Gutless sniping prick as a player, gutless sniping prick as a coach.

Yeah, it was a spiteful act by a gutless sniping sack of crap as a coach.

BUT...

It was accepted that he'd do that. It was anticipated.

Where's the outrage that we had no way to break up the predictability?

Where's the outrage at the couple of shots Fev missed?

It's more frustrating that we played right into Hawthorn's hands all match, and got a shellacking as a result. We could have used the predictability of Clarkson trying to stop Fev to give ourselves the upper hand.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

Exactly.A few goals to some of our other forwards would have prevented Fev from being double/triple teamed.Its not as if its the first time its happened and i`m surprised all teams don`t employ it. We are not smart enough to go to other options.

While i can understand you're all disappointed, and disappointment is always easier when you can point the finger at someone else to blame, you guys really are barking up the wrong tree going after Clarkson and the Hawks.

The last 12 mins of the game are on Foxtel right now. As much as it may hurt, I suggest you have a look.
Keep an eye out especially for Roughhead, who went down back to "fill the hole" in the dying minutes, being moved out of the way by the Hawthorn runner.

And if you get the chance to see the first quarter again, note how "easy" you guys made it for Buddy to get his. Double and triple-teamed at every possible contest. It was frustrating, but there was no whingeing or crying. Our forwards were good enough to step up and take the heat off him late in the quarter, and he was good enough to take the opportunities. I wouldn't have wanted him to get it any other way, and I would have though that nor would Fevola have wanted his gifted to him without having to earn it.

As far as Hawthorn supporters go, I can only speak for myself but I was happy to cheer for Fevola up until the ridiculous handball receive from a player already standing alone in the goalsquare for his 97th.
By the time the umpire gifted him the free for the "hold" in the goalsquare for his 99th, I was actually hoping he didn't make it, for the simple reason that it would have been a farcical, contrived result.

I feel sorry that Fev wasn't able to make it, but honestly, as close as he came, he didn't do enough to deserve it.
I also felt sympathy for the Carlton supporters at the time... but that's fading rapidly after hearing the sour grapes and sniping on talkback radio calls, and in threads like this one.

On the day that one bloke actually earned his hundred, getting another over the line on the back of charity from teammates, umpires, and - amazingly according to your demands - opposition players and coaches, would have cheapened the achievement and the game, not enhanced it as many of you seem to think.

If Fev - and your team - is good enough, he'll get his chance again, and you will be all the prouder for the knowledge that he will actually have earnt it.

- MrSpirit

anybody else see the holding/sheparding off the ball in the last contest for fev?

_________________
"You don’t get much more Navy Blue than Stephen Kernahan" - Marc Murphy

I just watched the replay of last nights game and noticed that with 30mins played, Hawthorn 70 odd points up, Fev on 99 and the game well and truely over, Clarkson dropped Jarrod Roughhead in the hole in front of Fev to stop him getting his 100 for no other reason then to be a prick.

Now no one expected the Hawks to do Fev any favours, like us with buddy, but at least give the guy a chance to kick his milestone one on one.

Before last night i would have supported the Hawks in a GF, but after that pathetic display last I hope the Cats embarrass the shit out of them.

bring on next year.

Hope you kept watching the replay and realised the error of your post.
Roughead did indeed position himself "in the hole" late in the game.
The Hawthorn runner came out and moved him away.

Are you sure?
If so i apologise... Roughhead is the disgrace.
What was he doing back there in hte first place? did he mve himself to the backline?

After the reaming Fev has got all year, especially compared to the armchair rides some forwards get (no, I'm not implying anythign about Franklin), He was well overdue some "charity"

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

Ratts not too happy either
http://carltonfc.com.au/tabid/4311/Defa ... wsid=66687

_________________
WADA medical director Dr Alan Vernec describes Essendon* FC drug case as biggest scandal in team sport the world of sport has seen. #WC2WB

#GUILTY

You are incorrect on both counts, and you don't need to watch 12 minutes to see it. Just compare Franklins mark for his ton against the last contest Fev went for. The former was uncontested. The latter has 2 hawks shepharding Fev from the contest whilst a third marks the ball.

Blame Clarkson to some extent. He certainly could have "orchestrated" some theatre, and for not doing that, and because I loathe him anyway, he's a sniping "see you next tuesday"
I blame our INSIPID midfielders who got flogged emphatically at the centre bounces. Look at the replay of the second half.

_________________
If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you!

Very sure.
And I assume he did it in the first place because we are a team heading into finals and a strong ingrained competitive spirit is part of what got us there. Probably the same reason Bateman did his little jig, do be honest.
I have no doubt that our players did everything they could to stop any carlton players from scoring at any time during the match, and that would include Fev and his 100th. They probably did see see it as a little 'win', although the scenes after the siren would have shown you - and Fevola - that there was nothing personal in it; I don't think there was a Hawk on the ground that didn't get over to Fev after the siren: no gloating, no mouthing off, just respect and I guess a touch of sympathy.

You might also want to consider that, had Fevola got his hundred, Franklin would have scraped home by only 2 goals in the Coleman - and one of those came late in the game from memory, certainly after Fev had started his charge. No way would making it easy for Fev to catch up have been any kind of priority for any of our players, let alone Buddy's co-key-forward.

what sort of tool signs up to an opposition fan site after a game?

I'm not here to stir up trouble, and I have no plans to hang around and answer every objection, so I'll make this the last.
Re-read my post: I said double and triple teamed at every opportunity. Franklin's ton came from a situation where we moved the ball too quickly to him for Carlton to get numbers to him. Furthermore, Bower was forced to leave him completely uncontested because Hawthorn's other forwards had proven themselves capable of making themselves threats, and our midfield had been willing to use them, rather than going to him at every occasion. Williams had bagged 3 virtually uncontested because of numbers going to Franklin, Roughead had had a raft of uncontested shots for the same reason (although he kicked poorly). By late in the first quarter, Carlton could simply not afford to give Franklin the blanket coverage they had begun with, and he started to get free - but don't fool yourself that it was anything to do with compassion from Ratten and the Blues.

With the last of Fev's contests, I was fully expecting it to be called shepherding off the ball by the umpires, as I and the Hawthorn supporters around me genuinely felt the umpires were trying to get Fev to the line as well (based on the 28-18 free kick count for the game, and the soft free he got in the goalsquare for 99). Just goes to show the difference in perspective that supporters have on umpires, as Carlton supporters seem to think the umpires were doing everything they could to stop him.
Ultimately, it wasn't called, and since it happens several times a game, every game, every week and isn't called, you'd have to say it was a consistent - if discompassionate - decision.

As for why four of our players were doing everything they could to stop Fevola from marking and scoring, I'll refer you to my post before this one. Our players were never going to lay down for him, it would have been farcical if they had, and you would be foolish to argue otherwise.

What I can tell you, is that if the roles had been reversed, and it were Franklin being blocked out, Roughhead and Brown would have crashed that contest and done everything they could to bring the ball to ground, and Buddy would have been a big chance at ground level. Fevola's teammates didn't, or couldn't, do that for him.

Basically, the whole thing comes down to the fact that it's not a Hawthorn player's role to contrive a fairytale ending for a Carlton player. That challenge was for Fevola and his own teammates, and unfortunately, although they came close, ultimately they just weren't up to it.

Life is all about taking responsibility for yourself, not blaming your woes on others.

Anyway I'm off.
Cheers and commiserations to those of you - and there do seem to be some - who are taking a rational perspective on the whole thing.

One that from what I saw on television is not too far off the mark.

Move on people.

_________________
"our electorate seeks less to be informed and more to be validated." Sad times.

Mr Spirit

As Ratts has said, we could have triple and quadruple teamed Franklin, and had a nine man defence. In fact, that probably would have reduced the margin and the attractiveness of the game. But we didn't. I don't actually recall that happening for any protracted period early in the game, perhaps you are confusing that with pack marking situations where it is every man for himself.

I don't think anyone here is saying Fev should have been gifted it, but he (and the crowd) was entitled to at least see him be able to contest. The shepharding, along with the 9 man defence and Bowdenesque time-wasting tactics says more about hawthorns priorities. As I said earlier, had the situations been reversed, I would have been urging us to back our own to inflict maximum damage on the rebound. 12 goals up late in the final quarter and you lot seemed to concede the ball was going to spend the last 5 minutes in the forward 50 of the side that finished 11th. I suppose that on the upside it will add a bit more feeling when the sides next play.

would the little sniper have sent 4 blokes back to play on Fev in the dying minutes if Fev had been on 60 goals, i doubt it. see it for what it is.

To be honest I haven't got an issue with Clarksons so-called tactics.

Perhaps it's all a bit of a deflection away from the shocking team scoreline.

very interesting today at the son's granny (he lost to a team that went out and headhunted for better players outside the club, so they had seven kids on the bench, at the start of the season - this was told to me by their coach, we are talking under 15)

anyway

many many people including 2 A grade amatuer footballers, a ressie footballer for St Kilda and some others - none of whom follow the bluebaggers, they were all disgusted with Hawthorn's tactics.

and that's my point realy, not the facts, but the impressions...will this grow in status? Only time will tell.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!