Matthew Scarlett - Washed up hack

[Lunchlady Doris]

You do understand the term "Washed up", don't you. I refers to a player who has lost his abilities, not to a player who never had any.

So on the back of keeping Franklin to 1 goal in 3 quarters (before injuring his ankle), and having an average 3 quarters against Richmond (before tearing them up in the last) you're ready to declare Scarlett has lost it?

Age doesn't really affect a players skills, or the ability to judge the ball in flight. Care to explain how that would work? Is it the cataracts that must surely be developing in his decrepit eyeballs?

 

[Bone Crusher]

Can you tell me which other fullbacks Collingwood use this tactic for? What? None? Don't you see that you're just showing how good Scarlett is, and how highly your side and coach rate him

Actually, I'm showing his weakness. Drag him up the ground, and he's completely ineffective.

He wasn't useless at all, he was the cause of his direct opponent having minimal effect on the game, especially on the scoreboard. If it was anyone other than Scarlett, that is a win.

Of course he was useless. Collingwood beat you all ends up that night, largely because we had 13 goal scorers, and there was nothing your best defender could do about it, because he was at the other end of the ground. Do you know anything about football, or are you one of those people that think that if Scarlett is playing on Rocca, Scarlett won't tackle or spoil any other player for the game?

You're only saying this because it is Scarlett we are talking about, again showing how good he is.

Correction, how easily he can be beaten.

A defender keeping his opponent away from goals and off the scoreboard is a defender who has done his job.

Scarlett didn't keep Rocca away from anything. Rocca went where he please, and Scarlett followed. His job isn't simply to keep one opponent from scoring. His job is to work with his team mates to keep the opposition team from scoring.

I have a feeling Thursday night is going to be closer to the NAB Cup GF than Rd 9 last year.

Again, We'll see. Of course, Malthouse will be coaching this week, which will make all the difference. Just like it did last year.

 

[witsend]

I didn't say he was washed up last year. But if Rocca is such a hack, why put your best defender on him?

I didn't say Rocca is a hack, but thanks for reminding me that he is..you proposed the argument that your coach was willing to sacrifice your FF to take our FB out of the game. More of an estimation by Malthouse of Scarlett's ability and importance, than Rocca's, wouldn't you say?
I repeat...if Scarlett's a washed up hack, why do opposition coaches put so much time into figuring out ways of getting him out of the play?

 

[witsend]

Of course, Malthouse will be coaching this week, which will make all the difference.

Absolute Comedy Gold Plated Excuse To End All Excuses for a complete hiding!!!
I hope he can kick 10 goals!

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Actually, I'm showing his weakness. Drag him up the ground, and he's completely ineffective.

Again, how many other fullbacks do you sacrifice a key forward to negate?

Of course he was useless.

He had 6 more disposals than Rocca, if Scarlett was useless what was Rocca?

Collingwood beat you all ends up that night, largely because we had 13 goal scorers, and there was nothing your best defender could do about it, because he was at the other end of the ground.

Thanks for that, there goes the argument about Scarlett being sheltered by being in a good team and getting help form other defenders This is great.

Do you know anything about football, or are you one of those people that think that if Scarlett is playing on Rocca, Scarlett won't tackle or spoil any other player for the game?

You would have no idea if Scarlett tackled or spoiled other players. Again, he had more touches than Rocca did, and kicked a behind too.

Correction, how easily he can be beaten.

Except he wasn't beaten. He was largely nullified, but so was his opponent. You know your'e good when your opponent, a key forward, has minimal effect on the game and you're still held accountable somehow.

Scarlett didn't keep Rocca away from anything. Rocca went where he please, and Scarlett followed. His job isn't simply to keep one opponent from scoring. His job is to work with his team mates to keep the opposition team from scoring.

So Scarlett is responsible for his opponent, plus everyone else's? If only these rules applied to other defenders, not just the superstar ones. And Rocca prefers to play on the wing now, that's where he pleases?

Again, We'll see. Of course, Malthouse will be coaching this week, which will make all the difference. Just like it did last year.

Yeah, I'm sure Malthouse had no input for the NAB Cup GF at all...

 

[catspremiers2007]

How has this thread digressed into a comparison between the best FB of the current era versus the worst 200 game player ever

It's just laughable to watch a Collingwood flog to try to win that arguement, thanks for making the hours at work fly by

 

[Bone Crusher]

Absolute Comedy Gold Plated Excuse To End All Excuses for a complete hiding!!!
I hope he can kick 10 goals!

Dude, it was a NAB Cup game. Why is it that the only supporters who ever think these games mean anything are the supporters of the team who won the last one? Last time Collingwood player Geelong in a real game, Malthouse's coaching wiped the floor with Thompson's.

 

[Bone Crusher]

Again, how many other fullbacks do you sacrifice a key forward to negate?

Only the ones that are stupid enough to fall for it.

He had 6 more disposals than Rocca, if Scarlett was useless what was Rocca?

Collingwood's forward line kicked 20 goals. Scarlett's job was to prevent that. Most people would agree he was useless in achieving that.

Thanks for that, there goes the argument about Scarlett being sheltered by being in a good team and getting help form other defenders This is great.

Again, I never made that argument. Perhaps you should stick to attacking me on arguments that I have made.

You would have no idea if Scarlett tackled or spoiled other players.

He certainly didn't tackle of spoil the Collingwood forwards often enough to stop the avalanche of goals at their end of the ground.

Again, he had more touches than Rocca did, and kicked a behind too.

Who cares how many touches he gets. His job isn't to get touches. It's to stop the opposition forwards from scoring. In that, he failed miserably.

Except he wasn't beaten. He was largely nullified, but so was his opponent.

He was prevented from doing his job = beaten. That's why the opposition scored 20 goals to 7.

So Scarlett is responsible for his opponent, plus everyone else's? If only these rules applied to other defenders, not just the superstar ones. And Rocca prefers to play on the wing now, that's where he pleases?

Ah... Now I see how much you know about football. Very good, carry on. Just think about this. How can one of your best clearing defenders be at all effective if he's nowhere near defence? The fact that we out scored you 20 goals to 7 should be some indication that scarlett's choice to follow Rocca up the ground was a poor one. The fact that Rocca took more marks that any other player should be an indication that he wasn't well held. The fact that we wiped the floor with you from the opening bounce to the final siren should be a good indication that the tactics employed by the pies were fare better than those employed by the cats. Take off your rose coloured glasses. Scarlett following Rocca up the ground cost you the game, or at the very least, most of the winning margin. The Collingwood forwards were having an absolute field day because your number one clearing backman was at the other end of the ground, thinking he's doing a good job but stopping one player from scoring (well almost, Rocca did score 1 goal). All the while, there are 12 other players kicking goals at the other end. If you think that Scarlett following Rocca up the ground was a good thing, then you've got rocks in your head.

 

[Bone Crusher]

How has this thread digressed into a comparison between the best FB of the current era versus the worst 200 game player ever

It's just laughable to watch a Collingwood flog to try to win that arguement, thanks for making the hours at work fly by

Try to win the argument? I have won the argument, with a score of 20.14.134 to 7.6.48. The results speak for themselves.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

None of this has anything to do with Scarlett being washed up. The fact that you hold him personally repsonsible for a game where none of our players turned up to play (except Gary Jr) shows how highly he is rated. Nathan Brown has no future in this game, how did he let Hawthorn kick 24 goals? What a dud.

Thanks for your time.

 

[Bone Crusher]

Thanks for your time.

Scarlett is welcome to sit on our half back line for the entire game any time he likes.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Scarlett is welcome to sit on our half back line for the entire game any time he likes.

Like most players, Scarlett plays where his coach tells him to.

 

[Bone Crusher]

Like most players, Scarlett plays where his coach tells him to.

Why would Thompson put his best clearing backman on the HF line?

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Why would Thompson put his best clearing backman on the HF line?

He put his fullback on your full forward. As for why he persisted with it I have no idea, but it's hardly a sign that Scarlett is a washed up hack.

How crap was Wakelin, he let Essendon kick 17 goals last year!

 

[Bone Crusher]

How crap was Wakelin, he let Essendon kick 17 goals last year!

So you've lowered yourself to this, have you?

 

[seababoon]

this thread is annoying.. i didnt want to post a comment, but i decided to.. i think scarlett and glass are the two best full backs in the competition hands down..

i wish someone would delete this thread.. its too stupid

 

[witsend]

Dude, it was a NAB Cup game. Why is it that the only supporters who ever think these games mean anything are the supporters of the team who won the last one? Last time Collingwood player Geelong in a real game, Malthouse's coaching wiped the floor with Thompson's.

I never bought up the NAB. You did. It just simply is a piss poor excuse for a hiding...no matter when it is!
Both teamstried to win...one failed...miserably.
And yes..you pantsed us last year with I consider a tackling effort that raised the bar for the competition (Notice how I didn't make excuses?) The trouble is you seem to have trouble repeating it consistently, if at all...but that victory last year is certainly not relevant or proof that Scarlett is a washed up hack.
You just keep bringing shit up and I keep knocking it down!

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

So you've lowered yourself to this, have you?

Is there a problem with that comment? If Scarlett is responsible for his opponent as well as 12 other goalkickers, I don't see what possible issue you could have?

 

[STC]

Bone Crusher you are clueless, whenever someone brings up a moment of Scarlett brilliance it's offtopic but you continue to bring up Rocca and Collingwood when they have no bearing on Scarlett's current ability.

This is a terrible thread.

 

[Bone Crusher]

I never bought up the NAB. You did.

No I didn't, Lunchlady Doris did.

I have a feeling Thursday night is going to be closer to the NAB Cup GF than Rd 9 last year.

It just simply is a piss poor excuse for a hiding...no matter when it is!
Both teamstried to win...one failed...miserably.

History shows how foolish it is to draw such conclusions from the NAB Cup.

but that victory last year is certainly not relevant or proof that Scarlett is a washed up hack.

It's proof that he's easily beaten if you can drag him out of his comfort zone.

You just keep bringing shit up and I keep knocking it down!

Only in your own mind, and the minds of other cat fans.

 

[STC]

No I didn't, Lunchlady Doris did.





History shows how foolish it is to draw such conclusions from the NAB Cup.



It's proof that he's easily beaten if you can drag him out of his comfort zone.



Only in your own mind, and the minds of other cat fans.

But since that game, Scarlett has been actually dragged out of his comfort zone maybe once or twice. It is a testament to his value that teams actually try to get him out of defence, sacrificing one of their key forwards in the process.

 

[Bone Crusher]

Bone Crusher you are clueless, whenever someone brings up a moment of Scarlett brilliance it's offtopic but you continue to bring up Rocca and Collingwood when they have no bearing on Scarlett's current ability.

The way Scarlett played half a season ago is far more relevant than the way he played 6 or 7 seasons ago, wouldn't you say?

But since that game, Scarlett has been actually dragged out of his comfort zone maybe once or twice. It is a testament to his value that teams actually try to get him out of defence, sacrificing one of their key forwards in the process.

Lets see how he does over the next few rounds. He didn't do too well last week. 10 disposals and no tackles.

 

[witsend]

The way Scarlett played half a season ago is far more relevant than the way he played 6 or 7 seasons ago, wouldn't you say?



Lets see how he does over the next few rounds. He didn't do too well last week. 10 disposals and no tackles.

Wow...now we're judging Full Backs by how many double digit disposals they get? How'd Presti go? The last few years? As long as we're discussing hacks?

 

[Bone Crusher]

Wow...now we're judging Full Backs by how many double digit disposals they get? How'd Presti go? The last few years? As long as we're discussing hacks?

You can judge him on the 28 disposals and 9 marks his opponent had if you like.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Only embarrassing yourself in this thread...

Scarlett is the only one embarrassing himself. Has he ever kicked a ball over 10m?