redback wrote:
Blue Vain wrote:
SurreyBlue wrote:
Ed was taken to the cleaners last week but again protected species.!!!
Ed who had 30 possessions, our equal most tackles (7), our most clearances (8), our most centre clearances (4), our most inside 50's (10)?
How does this "protected species" keep getting a game?
BTW, who "cleaned him up" exactly?
I am one, how many turnovers did he have.
3 clangers out off 30 possessions. Cripps had 11 out of 25 possessions.
Zorko who apparently cleaned him up had 7 clangers out of 20 possessions. But it's a rhetorical question anyway, isn't it?
Will the reality actually sway your opinion?
For the record, Ed hardly played on Zorko. He didn't attend the first 3 centre bounces of the second quarter when Zorko had 3 of his 6 possessions for the quarter and Brisbane kicked 3 goals in around 4 minutes. In fact, Curnow is rarely playing on a particular player at stoppages any more unless he's given a hard tagging role. For the past few weeks he plays a more strategic positioning role as a stoppage sweeper.
At centre bounces, he lines up on the defensive side of the stoppage to prevent the opposition exiting out the front of the stoppage which is the most difficult to defend. Around the ground he also positions himself on the defensive side to prevent players taking the ball on the fly. So he doesn't dictate his opponent. The opposition do by their set ups.
Why do you think he plays that role? IMHO, it's because he has the commitment, discipline and selfless attitude to play the role. Who else would you trust to play it other than Walsh?
Zorko beat Cuningham and Williams twice in the centre square. The couple of times Zorko went to Ed in the second quarter. Ed beat him. He plays a team role so when I read shit about him being a protected species or being touched up, it tells me the person making the claim either is happy to bag players without watching their role properly or they don't understand his real value.
So when he receives a coaches vote for his game, and supporters try to tell me he should be dropped, who should I believe? The person who understands his role or the one who perhaps doesn't?