03-25-2016, 05:06 AM
Team: C+
Yes, we lost, but we probably deserved to win. We played 3 distinctly better quarters than Richmond and had the better players on the night.
I liked our new game plan.
Votes:
[3] Gibbs
[2.5] Murphy
[2.5] Cripps
[2] Docherty
[1.5] Simpson
[1] Weitering
[0.5] Kerridge
[0.5] Rowe
[0.5] Graham
[0.5] Tuohy
[0.5] Phillips
Explanations:
[3] Gibbs: Just got the 3 votes. His ability to kick to a man surrounded by players and hit the target was probably the difference. He had 7 tackles and ran hard.
[2.5] Murphy: Good effort from the Captain, with lots of ball and very few turnovers.
[2.5] Cripps: His ability to make the play was excellent.
[2] Docherty: Lots of hard running: he played in a way that suited our game plan perfectly.
[1.5] Simpson: Strong and steady across half back.
[1] Weitering: 1st game? No worries! Just take a few fine marks and get 17 possessions.
[0.5] Kerridge: Not as good as he has been, but a useful contributor. He mucked up several kicks that were costly in the end.
[0.5] Rowe: Played pretty well in defence and can be happy with his effort, in all except that his man kicked goals with his few touches.
[0.5] Graham: Not quite as good as he was last year, but solid and dangerous.
[0.5] Tuohy: A solid and hard running game.
[0.5] Phillips: Showed something in the ruck and managed a goal. His ability to beat Hampson in the middle was crucial. He really showed a bit.
Honourable Mentions:
Wright: His goals were excellent, but he didn’t a lot otherwise. Still, a start he can work on.
Casboult: Had he been able to convert, he would have been the difference between victory and defeat. He was the only forward on the ground who marked consistently, but he couldn’t hit the side of a barn.
Boekhorst: Almost vote – worthy. Not quite as good as last time (against Sydney), but so much better than anything he did last year.
Curnow: Worked hard and did a fine job.
Yes, we lost, but we probably deserved to win. We played 3 distinctly better quarters than Richmond and had the better players on the night.
I liked our new game plan.
Votes:
[3] Gibbs
[2.5] Murphy
[2.5] Cripps
[2] Docherty
[1.5] Simpson
[1] Weitering
[0.5] Kerridge
[0.5] Rowe
[0.5] Graham
[0.5] Tuohy
[0.5] Phillips
Explanations:
[3] Gibbs: Just got the 3 votes. His ability to kick to a man surrounded by players and hit the target was probably the difference. He had 7 tackles and ran hard.
[2.5] Murphy: Good effort from the Captain, with lots of ball and very few turnovers.
[2.5] Cripps: His ability to make the play was excellent.
[2] Docherty: Lots of hard running: he played in a way that suited our game plan perfectly.
[1.5] Simpson: Strong and steady across half back.
[1] Weitering: 1st game? No worries! Just take a few fine marks and get 17 possessions.
[0.5] Kerridge: Not as good as he has been, but a useful contributor. He mucked up several kicks that were costly in the end.
[0.5] Rowe: Played pretty well in defence and can be happy with his effort, in all except that his man kicked goals with his few touches.
[0.5] Graham: Not quite as good as he was last year, but solid and dangerous.
[0.5] Tuohy: A solid and hard running game.
[0.5] Phillips: Showed something in the ruck and managed a goal. His ability to beat Hampson in the middle was crucial. He really showed a bit.
Honourable Mentions:
Wright: His goals were excellent, but he didn’t a lot otherwise. Still, a start he can work on.
Casboult: Had he been able to convert, he would have been the difference between victory and defeat. He was the only forward on the ground who marked consistently, but he couldn’t hit the side of a barn.
Boekhorst: Almost vote – worthy. Not quite as good as last time (against Sydney), but so much better than anything he did last year.
Curnow: Worked hard and did a fine job.
Live Long and Prosper!