Review Good, Bad and Ugly vs Lions

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Yes because he stopped running to the pocket, he stopped dead in his tracks and watched it go over his head before he realised that ball was ment for him
Looked like Fog spotted both Himmelberg and Rachele in a bit of space and the kick land between them
 
Last edited:
Nick's cost us that.
Wtf was butts' role today. Took him out of his comfort zone and he had his worst game in a long time up the field.

Also. Props to mchenry. Him lifting in the 4th nearly got us up........... Queue the cartel ripping Him apart from his missed shot in the 2nd qtr..... (despite us winning ~10 years ago from Stevie j missing a similar shot)
Yeah McHenry played pretty well in the 4th
 
I can't defend Adelaide's development of young players but I wouldn't say 2 games in defence means we only see him as a defender.
They subbed him off due to having a tall defence.
.instead of moving him up the ground and moving Jones deeper in defence.


Or heck, sub McHenry for Nank.


Nank shouldn't have been sub anyway.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
You’re one of those guys that has to go against the tide for the sake of it. Congratulations. McHenry is a sub standard footballer.
No. I agree with most in regards to most players.

It's just the pack not noticing mchenrys/robs strengths and only focusing on their weaknesses that piss me off. This is probably robs wnd best season (behind 2020). Sure he is dropping the intercept marks which brings out the attacks on him. But besides that. Name 1 game this year, or heck last year where he was soundly beaten

...... watch someone name a game I didn't see (only the Melbourne game this year)
 
They subbed him off due to having a tall defence.
.instead of moving him up the ground and moving Jones deeper in defence.


Or heck, sub McHenry for Nank.


Nank shouldn't have been sub anyway.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Yep. This would have been a good move. But it would have required coaching ability
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yep. Mchenry/keays would've chased that down and put in the effort and we probably win.

But this board never changes and will give him applause for taking the game on at other points
Well that's not what happened. The ball went a couple of metres over his head. Criticise things that should be criticised by all means
 
How is our gameplan so inflexible we prefer to sub out a 2nd gamer at half time than put him in an attacking role that compliments his play style.
Agreed
He's a natural midfielder
Playing him down back is setting him up to fail
 
Those writing off a 19yo in his second game need to take a breath.
I think Curtin's going to be very good. That is hopefully the worst game he will ever play, but there's no hiding from the fact that he was dreadful. Definitely doesn't mean anything about where he will end up later in his career.
 
Goodness me the constant McHenry bashing gets tiresome when he was better than Tex, Smith, Hinge, Curtin, Nank, Cook. By no means was Ned spectacular today but wasn't the main reason we didnt win.
It's McHenry who is tiresome.
Tiresomely ineffective.

Look closely at McHenry after he's marked and lining up for goal from not-far out.
I saw fear, not determination, and didn't think for a moment he'd kick that goal.

The clincher for me was with around 3 and a half minutes to play in the 3rd quarter.
The heat is on and Ned takes possession I50.
Does he fire out a quick handball even to move the ball forward? NO. Just showed more fear, indecision, clueless, hung on to the ball, tackled/htb ==> turnover.
He has NO composure or creative ability under pressure.
I praised McHenry to the hilt for his good work in creating the Tex goal, last week.

Nankervis should have started ahead of McHenry tonight, McHenry sub. Smith should not have played.
The blame is on Nicks who is the main reason we drew tonight, aided and abetted by his Golden try-hard-Boy, McHenry and his cooked Leader, Smith.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top