Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
After watching the replay, I thought Sinkers was pretty good. His ruckwork, particularly in the 1st qtr. was quite good against an in form ruckman. He moves well around the ground and influences a lot of the play. He still has a lot of weaknesses to his game, but it's a very good sign that he's making some real improvement this year.

Tippett, who was my pregame choice for ruckman, was barely passable, but did got better as the game wore on. I don't know if he can get back to last year's form. He's got to clunk marks and kick goals to be a value to the team.
I pretty much agree, though I find that pre-game I now favour Sinkers over Tippett for selection. But I thought that on this one the commentators last night had it pretty right: Longmire and the Match Committee should play whoever is in form out of Naismith, Sinkers, and Tippo, and whoever is showing the most desire. I admire Sinkers not for prodigious talent - he doesn't have that - but because he appears to me to give it his all. Of course, we can't see inside people's heads. Maybe Tippo gives it his absolute best, too; but on appearance he sometimes seems less than fully involved in a game when he's not playing well. (Hence the [apocryphal?] story after last year's GF??) Certainly, if Tippo is to play, he has to make the kind of contribution Ludwig talks of; otherwise, he becomes a liability.

My other main reflection after last night's game is how it underscores that the doom-sayers after last week's loss have hopefully been given some perspective. I was quietly confident of a victory last night, and glad to see the boys deliver. Just as Hawthorn seem to be one team that trouble us (though the loss of two players pre-game didn't help last week), we have done pretty well against Geelong in recent years. More significantly, we've done pretty well against the rest of the competition, too. Last night's win was an important victory to steady the ship as we approach September.