Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Are we "hard" enough (Read 9136 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Are we "hard" enough

As usual recently after a few days reflection ranging from disappointment through annoyance to resignation of another year gone,but we had injuries i tell myself.Yes but I was disappointed in some tactics,team selection,poor umpiring etc which we use week by week as the situation arises.So I say ah well next year as I rejoin MCC and dutifully tick the Carlton membership option also.Now i think thats all i can do for my team though I wish I could run out with em sometimes.Ive had 60 odd years of loving my blues being taken as a bub by my mum and dad who both loved the blues till the day they passed ,so ive seen great times hell yeah but for too long now we are over run.looked.tackled, by other clubs.Where I work we are laughed at and the opposition supporter diehards say we get what we deserve but i dont hear a lot of respect which hurts me more.So I Know we dont have the
Walls Mcclures Buckleys,Dominators,rhys jones so on so on and different era i know but I just dont see current crop of players in the "if i hurt them will they hurt me back" category including physicality,scoreboard,pressure act or just being niggardly.I know modern footy is more like a modern workplace now where rules and regs abound but you can still earn respect by the way you present.I want to see our key forwards run through the 2 defenders which are usually manning them,our midfielders who are fallen on and crushed get up and do it back to the opposition not see the defender who has  given up a cheap goal patted on the back and told gee bad luck..Maybe this time get some players or young guys in with a bit of grunt and tude as they say We seem to overlook these types for leaner type athletes but maybe we need a better mix? Forgive long rant but I do love my club.Most weeks reading this forum gets me over a loss or enjoy a win even more Interested to hear others feelings of how to step forward and get back where we should be.A proud successful club that never lets you down!    

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #1 –
I respect that supporters will have a range of opinions, but as a general rule I would never question the hardness of any AFL player. It's neither realistic nor sensible to expect every bloke to play like Mitch Robinson, and if you're going to question someone like Bryce Gibbs, then you should also question someone like Scott Pendlebury. There's room for different types in AFL footy. The salient issue is to be hard to play against, not to be hard per se.

This type of proposition, which broadcasts a kind of "good ol' days" vibe, is similar to laments about players only chasing the paycheck, not bleeding Navy Blue, not playing for the jumper etc. All ill advised and all to be avoided IMO.

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #2 –
Hardness in modern football is the relentless running and repeat efforts, without wanting to be offensive to the greats of the past, the likes of McClure, Dom and Buckley would spew up their ring if they had to run 13km in a game at the intensity of modern footballers!

Most of those pre-80s era blokes hardly left their zone, from that generation maybe only Ashman and a couple of others might be at home aerobically, of the next-Gen types Sheldon, English maybe Marcou would be competitive.

The 90s onwards it was different, basically defined by blokes like Robert Harvey, Flower or Craig Bradley, they are basically the same as modern footballers, Diesel, Kouta, etc., etc.. would be right at home. But people talked about Bradley and Harvey like they were freaks of nature, now they are all like that, and trust me it's as hard as hard gets!

I know that opinion is harsh, those past harder era players the run they had is matched today but by mediums and talls. BigH runs further than most pre-90s onballers. Obviously, modern players might go down like a proverbial "Bag of @#$!" if an 80s era player could actually catch them, but that is something very different.

There is the issue of having the right mix of introverts and extraverts, but you don't want to go too far on that, not like the Dawks, it comes back to bite you!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #3 –
We are a physically tough and brutal team.

For us, its psychological and physical stamina.

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #4 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
I respect that supporters will have a range of opinions, but as a general rule I would never question the hardness of any AFL player. It's neither realistic nor sensible to expect every bloke to play like Mitch Robinson, and if you're going to question someone like Bryce Gibbs, then you should also question someone like Scott Pendlebury. There's room for different types in AFL footy. The salient issue is to be hard to play against, not to be hard per se.

This type of proposition, which broadcasts a kind of "good ol' days" vibe, is similar to laments about players only chasing the paycheck, not bleeding Navy Blue, not playing for the jumper etc. All ill advised and all to be avoided IMO.
Agree Pauly, IMO every footballer is hard and tough given the game they play (ie by default).
We need to be "harder" off field IMO, that is more ruthless and not hanging onto nice guys who perennially injured for far too long. Then we all sit and wonder why what appear to be silly selections by the MC occur. Just Imagine if we had players of the footballing calibre of Martin, Marchbank and Cunningham available every week. I would hazard a guess and say that would be worth a couple of extra wins a year (the difference between making the 8 or top 4).
2021-Pi$$ or get off the pot
2022- Real Deal or more of the same? 0.6%
2023- "Raise the Standard" - M. Voss Another year wasted Bar Set
2024-Back to the drawing boardNo excuses, its time
2025-Carlton can win the 2025 AFL Premiership

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #5 –
The "hard men" of the football I grew up watching wouldn't last five minutes in today's game.  Even if they could achieve the level of fitness of modern day footballers, umpires all over the ground and TV cameras covering virtually every square centimetre would mean that they would be playing the same sanitised footy as everyone else ... and there's nothing wrong with that.

If you can find the footage on the club website, have a look at Matty Cottrell talking about his grandfather telling him that he should be running through his opponents.  It's a vastly different game to what Len played in the late 1950s.

As G2C is fond of saying, anyone who runs out for an AFL has to be as hard and tough as all get out.  Despite what some fans may think, there are no "soft" AFL players ... and it's mental toughness as a well as physical toughness.

We may have deficiencies in other areas but, if anything, we may be a little too eager to get physical, as suggested by the bit of biffo that allowed Joe Daniher an easy Joe the Goose.
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #6 –
I wouldnt call us hard as a team in an old school sense, we have a couple of harder players like Cripps who can look after themselves but I think other teams think they can get at us physically and upset us.
In terms of recruitment we do look for the Von Trapp athlete types who are are of good character and wont rock the boat with undisciplined off field stuff or being a bit different to the rest of the group.
We would never recruit players like Maynard, Ginnivan, DeGoey, Stringer or any other rough diamonds and we play safe with selections. Id prefer we loosened up on that front and looked for footballers first even if they were a bit spicy and backed our system in to manage those players.
When we were successful we always had a few renegades amongst the bunch who were different and maybe played hard off the field but got the job done on the field when it mattered.
JayJay is in his 60's and obviously remembers the good old days like I do but its clear the modern younger supporters see the game different and are happy with a more sanitised approach which conforms with what the AFL want and that characters in the game and extra physicality are not required especially with how the branding of the game has to show safety for players being of higher importance and the game being squeaky clean in all respects.

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #7 –
Quote from: Gointocarlton – on
Agree Pauly, IMO every footballer is hard and tough given the game they play (ie by default).
We need to be "harder" off field IMO, that is more ruthless and not hanging onto nice guys who perennially injured for far too long. Then we all sit and wonder why what appear to be silly selections by the MC occur. Just Imagine if we had players of the footballing calibre of Martin, Marchbank and Cunningham available every week. I would hazard a guess and say that would be worth a couple of extra wins a year (the difference between making the 8 or top 4).

No doubt.

I have at times wondered about the difference between perception and reality, and whether people are led by labels and the media. One catchphrase that immediately comes to mind (there's a few others) is the "unsociable Hawks." I mean, what exactly is this, and how does it manifest itself on game day ? Did our players cop more knees in tackles and more whacks in the head when we played them ? Did they try and cheat the rules more than other teams ? Was it more sledging, more slamming players into the side fence, more whinging to the umpires etc ? And if any of these things are true, what corrective actions did our club take, and if not, why not ? Sometimes I really think the media just give something a name and a direction, a bit of marketing wizardry, and the sheep invariably follow.

I should also add that our our current coach is probably the toughest most uncompromising player of his generation. I'm quite confident that if this hard/soft business was really a thing, he would be asking for more players like him.

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #8 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
I should also add that our our current coach is probably the toughest most uncompromising player of his generation. I'm quite confident that if this hard/soft business was really a thing, he would be asking for more players like him.

I think that’s the key Paul.

Vossy will understand that not all players can be cast from the same mould but he would have little tolerance for “Von Trapp” footballers, if indeed there are any at AFL level. 

I suspect that he wouldn’t have been too impressed with the Joe the Goose biffo that I mentioned in a previous post.  On the other hand, he wouldn’t have tolerated players standing by as Marc Murphy was targeted by the opposition.
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #9 –
yes some good points made regarding todays game v past games but I didnt mean going the biff  the way it used to be before videos and extra scrutiny helped to clean up behind the play incidents coupled with more awarness of a persons safety  Different times, different era, altogether in footy and life in general.More about wrenching that perception of Carlton that we are a little predictable or soft back a notch Last nights game got me reflecting on this as going through other teams I can see certain players that I would call MODERN day tough They can influence and shift a game not when things are rosy and winning but when  fighting to get back into a game and also with that air of unpredictability perhaps that makes opponents not take things for granted.Our captain is a geniunely tough footballer on a CONSISTENT basis Would just love to see a couple more,that show the seeds of that at junior level and not just passing certain athletic tests. I watch a lot of local football and enjoy the contests and passion that the players show and genuine commitment on a part time basis.Currently when I watch the baggers at this time I HOPE for a switched on Carlton but used to expect it every match I think we have stepped up in so many areas off the field in the last few years and continue to grow but just on field it feels like here we go again Just want to see more consistent care and passion for the jumper? thanks for listening people i dont post much but love to read your opinions during the good and bad weeks J

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #10 –
Hard yes.

Ruthless.  No.  In that regards we are perceived to be a bit soft, but we are not what we used to be in that regard.  Once upon a time you hit us physically and we'd fold. Now we don't fold. 
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #11 –
Quote from: Thryleon – on
Hard yes.

Ruthless.  No.  In that regards we are perceived to be a bit soft, but we are not what we used to be in that regard.  Once upon a time you hit us physically and we'd fold. Now we don't fold. 

This.

We're not soft but there haven't been many premiership sides of recent seasons that are as nice as us.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #12 –
I genuinely believe that some clubs - Geelong, Norf and the Whorks are some that think we are soft - I'll define this by saying that they think they can do stuff to us without any comebacks.  We're too nice and continuously suffer for it.  We don't play around the edges and margins like other clubs. Those fringe margins win you a game or two extra here and there.
Umpires won't protect you, they can barely interpret the rules as it is.  I saw six dangerous tackles last night, three were paid.  How many will get rubbed out for it like Owies, a "nice" Carlton player?
The only bloke who has pushed back in recent memory was Yarran slotting Chappy, who had been gagging for it for years.  Robbo should have dropped the Geelong runner who clogged the hole and stopped us from beating those cheats
DrE is no more... you ok with that harmonica man?

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #13 –
I think weve got some hardnuts that dont take a backward step.
Cripps, Acres, Newman, Hewett, Docherty McGov even Boyd are tough hombres that barely lose their one on ones
We missed out on cohesion and availability this season and looked disjointed compared to other top eight sides due to the week to week changes and long injury lay offs to key players.
But in terms of contested ball and winning one on ones - don't think there is a team better.

Re: Are we "hard" enough

Reply #14 –
Are we hard enough? - No!