Preview 2015 Grand Final: Hawthorn v West Coast Eagles - Gunston IN, Hartung OUT

[pantskyle]

1. Frawley can match Kennedy for speed easily.
2. Using stats from 2005 to back up his point? They have played one game there this year.
3. Using our 2008 performance as merit in beating us? Again, how is this relevant to this Saturday?
4. He says Frawley has looked lost in finals. Funny, he looked lost in the first half of the QF, moved down back, stopped Kennedy. Demolished Tex in the semi and beat Pavlich easily in the Prelim. Do these guys do any research or just make up shit?
5. If West Coast had a better attack wouldn't they have a higher percentage than us? I am pretty sure we have averaged the most goalkickers this year.

Honestly, all of these points are false or favour Hawthorn. Brendan Foster, you are an idiot.

I'm actually going to put money on Frawley to win the Norm Smith, if he can beat Kennedy it will go a long way to the Hawks winning the game.

 

[savagelunchbox]

Abasi, if Hawthorn beat WCE, I think pantskyle should do a lap of Waverley without pants. Seems apt.

 

[pantskyle]

Abasi, if Hawthorn beat WCE, I think pantskyle should do a lap of Waverley without pants. Seems apt.

What do I get if the Eagles win?

 

[Argy]

What do I get if the Eagles win?

A win?

 

[savagelunchbox]

What do I get if the Eagles win?

Abasi will take performance enhancing drugs while wearing an Essendon guernsey.

 

[RIOLIUSTAR]

What do I get if the Eagles win?

Chief, the most stable genius, will give you a shiny little cup, but there's no room to put yours on your profile

 

[pantskyle]

A win?

Pfft, I'd rather a naked Abasi.

Abasi will take performance enhancing drugs while wearing a Essendon guernsey.

I've seen him do this before, he sings Elton John songs whilst doing it.

Chief, the most stable genius, will give you a shiny little cup, but there's no room to put yours on your profile

I'll make room. Will remove that stupid pantskyle badge.

 

[Glacier]

The WCE forwards exposed us in the QF predominantly because of how we matched up. We literally couldn't have lined up much worse. Frawley at CHF & Lake on Kennedy is just crazy amounts of dumb... We had very little run from defence, but we were also defending from quite deep. We usually defend at Half Back & use the Full Back line for switching the ball & rebounding out the other way (why we always appear to give up cheap goals out the back). WCE dominated the mid-3rd of the ground & their Half-Forward (our HB) & had us defending at FB, leaving us to bomb long to clear the ball, which they owned.

In the QF, Kennedy had 26 disposals, 3.2 & 9 marks. He was also hugely effective in marking the ball 45m-60m from goal & delivering to Hill (3.0), LeCras (2.1) & Cripps (2.1). He ran Lake around & literally did what he wanted to. He was their match winner (others were contributors).

In the PF, Kennedy had 20 disposals, 2.3 & 9 marks. He was the player that kept them in it for Q1 - his work & his determination & run up the ground were brilliant. He dominated Scott Thompson in brain power & strength & just not being a dic**ead (sorry, can't stand Thompson...)! Again, he marked & scored from 45m-55m whilst also hitting up overlap runners for cheapies over the top.

IMO, we need to stop Kennedy marking the ball 45m-60m from goal. But wait... Where on Earth do we get a defender who can match Kennedy for pace & physical strength? The kind of defender who can play a lock-down, one-on-one role that keeps the league's best forwards to the following numbers:

- Tex Walker to 1.3, 10 disposals & 6 marks (SF);
- Buddy Franklin to 0.0, 7 disposals & 3 marks (Rnd 8); &,
- Combined to keep Hungry29, Maine & Taberner to 2 goals in the Prelim Final.

If only we could use our Chip Frawley - our QF CHF (just so dumb) on the best forward in the AFL to whom he's perfectly matched????

Jack Darling has played 14 games for 25 goals in 2015 - Gibbo can well & truly handle him & he's not nearly as damaging a high half-forward as Roughy or Gunston are. Stratton to LeCras & Doc/Burgoyne to Hill. This forces WCE's hand.

WCE usually prefer to rest a ruckman on the bench, allowing them to drift forward during regular play whilst also having an extra runner around the ball, but they'll not be able to leave Lake unattended as he'll chop off every high ball without contest. So they'll have to play/rest a ruckman at FF. This makes them top-heavy, or, clogs up free space that Cripps, LeCras, Hill et al would usually overlap run into when Kennedy has marked, 55m from goal. WCE's Forward 50m just got cramped, quick.

If Chip can force a contest on Kennedy at Half-Back or the flanks & force the ball to ground rather than giving up marks within 60m, we run a very good chance of clearing the ball quickly & hitting up our mobile Half-Forwards in Gunston, Breust & Roughy, or setting Smitty/Hill into space, rather than being constricted by the net or web or whatever they've renamed the Cluster; we'll also get to keep Popeye & Cyril near the F50m for when Hale/Schoey bring the ball to ground instead of having them at HB/Wing trying to run the ball forward. Alternately, if they win the disputed ball then they'll likely go inside F50m under pressure, which is how Lake wins Normies!


If we:

- pressure or restrict Kennedy;
- defend at HB, giving us room at FB to switch;
- use the width of the 'G well when heading forward; &,
- at least bring the ball to ground in our F50m if we can't mark.

We'll win.

Fantastic summary mate

 

[Paul Kersey]

Starting to think it's Hartung who gets dropped and the sub will come from someone who played on the weekend. Hale plays circa 30 metres out in our forward line in between rucking. Need Schoey contesting half forward. Gunston runs around as needed and Roughy can be a clearance player as required.

 

[EightyNineChamps]

Yes he can definately match Kennedy for speed if he is able to keep up with Lewis Jetta.

Check out :37 seconds in. Apologies for the Bruce fapfest...

Didn't realise he was that fast, new he was quick but not that quick.

Bruce and Dennis LOL...

 

[savagelunchbox]

Pfft, I'd rather a naked Abasi.



I've seen him do this before, he sings Elton John songs whilst doing it.



I'll make room. Will remove that stupid pantskyle badge.

okay, Abasi can moderate the the Essendon board for 12 months.

 

[Ranj Sri Lanka]

Been changing my INs and OUTs continuously, trying to figure out the best lineup. Eventually, the weather forecast did it for me. Assuming we'll lose the ruck anyway, have Roughie do Hale's job (which will actually bring Big Red into the game rather than spectating). If he and BB can negate NicNat enough to stop him providing an armchair ride to their onballers, then it becomes a matter for our guys to be smart enough to position themselves correctly at the contest.

IN: Gunners
OUT: Hale

I wouldn't mind this. Any further update on Hodge (not training yesterday) and Gunner's conditions. Also heard Smith had limited training? Any reason?

 

[pantskyle]

okay, Abasi can moderate the the Essendon board for 12 months.

I'm surprised he mods at all, he had to change his username from Echols because too many posters were calling him Echtrolls.

 

[Satchel]

U know I reckon a lot of our chances of success depends on Jordan Lewis who since the Goldstein "incident" has been pretty ordinary IMO

If Lewis plays the same game as last year's GF we 3 peat

Hopefully the fact that he now has safe arrival of junior means a big game from no 3

 

[RIOLIUSTAR]

U know I reckon a lot of our chances of success depends on Jordan Lewis who since the Goldstein "incident" has been pretty ordinary IMO

If Lewis plays the same game as last year's GF we 3 peat

Hopefully the fact that he now has safe arrival of junior means a big game from no 3

Also the points hanging over his head wouldn't have helped.

I hear Gaff doesn't do unsociable too well

 

[Briar Gold]

Without having to scroll through the posts on my phone... What's the general feeling with 'outs' assuming Gunston is fit.

I can't decide between Schoenmakers or Hale.

For romantic reasons I'm also tempted to have Langford in for Hartung. But that doesn't seem like a Clarkson thing to do and is probably not sensible.

Feels like a 50:50 match where the simple things like accuracy and effective tackles will decide the winner.

 

[Brant]

Starting to think it's Hartung who gets dropped and the sub will come from someone who played on the weekend. Hale plays circa 30 metres out in our forward line in between rucking. Need Schoey contesting half forward. Gunston runs around as needed and Roughy can be a clearance player as required.

Suckers to play as SUB & come on toward the end of the 3rd (likely for Hale).

He'll have pace compared with guys who have been bashed around for 90 mins on a warm day. Play him between HBF-HBF & let him kick over the back of CHF to that danger area or bury it deep into our FP to lock the ball in for 90 seconds so our mids & defenders can rest while their mids & defenders madly scramble to clear the ball & run it out.

 

[Paul Kersey]

Suckers to play as SUB & come on toward the end of the 3rd (likely for Hale).

He'll have pace compared with guys who have been bashed around for 90 mins on a warm day. Play him between HBF-HBF & let him kick over the back of CHF to that danger area or bury it deep into our FP to lock the ball in for 90 seconds so our mids & defenders can rest while their mids & defenders madly scramble to clear the ball & run it out.

Yeah Suckling was the first who came to mind TBH.

 

[cryptor]

Suckers to play as SUB & come on toward the end of the 3rd (likely for Hale).

He'll have pace compared with guys who have been bashed around for 90 mins on a warm day. Play him between HBF-HBF & let him kick over the back of CHF to that danger area or bury it deep into our FP to lock the ball in for 90 seconds so our mids & defenders can rest while their mids & defenders madly scramble to clear the ball & run it out.

I feel like Suckling's kicking will be too important on the MCG to have him sitting on the bench for 3 quarters. Though I concede there's not much choice.

 

[butchy]

I feel like Suckling's kicking will be too important on the MCG to have him sitting on the bench for 3 quarters. Though I concede there's not much choice.

Sub need to be someone who can run the lines and break into space. I think Hartung is the sub, no matter what.
If Gunston comes in, its for Schoey/Hale/Suckling. As much as id love Schoey to hold his spot, cant see it happening.
Although, Hale out, McEvoy/Roughy/Schoey to share the ruck duties has a good ring to it.
Cant see anyone else from Box Hill coming in, all played last week, prob would have been rested if serious chance eg- McEvoy last year.

 

[Paul Kersey]

Sub need to be someone who can run the lines and break into space. I think Hartung is the sub, no matter what.
If Gunston comes in, its for Schoey/Hale/Suckling. As much as id love Schoey to hold his spot, cant see it happening.
Although, Hale out, McEvoy/Roughy/Schoey to share the ruck duties has a good ring to it.
Cant see anyone else from Box Hill coming in, all played last week, prob would have been rested if serious chance eg- McEvoy last year.

Can't risk going in with one ruckman IMO.

 

[mikeder]

U know I reckon a lot of our chances of success depends on Jordan Lewis who since the Goldstein "incident" has been pretty ordinary IMO

If Lewis plays the same game as last year's GF we 3 peat

Hopefully the fact that he now has safe arrival of junior means a big game from no 3

Ye Satchel, you are right on there come to think of it; Lewis hasn't put in a big one since that game, and if he does on Saturday that will make a huge difference!

 

[Brant]

I feel like Suckling's kicking will be too important on the MCG to have him sitting on the bench for 3 quarters. Though I concede there's not much choice.

You're right - he kicks over or through a zone as well as anyone (when he's on...), but he's appears to also get closed down with relative ease, as well as being out-bodied when it's physical or close-checking.

I just hope we don't play Doc as SUB again.

I can't think of an WCE forward that Suckers would keep quiet if at HBF, but I can see him being dangerous once the pace/heat is slightly out of the game. Suckers is a weapon when we're in control. I'm not sure we'll get control in the first half with him out there. That's my concern.

 

[Brant]

Sub need to be someone who can run the lines and break into space. I think Hartung is the sub, no matter what.
If Gunston comes in, its for Schoey/Hale/Suckling. As much as id love Schoey to hold his spot, cant see it happening.
Although, Hale out, McEvoy/Roughy/Schoey to share the ruck duties has a good ring to it.
Cant see anyone else from Box Hill coming in, all played last week, prob would have been rested if serious chance eg- McEvoy last year.

Can't risk going in with one ruckman IMO.

Yep, we'll be pantsed in the ruck even with 2x Ruckmen. Play 1 & they'll jump into him at every chance as well as targeting him at every marking contest. The first time he gets caught under the ball he'll wear a knee in the back & that's it - we're gone. Also, we need to have 2x Big Forwards (Ruckman + Schoey) whilst Gunners & Roughy roam up to HB.

Need 2x Ruckmen.

 

[randall boner]

Yep, we'll be pantsed in the ruck even with 2x Ruckmen. Play 1 & they'll jump into him at every chance as well as targeting him at every marking contest. The first time he gets caught under the ball he'll wear a knee in the back & that's it - we're gone. Also, we need to have 2x Big Forwards (Ruckman + Schoey) whilst Gunners & Roughy roam up to HB.

Need 2x Ruckmen.

Agree