rhino27 wrote:
TheDenominator wrote:
dannyboy wrote:
1) early in the first I think about BV's concern with Cerra on the wing and no defender brought in to replace Boyd and...and he was right. The Cerra move simply unsettled the wingers that had been working...and I think we were a small defender short all night!
2) @#$%&! me could we just kick straight!!!!!
3) @#$%&! me do we have to gift 4 goals a game with stupid decisions.
4) 15 minutes in I turned to my brother and said we are not playing like last week, more like last year
5) I @#$%&! hate St Kilda!
We had seriously the most annoying flog of a saint fan sitting near us last night and it just made the experience even more @#$%&! frustrating!
How the @#$%&! these flogs get into Carlton reserved seating areas frustrates me even more
Probably the best thing I heard was from a Carlton supporter who after one our many many points shouted
"Hey goal umpire, can you show us how many flags the saints have won...oh, only ONE! Thanks goal umpire"
Had never heard that one before so thanks to whoever shouted that out..
I thought we gifted them more than 4 goals by the way
I have :
- Plowman's shit dump kick to Membrey for their first. Kick it higher and longer for @#$%&! sake
- Young's shit centre for a turnover in the first - cant remember who he was trying to hit
- OBrien's fumble from a Newnes handball in the second. This one changed the momentum of the second qtr. We looked to be getting on top.
- Hewett's indiscriminate handball backwards into our defensive 50 straight to Butler who waltzed in for a goal.
- Cerra's turnover inside 50 for a Ryder goal also in the second
- OBrien's turnover which was very similar to Young's where he went to Kennedy instead of the safer Newman option late in the 3rd. Scores were level at this point
- Plowman's dropped chest mark and inability to recover and tackle very late in the 3rd
All very avoidable goals and when combined with the fumbles we had that either cost us other goals or opportunities to attack + the woeful set shot kicking and that flower saints fan it was just a shit night at the footy
Don't disagree with any of that and not suggesting you are but our forwards deserve a whack too.
TDK missing what an under 10s player would kick. Aints take it up other end kick a goal. Then another. 18 points right there. Charlie 1.4 or something unacceptable. Honey missing very easy shots.
Corey having one he should've snagged. Instead gives it off to JSOS who misses. Both at fault there. JSOS selfishly calling for it when in a worse position. Corey should've ignored him and kicked it himself.
Hewett missing an easy one.
JSOS in the last. Running into goal 40 to 45 out. Nobody coming at him. Don't know what the flowering hell he was trying to do but
it was utter garbage.
Imagine Finals, let alone a Grand Final for a minute.
One ruck in TDK playing, or Pitto, but one ruck. He needs to have a chop out, moreso than a H & A game because the stakes are higher, thus raising intensity and effort and with that using more energy consumed.
Same happens to Jack: he tires too. His No. 1 role is a link up forward because he's a good forward and kicks and creates goals, often crunch goals when we badly need one.
Every one agrees Jack runs his guts out as a forward. He plays the forward role more like a high half forward, and you will find him forward, midfield and even in defence providing a marking link up consistently.
When Jack is called to do the ruck duties twice a quarter against ruckmen 10-15kgs heavier, stronger, he isn't having a breather, and he keeps soldiering on, and when the ball hits the ground, we all know Jack will do the roving too. He doesn't stop giving effort that requires energy.
Despite the surname conjuring up thoughts of deity, Jack is only human.
He can't be all things to all people and the team. We need him as the high half forward, because he is a running machine. Yes, a running machine, not to be confused as a 3rd tall. If we go back to round 1 game, TDK was the 3rd tall forward when Pitto was in the ruck and Jack was running up the wing, into defence providing a link, and in that role, a couple times he had no opponent when he came back into the forward 50...marking and kicking a goal.
IMO, Jack is being worn out by the 2nd ruck role. He would not be doing that if we had 2 rucks....and as a result, with fresher legs he would kick those open goals from 40 out.
Now we point out the opportunity loss, but that's the cost of having Jack as the 2nd ruck. You can't have it all, something has to give.
Play 2 rucks, and we will when Pitto is back, and I expect Jack to be very dangerous around goal, instead of labouring.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
