| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: Violent Sidebottom costs us game |  |
|
Seriously, if we'd had one of Sidey or Beams that game would've been a shoe-in and none of the textual retardation I'm wading through would be on here. Our worst posters would be happily sucking down a beer or two then giving one to their significant other rather than breaking out the Jim Beams and hate-posting on Nicks.
Injuries and suspensions suck, but as long as they're in June and not September, I'll take these losses and move on. Just means we need one back that would be pencilled in as a loss (one of the Hawthorn games).
Chill out guys, It's ONE home and away game at Shitihad stadium. |
|
|
|
 |
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: Re: Violent Sidebottom costs us game | |
|
| Wokko wrote: |
Seriously, if we'd had one of Sidey or Beams that game would've been a shoe-in and none of the textual retardation I'm wading through would be on here. Our worst posters would be happily sucking down a beer or two then giving one to their significant other rather than breaking out the Jim Beams and hate-posting on Nicks.
Injuries and suspensions suck, but as long as they're in June and not September, I'll take these losses and move on. Just means we need one back that would be pencilled in as a loss (one of the Hawthorn games).
Chill out guys, It's ONE home and away game at Shitihad stadium. |
they have a missus? 
the ball handling and decision making today was terrible but a by prodouct of relentless and referred pressure. neither beams not sidebottom would have really saved us. very few, if any, were clean with the ball.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Seeing as we had almost no spread all game, one of our hardest runners would definitely have made a difference.
But we lost this game mostly due to terrible defensive organisation. We played like it was 2013. Those who are saying we've been poor for a few weeks. No. We haven't been great, but we were at least tight defensively. Today we were was just plain bad.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ was just thinking that re our defence. looks like they panicked or simply dropped their bundle at inopportune moments. lacked composure on occasion.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Beast
Joined: 26 Oct 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Nah, judging by the Nicks' intelligentsia response that consists of the likes of Dave and Tannin the "inconsistent" Sidey wasn't a big loss. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| John Wren wrote: | | ^ was just thinking that re our defence. looks like they panicked or simply dropped their bundle at inopportune moments. lacked composure on occasion. |
Nothing to do with our 200 game defence general and sometime hate-figure being missing ? It looked that way.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | John Wren wrote: | | ^ was just thinking that re our defence. looks like they panicked or simply dropped their bundle at inopportune moments. lacked composure on occasion. |
Nothing to do with our 200 game defence general and sometime hate-figure being missing ? It looked that way. |
quite likely, yes.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Breadcrawl
Joined: 13 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yeah Maxy would have been handy
_________________
they can smell what we're cookin' |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
There's no doubt that losing Maxwell hurts our defensive organisation. Tonight was easily our worst for the year though, with or without Maxwell. On every counter attack they had free players inside the 50, at one point they had two completely unmarked 20 metres from goal. It's inexcusable.
I'm marking it down as an aberration. It's how we respond now that is important.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Sidebottom is easily covered; we have half a dozen of his type.
Goldsack isn't.
(Beamer's two goals per game, by the way, would have seen us getting away with the 4 points; and Maxwell's leadership and cool head down back was sorely missed too.)
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^^Where were those half dozen today Tannin? We could have done with them. Dwyer's the only one that came close to playing a Sidebottom role today and he's just not on the same level.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| John Wren wrote: | | ^ was just thinking that re our defence. looks like they panicked or simply dropped their bundle at inopportune moments. lacked composure on occasion. |
A lack of hard 2 way running by our midfield cost us, a lack of leg speed there didn't help that. Marley going 3rd man up on the Tooves - Crameri marking contest a case in point. Yes Marley managed to get back, but it was a pack of un-opposed doggies players waiting to clean up the spillage. Where was Griffens opponent? Where was Wallis's opponent? Defense was under the hammer the whole game. |
|
|
|
|
Beast
Joined: 26 Oct 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | | Sidebottom is easily covered; we have half a dozen of his type. |
bwahahahahahaha
It takes a special kind to stick to your guns in spite of reality saying you're wrong.
| Tannin wrote: | | Goldsack isn't. |
I rate Goldsack a lot more than Blair but he is still one of the last one picked.
| Tannin wrote: | | (Beamer's two goals per game, by the way, would have seen us getting away with the 4 points; and Maxwell's leadership and cool head down back was sorely missed too.) |
Agree with this. Especially on Beamsy who is clearly in our 3 best players closely followed by Sidey  |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | John Wren wrote: | | ^ was just thinking that re our defence. looks like they panicked or simply dropped their bundle at inopportune moments. lacked composure on occasion. |
A lack of hard 2 way running by our midfield cost us, a lack of leg speed there didn't help that. Marley going 3rd man up on the Tooves - Crameri marking contest a case in point. Yes Marley managed to get back, but it was a pack of un-opposed doggies players waiting to clean up the spillage. Where was Griffens opponent? Where was Wallis's opponent? Defense was under the hammer the whole game. |
griffen and macaffer, wallis and pendlebury for most of the game.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
backline was severely depleted, maxy badly missed, and reid cannot come back soon enough, and lets not forget Nathan brown.
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
