03-24-2017, 02:11 AM
Not the result I was looking for, but it wasn’t that bad. Just not good.
Team: D
Had we not turned the ball over as often as badly as we did, there would have been a 10 goal difference in the score line. But turn over the ball we did and often. Each time we paid the price. Until we get that out of our game we will continue to pay the price.
Votes:
[3] Kreuzer:
[2] Marchbank
[2] Plowman
[1.5] Murphy
[1.5] Simpson
[1] Gibbs
[1] Weitering
[1] Wright
[1] Docherty
[0.5] Silvagni
[0.5] Casboult
Explanations:
[3] Kreuzer: One of the best games the big lad has played. An uninterrupted pre-season makes a BIG difference and his marking was a lot more positive. He beat his man, which is good, as I rate Nankervis.
[2] Marchbank: If he hadn’t turned the ball over with such disastrous results, he would have ranked higher. He beat his man often out-marking him. His disposal was pretty good, but the few that were not were memorable for all the wrong reasons.
[2] Plowman: I could write the same thing for Plowman as I did for Marchbank.
[1.5] Murphy: Got a lot of the ball and worked very well, but our midfield just didn’t work as effectively as Richmond’s did. Still, the promise of better is there.
[1.5] Simpson: Simmo played a very Simmo like game, except that he (and out other small defenders) leaked goals to no-name players.
[1] Gibbs: Solid and worked hard, but Richmond’s midfield structures meant that Gibbs didn’t get a lot of clearances.
[1] Weitering: A sterling job in attack. Not enough possession perhaps, but what he did was excellent.
[1] Wright: Wright won’t be happy with a number of aspects of his game, especially his numbers. But what will please was the fact that he kept going and managed 3 good goals.
[1] Docherty: Not as good as he has been recently, but still worked hard across half back. Like Simpson, he would have been rated higher is the Richmond small forwards not got so many goals.
[0.5] Silvagni: Not given a lot of support, but showed more than a bit. Every possession he has lead to a scoring opportunity.
[0.5] Casboult: Started very poorly, but came into the game as it went on. His kicking for goal was much improved and his ruck work also improved over the night.
Honourable Mentions:
Sam Petrevski-Seton: made a big impression. When he is fit, he will be a gun. He did run out of juice. Skills were very good. He looked like Syd Jackson.
Patrick Cripps: Also a lot less than 100% fit, but struggled on manfully.
Simon White: Not embarrassed and did a good negative job.
Team: D
Had we not turned the ball over as often as badly as we did, there would have been a 10 goal difference in the score line. But turn over the ball we did and often. Each time we paid the price. Until we get that out of our game we will continue to pay the price.
Votes:
[3] Kreuzer:
[2] Marchbank
[2] Plowman
[1.5] Murphy
[1.5] Simpson
[1] Gibbs
[1] Weitering
[1] Wright
[1] Docherty
[0.5] Silvagni
[0.5] Casboult
Explanations:
[3] Kreuzer: One of the best games the big lad has played. An uninterrupted pre-season makes a BIG difference and his marking was a lot more positive. He beat his man, which is good, as I rate Nankervis.
[2] Marchbank: If he hadn’t turned the ball over with such disastrous results, he would have ranked higher. He beat his man often out-marking him. His disposal was pretty good, but the few that were not were memorable for all the wrong reasons.
[2] Plowman: I could write the same thing for Plowman as I did for Marchbank.
[1.5] Murphy: Got a lot of the ball and worked very well, but our midfield just didn’t work as effectively as Richmond’s did. Still, the promise of better is there.
[1.5] Simpson: Simmo played a very Simmo like game, except that he (and out other small defenders) leaked goals to no-name players.
[1] Gibbs: Solid and worked hard, but Richmond’s midfield structures meant that Gibbs didn’t get a lot of clearances.
[1] Weitering: A sterling job in attack. Not enough possession perhaps, but what he did was excellent.
[1] Wright: Wright won’t be happy with a number of aspects of his game, especially his numbers. But what will please was the fact that he kept going and managed 3 good goals.
[1] Docherty: Not as good as he has been recently, but still worked hard across half back. Like Simpson, he would have been rated higher is the Richmond small forwards not got so many goals.
[0.5] Silvagni: Not given a lot of support, but showed more than a bit. Every possession he has lead to a scoring opportunity.
[0.5] Casboult: Started very poorly, but came into the game as it went on. His kicking for goal was much improved and his ruck work also improved over the night.
Honourable Mentions:
Sam Petrevski-Seton: made a big impression. When he is fit, he will be a gun. He did run out of juice. Skills were very good. He looked like Syd Jackson.
Patrick Cripps: Also a lot less than 100% fit, but struggled on manfully.
Simon White: Not embarrassed and did a good negative job.
Live Long and Prosper!