Did We Write Off Hawthorn Too Soon?

[SA HAWK]

Scoreboard flattered the Hawks. They’re a top 8 team imo and we did what we had to. When it mattered we were too good

Agree when it mattered you were too good but thought the scoreboard was about right.

We cough up far too many easy goals.

 

[Iceman!]

Not a top tier team. They're a second grade team led by a second grade star. They are behind Adelaide, Port, Sydney, GWS, Richmond and Geelong. Just like Tom Mitchell is behind the true A+ players: Martin, Dangerfield, Buddy, etc.

Going with the Mitchell hate in two threads. Nice to see the runner up in the Brownlow, All Australian, B&F winner still has a lot of improvement in him.

 

[RIOLINWITPUNCHS]

Not a top tier team. They're a second grade team led by a second grade star. They are behind Adelaide, Port, Sydney, GWS, Richmond and Geelong. Just like Tom Mitchell is behind the true A+ players: Martin, Dangerfield, Buddy, etc.

Mitchell is an A+ player even if i take my Hawthorn glasses off.

You are a goose.

 

[hk89]

Probably not that different to our loss last year except this time Richmond relaxed a bit too early. Never really felt at any stage that we were in a position to really trouble Richmond. Rance was too solid when we kept bombing it in for us to generate any momentum until they put the queue in the rack in the last. Still a fair gap between us and the top 4 teams (which I don't think includes Richmond at this stage of the season), but feels like we can still have a crack at finding a spot in the bottom half of the 8. Problem is, we are competing with about 8-10 contenders for 4 spots. Will be an interesting season again by what we've seen so far, with finals spots likely up for grabs very late into the season. Rioli still hasn't worked his way back to his best, and Frawley probably in desperate need of some in-game touch. O'meara will likely to continue to improve as the year goes on. Still think a 4-2 start from our first 6 games will set us up for a decent crack at making finals, and that still seems very achievable given that would only require two wins from Melbourne, Saints and North.

 

[Bazzar]

Once again Mitchell showed he's the king of the useless stat.
Cotchin had 11 fewer possessions and was 10 times the better player.
Travesty if Mitchel gets a Brownlow vote for this game

 

[Iceman!]

Once again Mitchell showed he's the king of the useless stat.
Cotchin had 11 fewer possessions and was 10 times the better player.
Travesty if Mitchel gets a Brownlow vote for this game

Mate did Mitchell steal ya Mrs? You abuse him every bloody week.

Even if you ignore the disposals stat he still had

8 tackles
12 clearances
1 goal

That is having an impact on the game. Cotchin was very impressive as well, but you had no idea if you think Titch was not one of the better players on the ground.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Once again Mitchell showed he's the king of the useless stat.
Cotchin had 11 fewer possessions and was 10 times the better player.
Travesty if Mitchel gets a Brownlow vote for this game

Rubbish.

Mitchell had the better of Cotchin in the following:
Clearances
Score involvements
Tackles
Rebound 50’s
Kicks
Marks
Handballs
Disp efficiency
Goals


Cotchin had a whopping 1 more contested possession and 1 more inside 50.

 

[Bazzar]

Rubbish.

Mitchell had the better of Cotchin in the following:
Clearances
Score involvements
Tackles
Rebound 50’s
Kicks
Marks
Handballs
Disp efficiency
Goals


Cotchin had a whopping 1 more contested possession and 1 more inside 50.

Surprise, surprise , surprise you of all people, the Tiger troll continue to distort facts.
Winners are griners, and Mitchel "as per usual" isn't one

 

[WWSD]

Surprise, surprise , surprise you of all people, the Tiger troll continue to distort facts.
Winners are griners, and Mitchel "as per usual" isn't one

Luckily the umpires see his game differently. He will get either 3 votes or 2 votes.

 

[SA HAWK]

Surprise, surprise , surprise you of all people, the Tiger troll continue to distort facts.
Winners are griners, and Mitchel "as per usual" isn't one

Will probably win the 3 Brownlow votes.

 

[StillAtLarge]

Once again Mitchell showed he's the king of the useless stat.
Cotchin had 11 fewer possessions and was 10 times the better player.
Travesty if Mitchell gets a Brownlow vote for this game

I had our best as Stratton, Mitchell, Gunston, O'Meara and Puopolo.
Richmond's as Vlastuin, Cotchin, Astbury, Houli and Edwards. But take out Cotchin and Richmond still win. Without Mitchell we don't get within 10 goals. You are an idiot

 

[Hodgey09]

Surprise, surprise , surprise you of all people, the Tiger troll continue to distort facts.
Winners are griners, and Mitchel "as per usual" isn't one

1) He isn't distorting facts, he's giving you actual facts

2) Mitchell's won 2/3 games he's played this year, so not sure how he's losing "as per usual"?

 

[Furn2]

The 2nd half of last year they was only the Tigers who got hold of us and it was same issues today.

I think its tactical they just have a gamestyle that we struggle with.

 

[Bazzar]

Luckily the umpires see his game differently. He will get either 3 votes or 2 votes.

Why? He was ineffective. There's a reason opposition coaches don't tag him

 

[Since 2001]

Here come all the tiger fans hahaha

 

[Hodgey09]

Why? He was ineffective. There's a reason opposition coaches don't tag him

Not sure if troll, complete moron...or Nathan Buckley.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Surprise, surprise , surprise you of all people, the Tiger troll continue to distort facts.
Winners are griners, and Mitchel "as per usual" isn't one

You walk in here, make an outlandish post and then squeal troll when presented with facts.

Classic.

“10 times the better player”.

 

[Off The Couch]

Here come all the tiger fans hahaha

Well it’s a break from the bomber posters who won’t be popping in for a chat this week

 

[WWSD]

Why? He was ineffective. There's a reason opposition coaches don't tag him

If he was ineffective he wouldn't be polling Brownlow votes. Teams don't tag him because he wins the footy no matter the situation. You're the same poster who said Hodge wasn't a good player. I'll take you're opinion with a grain of salt.

 

[Bazzar]

Not sure if troll, complete moron...or Nathan Buckley.

Who tagged him today? Who tagged him last week" Who tagged him the week before?

 

[Bazzar]

You walk in here, make an outlandish post and then squeal troll when presented with facts.

Classic.

“10 times the better player”.

Coming from you, so funny (and predictable)

 

[StillAtLarge]

Why? He was ineffective. There's a reason opposition coaches don't tag him

He is just about untaggable. I'm not joking. I know he's not the silkiest player but he kicks his goal a game and racks up 35 touches (of which 40-50% are contested). Anyone that doesn't rate him is a fool, the coaches all rate him but it's easier to tag other players out of the game rather than wasting effort on a freak ball winning magnet.

 

[Hodgey09]

Who tagged him today? Who tagged him last week" Who tagged him the week before?

I'll go with troll. You surely can't be this stupid.

 

[Bazzar]

I'll go with troll. You surely can't be this stupid.

Not stupid, but who was the Tiger that sat on him today?

 

[QuietB]

Who tagged him today? Who tagged him last week" Who tagged him the week before?

Who tagged Cotchin?