The Quiet Achiever - I Salute You.

[Snake]

Super Ted (Ted Richards) although he hasn't set the world on fire this year, day in day out, he is getting the job done, his consistency has been excellent. Well done mate, keep up the good work.:)

[Kanga]

Super Ted (Ted Richards) although he hasn't set the world on fire this year, day in day out, he is getting the job done, his consistency has been excellent. Well done mate, keep up the good work.:)

On a dark night for your club, Richards was one of your best....... Inaccuracy in front of goal and very poor delivery from a midfield that was beaten was the upshot of the night.

Goodes is clearly not fit - not resting him was a mistake as you guys need him firing in the finals....

[ScottH]

Teddy rarely has a bad game these days. Fast becoming a stalwart in defence (or the occasional fwd folly), as is B2.

As for Goodes, gone, I reckon. Judd struggle a fair bit last year with a groin injury, could be the same as Goodes.

[AnnieH]

As for Goodes, gone, I reckon. Judd struggle a fair bit last year with a groin injury, could be the same as Goodes.

You better take that back.

Goodesy will be AOK. Judd doesn't have Nathan Gibbs. That's a HUGE difference right there.

Goodesy should have been rested against the crows. I hope he'll get a rest this week.

[ernie koala]

Agree Ted has become one of most dependable players, not to mention his near BOG performance in the 2006 GF. He has been a fantastic pick up. I get the same feeling about Mattner. As for playing an injured Goodes for the 2nd week in a row..:confused: What a shocking decision. Then for Roos to come out in the press and say "We'd be crazy to play him next week, it's sad to see him play injured like this" :eek: :eek: You screwed up Roos and let him down by playing him on the weekend...how about some honesty instead of double speak. Isn't that what your dreaded leadership group is about , or doesn't it include coaches?

[ScottH]

You better take that back.

Goodesy will be AOK. Judd doesn't have Nathan Gibbs. That's a HUGE difference right there.

Goodesy should have been rested against the crows. I hope he'll get a rest this week.

I think you answered your own bitch about my comment with the last para.
And NO, I won't take it back. If he can't run, he shouldn't be on the ground. Doesn't matter who he is.

[SimonH]

One of the best on the w/e. His only problem was that (by instruction or inclination) most of his attacking marks were taken in the 55-65 metre arc from goal. Where we really struggled was manufacturing a grab within scoring distance. Ted can create inside 50s, but he's not much of a goal-kicker. Which is why, as everyone on earth has noted, Grundy should have been the tall from defence pushed forward.

[Snake]

Agree Ted has become one of most dependable players, not to mention his near BOG performance in the 2006 GF. He has been a fantastic pick up. I get the same feeling about Mattner. As for playing an injured Goodes for the 2nd week in a row..:confused: What a shocking decision. Then for Roos to come out in the press and say "We'd be crazy to play him next week, it's sad to see him play injured like this" :eek: :eek: You screwed up Roos and let him down by playing him on the weekend...how about some honesty instead of double speak. Isn't that what your dreaded leadership group is about , or doesn't it include coaches?

Totally agree, he IMHO was BOG 2006 GF.;)

[mcs]

having a very good season this year Ted back to close to his best after a poor 2007. A solid mark, very good contested mark, a dependable kick and generally makes few mistakes. If only many other members of the team had similar consistency as Big Ted :)

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Kanga is back now that they have a chance to make the 4. What a coincidence:o

[giant]

:confused: I thought he was on the Porpoise for most of the night?

[BSA5]

:confused: I thought he was on the Porpoise for most of the night?

He was on him for the first quarter, I think. Not sure about the second, but from half time, Bolton took him. But why he was on Porps in the first place is beyond me; Bolton, Mattner, Bevan or Kennelly would have been much more suited.

Anyway, Richards was absolutely fantastic when he was played a little bit looser, as he always does. Honestly, I don't think we should be using Richards as a one-on-one defender. He can do it in a pinch (say if injuries strike in the backline during the game), but he is SOOOOO much better playing as a loose man in defence, taking marks as the third man up, and providing a bit of run out of defence (not to the same extent as Malceski, Kennelly and Mattner, but still gives a lot).

[NMWBloods]

Honestly, I don't think we should be using Richards as a one-on-one defender. He can do it in a pinch (say if injuries strike in the backline during the game), but he is SOOOOO much better playing as a loose man in defence, taking marks as the third man upI agree. He's not so good in a wrestle, but he reads the flight of the ball well and is great mark or spoil when given a clear run at it. He's also not a good forward so hopefully we limit his time up there.

[hot potato]

When I first saw him on North Sydney oval, I said to Her Indoors he looked a good pickup.
She said 'Yes I hope he asks me out"

[Kanga]

Kanga is back now that they have a chance to make the 4. What a coincidence:o


Making up the numbers mate.... i can assure you.

[Jewels]

Making up the numbers mate.... i can assure you.

I think there are 15 teams doing that this season.

[BSA5]

I agree. He's not so good in a wrestle, but he reads the flight of the ball well and is great mark or spoil when given a clear run at it. He's also not a good forward so hopefully we limit his time up there.

Yeah. He can do a good one-on-one defensive job in a pinch though. I remember the Saints game last year when he played on Riewoldt. He beat Saint Nick comfortably (albeit with the help of the umpires, who must have thought it was opposite day). Not something we can rely on, however.

[Darren Thomson]

yes, 15 making up the numbers, unless half the team break legs they might as well put Cats on the cup now, the rest is a formality, of course, that won't stop me turning up for Swans games and praying for a miracle

[reigning premier]

yes, 15 making up the numbers, unless half the team break legs they might as well put Cats on the cup now, the rest is a formality, of course, that won't stop me turning up for Swans games and praying for a miracle

What a load of bollocks.

The beauty of our finals system is that the best team on the day will win. If we were in an EPL style competition, yes, give the Cats the cup now. But we're not. Collingwood have proven they are beatable and there's a cple of teams that are better than that mob.

The New England patriots seemed to have it in the bag in the NFL earlier this year as well after going undefeated for the entire season before they got smacked in the super bowl. The Cats haven't even gone undefeated and yet everyone's prepared to give them the cup. WTF?

[hot potato]

A week is a long time in football. But the Cats are as classy an act as you will ever witness so if they don't win the flag in 08, they will have seriously under-achieved.

[reigning premier]

A week is a long time in football. But the Cats are as classy an act as you will ever witness so if they don't win the flag in 08, they will have seriously under-achieved.

The same could be (and has been) said of Adelaide over the last 5 years and Stkilda in the 5 before that.... How many Premierships have thay won in the last 10 years?

[hammo]

The same could be (and has been) said of Adelaide over the last 5 years and Stkilda in the 5 before that.... How many Premierships have thay won in the last 10 years?

You have proven to all and sundry that you don't know what you're talking about.