Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
List Changes 2018
(10-22-2018, 02:05 AM)cookie2 link Wrote:Agree and that's why I think one more year of Rowe may have been handy. He was obviously not a long term prospect going forward.

I fear as we struggle to retain players like Charlie and Cripps you may well see more decisions like this, the displacement of long term experienced players with kids.

It is not just our club, it could be that this is symptomatic of the growth in marquee player wages outstripping the growth in the TPP.
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Reply
(10-22-2018, 01:54 AM)LP link Wrote:It is interesting when you look at it from the losers perspective, and not just GFs as you highlight Melbourne's plight.

Even Nthmond's loss to the Filth a function of the inability to match up on Mason Cox, it seems it was at least a contributing factor?

I suppose it's a horses for courses debate, if they have them and they are an influence you need to be able to deal with them in some way!

And yet the Tigers knew that 9 times out of 10, likely higher, Cx is a non event.

Tigers lost as soon as they chose to play an injured Dusty.....
Finals, then 4 in a row!
Reply
(10-22-2018, 01:54 AM)LP link Wrote:It is interesting when you look at it from the losers perspective, and not just GFs as you highlight Melbourne's plight.

Even Nthmond's loss to the Filth a function of the inability to match up on Mason Cox, it seems it was at least a contributing factor?

I suppose it's a horses for courses debate, if they have them and they are an influence you need to be able to deal with them in some way!

Astbury was in hospital the night before the game and shouldn't have played.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!
Reply
So, there's 2 down before first bounce....perhaps Hardwick was cocky?
Finals, then 4 in a row!
Reply
Losing (well,  greatly reduced effectiveness)  Astbury destroyed their defensive structure so prance couldn't play purely as a loose intercept tall.

Their midfield was swamped,  a fit Dusty wouldn't have made any difference and Cotchin didn't pick up the slack.

Comprehensively beaten IMO.
DrE is no more... you ok with that harmonica man?
Reply
(10-22-2018, 03:29 AM)Professer E link Wrote:Losing (well,  greatly reduced effectiveness)  Astbury destroyed their defensive structure so prance couldn't play purely as a loose intercept tall.

Their midfield was swamped,  a fit Dusty wouldn't have made any difference and Cotchin didn't pick up the slack.

Comprehensively beaten IMO.

Quote:a fit Dusty wouldn't have made any difference ......

The bloke could hardly run and barely kick..... you have got to be kidding!  :Smile :Smile
Finals, then 4 in a row!
Reply
(10-22-2018, 01:29 AM)ElwoodBlues1 link Wrote:Collingwood could have done with one vs WC..once Kennedy and Darling exerted their influence it was game over....
Melbourne have recognized their weakness having skinny kids down back and recruited May...

Its not about winning premierships at the minute either...we need to win games, having a undersized defense wont help....

Yet, I don't think that's what cost them.

Their mids stopped getting first use, and once Grundy was negated, they were out of the game.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson
Reply
(10-22-2018, 06:07 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:Yet, I don't think that's what cost them.

Their mids stopped getting first use, and once Grundy was negated, they were out of the game.
That is the key to Collingwood: negating Grundy.
Live Long and Prosper!
Reply
So where does that leave the one ruckmen strategy?
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Reply
(10-22-2018, 09:02 PM)LP link Wrote:So where does that leave the one ruckmen strategy?

Apparently it's been abandoned LP  Smile
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)