Rd 22: Post Game Peace? Carlton vs Hawthorn

[DJC]

Master of making us play slow crap football hence why we're down the bottom and can't score.

Remind me who won on Saturday night; Murphy's team with its slow, crap football or Mitchell's handball happy team?

[cookie2]

Remind me who won on Saturday night; Murphy's team with its slow, crap football or Mitchell's handball happy team?

We always looked in control. 

[DJC]

I rate Tom Mitchell very highly. I don't buy he has no impact at all. His biggest strength is the angles he runs to get the ball and then out of congestion and stoppage. His running patterns are elite. However when there are other motives at play and to use our captain as a scapegoat i take issue with.

I agree Shadesy and I wouldn't mind Mitchell in navy blue.  However, Murphy is at least as important to us as skipper and football accumulator and distributor as Mitchell is to Hawthorn. 

[LP]

Tom Mitchell best games come when his efficiency is very high, but he is not consistent yet.

Also, he is a very poor defensive runner, if he was at Carlton he would get bagged mercilessly for jogging behind play. At the Dawks even his team-mates are forced to give him a hurry up.

We had a player very similar to the current version of Tom Mitchell, he was called Brock McLean and most Carlton fans hated him! Yet Brock was a far better ball user than Tom Mitchell currently is!

[madbluboy]

Remind me who won on Saturday night; Murphy's team with its slow, crap football or Mitchell's handball happy team?

We beat Sydney and GWS too but what will that matter in a couple of weeks.

[ElwoodBlues1]

I rate Mitchell...was a good player at the Swans but is even better at the Hawks where he doesnt get the same amount of help....
44 times is a lot of footy...he went at 84% efficiency with the ball which is very decent considering Murphy who played well for us went at 70%..
He isnt the high impact goalkicking, break the lines star like Dangerfield but he is that reliable ball winner that every team needs in the guts.....
Different player to Murphy IMO...so hard to compare....

[DJC]

I rate Mitchell...was a good player at the Swans but is even better at the Hawks where he doesnt get the same amount of help....
44 times is a lot of footy...he went at 84% efficiency with the ball which is very decent considering Murphy who played well for us went at 70%..
He isnt the high impact goalkicking, break the lines star like Dangerfield but he is that reliable ball winner that every team needs in the guts.....
Different player to Murphy IMO...so hard to compare....

Most of Mitchell's disposals were handpasses and that would inflate his disposal efficiency as would the fact that kicks >40m to a 50/50 contest are counted as 'effective'.  Some of his kicking gave his team mates no chance, particularly the forwards, and his shot at goal was a shocker.

Not a bad player though!

[LP]

Most of Mitchell's disposals were handpasses and that would inflate his disposal efficiency as would the fact that kicks >40m to a 50/50 contest are counted as 'effective'.  Some of his kicking gave his team mates no chance, particularly the forwards, and his shot at goal was a shocker.

Not a bad player though!

Yep, there are other bear traps hiding in the stats as well, always pays to read the fine print!

Like I50s that go uncontested and direct to an unmanned opponent.

[Micky0]

I find it hard to respect Hawthorn, even though my father barracked for them.

[2] Hypocrisy: Clarkson, Hodge and many others are total hypocrites. I was at the game many years ago when both Buddy and Fev were going for their 100th goal of the season. Buddy got his early: we couldn't stop Hawthorn at the time. However, as the game went on, Fev got closer and closer, up to 99 at 3/4 time. Hawthorn then did everything they could to stop Fev getting that final goal, including playing 5 men on him. Naturally Fev fell short, although a number of very cheap goals managed to be scored by us during the quarter.
Clarkson, Hodge and others then came out of separate occasions to state that it was pity that Fev didn't get his 100, that they did not try extra hard to stop him getting the goal and that they would be happy to see it happen.
What bald faced lies they uttered.
It doesn't bother me that they were so competitive that they felt they had to defend every goal. I can understand that. But to come out publically and to try to rewrite history with them in the role of good guy was ridiculous. I cannot believe any of them could honestly have believed that trash having seem them play

I was there too and with some Hawks supporters and they, along with Clarkson, were laughing in our faces at Fev not getting that milestone. What poor sports.

As has been said, Clarkson dropped 7!!! Players back on to Fev to ensure he didn't get his 100. It had nothing to do with them not wanting the crowd to rush the ground at all, Clarkson is just a cunt.  Had he played fair Fev would've gotten his 100 And there could've been a double celebration and the game would be talked about now still for fair sportsmanship and two of the big time forwards getting their 100 at the same time. Instead Clarksons bloody attitude of fuck everyone and don't care who you trample on to get what you want mean the game is really only remembered by both supporters for buddy and by Carlton supporters as showing that Clarkson was a ruthless small small Man.

Clarkson is a bad sport and just a cunt of a guy. End of discussion.

[chalkybill]

Not the place for this enquiry but what the hell.  Does anyone know who the very, very short person was who walked around the ground with the 87 premiership group?