Ins & Outs V Hawks for FINALS FOOTY

[acker]

Reid got a fair bit of it considering he was off the ground for quite a while and good attack on the ball. But I would probably leave him out for Farren and Skip for Hudson. Definitely keep Hill in!

Reid had a good debut, he is bigger bodywise than Hill, Ward and Harbrow. And looks more comfortable inside contesting the ball than them.

Although Hill even though he is smaller, via his pace and skill is starting to sneak inside to the contested ball a bit more.

 

[Bodicifer]

In: Hudson, Ray
Ou: Skipper, Reid

Can't see any other changes being made at this stage.

 

[Parkey]

Am I only the only person that thinks Farren Ray doesnt kick the ball forward very well?
I read in the "Drafts" forums opposition supporters calling him soft. I dont think hes soft, in fact I think he goes hard at the ball. The only real disapointing thing about his game is hes disposal of the footy imo.
As mentioned Reid will go for sure purely cause he was only in there to get a little experience, and rest others.
Skipper again as mentioned has played his last game for the dogs. A shame I thought he had talent.

In: Ray ( gotta see what he can do in finals )
Hudson

Out: Reid
Skipper

Hill has to stay I think he has great potential and can take a contested mark, something we lack!

 

[stefoid]

ray, hudson for reid, skipper

Rays disposal (particularly by hand) worries me far more than any lack of contested abilities. But the boy can run fast and long and we will need that.

We need all the onball firepower we can get , because that is playing to our strength. sacrificing an onballer to shore up our defensive tall timber (in tiller) is the wrong tactic.

To win we have to dominate the midfield, its that simple.

 

[maddog37]

ray, hudson for reid, skipper

Rays disposal (particularly by hand) worries me far more than any lack of contested abilities. But the boy can run fast and long and we will need that.

We need all the onball firepower we can get , because that is playing to our strength. sacrificing an onballer to shore up our defensive tall timber (in tiller) is the wrong tactic.

To win we have to dominate the midfield, its that simple.

We need as many rotations through the middle as possible. The hawks rely on Mitchell, Bateman, Lewis and Sewell. All hard but not super quick. Fresh legs will see them look slow.

 

[robbo3005]

Firstly, I think Ray should play, but not because of one game 2 years ago.

Secondly, yes I have noticed Hargrave plays his best while he's the 3rd or 4th defender. He never was going to be a CHB/FB! Just look at the size of him compared to Buddy, J.Brown, T.Cloke ect ect! Of course he's going to play better against opponents that suit him. Lake doesn't do to well against the Cyril Rioli's of the world either.

Geez, I think I gave several other reasons for Rays inclusion??

In regards to Hargrave, the theme of this part of the thread is whether we need an extra tall in the backline.

If we don't bring in a player of Wights ilk, Hargrave may need to play on a major tall. The cost maybe the run and drive he creates when he is on a third or fourth rated defender.

Get it Smart A....?

 

[BWFC]

Bulldogs 4 bucks for the win? Shit, might put a pineapple on that!

OT... I never really liked your posts but then you changed your avatar to Larry David and my love for him has somehow made your posts mroe tolerable. Pretty pretty pretty pretty pretty good.!

I cant wait to see the team this week because some hard decisions need to be made either way.

 

[doggiesin08]

Rays disposal is not that bad at all and I think he is quite calm under pressure and would make a good HBF. Against Brisbane he tagged Travis Johnstone to 13 possession while getting 22 himself at 95% efficiency.