Hawthorn's back line.

[KissStephanie]

You could have 1000 monkeys typing 1000 words on bigfooty for 1000 days and you still wouldnt change the fact:

R 22 2010, Haw d Coll. Haw were better in the main KPI of AFL football - the team which scores most It has no relevance to this year but it was still a win

Nah. Collingwood wasted their chances and didn't have any incentive to win because top spot was secured. Hawthorn made the most of their chances, and they had to win to have any chance of hosting a final the following week. It doesn't matter anyway because five weeks later, Collingwood won the premiership.

 

[Pessimistic]

Drew actually

 

[Rev08]

Nah. Collingwood wasted their chances and didn't have any incentive to win because top spot was secured. Hawthorn made the most of their chances, and they had to win to have any chance of hosting a final the following week. It doesn't matter anyway because five weeks later, Collingwood won the premiership.

The FACT is Hawthorn beat Collingwood in round 22 2010. Collingwood, for whatever reason, weren't good enough to beat Hawthorn on the day.

Football is won and lost by one simple stat - total score. Not kicks, or tackles, or handballs, or inside 50's, or hit outs, or "missed opportunities", or bum taps, or any other stat you want to make up. So, please answer me this question:

At the end of the round 22 2010 game between Hawthorn and Collingwood, who had the higher score, thus winning the game?

The rest of your argument is based on pure speculation. I can do the same, just watch:

Hawthorn would have EASILY won the game in round 4 last year. But we weren't trying - we were boycotting playing proper football because Buddy had been suspended for something we thought was unjust. If we had have tried we would have won by 10 goals.

See how ridiculous you sound?

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Nah. Collingwood wasted their chances and didn't have any incentive to win because top spot was secured. Hawthorn made the most of their chances, and they had to win to have any chance of hosting a final the following week. It doesn't matter anyway because five weeks later, Collingwood won the premiership.

Perhaps you could give it a rest then...

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Perhaps you could give it a rest then...

I swear it has posted about that Rd 22 game in at least 30 threads I've stumbled across.

 

[hk89]

I swear it has posted about that Rd 22 game in at least 30 threads I've stumbled across.

It is not surprising that Pies fans are so defensive about the round 22 outcome. It is similar to Hawks fans being defensive about Geelong being the best team over the season in 2008 (which they clearly were, just not on GF day). Pies fans worry that not being able to beat the Hawks in round 22, and then not having to meet them in the finals puts a question mark over whether they could have the won the GF - or even got into it at all - if the hawks had managed to secure a home final, and avoid the Freo embarrassment. So they come up with the 'dead rubber' excuse.

Given the pies' inability to beat the Hawks with buddy playing, they had two very big incentives to win that game:
a) To show they could, and hence diminish any psychological hold the buddy factor may have had over them, and more importantly
b) To make sure a home final was impossible for the Hawks, hence decreasing the chance they'd meet them in the finals series. Who wants to play in a prelim against a team you've not beaten in several years when their star forward is playing?

Pies fans should STFU up about the dead rubber myth. If they want a come back, 'so what, we won the flag' should be enough. Just as it should be for Hawk's fans in regard to '08. Long threads arguing the merits of the round 22 clash just makes them look like they actually have something to be scared about.

Personally I think we should rest buddy in round 15, given it seems likely we don't need to beat Pies to make top 4 (although that could change rapidly). Keep them guessing about how well they can handle him, and unleash him on them in the finals If we lose, they are still unsure where they stand. If we win, they'll be even more shit scared come finals time.

 

[hodge#15]

Of course he is good enough to have done that, although I don't remember it. Collingwood had seven more scoring shots and are good enough to have not wasted so many of those shots, but it happens sometimes.That's not fact at all! If anybody thinks that Dayne Beams is not good enough to kick a simple goal from 30 metres is delusional. Of course he is good enough, but misses occur sometimes and that is what happened at the time. He shouldn't have missed because he is good enough to have kicked it, but he didn't at the time.That's not fact either. Collingwood were definitely good enough to win that match without any doubt. Wasted shots and a lack of incentive was the difference against a team that kicked straighter and had incentive to win. Collingwood controlled most of the match and the stats clearly indicated that they were good enough to win, but I can understand them going at only about 70% intensity in a match that didn't matter with the finals starting the following week.I don't know yet if that is fact either. Lessons may have been learned from that match to help the next time the two teams meet each other. I'm sure Collingwood would be quite confident considering they got so close despite wasting more shots at goal and not having an incentive to win against a team that made the most of their chances and had an incentive to win. It seems to me from these points you've made that you may struggle with lateral thought.See above.

Bit insecure mate? Your arguing over a home and away match that you lost in the same year that you won the premiership. Do you realise how pathetic you look?

The fact is your only arguing with my fellow hawthorn supporters because you know Hawthorn can beat Collingwood and is a major threat to their back to back flag campaign, Moreso than Geelong. Hawthorn have the wood over you and we crush you evvery time we play you.

If you were ever going to smash us mate it would have been in round 22 last year while we had an average gameplan and wern't playing anywhere near what we are playing like now.

You, myself and everybody on this board including collingwood supporters Hawthorn are the main threat to them. (No offence to Geelong they probably could and will win the premiership, but collingwood always destroys you)

 

[RogerC]

I'm having a hard time locating the last post that had anything at all to do with the thread topic. Can anyone help me out?

 

[PieNSauce]

I'm having a hard time locating the last post that had anything at all to do with the thread topic. Can anyone help me out?

Sure, Go back to the 1980's

 

[absfab]

Mate I despise the Pies as much as any right thinking person should.

However....

Pies fans worry that not being able to beat the Hawks in round 22, and then not having to meet them in the finals puts a question mark over whether they could have the won the GF - or even got into it at all - if the hawks had managed to secure a home final,

This sounds a lot like how the football world was "shitting itself" over Hawthorn making the finals. When as it happens Hawthorn did make the finals and were humiliated by Freo seconds. Road trip is irrelevant. It was a meek surrender, just like Round 22, 2009.

So they come up with the 'dead rubber' excuse.

Collinwood fans weren't alone in that opinion. It was blindingly obvious to all who watched the game. In fact the only people who (need) to believe otherwise are rusted on Hawthorn tragics.

Given the pies' inability to beat the Hawks with buddy playing, they had two very big incentives to win that game:
a) To show they could, and hence diminish any psychological hold the buddy factor may have had over them, and more importantly
b) To make sure a home final was impossible for the Hawks, hence decreasing the chance they'd meet them in the finals series. Who wants to play in a prelim against a team you've not beaten in several years when their star forward is playing?.

If I were a Collingwood supporter (what a dirty thought) Hawthorn and Buddy would have been a non issue in September 2010, because as much as you might want to avoid the fact, Hawthorn were never considered a serious contender. By anyone.

Pies fans should STFU up about the dead rubber myth. If they want a come back, 'so what, we won the flag' should be enough. Just as it should be for Hawk's fans in regard to '08.

On the contrary. It would be really nice if a lot of people STOPPED banging on about "we won the flag". And yes I'm looking at Hawthorn supporters.

 

[PieNSauce]

Mate I despise the Pies as much as any right thinking person should.

However....



This sounds a lot like how the football world was "shitting itself" over Hawthorn making the finals. When as it happens Hawthorn did make the finals and were humiliated by Freo seconds. Road trip is irrelevant. It was a meek surrender, just like Round 22, 2009.



Collinwood fans weren't alone in that opinion. It was blindingly obvious to all who watched the game. In fact the only people who (need) to believe otherwise are rusted on Hawthorn tragics.



If I were a Collingwood supporter (what a dirty thought) Hawthorn and Buddy would have been a non issue in September 2010, because as much as you might want to avoid the fact, Hawthorn were never considered a serious contender. By anyone.



On the contrary. It would be really nice if a lot of people STOPPED banging on about "we won the flag". And yes I'm looking at Hawthorn supporters.

lol. Never thought I'd see the day when I'd agree with a post from a C... Carl... um... Bl... Blu... I mean a post from one of you people.

 

[RogerC]

Sure, Go back to the 1980's

Well, at least you're on-topic, I'll give you credit for that.

 

[RogerC]

On the contrary. It would be really nice if a lot of people STOPPED banging on about "we won the flag". And yes I'm looking at Hawthorn supporters.

I can fully understand why a Carlton supporter would want that. Must be very painful for you.

***

On-topic for just a moment, if you'll all indulge me:

Hawthorn's backline, despite the losses of Stratton and Gilham, is operating pretty well. As a unit, it's about mid-table for efficiency. It's still working to negate opposition forward lines, rather than defeat them one-on-one. The objective is to get the ball into neutral situations (out of bounds, ball-up, or just in a ground-level pack situation of some sort), and work to gain possession from there.

The midfield is doing all the grunt work in preventing inside-50s. Only West Coast are more successful in that area this year. Good teams (Geelong, Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon) haven't been too fussed about seeing the ball in defensive 50, because they're excellent at preventing scores and extracting the ball. Hawthorn are definitely compensating to a degree by trying to break-even in the middle of the ground. But there's not much evidence of flooding either. They're trying to hold positions around the ground. That helps prevent opposition sides from scoring off the break, something that was a big problem for Hawthorn in 2010.

But in the past 2-3 weeks, Hawthorn's defence is holding together much better, and opponents are finding it harder to score once they're in there.

***

As for round 22, 2010, I really don't care. By the time that game was played, Fremantle had already defeated Carlton, so Hawthorn's incentive to win was reduced (a home final was very unlikely). The only reason for either side to win was pride. Both of them had an eye on the following week.

Trying to extract meaning from one game is useless. Collingwood won the flag. That's all that matters.

 

[hk89]

Road trip is irrelevant.

Yes, we all know how well Freo play away from home. To say their home final was irrelevant is pure ignorance.

Hawthorn were never considered a serious contender. By anyone.

Bullshit. The media was full of speculation about Hawks form turnaround after the shocking start, and its potential impact on the final series, and rightly so. Our record in the last 12 months mentioned by Furn speaks for itself:

Hawks 18-6-1 in last 12mths with 4 losses interstate.

This shows two things, we've been one of the best performed teams in the competition over the last 12 months, and we suck interstate (making your 'Road trip irrelevant' comment even more obtuse). Certainly we were an outside hope with no double chance, but one thing is certain, every team in the top 8 would have rather played Carlton than Hawks, and teams that had lost to us (or narrowly won or drawn) in the latter part of the season would have been extra concerned (and that was basically the entire top 4 at that stage). It is easy for Pies fans to say now that they were not worried about playing Hawks, but these threads tell a different story.

It would be really nice if a lot of people STOPPED banging on about "we won the flag". And yes I'm looking at Hawthorn supporters.

I'm sure you are - with envy. I'm reckon every club who haven't won a flag in the last 15 years wishes other club's fans stopped saying "we won the flag". I bet this especially applies to the ones that had cheated the salary cap and the draft (via tanking), and STILL not managed to snare one in that time period.

 

[PieNSauce]

Well, at least you're on-topic, I'll give you credit for that.

lol. Life's too short to take everything seriously!

 

[hk89]

I'm having a hard time locating the last post that had anything at all to do with the thread topic. Can anyone help me out?

I believe it was this post
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=21179246&postcount=116

But the "We're not afraid of big bad Hawthorn" brigade weren't interested in discussing anything outside of how their soft team lay down and gave up in round 22 last year (if true, a pitiful thing to admit. Their team actually goes out onto the ground and doesn't try? No wonder we have Carltank fans joining in now, that is their speciality isn't it?).

 

[absfab]

Yes, we all know how well Freo play away from home. To say their home final was irrelevant is pure ignorance.

Nice try. The crippled side Freo put on the paddock was beatable on the moon. Without space suits.

Bullshit. The media was full of speculation about Hawks form turnaround after the shocking start, and its potential impact on the final series, and rightly so. Our record in the last 12 months mentioned by Furn speaks for itself:

Ah. Media speculation. Second only to the daily horoscope as a meaningful guide to life's little decisions.

I'm sure you are - with envy. I'm reckon every club who haven't won a flag in the last 15 years wishes other club's fans stopped saying "we won the flag". I bet this especially applies to the ones that had cheated the salary cap and the draft (via tanking), and STILL not managed to snare one in that time period.

How very Hawthorn. Over my lifetime easily the most obnoxious supporter group in victory, and the biggest bunch of sooks in defeat. Even worse than Collingwood.

And still in 2011, after a slide into heartless mediocrity for two years, still find it natural to troll Geelong. The side who rolled up their sleeves and came back to win the next flag after a shock loss. And today is clearly, still, a better team.

 

[PieNSauce]

On-topic for just a moment, if you'll all indulge me:

Hawthorn's backline, despite the losses of Stratton and Gilham, is operating pretty well. As a unit, it's about mid-table for efficiency. It's still working to negate opposition forward lines, rather than defeat them one-on-one. The objective is to get the ball into neutral situations (out of bounds, ball-up, or just in a ground-level pack situation of some sort), and work to gain possession from there.

The midfield is doing all the grunt work in preventing inside-50s. Only West Coast are more successful in that area this year. Good teams (Geelong, Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon) haven't been too fussed about seeing the ball in defensive 50, because they're excellent at preventing scores and extracting the ball. Hawthorn are definitely compensating to a degree by trying to break-even in the middle of the ground. But there's not much evidence of flooding either. They're trying to hold positions around the ground. That helps prevent opposition sides from scoring off the break, something that was a big problem for Hawthorn in 2010.

But in the past 2-3 weeks, Hawthorn's defence is holding together much better, and opponents are finding it harder to score once they're in there.

***

As for round 22, 2010, I really don't care. By the time that game was played, Fremantle had already defeated Carlton, so Hawthorn's incentive to win was reduced (a home final was very unlikely). The only reason for either side to win was pride. Both of them had an eye on the following week.

Trying to extract meaning from one game is useless. Collingwood won the flag. That's all that matters.

It's nice to see that there are at least still one or two Hawthorn supporters with some perspective. Contrary to the opinions of some, how many games you win or lose and to who is utterly irrelevant when the cup is sitting in your cabinet.

 

[hk89]

The midfield is doing all the grunt work in preventing inside-50s. Only West Coast are more successful in that area this year. Good teams (Geelong, Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon) haven't been too fussed about seeing the ball in defensive 50, because they're excellent at preventing scores and extracting the ball. Hawthorn are definitely compensating to a degree by trying to break-even in the middle of the ground. But there's not much evidence of flooding either. They're trying to hold positions around the ground. That helps prevent opposition sides from scoring off the break, something that was a big problem for Hawthorn in 2010.

But in the past 2-3 weeks, Hawthorn's defence is holding together much better, and opponents are finding it harder to score once they're in there.

Good points. What I find interesting is the way the midfield is restricting the inside 50s, I'm not sure I agree that there is no flooding, there still appears to be a lot of numbers in restricted areas of the ground (whether that be a forward press or back line flood). It seems to me the reduction in inside 50s is more about restricting options (partly via congestion), forcing a turnover, and then keeping possession after that (via foot, so as not to create so many chances for contests leading to ruck contests, which so far, often lead to opposition clearances).

We've been quite poor in the clearances over the year so far (probably due to poor taps to advantage), so part of the reason we've seen so much short kicking is IMO to avoid having to win them (despite having a couple of very good clearance players). If Bailey can improve over the year to the point that we can break even in the ruck, leading to winning more clearances, it should help take even more pressure off the backline.

In terms of ability to stop opposition forwards, I agree we are middle of the road (at best). However our back half are very good at fitting in with the overall game plan, and generally speaking have the elite foot skills to do it (I'm actually a little surprised there is no room in the team for Ladson based on that, but perhaps a few like types have shown more, and doesn't hurt to get games into the new guys at this stage of the season).

 

[hk89]

Nice try. The crippled side Freo put on the paddock was beatable on the moon. Without space suits.

Without space suits? Gee I wonder what analogy you'll use to describe how beatable the (heavily rested) team was they fielded a few weeks earlier where we won by 115 points. Freo are SO bad away from home, they send a bunch of WAFL players on the road, that's how important a home final was. How much did Carlton win by when they played Freo at home? Oh that's right...

Ah. Media speculation. Second only to the daily horoscope as a meaningful guide to life's little decisions.

Oh, so by 'nobody rated them' , 'nobody' means you and a few other BF trolls? Where does 'Bigfooty Troll' fall in your hierachy of truth? It seems unlikely they'd rate above media commentators who've played the game at the highest level, and put their real names and reputations on the line when they express their opinion, but its a topsy turvy world these days, so who knows.

And still in 2011, after a slide into heartless mediocrity for two years, still find it natural to troll Geelong. The side who rolled up their sleeves and came back to win the next flag after a shock loss. And today is clearly, still, a better team.

Stay on one off topic rant at a time please. I was trolling Carlton, not Geelong. Geelong are still a very good side, and based on the fact that they've won all their recent games against the Hawks (the opposite of the two other likely top 4 finishers, Carlton and Pies ,who have won almost no recent games against Hawthorn (1 from pies, 0 from Carlton)), they should be considered flag favourites, especially when you consider they've actually beaten Collingwood and Carlton already this year. Still don't understand the love for a team that took two goes at winning a flag.

 

[PieNSauce]

Still don't understand the love for a team that took two goes at winning a flag.

I'll make it simple for you. 2 goes to take a flag is better than no goes and no chance!

 

[hk89]

I'll make it simple for you. 2 goes to take a flag is better than no goes and no chance!

Obviously I understand why they are rated, they've just won a flag. I'm more referring to the aura of invincibility that fans (and others) seem to think surrounded them this year, despite being 1 point away from not being premiers. This aura has perhaps diminished somewhat since the loss to the cats, and lack of 4 quarter efforts against lesser teams, but there was a very big feeling of 'lets give them the cup now' prior to that.

 

[PieNSauce]

Obviously I understand why they are rated, they've just won a flag. I'm more referring to the aura of invincibility that fans (and others) seem to think surrounded them this year, despite being 1 point away from not being premiers. This aura has perhaps diminished somewhat since the loss to the cats, and lack of 4 quarter efforts against lesser teams, but there was a very big feeling of 'lets give them the cup now' prior to that.

Well that may be true of some but I've never been a subscriber. Truth be known I do happen to think we're better than even I expected given the lack of our ruckmen who many credit with being the sole reason we won a premiership at all. By the same token, I certainly don't think we're unbeatable but I'm hardly going to sit back and listen to flog after flog tell us how bad we are. Until now we have been ordinary but got the job done. To say more than that is to say too much IMO but given injuries you'd take that every day of the week including a 3 point loss to a near full strength Geelong.

 

[hk89]

Well that may be true of some but I've never been a subscriber. Truth be known I do happen to think we're better than even I expected given the lack of our ruckmen who many credit with being the sole reason we won a premiership at all. By the same token, I certainly don't think we're unbeatable but I'm hardly going to sit back and listen to flog after flog tell us how bad we are.

Fair enough, but I don't see a lot of that happening in this thread (excepting a harmless bit of hyperbole and counter hyperbole). I think the main gist of the hawthorn posts are not that Pies are bad, clearly they are very very good, but that
a) They lost their last clash against Hawks
b) They haven't won for a while against Hawks with Buddy
c) Buddy likes kicking big bags against pies.

And that these facts together add up to a situation where the Pies should have a very healthy respect for the Hawks, despite a healthy thumping in round 4 last year (without Buddy). This might change after round 15. If Buddy plays and the Pies smash us, then at least a) and b) go away, and Pies fans get bragging rights over an important win that will go a long way to killing off the 'pies are our bitches' sentiment (which frankly given the single win without buddy over recent times, is not without factual support). Round 4 may well turn out to be the rule, and round 22 the exception, obviously after round 15 things will be clarified.

I don't see how any of these facts are really up for dispute. I'm sure the pies coaching staff have the Hawks in a list of 3 or 4 teams they'd be concerned about.

Until now we have been ordinary but got the job done. To say more than that is to say too much IMO but given injuries you'd take that every day of the week including a 3 point loss to a near full strength Geelong.

3 points was probably a bit flattering given what could have happened in the first quarter with some straighter kicking (although I'd concede Geelong's forward 50 entries were not high quality). Other than that, Pies have certainly been impressive though, despite lack of 4 quarter efforts they've done more than enough to win, travelling very well, even for a team that took two tries to win the flag

Having said that, the fact that pies are travelling well doesn't take away from the fact that our back half has been quite effective this year, and I'm not sure you can assume Cloke will tear it apart, which I think might have been the suggestion that sparked the tangential spin this thread has taken.

 

[Fluro Boots]

One thing about the Hawks backline is yes they are undersized, but if they can overcome that and defend the high ball well enough it just may give them a slight advantage when it hits the deck over their bigger opponents. There is some hurt factor there by foot as well with Guerra, Suckling and Gibson all being excellent kicks with some attacking flair.

Fowards are always going to take marks. It's whether or not they can keep them to an acceptable number and then hurt the opposition enough on the rebound.