Blake vs Mumford

[YOTC]

1st quarter

Blake r*ped Mumford. Dominated him from the very first bounce. Was winning the hitouts 6-2 before he went off.

Blake sold Varcoe into trouble, but Mumford dropped an uncontested mark which led to a Varcoe goal. Calling it even around the ground.

 

[YOTC]

2nd quarter

Blake still winning the taps. Mumford better around the ground but wouldn't say he's been influencial.

 

[YOTC]

Oh yes!

Cop that. What a goal!!!

 

[vinum coupe]

The moment of truth has arrived. I hope there are no more excuses from the Blake apologists if Mummy gives Flake a bath.

How's this working out for you?

 

[Big Fozza]

very happy with blake today.

winning the hitouts and keeping his own over the ground

 

[CF]

Blakey pantsed Mumford LMAO. Sure he had a few "Blake" moments like he always does but absolute class in the ruck as per usual. Nice goal too. He can kick it he just needs some confidence.

 

[InnocentBystandr]

Yep, Blake won the ruck duel today. Actually has a decent boot when he has the confidence to kick it (I recall a long roost into the 50 that set up a Chappy goal in the QF against C'wood last year). Held a couple of marks too (not as confident as Mummy in that area though) but need to impose himself after he's won the tap.

I like the way he an Mummy shook hands after the match. Mummy went up to GAJ after the match to 'apologise' for slamming his head into the KP turf. Lucky for GAJ it was the new surface at KP and not the 'concrete' of Homebush!

 

[Selective Retention]

I thought it pretty much matched up with how I saw it last year.

People like Mummy because of the second efforts. It's just a characteristic that football supporters go gaga over. Blake being lacking in this department widens the perception.

Mummy got his hands dirty, laid 8 tackles, but ultimately Blake was more effective - I wouldn't say pantsed however - on the day.

 

[Copulator]

I just wish blake had mumford aggression and 2nd efforts, combined they would form an awesome ruckman but separate neither are much chop

 

[Exhale You]

Blake comprehensively won the duel today.

Mumford's second efforts and defensive pressure were excellent as always, but in the middle Blake destroyed him and had far more influence on the result.

Blake is obviously going to come up against significantly better ruckmen over the next few weeks but it was a promising start in his role as number one ruckman in 2010, hopefully he can go on with it against the Brisbane duo (assuming Clark gets up).

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Clearly with 9 tackles Mumford was great around the ground, but I thought Blake dominated the hitouts and had one of his better games for a while.

We have a big month of footy ahead, and without Ottens we really need Blake to stand up so I hope he keeps this up

 

[David the Cat]

The moment of truth has arrived. I hope there are no more excuses from the Blake apologists if Mummy gives Flake a bath.

 

[Vdubs]

We can have at least 1 week of no Blake bashing. Very good 4/4 performance with lots of time on the ground for Tomahawk to ruck. When>if he gets his confidence up, he could evolve into a formidable #1 ruck.

 

[rocker_oz33]

blake was great in the ruck and his early ruck work to gazz and co really set the tone,and that goal he kicked was gold the crowd loved it

 

[Vegas.]

Toma in the ruck was good for comedic value.

 

[MF]

I thought blake was more effective and gave your mids much better service than Mumford but calling it a 'pantsing' is probably getting a bit carried away. Blake: 33 hitouts, 8 possies, 1 goal. Mumford: 25 hitouts, 14 possies, 9 tackles.

As most on here predicted before the game: Blake won the ruck duel, Mumford won around the ground.

 

[YOTC]

I thought blake was more effective and gave your mids much better service than Mumford but calling it a 'pantsing' is probably getting a bit carried away. Blake: 33 hitouts, 8 possies, 1 goal. Mumford: 25 hitouts, 14 possies, 9 tackles.

As most on here predicted before the game: Blake won the ruck duel, Mumford won around the ground.

It was a pantsing. Mumford was hopeless every time against Blake. Only won taps against Hawkins.

Pyke was doing a better job than Mumford in the ruck.

 

[MF]

It was a pantsing. Mumford was hopeless every time against Blake. Only won taps against Hawkins.

Pyke was doing a better job than Mumford in the ruck.

I guess when you want to believe something hard enough it's easy to ignore the facts.

 

[Brasil2007]

Clearly with 9 tackles Mumford was great around the ground, but I thought Blake dominated the hitouts and had one of his better games for a while.

We have a big month of footy ahead, and without Ottens we really need Blake to stand up so I hope he keeps this up

Had a very good game. Probably could have ended up with a couple of goals because Mumford didn't give him any respect.

I hope it's fairly obvious now why he's being played - for all the stuff about Mumford being better around the ground etc, the few tackles and possessions someone who is better around the ground might get isn't worth sacrificing the clearances.

Thought he worked hard to make himself dangerous too, although there were a couple of instances when I think he might have pushed into the square when we had a free kick at goal.

Also shows the difference between a full time ruckman (Blake) and a part timer.

 

[CF]

I guess when you want to believe something hard enough it's easy to ignore the facts.

Geelong 4.0 7.4 12.8 19.12 (126)
Sydney Swans 3.0 5.2 7.3 9.5 (59)


these facts tell me that Mumfords contribution was crap

 

[YOTC]

I guess when you want to believe something hard enough it's easy to ignore the facts.

What facts?

Would love to know the 1 on 1 hitout stats. Mumford was losing to Blake 8-2 before I stopped caring. You paid $300,000 for the clanger man.

 

[Brasil2007]

What facts?

Would love to know the 1 on 1 hitout stats. Mumford was losing to Blake 8-2 before I stopped caring. You paid $300,000 for the clanger man.

Don't forget the free kicks and 50s, plus the times he let Blake float around our forward line without an opponent.

Mumford may be a better player and may suit Sydney more but Blake is by far the better ruckman for the Cats.

 

[patience]

We can have at least 1 week of no Blake bashing. .

Yes, please. I personally don't love or hate him. The vitriol way over the top.

 

[MF]

What facts?

Would love to know the 1 on 1 hitout stats. Mumford was losing to Blake 8-2 before I stopped caring. You paid $300,000 for the clanger man.

As I said... Blake clearly won the ruck duel. If that's all your basing each players performance on then yes... Blake pantsed him.

If we're going to be reasonable and take both players influence on their team into account then it's hardly a 'pantsing'. Mumford was close to BOG for us today. That's probably a sad indictment on the rest of the team but his work around the ground was clearly superior to Blakes.

Just because your team doesn't need Blake to be a Cox style extra midfielder around the ground, it doesn't mean the opposing ruckmans work around the ground counts for naught when comparing their games.

Anyway... I can see it's going to be impossible to discuss this rationally with someone who has such an obviously biased agenda...(ie. proving the Blake detractors on your own board wrong). Well done on a convincing win and best of luck for the rest of your season.

 

[The rabbi]

Yes, please. I personally don't love or hate him. The vitriol way over the top.

Just like much of the Byrnes bashing on this forum. Although I think that Hawkins is the flavour of the month.