Our defense.. Who's the unlucky one??

[spudmaster]

sPAHNGER HAS TRUE hAWTHORN SPIRIT , HE'S A GOER IN THE OLD FASHIONED WAY OF DESCRIBING A TOUGH COMPETITOR, lITHERLAND IS A NATURAL. CEGLAR HAS FINALLY GOT COMFORTABLE ALL I CAN SAY IS WOW!!!!!

You have a piece of cheese under your caps-lock key.

 

[Agent Smith]

Jesus saves.






That's why he plays in the backline.

 

[JoondalupJ]

You have a piece of cheese under your caps-lock key.

You've found my fetish , cheese annihilation whilst on BIGFOOTY.

 

[Brant]

Back to the thread title & original question: "Who's the unlucky one."

I'd say the unlucky one(s) are the opposition forwards come Finals!

 

[earthquake]

I just did a thread about Sydneys defence...its way bettter than any in the competition re efficiency and why they are the quickest scoring team out of defence

 

[Flag08]

Why isnt the most obvious person listed as one of the options?

Gibbo in, Shoey out.

 

[Davo23]

I will sign!

Save yourself, oh Great One.

You know you can ...

 

[Flag08]

7 Backs are:

Lake, Gibbo, Stratts, Spang, Lithers, birch, Suckers. Reserve: Shoey

7 mids are:

Smith, Hill, Sheils, Burger, Lewis, Mitch, Mcevoy.
Reserves: Cegs for BB and Sewell for the others.

7 forwards are:

Gunstall, Ruff, Cyril, punky, Hale, Poppy, Hodge.
Reserve: Cegs for Hale

Sub options: Duryea, Simpkin, Hartung.

 

[Hodginator]

Why isnt the most obvious person listed as one of the options?

Gibbo in, Shoey out.

Shoey is the swing man and with a fully fit 22*, he'd be playing forward

*doesn't happen often but I think the point of this thread is based on a fit list.

 

[bluespooner]

Why isnt the most obvious person listed as one of the options?

Gibbo in, Shoey out.

Perhaps because Schoenmakers is one of the more important players in the team - as a mobile forward. For mine the players that would miss out should be Stratton and Duryea both have got really bad hands in close, that is pressure situations, they can only use one side of their body which makes them slow, and I don't rate the kicking of either of them.

 

[Glacier]

I am starting the Save Spangher petition. Who wants to sign?

Where's the dotted line ?

 

[seysearles]

Boner alert.....

 

[Nomore4s]

Perhaps because Schoenmakers is one of the more important players in the team - as a mobile forward.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree with this. No way is he one of our most important players - in any position, especially as a forward. We have plenty of forward options and the forward line operates just fine without him playing forward.

The only reason he carries any worth to the team atm is because he is a swing man you can play forward or back and cover down back if an injury happens to a KP player. With Lake and Spanger back and playing well imo there is not really a place for him down back atm, it will be interesting to see how he goes forward if he gets to string a few games together there.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Perhaps because Schoenmakers is one of the more important players in the team - as a mobile forward. For mine the players that would miss out should be Stratton and Duryea both have got really bad hands in close, that is pressure situations, they can only use one side of their body which makes them slow, and I don't rate the kicking of either of them.

In what universe is Schoenmakers one of our most important players?

Goodish player, still developing……and that is all.

 

[Brant]

In what universe is Schoenmakers one of our most important players?

Goodish player, still developing……and that is all.

Mate, I think you're terribly underrating how important Schoey is to us supporters. If it were'nt for Schoenmakers then half the threads on Big Footy wouldn't exist!

 

[Hawks13]

In what universe is Schoenmakers one of our most important players?

Goodish player, still developing……and that is all.

IMO he is important structurally. If we can afford to play him forward, it creates a mismatch. No defence in the competition can contain Gunston, Hale, Roughy, and Schoey if they all play forward.

 

[Pessimistic]

Perhaps because Schoenmakers is one of the more important players in the team - as a mobile forward. For mine the players that would miss out should be Stratton and Duryea both have got really bad hands in close, that is pressure situations, they can only use one side of their body which makes them slow, and I don't rate the kicking of either of them.

Lets you play a reserve big defender on a forward flank without losing forward pressure meaning sub can be a runner who by shuffling can cover talls too. win. Win.......................win !

Plus in the last two games we had purple patches, shoe was right in the action clearing a path for others to score

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

IMO he is important structurally. If we can afford to play him forward, it creates a mismatch. No defence in the competition can contain Gunston, Hale, Roughy, and Schoey if they all play forward.

Our most important players, in some sort of order would look something close to this:

1) Roughead
2) Mitchell
3) Gunston
4) Hodge
5) Lake
6) Gibson
7) Breust
8) Hill
9) Birchall
10) Rioli

Then there are guys like Burgoyne and Smith that are arguably more important than Schoenmakers as well.

Now, if Schoenmakers is "one of our most important players" how is it that he cannot find a place on this list?

Schoenmakers is a good player, no doubt. But let us not overstate his influence/importance. He is still a "bottom six" player in terms of our absolute best 22 and may very well be fighting for his spot come September. He is far from being a vital cog in the wheel and we have coped just fine in his absence.

 

[burner1]

If gibbo is back spangher has to go. Like for like. Given mitchell is back and spends a bit of time at hb then duryea and suckling are at risk. Probably duryea. Assuming ceglar and mcevoy is our best ruck combo then mcevoy can provide some aerial cover down back if needed and shoey will be needed as a tall target and can play back if needed.

 

[bluespooner]

Our most important players, in some sort of order would look something close to this:

1) Roughead
2) Mitchell
3) Gunston
4) Hodge
5) Lake
6) Gibson
7) Breust
8) Hill
9) Birchall
10) Rioli

Then there are guys like Burgoyne and Smith that are arguably more important than Schoenmakers as well.

Now, if Schoenmakers is "one of our most important players" how is it that he cannot find a place on this list?

Schoenmakers is a good player, no doubt. But let us not overstate his influence/importance. He is still a "bottom six" player in terms of our absolute best 22 and may very well be fighting for his spot come September. He is far from being a vital cog in the wheel and we have coped just fine in his absence.

When you consider Schoenmakers has been required to play out of position for most of his Hawthorn career, I'm not surprised you don't have him on that list. How do you think Roughead would have fared having to play on opposition key backs, in the interviews I've seen with Roughead when asked if he would play down back he has always given answers with a total lack of enthusiasm for playing defensively. That is despite that fact that he is better equipped for playing defensively than Schoemakers, as he is a much superior one-on-one player.

For mine Schoenmakers rightful position is playing a similar role to Gunston, a mobile forward floating up and down a flank of the ground but playing predominantly forward of centre. He should never be given the role of having to match up on a key opposition forward as he cannot play man-on-man against the key opposition target forwards. This was known before he was drafted but it is the role Clarkson has required him to play, partially by necessity, but it has diminished Schoenmakers as a player.

The fact that Schoenmakers is available is the reason why Franklin was expendable at the price he was demanding. There was a very good reason why clubs like Carlton were expressing an interest in trading for Schoenmakers, given his capabilities and age. For mine, he is easily in the top five most important players at the club.

 

[Flag08]

When you consider Schoenmakers has been required to play out of position for most of his Hawthorn career, I'm not surprised you don't have him on that list. How do you think Roughead would have fared having to play on opposition key backs, in the interviews I've seen with Roughead when asked if he would play down back he has always given answers with a total lack of enthusiasm for playing defensively. That is despite that fact that he is better equipped for playing defensively than Schoemakers, as he is a much superior one-on-one player.

For mine Schoenmakers rightful position is playing a similar role to Gunston, a mobile forward floating up and down a flank of the ground but playing predominantly forward of centre. He should never be given the role of having to match up on a key opposition forward as he cannot play man-on-man against the key opposition target forwards. This was known before he was drafted but it is the role Clarkson has required him to play, partially by necessity, but it has diminished Schoenmakers as a player.

The fact that Schoenmakers is available is the reason why Franklin was expendable at the price he was demanding. There was a very good reason why clubs like Carlton were expressing an interest in trading for Schoenmakers, given his capabilities and age. For mine, he is easily in the top five most important players at the club.

Oh dear.

 

[Taskmaster]

If gibbo is back spangher has to go. Like for like. Given mitchell is back and spends a bit of time at hb then duryea and suckling are at risk. Probably duryea. Assuming ceglar and mcevoy is our best ruck combo then mcevoy can provide some aerial cover down back if needed and shoey will be needed as a tall target and can play back if needed.

Absolute Horse Sh.t!!! 1. Spang is a better defender than Shoey and 2. Spang could be a swing man. Shoey is the one that could be the unlucky one.

 

[Hens Hall]

On a pure defensive aspect than Suckling must go.

Too much of a liability physically which is what you don't want in the finals when the the time to execute cute little kicks come at a premium and the ability absorb physical pressure is more important.

I still have nightmares of Clinton Young falling over deep in defence to allow that soft goal to Hannebury(??). Suckling is in the same mould.

I feel Duryea still provides reasonable skill level but with a more physical aspect.

 

[bluespooner]

7 Backs are:

Lake, Gibbo, Stratts, Spang, Lithers, birch, Suckers. Reserve: Shoey

7 mids are:

Smith, Hill, Sheils, Burger, Lewis, Mitch, Mcevoy.
Reserves: Cegs for BB and Sewell for the others.

7 forwards are:

Gunstall, Ruff, Cyril, punky, Hale, Poppy, Hodge.
Reserve: Cegs for Hale

Sub options: Duryea, Simpkin, Hartung.

Definition of clueless.

 

[HawkTalons]

This is a really tough call. I put Suckling because, apart from his cannon, he doesn't really play football with any ferocity. If he really flung himself around like Spangher, I'd be more tempted. I really like Duryea's work - he's so tough and gutsy. He's also got a booming left foot and has been an exceptionally good replacement for Goo. Litherland should be re-signed effective now. I mean NOW. HFC get onto this RIGHT THIS INSTANT!! As for Stratton...good one!