Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Mon Jun 16, 2025 9:40 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 203 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 4:48 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:38 am
Posts: 1313
Location: brunton room
Sugarcane wrote:
Austin had a chance recently and blew it. He hasn't fired a shot since coming to the club. quote]


Agree with this 100%. Austin is not up to AFL standard and will be delisted in October.

_________________
You heard it here first!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 4:54 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:44 am
Posts: 3136
Cazzesman wrote:
Asp wrote:
I only watched on TV but here are my obesevations:

Watson had not been playing well for the Bullants - so why was he picked against the best team in the comp. ? Not good fot the kid or us.


What was wrong with Watson's last game against Sandringham? Perhaps playing a kid against the best lets him know how hard he has to work to reach that lofty level.

Regards Cazzesman


Can only comment on the pies game but imo, watson was disappointing yesterday. Mainly poor decision making and an unwillingness to utilise his main weapon ie long kicking. The turnovers from kickouts also didnt help

Having said that though, it was a very tough ask for him to come in and play well yesterday - imo, the MC should either have brought him in a few weeks earlier (ie give him a proper run to pick up the pace of the game before you hit the big games against pies/Essendon*) OR gone into the game with either austin/bower on field (ie more experienced players)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 4:57 pm 
Online
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:08 pm
Posts: 16950
Location: Melbourne
Rod Waddell wrote:

I may be harsh but i would of thought that he'd have this aspect down pat.



I think it is fair to say he did at TAC level and now he is coming to terms with playing against stronger and more talented (at this time) men.

How many 19yr old 3 game vets have you known to be perfect in the AFL during your lengthy viewing career? :wink:

How was Kennedy going at the same time? Or Cloke or Dawes?

Regards Cazzesman

_________________
Ricky Gervais - “Everyone has the right to hold whatever beliefs they want. And everyone else has the right to find those beliefs f***ing ridiculous.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:05 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 40291
Location: seaside
Yup.........

early Dawes was pretty average........!


kindest regards tomi









i'm just glad we didn't reveal our "hand" yesterday.........!

_________________
that'siti'mnotchangingthistagain......!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:10 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:09 pm
Posts: 6047
If Austin can't get a game with Jamo, Waite, White, Setanta out injured and Bower underdone and Watson in so-so VFL form - then I'd say his papers have been stamped.

I think Austin should have played against the Bulldogs instead of Bower. Not because I think it would have made a huge difference to the result - or that I rate him more highly than Bower (I don't) - but because (1) he's match-fit and in solid VFL form; (2) he deserved another chance (in the circumstances, I didn't think his performance in the WCE game was as bad as some have suggested); (3) unlike Bower, he has shown he can play at both ends of the ground; and (4) it would have allowed Bower to have a full game in the VFL last week to find some fitness and confidence (which could have saved us from using him the Sub yesterday - ie. he could have started in defence and either Austin or Watson been the Sub).

The management of Austin, Bower & Watson has got me very confused at the moment...

_________________
It's never as good as it looks and it's never as bad as it seems.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:24 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:49 am
Posts: 1650
Cazzesman wrote:
Rod Waddell wrote:

I may be harsh but i would of thought that he'd have this aspect down pat.



I think it is fair to say he did at TAC level and now he is coming to terms with playing against stronger and more talented (at this time) men.

How many 19yr old 3 game vets have you known to be perfect in the AFL during your lengthy viewing career? :wink:

How was Kennedy going at the same time? Or Cloke or Dawes?

Regards Cazzesman


Thanks Cazz. Lets hope he commences to carve out a career down the same road as these three. Just read Rhino's post. If the theme of his post is true then we should be focussing on eradicating this out of Watson's approach before it's too late.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:36 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:34 pm
Posts: 1223
Location: East Coburg
4thchicken wrote:
Wasnt too unhappy with the game yesterday. Some might argue that the final 19 point margin flattered us slightly given the pies inaccurate kicking, but lets not forget that we hit the post 6 times.

We matched it with the pies for most of the game but structurally we are shot.

Bring in jamison and waite and its a whole different ball game. Jamison would tighten up the backline significantly (less opposition marks) and allow us to shift Henderson up forward/thornton back. Along with waite, suddenly we've 2 tall targets to kick to that will lead up and present to the mids/backline (thornton doesnt lead up/present)

Players that could also return by finals and be key contributors include hampson, carazzo, houlihan, touhy and possibly mclean (given ineffectiveness of ellard/curnow atm)

We've gone from a 23 pt margin to a 19 pt one. Imo, the next time we meet the pies (likely to be in the finals), the margin will close up again :)


Pies "inaccurate kicking" is a bit of a myth.

They had 6 rushed behinds and we had 1. So "kicking" for goal was 13-14 to 11-12. And we hit the post 6 times, Collingwood 2.

_________________
"You can't polish a James Hird"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:41 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:34 pm
Posts: 1223
Location: East Coburg
Oh, and 3 times those points resulted in goals from the kick-in anyway.

_________________
"You can't polish a James Hird"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:55 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:39 pm
Posts: 15848
Hotcox wrote:
Sugarcane wrote:
Austin had a chance recently and blew it. He hasn't fired a shot since coming to the club. quote]


Agree with this 100%. Austin is not up to AFL standard and will be delisted in October.


Predictable, should make that your signature.

_________________
"I had to eat"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:55 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:39 pm
Posts: 15848
tommi wrote:
Yup.........

early Dawes was pretty average........!



:lol:

_________________
"I had to eat"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:02 pm 
Offline
Laurie Kerr
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:16 pm
Posts: 112
Just re-watched the 1st quarter.

A combination of kicking under pressure, kicking to a man who is standing still, being outnumbered at the contest and just bad kicks resulted in 7 Carlton kicks being marked by Collingwood players.
This is only the 1st quarter and there were no Collingwood kicks being marked by Carlton players.

walker - reid HB (position where the ball was kicked from)
walker - davis HF
curnow - thomas C
twomey - toovey HB
robinson - reid HF
watson - thomas FB
walker - pendlebury HB

Also noticed at bounces, there would be at 1 Collingwood player who'd just plant himself on their defensive side just waiting for the Carlton player's to knock it towards goal; the only player being near the ball: a Collingwood player.

2nd Quarter was 3 each

simpson - davis FB
garlett - o'brien HB
warnock - reid HF

rounds - laidler HB
thomas - joseph HB
sidebottom - joseph HB


Last edited by skadoosh on Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:32 pm 
Offline
Bruce Comben

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 10:31 pm
Posts: 31
aboynamedsue wrote:
If Austin can't get a game with Jamo, Waite, White, Setanta out injured and Bower underdone and Watson in so-so VFL form - then I'd say his papers have been stamped.

I think Austin should have played against the Bulldogs instead of Bower. Not because I think it would have made a huge difference to the result - or that I rate him more highly than Bower (I don't) - but because (1) he's match-fit and in solid VFL form; (2) he deserved another chance (in the circumstances, I didn't think his performance in the WCE game was as bad as some have suggested); (3) unlike Bower, he has shown he can play at both ends of the ground; and (4) it would have allowed Bower to have a full game in the VFL last week to find some fitness and confidence (which could have saved us from using him the Sub yesterday - ie. he could have started in defence and either Austin or Watson been the Sub).

The management of Austin, Bower & Watson has got me very confused at the moment...


+1.

The comments of some on here that Austin had his chance vs WCE are just absurd.
Having a look at the stats on the AFL website for him in the game:
8 possessions (100% efficiency), 4 contested, 1 clanger, 2 marks (1 contested), 1 inside 50, 2 rebound 50, 4 tackles, 7 1%ers

If that's a bad game, from a guy who hadn't played since 2009 (due mainly to injury), then I'll go he.

Watson yesterday:
10 possessions (70%), 4 contested, 2 clangers, 1 mark, 2 rebound 50, 1 tackle, 3 1%ers
(To my knowledge, kick-ins aren't included and this was probably the most notable area in which Watson was shown up yesterday - in my view he was probably selected ahead of Austin for this aspect of his game and, unfortunately, he was a liability)

I'm not saying that Austin is a better long-term prospect than Watson, but he deserves fairer treatment. If there's any consistency about the MC, Watson has to go cos on the stats above, he was even 'worse' than Austin a couple of weeks ago.

Bower looked good when he came on - must start next week's game.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:50 pm 
Offline
Laurie Kerr
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:16 pm
Posts: 112
3rd Quarter
4-0

gibbs - thomas C
scotland - ball HB
robinson - tarrant HF
duigan - o'brien HF


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:02 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am
Posts: 10575
Austin needs to stay on our list and more importantly needs to be given a better opportunity than current. If he gets delisted on current opportunities and more importantly on our KP depth, than bugger me I've missed something again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:14 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:44 am
Posts: 3136
aboynamedsue wrote:
If Austin can't get a game with Jamo, Waite, White, Setanta out injured and Bower underdone and Watson in so-so VFL form - then I'd say his papers have been stamped.

I think Austin should have played against the Bulldogs instead of Bower. Not because I think it would have made a huge difference to the result - or that I rate him more highly than Bower (I don't) - but because (1) he's match-fit and in solid VFL form; (2) he deserved another chance (in the circumstances, I didn't think his performance in the WCE game was as bad as some have suggested); (3) unlike Bower, he has shown he can play at both ends of the ground; and (4) it would have allowed Bower to have a full game in the VFL last week to find some fitness and confidence (which could have saved us from using him the Sub yesterday - ie. he could have started in defence and either Austin or Watson been the Sub).

The management of Austin, Bower & Watson has got me very confused at the moment...


agree - even if austin's papers have been stamped, he should still be looked at as a a player to cover injuries.

Unfortunately for us, Injury/underdone player management is something that Ratten/the MC have consistently gotten wrong over the past few years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:31 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:37 pm
Posts: 19415
Location: afl.virtualsports.com.au
http://aflcommunityclub.com.au/index.php?id=384

Very interesting video on kick-ins and the options available other than to bomb it long. Have sound on.

_________________
"You are being watched. The government has a secret system. A machine that spies on you every hour of every day. I know because I built it." - Finch


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:32 pm 
Online
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 7341
Cazzesman wrote:
Mickstar wrote:

Very interesting comments RE Watson by Rhino.If true then Austin should get the gig.Amazing info on Watson.Its hard to believe a young guy given an oppurtunity of a lifetime is not putting in...........CAZZ,please tell me its not true.


Mickstar unless I have missed something in the post, none of that was INFO it was all just opinion. Not one thing I read had any corroborative fact attached to it.

Regards Cazzesman


Good.I hope he gets another crack next week coz i reckon he has a future.A couple of hiccups along the way wont hurt.

_________________
All my dangerous friends


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:33 pm 
Offline
Garry Crane

Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:39 am
Posts: 209
great calls re player management by the MC..

Watson, Austin and Bower....baffling stuff !

Ditto Hendo...our intended CHF for the next decade playing FB when we can't find a mark in the fwd 50...this after hendo was rushed back in rd 3 when he was clearly not ready !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:39 pm 
Online
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 7341
Kouta wrote:
Mickstar wrote:
cant understand the talk of Hendo going forward as he has proved hopeless up there.He is finding his feet in the backline and gaining confidence.Why move him forward and undoe all that good work.I cant see anyone on our list at the moment to fill CHF so i would be persisting with Thornton.Just provide a contest and let the littlies swoop...........

And you dare to say that Greg Swann doesn't have any footy knowledge.

Move on from Fevola being shunted.

Henderson kicked 25 goals before he had turned 20, yet some still think he's a backman. :roll:


I said Greg Swann should be in the front office like every other CEO in the comp.Adminisrators meddling in the footy team is a recipe for disaster.Has been since the game began and always will be.

And as questioning my footy knowledge is a bit rich coming from you Kouta..............check some of the stuff you have blurted out over the years.

_________________
All my dangerous friends


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 9:05 pm 
Offline
Geoff Southby

Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:24 pm
Posts: 5537
Location: Bridge, Starship Enterprise
livolover wrote:
great calls re player management by the MC..

Watson, Austin and Bower....baffling stuff !

Ditto Hendo...our intended CHF for the next decade playing FB when we can't find a mark in the fwd 50...this after hendo was rushed back in rd 3 when he was clearly not ready !


+1

Shame the MC as paid employees of a company limited by guarantee will not answer queries raised by their bosses - their shareholders being the members of the club. Add Ellard to the list who has barely had a touch for the past month and Tuohy's demotion to Livo's lot.

_________________
"Get ready, Teddy - you're on": Ron Barassi half time 1970 Grand Final


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 203 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ByteDanceSpider, Cazzesman, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], juppy, Mickstar, Shanghai Blues, windy and 69 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group