Preview Semi-Final: Hawthorn v Adelaide Crows, MCG, 18 September 2015 @ 7.50pm

[Agent Smith]

Bewildered that this team, the team with an unsociable reputation, the team that smashed Sydney so harshly in last year's GF that if it was a sport b/w animals and not humans that the RSPCA would have been called in, the team that is entering an AFL semi-final with almost a full playing list ffs, this team selected tonight would right now be incapable of physically intimidating the local Under 8's netball team.

So long as Adelaide play like they did last week, then the team selected to play will actually work - lots of free running and no physical niggling. But if Adelaide decide to turn on the grunt, geez... watch out coz this could get ugly.

 

[MC_9]

Langford wasn't the only on last friday night but his quick kicks out of congestion straight to an eagles player arms were diabolical. It is like he was playing 80's footy.

Exactly right.

I'm surprised more people don't see it. It is so frustrating to watch.

Wins the ball in tight (no doubting his talent there), but then just slams it on his foot hoping its goes to a Hawthorn player. He rarely ever lowers his eyes, or goes to the release player. He plays with the mentality, 'win ball, boot ball'.

He really needs to improve that aspect of his game, or he will keep playing for Box Hill. The good thing is that it can be fixed, he just really has to work on it.

 

[Wundo]

You should read up on confirmatory bias and self fulfilling prophecy. You've got it in bucketloads. How's your field kicking btw?

In short, Taskmaster; you see what you want to see and exclude anything to the contrary.
My field kicking is shite, couldn't even get a game with Carlton.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Don't underestimate Cheney, good player.

Love him, but not on hale. I'd put him on breust and trust him to get the job done

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Exactly right.

I'm surprised more people don't see it. It is so frustrating to watch.

Wins the ball in tight (no doubting his talent there), but then just slams it on his foot hoping its goes to a Hawthorn player. He rarely ever lowers his eyes, or goes to the release player. He plays with the mentality, 'win ball, boot ball'.

He really needs to improve that aspect of his game, or he will keep playing for Box Hill. The good thing is that it can be fixed, he just really has to work on it.

+1. There is a need for these players and it wouldn't suprise me if he was recalled if we make the GF. Sewell was similar, sometimes it really is just about getting it forward at all costs.

But it was infuriating against WCE. I guess its a fine line.

Im glad Shoey is playing.

 

[IdiotBox]

Kb is following the lazy media pack in bangin' on about the unsociable Hawks and how we're going have to tip-toe around the Crows in case someone crosses the line.

 

[Bad Boy Beama]

Suckling is truly untouchable (at the selection table, certainly not untouchable on the field)

Isn't this his 100th game perhaps if we win it could be his last.

 

[MC_9]

Sheils had about the same. Mitch was 56%. Had almost as many ineffective possessions as Langford had possession. Lewis was 57%.

The difference is Langford has form, where the others guys had a bad night. All those other players, have shown consistently that they are much better with their disposal, disposal out of congestion and generally very good decision makers.

Langford, even if you take out the his rushed kicks from congestion, when he has the ball in space he usually makes the wrong decision and just boots in long in hope . He really has a school football mentality.

Clearly the coaching staff and match committee have the same view.


Anyway to the game.

A couple of things I really hope to see this game.

Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Burgoye and Shiels to do the brunt of the midfield work. It is time for the big boys to step in, and really take control of the game.

Frawley to be given the direction to follow Walker around like a bad smell. Even follow him up the ground, everywhere. I feel like Frawley excels when he is given a specific task of negating the oppositions best forward. Don't worry about anything else other then stoping Walker.

Lake goes the Jenkins, and Gibson plays as the backline general (third tall), with Stratton on Betts and Duryea on Cameron. I feel like the backline got really lost against the Eagles last week.

Roughead to start in the square. Shoey to play as a traditional CHF role really crashing packs, and throwing his weight around (He looks like Tarzan, time to play like Tarzan). Bruest to just find some form (hopefully gets some early goals). Unfortunately in the worst form of his career, at the wrong time of year.

 

[Changa10]

Love him, but not on hale. I'd put him on breust and trust him to get the job done

So, if our forward line is as below, who are the match-ups?

Roughead - Talia
Schoenmakers - Van Berlo?
Hale - Hartigan?
Rioli - Brown?
Breust - Cheney
Puopolo - Laird?

Looking at your backs, as selected, I suspect Cheney goes to Schoey or resting ruck doesn't he?

 

[cryptor]

Breust on Cheney would be a big win for us. Breust would turn him inside out. Cheney would be best suited on Schoenmakers.

 

[hardway]

Hope the MCG ground staff has been working hard over the last couple of weeks. The surface has been a disgrace.

 

[Glenferrie Oval]

Free standing room ticket behind the city end goals for anyone. Bay = M32.
PM me if you want it.
Pick up today up the parliament end of the city, or tonight, at gate 1 at 7:30.

 

[The Kipster]

Langford out makes sense. Definitely would have had him out over Suckling. This is going to offend many but you need to take 2014 finals goggles off.

Have you had your medicine today? Langford>>>>>>>>>Suckling...

 

[Bad Boy Beama]

Love him, but not on hale. I'd put him on breust and trust him to get the job done

Bruest is too mobile for Cheney

 

[MC_9]

Have you had your medicine today? Langford>>>>>>>>>Suckling...

Based on what?

 

[becalm]

I'm all for Suckling staying in the side as long as he does not enter the defensive area of the ground. He is very poor 1 on 1 and he has been caught one out and beaten many times this year which have resulted in goals to the opposition. Being named in the back pocket must be an illusion surely, as is the naming of Frawley at centre half forward. If these 2 start the game in those postions Clarko needs to visit his shrink.

 

[The Kipster]

I'll spew in my mouth a little if Chip starts forward. But mark my words. if Suckling starts in a back pocket I will projectile vomit in the back of the head of whomever is sitting in front of me.

Those soft contests last week early did make me vomit...soo reminiscent of Youngy

 

[The Kipster]

Based on what?

Based on what I perceive as an essential, contested possession and the ability to not be knocked off the ball.

 

[Bikefreak]

Kb is following the lazy media pack in bangin' on about the unsociable Hawks and how we're going have to tip-toe around the Crows in case someone crosses the line.

He should have been at bingo.

Must have escaped again.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 

[MC_9]

Based on what I perceive as an essential, contested possession and the ability to not be knocked off the ball.

We didn't lose last week because we were not hard enough at the contest. We lost because we got cut to pieces on the outside. We could not control the game, as we kept turning the ball over. West Coast scored 10 goals from our turnovers.

I guess people perceive different things as essentials to the game. I believe that ball use, and ability to hit targets and control the game is more important the winning a contested ball, but turning it over instantly. Obviously if a player can do both, thats golden (ala Sam Mitchell, Luke Hodge, Shaun Burgoye, et al).

A balance is also required, but I believe we have enough inside winners. We just need more outside ball users.

 

[Bikefreak]

The difference is Langford has form, where the others guys had a bad night. All those other players, have shown consistently that they are much better with their disposal, disposal out of congestion and generally very good decision makers.

Langford, even if you take out the his rushed kicks from congestion, when he has the ball in space he usually makes the wrong decision and just boots in long in hope . He really has a school football mentality.

Clearly the coaching staff and match committee have the same view.


Anyway to the game.

A couple of things I really hope to see this game.

Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Burgoye and Shiels to do the brunt of the midfield work. It is time for the big boys to step in, and really take control of the game.

Frawley to be given the direction to follow Walker around like a bad smell. Even follow him up the ground, everywhere. I feel like Frawley excels when he is given a specific task of negating the oppositions best forward. Don't worry about anything else other then stoping Walker.

Lake goes the Jenkins, and Gibson plays as the backline general (third tall), with Stratton on Betts and Duryea on Cameron. I feel like the backline got really lost against the Eagles last week.

Roughead to start in the square. Shoey to play as a traditional CHF role really crashing packs, and throwing his weight around (He looks like Tarzan, time to play like Tarzan). Bruest to just find some form (hopefully gets some early goals). Unfortunately in the worst form of his career, at the wrong time of year.

Ahem.....Langford doesnt have consistent form in the ones.

Twos....maybe....in and around his injuries.

Rose glasses again.

Btw...absolutely love the lad....but he has had a year to forget.



Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 

[KAMSTAR HFC]

We have been written off.....again. Victory will be sweet tonight as I expect us to win easily. If we can go all the way from here will it rate as our finest of this era? I think so

 

[The Kipster]

We didn't lose last week because we were not hard enough at the contest. We lost because we got cut to pieces on the outside. We could not control the game, as we kept turning the ball over. West Coast scored 10 goals from our turnovers.

I guess people perceive different things as essentials to the game. I believe that ball use, and ability to hit targets and control the game is more important the winning a contested ball, but turning it over instantly. Obviously if a player can do both, thats golden (ala Sam Mitchell, Luke Hodge, Shaun Burgoye, et al).

A balance is also required, but I believe we have enough inside winners. We just need more outside ball users.

I don't disagree with your post, however Suckers ball use for months has been ordinary, so his so-called advantage has been nullified. Langers also has run, let's not forget that either...We all have a view, so mine is no better nor worse than yours, in Clarko we trust

 

[Blaze Storm]

We didn't lose last week because we were not hard enough at the contest. We lost because we got cut to pieces on the outside. We could not control the game, as we kept turning the ball over. West Coast scored 10 goals from our turnovers.

I guess people perceive different things as essentials to the game. I believe that ball use, and ability to hit targets and control the game is more important the winning a contested ball, but turning it over instantly. Obviously if a player can do both, thats golden (ala Sam Mitchell, Luke Hodge, Shaun Burgoye, et al).

A balance is also required, but I believe we have enough inside winners. We just need more outside ball users.

^This, spread was awful, there were no good leads, players were crowded into the wing and then the eagles were allowed to spread and transition with little resistance putting the back line under the pump. The Eagles' entries were to leading targets and space, whereas ours were long kicks down the line and "fingers crossed our guy gets it". It was very similar to our games against Geelong and Sydney in recent years.

I'm still convinced that if we can flick that mental switch we did against Freo/Syd in the second half of the year, we're right back in the finals race. Put up an effort like last week/Richmond/Port games and we're out in straight sets.

 

[MC_9]

I don't disagree with your post, however Suckers ball use for months has been ordinary, so his so-called advantage has been nullified. Langers also has run, let's not forget that either...We all have a view, so mine is no better nor worse than yours, in Clarko we trust

That we agree on.