat Sydney, both grand finalists so they have clearly been building, this is not some fluke that has happened overnight.
Also just wondering bro, do you rate malthouse on this year's efforts or not? Because surely if we have that much talent to be better than Richmond we've underacheived this year? I thought you had it the other way around and said it was the players? Apologies if i got this wrong I could be thinking of someone else, but pretty sure it was you. i just don't think you can lay the blame at the players' feet and say they're talented enough but it's not up to malthouse to get the best out of them.
To clarify, I rate Malthouse as a coach.
The players we have are talented, however they are not well rounded. They have obvious strengths, and not so obvious weaknesses. The fact that its taking them this long to adapt makes me question their commitment to the cause and whether or not they are in it for the team, rather than for themselves.
Ratten made a good coach because he was able to get our squad playing good attractive footy, but he failed to develope them as players, which is why people are so divided on him as a coach. When everyone was fairly happy and things were going well, it was roses. As soon as the schizen hit the fan we fell apart quicker than a building built on sandy foundations.
The coach can only do so much when the players dont want to develope, and would rather stick with their old habits because its easier to be like this. The only reason im quick to blame the players, is that this same factor is what got Ratten in the end. Not enough improvement from them as individuals and as a team, unwilling to adapt.
Now, the players may still decide to not adapt and play team first football, and thats up to them, but its time to embrace the mantra of the coach comes first, and to stand by his decisions. I do believe you have a bit of a selective memory regarding the Ratten years and might be painting them to be better than they actually were, because it suits your current argument, but lets face it, they were simply better than we have put up with for a long time, and still pale in comparison to our truly succesful years of the past. FWIW, I dont blame Ratten. I dont believe he received the full support of the board and his coaching group, and I also believe that whilst Malthouse has received more than Ratten did, he too has not quite had the right mix around him, as evidenced by clear differences of opinion surrounding what we have and where we are at, and the departure of Mr. Cordy at the end of the year.
As for Richmond beating Hawthorn and Sydney last season, they also lost to Gold Coast, and couldnt put us away last year with half a side in. Were they false dawns? Yes they were. This season appears to be a true dawn for the first time in a long time for them. The thing is, I still dont rate them that highly, and believe that they are simply doing what North Melbourne did last season. In fact, the bottom 4 of the 8 are down right questionable, which sort of makes our season that much harder to bear. I think the talent level of postions 6 - 12 is a lot more even than people think.
That is not the point i was making. Hawthorn struggle with Richmond like we struggle with St Kilda (who beat us again this year).
The fact that we cant beat Hawthorn is not important in this discussion. St Kilda beat us in premiership years whilst rooted to the bottom of the ladder.
I like our Ins....all goers...Tigers have two good players out and some duds in(shows they have no depth)......Blues by 28 points.....
I like it.
Every chance dickmond will cock it up
You guys are dreaming. Richmond are the real deal and our coach has lost the players. Can you imagine what would've happened the last two weeks if Juddy wasn't playing? I'm tipping we may start brightly but will be well and truly overrun by half time. This could get very ugly.
Totally agree PI2C - this is the first time in many, many years whereby we're playing a Richmond team that is CLEARLY better than us.....and substantially so. Anyone who even considers us to be a chance, simply based on recent past performances, you're simply not being realistic in any way, shape or form. I like the changes Mick has made considering the injuries, really like them, but it still won't change the fact that the Tigers are on a totally different level to us in ability, development & confidence. It could get real ugly tomorrow....expect Hendo to return to defence, seeing as Jamo continues his spud-like form.
i disagree that they are clearly better than us. They might even win tomorrow but its not because they are better. They have had a good year. We have not, the talent level is still as good if not better at Carlton. We just havent been playing well.
I still think that Richmond has been vastly overated this year. They beat Hawthorn again this year and everyone have arrived. Richmond is to Hawthorn, as is St Kilda to us. One of those sides they struggle with at the best of times.
