| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Stupied
Joined: 14 Mar 2013
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Frosty will be fine. The ice man does not have the weakness of us mere mortals. |
|
|
|
 |
Damien 
Me Noah & Flynn @ the G
Joined: 21 Jan 1999
Location: Croydon Vic
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Could be worse. Buddy could still be there!
_________________
'Collingwood are the Bradmans of Football'
The Herald - 1930 |
|
|
|
|
Beast
Joined: 26 Oct 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Darkstranger wrote: | | Have you watch games lately, talls aren't the issue, Bruest, Rioli, Smith & Puopolo! They'll hurt us! |
Yeah I have and both Roughie and Gunna are averaging 3 goals per game this season.
Ludicrous post. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
& who delivers them the ball to get the goals?
The talls & the ones mentioned by Dark Stranger are the problem. In a nutshell: Hawthorn.
Ceglar has been progressing well too.
The Hawks are allegedly considering brining back players like Lake & Shiels.
Pretty formidable team
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Stinger
Joined: 01 Dec 2003
Location: Canberra
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Darkstranger wrote: | | Have you watch games lately, talls aren't the issue, Bruest, Rioli, Smith & Puopolo! They'll hurt us! |
Yep, starve the midfield and D50 entries are not an issue. We are good at that right? |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Damien wrote: | | Could be worse. Buddy could still be there! |
oh my.
just wait til we have to confront sydney again.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
GoWoodsmen
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Location: Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Just had a squiz at the stats.... no question our backline stocks are threadbare (as shown on Sunday). Heightwise it looks like some fairly obvious match ups.
Frost (195cm) (if he comes up) takes Roughy (193cm)... will match him for pace... probably not one-on-one strength but he hasn't been beaten much in that regard.
Keeffe (204cm) to Hale (201cm) (assuming he's playing forward the whole game)
Bruest - any one of Langdon, Harry or Tooves (he's a short arse... just a damn good shot at goal short arse)
Marley has to go to Cyril if he's forward. Danger is really him sweeping into the forward line from the midfield. Do we think Marley has got the tank to stick with him?
Gunston - this is where I kind of agree with others that White might have to push back... or someone is going to have to play tall. He's 193cm.... most of our defenders left will be giving up 4-5cm in height. Seedsman perhaps? Probably match him in most regards?
I know this is an incredibly simplistic view of it. If Frost doesn't get up, we are in a world of pain. And if we cop another injury then I'm not sure how we restructure without Goldy, Maxy, Reid and Brown in the team.
Last Sunday was the first time our backline looked seriously lost which was mostly down to how quickly the Bulldogs got the ball in there. Don't doubt for a second... the Hawks will do exactly the same unless we can slow them down severely.
Hate to be a pessimist but it looks to me a bridge too far. Would be a massive result for our season if we could find a way to win.
Go Pies.
_________________
Side By Side Forever |
|
|
|
|
Clifton Hill-Billy
Joined: 29 Sep 2011
Location: 3068----> 3076
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| GoWoodsmen wrote: | Seedsman perhaps? Probably match him in most regards?
|
Seedsman would get destroyed by Gunston, not defensively skilled enough to shut down a player of Gunston's caliber. Ditto the rest of the available players in the backline. Not sure who we'd put on Gunston, but I'd definitely have Tooves above Seedsman in terms of possible match-ups.
_________________
"Hey Ma get off the dang roof!" |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Clifton Hill-Billy wrote: | | GoWoodsmen wrote: | Seedsman perhaps? Probably match him in most regards?
|
Seedsman would get destroyed by Gunston, not defensively skilled enough to shut down a player of Gunston's caliber. Ditto the rest of the available players in the backline. Not sure who we'd put on Gunston, but I'd definitely have Tooves above Seedsman in terms of possible match-ups. |
Yeah, I'd agree, Tooves is the man barring some sort of miracle. |
|
|
|
|
GoWoodsmen
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Location: Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | Clifton Hill-Billy wrote: | | GoWoodsmen wrote: | Seedsman perhaps? Probably match him in most regards?
|
Seedsman would get destroyed by Gunston, not defensively skilled enough to shut down a player of Gunston's caliber. Ditto the rest of the available players in the backline. Not sure who we'd put on Gunston, but I'd definitely have Tooves above Seedsman in terms of possible match-ups. |
Yeah, I'd agree, Tooves is the man barring some sort of miracle. |
Yep, good call actually. He's proven he can play 'tall' so the height difference shouldn't be an issue, he's got the pace and nouse as well. When was the last time Tooves got toweled up? I honestly can't remember!!!
_________________
Side By Side Forever |
|
|
|
|
Bob Sugar
Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Location: Benalla
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yeah Toovs is the obvious one for Gunstan, Bucks might want to work Gunstan both ways though, if he does then Harry might be the man, it would be a win for us to drag him outside 50.
_________________
Defender...........
On the day before the first, Daicos created God.
You like this. |
|
|
|
|
Breadcrawl
Joined: 13 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Defender wrote: | | Yeah Toovs is the obvious one for Gunstan, Bucks might want to work Gunstan both ways though, if he does then Harry might be the man, it would be a win for us to drag him outside 50. |
Hmmm I don't mind that idea...
_________________
they can smell what we're cookin' |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | Clifton Hill-Billy wrote: | | GoWoodsmen wrote: | Seedsman perhaps? Probably match him in most regards?
|
Seedsman would get destroyed by Gunston, not defensively skilled enough to shut down a player of Gunston's caliber. Ditto the rest of the available players in the backline. Not sure who we'd put on Gunston, but I'd definitely have Tooves above Seedsman in terms of possible match-ups. |
Yeah, I'd agree, Tooves is the man barring some sort of miracle. |
Clearly Tooves is the matchup for Gunston. Sure, he's a couple of centimetres shorter, but a medium's always a better matchup than a tall on Gunston, he's not really a contested marking player. Pretty sure Toovey's always been our matchup for him.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Tooves gets Darling from the Wiggles every time, last week he got Crameri, he's got pace, endurance, good body on body and can easily take Gunston.
No chance I'd bring White back.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Every one? |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
