Preview Qualifying Final - Hawks vs Collingwood

[Agent Smith]

This comment is laughable.

You're right - most likely it'll still be the same story, but good for a laugh.

 

[QuietB]

This comment is laughable.

Why? Pies best this year is nowhere near the levels they reached in 10/11. Doesn't mean you can't get there again but the statement is still true

 

[MC_9]

This comment is laughable.

How is that laughable?

Hawthorns best in 2012, is a fair way better then Collingwoods. If we are talking 2010/11 beast mode, thats a different story. But we haven't seen Collingwood really produce that at all this year, due to a number of factors.

 

[tazhawk]

This comment is laughable.

Go away you silly newbie.

 

[Pessimistic]

Surprises ?

Hale and Rough in centre bounces at the same time perhaps ?

 

[Roddy]

This comment is laughable.

What's laughable about it?

 

[hawkheart]

Can someone with better tactical nous than I explain how we might combat the successful tactic Geelong employed (and has been mentioned here with respect to Dawes) where Gibbo as third man up is led away from the action (by Pods, Dawes) leaving Shoe one out with Cloke / Hawkins? For the sake of the argument, please skip any judgement on how Shoe will go against Cloke / Hawkins - more interested in tactically how you get the situation back on our terms with respect to Gibbo. Cheers

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Can someone with better tactical nous than I explain how we might combat the successful tactic Geelong employed (and has been mentioned here with respect to Dawes) where Gibbo as third man up is led away from the action (by Pods, Dawes) leaving Shoe one out with Cloke / Hawkins? For the sake of the argument, please skip any judgement on how Show will go against Cloke / Hawkins - more interested in tactically how you get the situation back on our terms with respect to Gibbo. Cheers

IMO, it's down to Gibbo doing a Scarlett and just not venturing outside the defensive 50 metre zone, with a player further up the field providing a contest to the forward who gets up the ground when trying to take a mark.

 

[Hawkzzz]

I have a really stupid question. Why are other teams able to double team Franklin yet we are unable to do so against Hawkins?

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

Can someone with better tactical nous than I explain how we might combat the successful tactic Geelong employed (and has been mentioned here with respect to Dawes) where Gibbo as third man up is led away from the action (by Pods, Dawes) leaving Shoe one out with Cloke / Hawkins? For the sake of the argument, please skip any judgement on how Shoe will go against Cloke / Hawkins - more interested in tactically how you get the situation back on our terms with respect to Gibbo. Cheers

Yeah its a tough one.

I think what happened in the latest Geelong, they played Pods and Hawkins close to goal but they were very good at separating the contest. I may be incorrect but I hardly saw Pods wondering outside the forward 50. Really he played a decoy forward whereby he would go to a dangerous spot and hence required a good defender to go with him but then allowed Hawkins to have room to compete 1 out.

Also if you look at the first quarter it was players like Chapman and Johnson who tore us apart. Geelong were able to get some easy hit up leads inside the forward 50 which made all our defenders have to tighten up on their men.

The thing with Collingwood is that Cloke is the only player in half decent form and that was only 1 game. I think they will have to bring back Dawes to atleast be a decoy and to also pinch hit in the ruck.

 

[Hawk Dork]

Playing Burgers on Cox daring the Weegirls to keep looking for him and then Gibson, Shoey and Stratton coming in 3rd man up was probably the clue.

 

[cryptor]

I have a really stupid question. Why are other teams able to double team Franklin yet we are unable to do so against Hawkins?

Because everyone knew chances were we'd kick it to Franklin even if there was a loose man. Things should be different now that the team knows we can kick big scores without him.

 

[Off The Couch]

Because everyone knew chances were we'd kick it to Franklin even if there was a loose man. Things should be different now that the team knows we can kick big scores without him.

You would think so but I would suggest without taking a look at the stats that they have reverted back to the old ways on his return to the team.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Yeah its a tough one.

I think what happened in the latest Geelong, they played Pods and Hawkins close to goal but they were very good at separating the contest. I may be incorrect but I hardly saw Pods wondering outside the forward 50. Really he played a decoy forward whereby he would go to a dangerous spot and hence required a good defender to go with him but then allowed Hawkins to have room to compete 1 out.

Also if you look at the first quarter it was players like Chapman and Johnson who tore us apart. Geelong were able to get some easy hit up leads inside the forward 50 which made all our defenders have to tighten up on their men.

The thing with Collingwood is that Cloke is the only player in half decent form and that was only 1 game. I think they will have to bring back Dawes to atleast be a decoy and to also pinch hit in the ruck.

We're getting off topic a little bit now, but with respect to Hawthorn's last loss to Geelong, I recall Podsiadly going up the ground a lot to clear out space for Hawkins, dragging Gibson away from the play.

Chappy was able to run into free space into Hawthorn's defensive 50 metre arc because he wasn't tracked by his opponent tightly enough.

 

[cryptor]

You would think so but I would suggest without taking a look at the stats that they have reverted back to the old ways on his return to the team.

Good point. I was worried that we'd fallen back into old habits. But given the highly contested nature of the last two games I'm willing to write them off as a product of that. We still have a nice spread of goal kickers and it's naturally going to be more difficult for our non-Franklin forwards to get as many shots on goal in a tightly contested game.

 

[IdiotBox]

A reasonable article from Jolly... (if indeed it wasn't ghost-written)

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ance-to-play-finals-footy-20120904-25co6.html

 

[illnino]

This comment is laughable.

This reply is laughable.

In 2012;

Hawthorn's best >>> A few other teams' best >>> Collingwood's best

The ladder, as well as our two games against you earlier this year reflect that (one in which we were missing one of the top 5 players in the league).

As Dixie suggested, when we play our best for more than 3/4 of a game against a top side, we win. If we're off our game for more than a quarter against a top side however, we most likely lose. This has been proven time and time again this year in game's against Collingwood, Geelong, Sydney and others.

Granted we do get an extra day's recovery this week, but we also had a much harder slog than Collingwood last week, so my main concern is running out of legs.

 

[Linzman]

As with the Eagles I reckon the Hawks will get going with a blinder in the first quarter. I get the feeling that unlike the West Coast game some creative tactics will then shut the Pies out of the contest for the rest of the game.

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

We're getting off topic a little bit now, but with respect to Hawthorn's last loss to Geelong, I recall Podsiadly going up the ground a lot to clear out space for Hawkins, dragging Gibson away from the play.

Chappy was able to run into free space into Hawthorn's defensive 50 metre arc because he wasn't tracked by his opponent tightly enough.

I actually think that the Geelong loss has a massive bearing on this game, or at least the way that we still need to adapt to big clunking forwards. Last year 5 of our 6 losses came against 2 teams, Collingwood and Geelong. Both teams used the exact same tactic, bomb it long into the forward line.

Now Shoe has definitely improved since last year, however he still needs the support of other backmen going third man up in a marking contest.

With regards to the Collingwood game, it has been a massive bonus for us the Cloke and Dawes have been in terrible form throughout the majority, but Cloke did look pretty good last Saturday night and was pulling in a huge amount of contested grabs (admittedly against the Bummers). This could prove the crucial contest as it was Cloke who single handed got them over the line by playing 1 quarter of good football.

Despite the cliche, this game will not be won in the midfield. Last game Swan, Beams and Pendlebury had 117 disposals between them and kicked 6 goals! This game will be won by the forward line that can make the opposition back line be more accountable as both teams aim to get a lot of drive from defense. If Hawks can shut down Johnson and Shaw, as well as not allowing Maxwell to drift across third man up, we will probably win this game and comfortably. However they will be aiming to shut down Suckling and Birchall and making Gibson and Stratton accountable. That is where the game will be won.

 

[Pessimistic]

In the last geelong game (whom we are not playing this week !) the Hawks steadastly refused to put an extra in defence, so that tactic is available.
Of course with geelong the love the extra man they get in defense so need to be very careful with our ventures inside our f50

 

[KingHodge15]

I actually think that the Geelong loss has a massive bearing on this game, or at least the way that we still need to adapt to big clunking forwards. Last year 5 of our 6 losses came against 2 teams, Collingwood and Geelong. Both teams used the exact same tactic, bomb it long into the forward line.

Now Shoe has definitely improved since last year, however he still needs the support of other backmen going third man up in a marking contest.

With regards to the Collingwood game, it has been a massive bonus for us the Cloke and Dawes have been in terrible form throughout the majority, but Cloke did look pretty good last Saturday night and was pulling in a huge amount of contested grabs (admittedly against the Bummers). This could prove the crucial contest as it was Cloke who single handed got them over the line by playing 1 quarter of good football.

Despite the cliche, this game will not be won in the midfield. Last game Swan, Beams and Pendlebury had 117 disposals between them and kicked 6 goals! This game will be won by the forward line that can make the opposition back line be more accountable as both teams aim to get a lot of drive from defense. If Hawks can shut down Johnson and Shaw, as well as not allowing Maxwell to drift across third man up, we will probably win this game and comfortably. However they will be aiming to shut down Suckling and Birchall and making Gibson and Stratton accountable. That is where the game will be won.

That first quarter against Geelong and Sydney both were on top in the ruck and midfield. Continually bombing the ball in and not allowing us to set up cost us dearly. They also cut-off our kicking game and shut down our half backs. Collingwood are a good team and i think we need to avoid giving them a start in this one. We need to come out of the blocks early especially in the middle.

 

[Thaihawk]

We're getting off topic a little bit now, but with respect to Hawthorn's last loss to Geelong, I recall Podsiadly going up the ground a lot to clear out space for Hawkins, dragging Gibson away from the play.

Chappy was able to run into free space into Hawthorn's defensive 50 metre arc because he wasn't tracked by his opponent tightly enough.

If umpires ever wake up to Pods, Hawkins goal kicking will be limited. He is the worst jumper holder playing, and blocks at every opportunity, legally and illegally. And when he attacks the pack he usually makes contact with an opposition players head. All this but not many frees against him, and he creates space for Hawkins, and as Dixie said, Chappy. All very well while you are getting away with it.

 

[WWSD]

This comment is laughable.

1st Hawthorn
2nd Adelaide
3rd Sydney
4th Collingwood

The ladder speaks for itself. I'm sorry, but Collingwood have been the 4th best team this year. Deal with it!

 

[Flukey!]

A reasonable article from Jolly... (if indeed it wasn't ghost-written)

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ance-to-play-finals-footy-20120904-25co6.html

Interesting that he thought the Jolly/Maxwell combo worked.
I think they only got away with it because they were playing Essendon.

 

[Roger Rogerson]

I have no doubt at the first centre bounce if Hale crosses the centre line he will be penalised. Absolutely no doubt the umpires will be onto it this week. I would hate to be Nth Melb especially. I hope we are planning for a crackdown on it.