Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne (Read 7246 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #15 –
Team: first qtr, S for soft. Remaining 3 quarters, B-.

5. Weitering

3. Pittonet

2. Docherty

2. Jones

1. Curnow

1. Gibbons

1. Murphy

HM: Crippa after he shook off what ailed him, Martin, SPS after he, also, shook off what ailed him.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #16 –
I too wanted to give Pittonet some votes, but his direct opponent ran rampant and was clearly the BoG.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #17 –
Team D
5 - Docherty
4 - Weitering
3 - Murphy
2 - Pittonet
1 - Cripps

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #18 –
Team D
5 Weitering
4 Curnow
3 Docherty
2 Murphy
1 Jones

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #19 –
Team:  C.

5. Weitering
2. Pittonet
2. Docherty
1. Gibbons
1. Jones
1. Cripps
1. Martin
1. Curnow
1. Casboult

Will not give Murphy a vote until he tackles someone.

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #20 –
Quote from: LP – on
He was the main reason we squared the center clearances after 1/4-time, he was getting to the fall of the football first.

I'll watch the last 2.5 quarters again, I doubt it.

Soft leaders are a liability.

Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #21 –
Quote from: LP – on
I too wanted to give Pittonet some votes, but his direct opponent ran rampant and was clearly the BoG.

Rucks are like midfielders though, both can have good games. Kreuzer v Grundy was a perfect example last year.

2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #22 –
D

5 Pittonet
5 Weitering
2 Cunningham
2 Gibbons
1 Jones
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!
 

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #23 –
I finally got to see the game today and I'm not very happy.
Never mind, the Universe doesn't pay any attention to me.

Team:   C
We were so poor early, that it wasn’t funny. However, our fightback was pretty good. But we really need to want the ball more and be tougher at the ball.

Votes:
[3]   Jacob Weitering:
[2]   Sam Docherty:
[2]   Ed Curnow:
[2]   Michael Gibbons:
[2]   Marc Murphy:
[1.5]   Marc Pittonet:
[1]   Liam Jones:
[0.5]   Jack Martin:
[0.5]   Mitch McGovern:
[0.5]   Patrick Cripps:

Explanations:
[3]   Jacob Weitering:   Total domination of his position. Since he was dropped, he has improved every game.
[2]   Sam Docherty:   Doc was a little rusty: he made a few errors that he will not do in a few more weeks. However, he was dynamic and provided huge amounts of drive from half back.
[2]   Ed Curnow:   Had a job on Viney and totally thrashed him. Viney had no impact on the game.
[2]   Michael Gibbons:   After a very poor start, Gibbo was strong at the ball and more than handy. He still needs to get more of the pill, but you can’t fault his effort.
[2]   Marc Murphy:   Murphy got a lot of the ball and was pretty good with it. He managed to get the clearances we didn’t get early. However, I would have liked to see more defensive work from him.
[1.5]   Marc Pittonet:   After being pounded early, Pittonet came back hard and was important in our comeback. Unfortunately, I don’t see him as the premiership ruckman we need. What I didn’t like was that he let Gawn get away from him too often. But for a 1st game, he did a lot of good things.
[1]   Liam Jones:   Jones was very good in defence but struggled to get as much of the ball as he can do.
[0.5]   Jack Martin:   Martin looked dangerous all night and did some very nice things. But I would like to have seen some more defensive effort.
[0.5]   Mitch McGovern:   Very ordinary early, but he got into the game when he got on his bike. That is the thing he needs to do more of. He also needs to start holding his marks.
[0.5]   Patrick Cripps:   I noted that Cripps was held at every single bounce during quarters 2 and 3. He still did a decent job, except for his kicking for goal.

Honourable Mentions:
Harry McKay:   H was dangerous and generally beat his opponents on the lead, but he needed to hold more of his contested marks.
Sam Petrevski-Seton:   SPS was very poor early, but he picked up his game well.
Sam Walsh:   Not Sam’s best game, but he was solid. His disposal was off somewhat.
Live Long and Prosper!

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #24 –
Team: D-

5 - Weitering
4 - Docherty
3 - Curnow
2 - Gibbons
1 - Cripps

Re: Round 2 Voting: Jim Park Award: Carlton vs Melbourne

Reply #25 –
I close this thread tomorrow. Please vote soon if you want to vote at all!
Live Long and Prosper!