Col.W.Kurtz said:
He's better than Tucky I will give you that. Reminds me a fair bit of him actually.
Big numbers, poor disposal. Not a fan I must say but each to their own.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Round 4-The other games
- Thread starter mb64
- Start date
He's better than Tucky I will give you that. Reminds me a fair bit of him actually.
Big numbers, poor disposal. Not a fan I must say but each to their own.
Lamb22, you may be right about Hawthorn.
I am reconsidering my stance on them.
And for all the good things Pelchan has done, to not walk away with one of Seaby, Mumford or Jolly is a massive mistake. The dodgy hamstring pair of Gibson and Burgyone are looking like the wrong fit for the Hawks. No ruck and a terrible backline are hurting them.
Still think they make the 8 but questions have to be asked.
I am reconsidering my stance on them.
And for all the good things Pelchan has done, to not walk away with one of Seaby, Mumford or Jolly is a massive mistake. The dodgy hamstring pair of Gibson and Burgyone are looking like the wrong fit for the Hawks. No ruck and a terrible backline are hurting them.
Still think they make the 8 but questions have to be asked.
SCOOP said:
I'm with ya Scoop. I thought they'd be a real force this year but they were serioulsy horrible tonight. I know they have some injuries but they were, dare I say it, Richmond like in their disposal and trying to move it out of the backline. They were embarrassing. They have some serious spuds in their backline; Murphy is the king of them. Schoenmakers might be OK one day but at the moment he kicks it like McGuane and Moore. Bateman played one of the worst games I have ever seen. Must have had at least a dozen turnovers. I found myself wondering how they ever won a flag with some of these blokes.
Geez it was a *smile* game from two supposed top teams. Collingwood were little better than ordinary but Hawthorn were abysmal.
Jezza81 said:
Raines getting better and better each week.
Will play finals football this year.
Top 4 finish for Brisbane,
I was happy to see Lloydy state what is plainly obvious - lack of leg speed and penetration.
This was the first game Hawks met an opponent who were up early and their skills or lack of were there for all to see. Must disagree about Collngwood being ordinary. Their footskills in the first half were terrific although they dropped off after half time
Hawks have got some good inside mids, a couple of tall forwards and Cyril but that's it! They actually had a better list on the park last year injury wise and were just as ordinary or perhaps slightly better. They are a bottom 8 side from last year.
As Lloydy said Burgoyne and a couple of young blokes might improve their leg speed but not enough to bother the big boys. Maybe bottom half of the 8 at best.
I thought they'd beat North but it probably close to 50/50. Should be 2 - 3 next week, if not year over for Hawks.
PS Buddy on 2 goals going into round 5. My guess that he'd get about 60 this year might be overly generous - tracking for a total of 11, ATM
This was the first game Hawks met an opponent who were up early and their skills or lack of were there for all to see. Must disagree about Collngwood being ordinary. Their footskills in the first half were terrific although they dropped off after half time
Hawks have got some good inside mids, a couple of tall forwards and Cyril but that's it! They actually had a better list on the park last year injury wise and were just as ordinary or perhaps slightly better. They are a bottom 8 side from last year.
As Lloydy said Burgoyne and a couple of young blokes might improve their leg speed but not enough to bother the big boys. Maybe bottom half of the 8 at best.
I thought they'd beat North but it probably close to 50/50. Should be 2 - 3 next week, if not year over for Hawks.
PS Buddy on 2 goals going into round 5. My guess that he'd get about 60 this year might be overly generous - tracking for a total of 11, ATM
SCOOP said:
They actually tried to get Lade to come out of retirement, so they were really desperate for a ruck.
Agree about Gibson, but Burgoyne was picked becaus they were aware of their lack of speed and penetrating foot skills in the middle ( Hodgey excepted). It s also why they need Cyril in there. I am a bit worried about Cyril - he looked slow and sore late in the last quarter - might have just run out of petrol tickets.
So I think Burgoyne was a good if desperate move considering his injury concerns. I must say I think we have seen the best of Burgoyne.
Is there any other players in the comp who are better down Hill skiers than Didak and Thomas?Last night is further proof to what i think of those 2.The Hawks? Geez you have to start asking was 2008 a fluke or ahead of their time?
Hard to believe but are the Crows worse than us?We all know where we expected to finish this year whereas the Crows were finals contenders.
Well done to the lions.They did too the Bulldogs what the Bulldogs did to us[Half court basketball] in the 2nd half.The doggies couldn,t get it out of their defensive half.
Hard to believe but are the Crows worse than us?We all know where we expected to finish this year whereas the Crows were finals contenders.
Well done to the lions.They did too the Bulldogs what the Bulldogs did to us[Half court basketball] in the 2nd half.The doggies couldn,t get it out of their defensive half.
Hawks have got a lot of guys missing... So I think it's hard to judge their performance so far.
But their rolling zone tactic has been worked out after 2008, so Clarkson will have to pull something else out of his hat to challenge the top teams this year.
But their rolling zone tactic has been worked out after 2008, so Clarkson will have to pull something else out of his hat to challenge the top teams this year.
We had 6 ruckman on the list, who were playing at their respective levels( bar Bailey) when Burgoyne was initially engaged in talks. From there Bailey returned and did another knee, Campbell played out the year then told the club he didn't want to continue playing and hindering his after footy life, Walsh had stress fractures in his foot, Taylor broke an ankle in the nab, and Skipper did a ligament also. We have two kids in Grimley and Lowden who are not up to it yet.SCOOP said:
Ruckman weren't the issue when Burgoyne was first being talked to. Outside run and carry was.
'No ruck' means you're not watching the same game as me. Renouf is doing a great hob, he just doesn't have a helper at the moment.
That bit I've bolded, simply isn't true.lamb22 said:I was happy to see Lloydy state what is plainly obvious - lack of leg speed and penetration.
This was the first game Hawks met an opponent who were up early and their skills or lack of were there for all to see. Must disagree about Collngwood being ordinary. Their footskills in the first half were terrific although they dropped off after half time
Hawks have got some good inside mids, a couple of tall forwards and Cyril but that's it! They actually had a better list on the park last year injury wise and were just as ordinary or perhaps slightly better. They are a bottom 8 side from last year.
As Lloydy said Burgoyne and a couple of young blokes might improve their leg speed but not enough to bother the big boys. Maybe bottom half of the 8 at best.
I thought they'd beat North but it probably close to 50/50. Should be 2 - 3 next week, if not year over for Hawks.
PS Buddy on 2 goals going into round 5. My guess that he'd get about 60 this year might be overly generous - tracking for a total of 11, ATM
Interestingly we pushed Geelong and the Bulldogs with similar teams, yet now we're bottom half of the eight, even though Geelong lost after a 6 day break, as did the Bulldogs last night.
No doubt in my mind that Rounds 2 and 3 caught up with us last night, as we were flat from the start. Skills were the poorest I'd seen for some time, and our decidon making also.
Collingwood continued to play out around the boundary, which is the style of game that we usually punish them for, but not last night. We were out on our feet by quarter time and simply not up to it.
Still, I don't read too much into last night. We were clearly not in the same frame of mind as Collingwood, and our run just wan't there.
theScabman said:
Denial is a not a river in Egypt.
Hawks were OK and up for it early - just didn't have the skills.
Hawks won in 2008 through great coaching and the fact that few sides wanted to take Hawks up on their zone and play ugly. After Hawks won everyone got on board. As I have said consistently hawks have poor footskills. Everyone looks like they have good footskills when rebounding in numbers kicking to a leading player in 50 metres of space. That's what the rolling zone allowed Hawks to do virtuially unopposd in 2008. Those days are gone. Accordingly Hawks lack of skills isexposed and the beneficiary of the player with 50 metres to lead into also suffers when he cant actually take a proper contested mark in traffic or kick straight.
Welcome to the future Scabman!
PS you've been bottom 8 for 26 weeks now and in your last 10 games last year, preseason and this season you are 3 wins 7 losses, with your wins coming against Melbourne and Richmond (2)
PPS I said bottom half of the eight at best Scabman. Personally I think you guys will miss the eight. A side with no rucks, slow mids who cant kick, no defence and Hacks like Guerra, Murphy, Renouf, Gilham or the sublime footskills of Brown or Lewis or Schoenemakers is not a top 8 template. Only Cyril who is head and shoulders above your second best player as game and momentum changer can get you there.
