Opinion The Hawkins Thread

[someday-somehow]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

I think a fully fit and firing Hawthorn are more dangerous than a fully fit and firing St.Kilda.


I don't rate opinions from posters who let their hatred for a club blindly bias their posts.

You can sit their throwing darts at the Buddy Franklin poster on your wall all you like, but this is my honest opinion. I don't believe its misguided.

Yeah but they're not fully fit and firing are they?, at the moment they're disgracefull so in the context of this year you would rather face them in the finals than St Kilda who still beat us after we threw everything at them.

You are just dead set wrong about my bias...I love buddy and I think he's a star - I watched him in awe last year. I have nothing against the hawks but for gods sake we lost one grand final to them, our current group and the hawks current group have faced off in ONE FINAL (last year). Any previous loss going back to 2000 and before that has nothing to do us playing the hawks 2009.

The hawks supporters want to get into your head and they have succeeded.

 

[someday-somehow]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

I posted this one month after last year's GF debacle...

Still waiting for someone to produce evidence of a 'big' game that the Cats have won against the Hawks since the '63 GF. And, no, despite the anticipation about the fixture, Round 17 this year does not count. It didn't change anything about either team's premiership hopes (apart from reinforcing the Hawks' belief that they could match it with our boys).

Finals record between the clubs since 1989 is 4-0 to the Hawks; there have also been late season losses to them that have cost us finals football.

I guess it's true to say that we have nothing to fear from Hawthorn in 2009, but that's only because they don't look as if they will contend at all. The record shows that when they do contend, we have enormous difficulty in putting them away.

In my lifetime (1971-2009), our winning percentage against the Hawks is by far our lowest - 31%.

Next worst is against the Lions (36%), obviously tested over a far shorter period (including their threepeat).

From there, it's Carltank at 41%, and onwards and upwards it goes.

The stats back the assertion that the Hawks win lots of games against the Cats, and (for me) their non-competitiveness this season is a bonus for us.

OK hows this then....The hawks currently have a win-loss ratio of 6-8, therefore any win they have this year is ABSOLUTELY CRUCIAL, we beat them in round one and denied them 4 points and unless finals are out of contention for them next time we meet the win will also be absolutely crucial - for them.

I will repeat, in 2000 the hawks beat us in a final - neither team were going to win the flag that year lets face it and the hawks outfit of that year has been almost completely rebuilt - in other words it's not the same team.
That means that the "big game" score between these 2 teams at this point is 1-0.

If we are going to go back through finals of past teams we might as well include everything before the 1970's....it's all irrelevant.

All other results in our history are coincidental - and to think I have been accused of my bias against hawthorn...all I can see here is fear based on nothing but past eras.

We have beaten StKilda in "big games" before this year but I can honestly say that if I had a choice of which 2009 team I would rather face in the Grand Final I would take Hawthorn without even thinking about it considering their form this year.
And as for all those who are waiting for StKilda to "choke"....you'll do well to remember that the football world was waiting for the cats to do just that in '07 so based on what I've seen this year it may not happen.

 

[krisholio14]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

I'm still waiting for the naysayers (mainly Renegade) to tell me exactly what they expect him to be doing at this point.

I think its basically a case of people thinking he'd be Carey, Brown and Tredrea rolled into one within 2 seasons, and because he hasn't done that, he's now no good.

FFS, he hasn't had a full pre season yet, he had his running and kicking action remodelled in the last off season to rid him of the problems he was having with his foot, and he's still coming to grips with playing against men and not boys.

He may not be tearing games apart, but he's shown enough to suggest that with a full pre season under his belt, and the confidence and experience that only comes with playing in the ones, he will be a very good player in due course.

 

[goyoucatters]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

ok hows this then....the hawks currently have a win-loss ratio of 6-8, therefore any win they have this year is absolutely crucial, we beat them in round one and denied them 4 points and unless finals are out of contention for them next time we meet the win will also be absolutely crucial - for them.

with hindsight, hawthorn's loss to us in round 1 could be crucial - it didn't appear to be anything like that at the time. No team is going to suggest that a round 1 loss endangers their entire season (unless you're the tiges).

i will repeat, in 2000 the hawks beat us in a final - neither team were going to win the flag that year lets face it and the hawks outfit of that year has been almost completely rebuilt - in other words it's not the same team.
That means that the "big game" score between these 2 teams at this point is 1-0.

If we are going to go back through finals of past teams we might as well include everything before the 1970's....it's all irrelevant.

how can the record between two teams over a significant period of time be irrelevant? I believe the record over time has contributed to a conviction at hawthorn that they can always lift themselves to defeat the cats when it really matters.

comes down to the fact that there is no team they would rather face in a truly important match...

all other results in our history are coincidental - and to think i have been accused of my bias against hawthorn...all i can see here is fear based on nothing but past eras.

We have beaten stkilda in "big games" before this year but i can honestly say that if i had a choice of which 2009 team i would rather face in the grand final i would take hawthorn without even thinking about it considering their form this year.

everyone would take hawthorn, based on this year's performances. kellykellykelly's point related to a 'fully fit and firing hawthorn', something we haven't seen this year.

and as for all those who are waiting for stkilda to "choke"....you'll do well to remember that the football world was waiting for the cats to do just that in '07 so based on what i've seen this year it may not happen.

saints are playing great football, and there's plenty of good reasons to suspect that they will be our biggest threat in september. The point is simply this - if the hawks were building the kind of game that they got going late in '08, they'd believe they were a bigger threat. And i, for one, would agree with them...

goyoumightycats!!!

 

[someday-somehow]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

^^^
If we beat the hawks in a grand final then all this BS about them winning "big games" would cease.
I would have preferred this to be the case in '09 so at least all this rubbish would stop (I think if the cats had the time over they would win it - I honestly believe this).

I also believe that the saints of '09 (fully fit and firing) are a better, harder and more balanced team than Hawthorn '08 (fully fit and firing).

We could win the flag this year and all we will ever hear is "you were lucky the hawks didn't make the finals". Do you and KKK honestly believe that?

 

[kellykellykelly]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

Yeah but they're not fully fit and firing are they?, at the moment they're disgracefull so in the context of this year you would rather face them in the finals than St Kilda who still beat us after we threw everything at them.

You are just dead set wrong about my bias...I love buddy and I think he's a star - I watched him in awe last year. I have nothing against the hawks but for gods sake we lost one grand final to them, our current group and the hawks current group have faced off in ONE FINAL (last year). Any previous loss going back to 2000 and before that has nothing to do us playing the hawks 2009.

The hawks supporters want to get into your head and they have succeeded.

I not too sure about Hawthorn supporters being inside my head... It's just my opinion that Hawthorn have an innate ability to get up and firing against the cats. This is hardly as a result of anything that Hawthorn supporters have pushed upon me. Moreover, this is nothing that keeps me awake at night, just an observation!

In the context of '09, of course i'd rather play Hawthorn in a final rather than St.Kilda, but then again, i'd also like to play Melbourne in a final this year. But that's not what i was getting at.

I'm looking forward to playing Hawthorn again, and hopefully smashing them for a bit of meaningless retribution.


Go Tom Hawkins, Go Cats!

 

[goyoucatters]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

^^^
If we beat the hawks in a grand final then all this BS about them winning "big games" would cease.

Bring it on...

I would have preferred this to be the case in '09 so at least all this rubbish would stop (I think if the cats had the time over they would win it - I honestly believe this).

Nobody is able to 'have their time over' in a football match - the result is the only thing that stands.

I also believe that the saints of '09 (fully fit and firing) are a better, harder and more balanced team than Hawthorn '08 (fully fit and firing).

Fair enough - I still think the lack of GF experience (and the weight of expectation to win only their second flag) could bring them undone.

We could win the flag this year and all we will ever hear is "you were lucky the hawks didn't make the finals". Do you and KKK honestly believe that?

You will only hear that sort of claptrap from trolling Hawks fans...No team that misses the finals would ever seriously claim that it would have won the flag if it had only been allocated a place in the GF. And I wouldn't suggest such a ridiculous thing either...

Keep the faith,
S.

 

[The Riddler]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

We can't really drop Hawkins, there's nobody else to bring in who's going to do any better.

 

[thegerman]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

I'm still waiting for the naysayers (mainly Renegade) to tell me exactly what they expect him to be doing at this point.

I think its basically a case of people thinking he'd be Carey, Brown and Tredrea rolled into one within 2 seasons, and because he hasn't done that, he's now no good.

FFS, he hasn't had a full pre season yet, he had his running and kicking action remodelled in the last off season to rid him of the problems he was having with his foot, and he's still coming to grips with playing against men and not boys.

He may not be tearing games apart, but he's shown enough to suggest that with a full pre season under his belt, and the confidence and experience that only comes with playing in the ones, he will be a very good player in due course.

Big thumbs up Diablo!

 

[The rabbi]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

Yup, i agree that good delivery has to start with a good lead.

We never seem to have the space in the forwardline for this style of lead - mark - lead - mark sort of play..

This is either a defect with our forwards ability to find space, a defect with the overall structure of the forward line, or the fact that opposition teams have figured out how to defend us.

I think it is a combination of the first two points.
.

I disagree. I think is because Geelong are too slow at getting the ball into the forward line.

When you are pinging the ball backwards and sideways with hand ball to try and find some space to go forward you also allow the opposition time to flood your forward line.


Geelong find it difficult to break the lines and move the ball quickly into the forward line. See how teams cut off Ablett's run. If they could get it down there quick as in '07 and give the key forwards a one on one contest, then I think that Hawkins and Mooney would look a lot better than they do at the moment.

 

[meto]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

I'm not sure if they are the same age, but have a look at Josh Kennedy from West Coast, he is their future, and is producing similar results to Hawkins.

Not setting the world on fire, but LEARNING.

Josh Kennedy won't cost West Coast a flag this year, Hawkins might cost us another flag though.
It doesn't pay to be tunnel visioned or just have blind faith that all will be well come September.
I got slammed by suggesting we needed a plan B, or insurance for the forward line.
Lonergan can play forward or back and is in good form, only thing Bomber won't look after him even when he's playing well and at 197cm
he's needed down back to help Harry.

 

[catempire]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

In Thompson's mid-week press conference he remarked that it was the biggest game Hawkins had been involved in and that experience will hold him in great stead. He said they see him as a long term prospect and not a "week-to-week" proposition.

He also said something which I found interesting. It went something like:

"Some players have to earn selection and others you play because you know it will benefit the team in the long term".

That's encouraging.

 

[footymissionary]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

....

 

[bulletproof]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

If i could compare Tom to a player from the last ten years it would be Anthony Rocca. I remember Big Tony coping similar abuse at this stage of his career. Mostly because of his huge salary and being Sav's brother, just like the absurd Tony Locket comparisons and the 2006 Championships plague Hawkins.

He was never a champion, but he won a Copeland trophy and has been the mainstay of the collingwood team over the past decade (until this year).

If he is as good as him, I'd take that. Anyone would.

 

[krisholio14]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

If i could compare Tom to a player from the last ten years it would be Anthony Rocca. I remember Big Tony coping similar abuse at this stage of his career. Mostly because of his huge salary and being Sav's brother, just like the absurd Tony Locket comparisons and the 2006 Championships plague Hawkins.

He was never a champion, but he won a Copeland trophy and has been the mainstay of the collingwood team over the past decade (until this year).

If he is as good as him, I'd take that. Anyone would.

Good comparison, right down to the apparent lack of stamina and physical conditioning

 

[meto]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

What's the point perservering to the death? Get a brain Thompson, if the kids' a long term prospect why is he continually given a position that could cost us the flag.
At 21 he's hardly a kid anymore.
And what about the other long term prospects, where are they?

 

[thejester]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

What's the point perservering to the death? Get a brain Thompson, if the kids' a long term prospect why is he continually given a position that could cost us the flag.
At 21 he's hardly a kid anymore.
And what about the other long term prospects, where are they?

Mitch Brown broke his leg and Scotty Simpson injured his ankle (?). So unless you want to play Lonergan (and let's be serious - does anyone think he would have done any better than Hawkins on the weekend?), it's Hawkins or bust.

EDIT: Keep in mind also that Varcoe copped games under the same logic now being applied to Hawkins...can anyone say they're disappointed with the result?

 

[Poetic Justice]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

Mitch Brown broke his leg and Scotty Simpson injured his ankle (?). So unless you want to play Lonergan (and let's be serious - does anyone think he would have done any better than Hawkins on the weekend?), it's Hawkins or bust.

EDIT: Keep in mind also that Varcoe copped games under the same logic now being applied to Hawkins...can anyone say they're disappointed with the result?

I think Lonergan would have taken a couple of the marks Hawkins didn't.

 

[KardiniaPark]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

Take him out the back and shoot him.

 

[krisholio14]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

Take him out the back and shoot him.

Better still, let's trade him for Richard Tambling

 

[KardiniaPark]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

Nah id rather just shoot him

 

[kicksome]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

pretty keen to see how this mitch brown fellow turns out, from what ive heard hes a bit of a markologist.
Imagine having someone in our forwardline in a few years than can take a contested mark! oh snap sounds good

 

[Cattery]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

EDIT: Keep in mind also that Varcoe copped games under the same logic now being applied to Hawkins...can anyone say they're disappointed with the result?

Not with the end result, but if Hawkins puts in a performance in this years GF [ provided we get there ] like Varcoe did in last years it could potentially cost us a flag.

 

[kellykellykelly]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

Meto, you seem very intent on getting Lonergan back into the team.

It's all well and good to say "Hawkins is shit, bring back lonergan", but we tried that last year, and we all know how that turned out.

Hawkins has upside, Lonergan doesn't.

The end.

 

[goodoldcats]

Re: What now for Hawkins?

Not with the end result, but if Hawkins puts in a performance in this years GF [ provided we get there ] like Varcoe did in last years it could potentially cost us a flag.

hawkins is less likely to cost us a flag than blake. i would rather a cardboard cutout