Hughes and Banfield?

[s_wd6]

Hahaha. You just know this has come from Longmuir and not Chris Scott. He ain't getting dropped that's for sure....
Also, with all due respect - how did Ethan Hughes get 3 votes? Scott has phoned these in.

Look Banfield was good and deserved votes from both coaches imo.

Hughes I'm confused, mostly because I have no idea what role or who he was playing on. Did he spend time on Cameron? It was mentioned in the lead up to the game that he might. Or Maybe Scott got Hughes and Ryan mixed up. Or maybe he just had a good game that went under the radar.

 

[WilloTree]

 

[gungho]

Look Banfield was good and deserved votes from both coaches imo.

Hughes I'm confused, mostly because I have no idea what role or who he was playing on. Did he spend time on Cameron? It was mentioned in the lead up to the game that he might. Or Maybe Scott got Hughes and Ryan mixed up. Or maybe he just had a good game that went under the radar.

Not to take the piss out of Hughes, but it's basically Chris Scott saying I can't be bothered. Young had 23 disposals, Hughes 16. Young had 5 inside 50s. Hughes had 1. Young was better on almost every metric to be honest.

 

[freoextra]

Look Banfield was good and deserved votes from both coaches imo.

Hughes I'm confused, mostly because I have no idea what role or who he was playing on. Did he spend time on Cameron? It was mentioned in the lead up to the game that he might. Or Maybe Scott got Hughes and Ryan mixed up. Or maybe he just had a good game that went under the radar.

He was on Cameron at times when up the ground, not sure who he was on when in defence but he was certainly solid, and if he stopped two dangerous players on the day probably deserves the votes.

It's possible that Young had the easier role (not a lock down and designated to be given the ball) which explains the difference in numbers but also the value by the MC.

 

[Footskill]

Look Banfield was good and deserved votes from both coaches imo.

Hughes I'm confused, mostly because I have no idea what role or who he was playing on. Did he spend time on Cameron? It was mentioned in the lead up to the game that he might. Or Maybe Scott got Hughes and Ryan mixed up. Or maybe he just had a good game that went under the radar.

In traffic, Hughes was good.

 

[Joao]

I didn't notice Hughes, which as a backman isn't a bad thing, but not sure he was equal 5th best on ground.

 

[pK75]

I didn't notice Hughes, which as a backman isn't a bad thing, but not sure he was equal 5th best on ground.

Equal 3rd best on!

 

[Docker82]

you guys are gonna love this

View attachment 1693893

JOM actually very stiff here, Young more so.

 

[Freoforever86]

Banfield and Hughes are playing a role.
Personally believe that they’re placeholders.
Can’t keep guys like Raz Johnson or Chappy out of the side for them.

Happy they’re playing well and are taking opportunities, but they’ll always be a bad game away from wafl

 

[estibador]

Watching the replay last night Banners was extremely unlucky not to have another goal to his name when the umps ignored a blatant 50, as not one, but two Geelong players ran from behind right through his protected space when he tried to play on from 50 in the 1st qtr.

It was the one when he marked, went to play on to his right then had to veer instantly to his left when he saw the Geelong player there. Pretty much the textbook example of why that's meant to be a protected zone to allow the attacking team to move the ball quickly.

I reckon if he had done the old 'stop and gesture' at them he probably would have got the 50 (although maybe not the way the umps were riding Geelong in the 1st)

 

[Ripper]

Watching the replay last night Banners was extremely unlucky not to have another goal to his name when the umps ignored a blatant 50, as not one, but two Geelong players ran from behind right through his protected space when he tried to play on from 50 in the 1st qtr.

It was the one when he marked, went to play on to his right then had to veer instantly to his left when he saw the Geelong player there. Pretty much the textbook example of why that's meant to be a protected zone to allow the attacking team to move the ball quickly.

I reckon if he had done the old 'stop and gesture' at them he probably would have got the 50 (although maybe not the way the umps were riding Geelong in the 1st)

Both were excellent! I was a bit surprised when I discovered BB had passed the 50 game threshold and Ethan is into the 90's.
From my experience some people develop later but catch up to the early stars

 

[Frigate]

Look Banfield was good and deserved votes from both coaches imo.

Hughes I'm confused, mostly because I have no idea what role or who he was playing on. Did he spend time on Cameron? It was mentioned in the lead up to the game that he might. Or Maybe Scott got Hughes and Ryan mixed up. Or maybe he just had a good game that went under the radar.

Not to take the piss out of Hughes, but it's basically Chris Scott saying I can't be bothered. Young had 23 disposals, Hughes 16. Young had 5 inside 50s. Hughes had 1. Young was better on almost every metric to be honest.

You both are confusing the F out of me. In what world do you compare Hughes to Young or Ryan. It is comparably stupefying as comparing Schultz to Amiss. Both play forward so one was better... Hughes does everything right the coach asks him to do. He is extremely disciplined, courageous and not selfish (hence winning the player team award a few years back). His one question mark was disposal, which he has improved at immensely. He does not do much wrong these days, and is rarely beaten. He will never be a Young, he is simply an elite defensive rebounding midfielder. Ryan is a lockdown intercept player. Hughes is a structural gap player. He will take a player out, play 3rd man up and, occasionally intercept. In terms of winning games of football, Hughes has been significant. Ahead of many others IMO.

 

[s_wd6]

You both are confusing the F out of me. In what world do you compare Hughes to Young or Ryan. It is comparably stupefying as comparing Schultz to Amiss. Both play forward so one was better... Hughes does everything right the coach asks him to do. He is extremely disciplined, courageous and not selfish (hence winning the player team award a few years back). His one question mark was disposal, which he has improved at immensely. He does not do much wrong these days, and is rarely beaten. He will never be a Young, he is simply an elite defensive rebounding midfielder. Ryan is a lockdown intercept player. Hughes is a structural gap player. He will take a player out, play 3rd man up and, occasionally intercept. In terms of winning games of football, Hughes has been significant. Ahead of many others IMO.

All i was saying is that I had no idea what role Hughes played on the weekend. My only comment on Ryan was tongue in cheek about Chris Scott not knowing our players names. If you look at my posting history you would known I am a big fan of hughes and have defended him all season