Deja Vu...

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ugg
    replied
    Originally posted by Xie Shan
    I don't take many pictures during the game, but I couldn't resist taking this one demonstrating the Eagles' proficiency at "getting numbers behind the ball" . This is our forward line in the second quarter...

    And I agree, Roos did not seem to react to this. Maybe our forward line has become too predictable, we missed Schneider last night. Phillips needs some extended time up forward to show what he can do, his lack of experience against someone like Wirrpanda was telling.
    Haha, I'm sitting about four rows down from you. I can even see the back of my head in the picture.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeadlyAkkuret
    replied
    Originally posted by Xie Shan
    I don't take many pictures during the game, but I couldn't resist taking this one demonstrating the Eagles' proficiency at "getting numbers behind the ball" . This is our forward line in the second quarter...
    That's amazing isn't it. If that were us, we'd be "ruining the game", "playing boring football", but when it's the Eagles it's "getting numbers back"

    Leave a comment:


  • NMWBloods
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr_Juicy
    Aaaah yes. My usual approach. How does that go again?
    There are lots of reasons why a team "should" win a match or not - I was clarifying what his were, as made clear in subsequent discussions.

    You know what your usual approach is - you use the same one with each incarnation.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr_Juicy
    replied
    Originally posted by NMWBloods
    Perhaps you could then have noticed that the issue you referred to had already been discussed and clarified... but you probably did and just preferred your usual approach...
    Aaaah yes. My usual approach. How does that go again?

    Leave a comment:


  • NMWBloods
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr_Juicy
    I'm sorry I don't spend as much time on here as you apparantly do. And yes it was made abundantly clear to me from the start.
    Perhaps you could then have noticed that the issue you referred to had already been discussed and clarified... but you probably did and just preferred your usual approach...

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr_Juicy
    replied
    Originally posted by NMWBloods
    Thanks Mr_Timely but he wasn't really that clear!
    I'm sorry I don't spend as much time on here as you apparantly do. And yes it was made abundantly clear to me from the start.

    Leave a comment:


  • annew
    replied
    I think that Goodes is wasted as a tagger no matter that he is against the best in the AFL. Goodes should be given the same freedom as Judd is given, stop using him to negate the best player and let the opposition try and negate him. Goodes just does not play well in a negative role, he is an attacking player first and foremost and still played the best footy of his career as a ruck man where he could go wherever he wanted.

    Leave a comment:


  • NMWBloods
    replied
    Originally posted by liz
    Kirk is capable - and as I posted earlier, I think it was he who set the standard in the second half. As he did in the GF last year.
    He is, but I feel it's more a slower, grinding process rather than setting the team alight, which Goodes could do.

    And I think Hall was trying very hard to spark the team last night. It can be hard to do it when you're playing in the forward line and the problems are happening further up the ground. But while his play-on tactics and attempted tackle busting didn't always work, I think it was a sign of him desperately trying to make something happen within that horrendously clogged up forward line when the more traditional approach wasn't working. Even though it was hardly one of his classic games, he was one of the few who tried to play a four quarter game, I reckon.
    Yep, he definitely tried, but probably too hard. Should have just gone back to basics.

    Leave a comment:


  • Xie Shan
    replied
    Originally posted by AussieAnge
    Jeffers don't you realise that only Sydney flood other teams merely get "numbers behind the ball?"
    I don't take many pictures during the game, but I couldn't resist taking this one demonstrating the Eagles' proficiency at "getting numbers behind the ball" . This is our forward line in the second quarter...

    And I agree, Roos did not seem to react to this. Maybe our forward line has become too predictable, we missed Schneider last night. Phillips needs some extended time up forward to show what he can do, his lack of experience against someone like Wirrpanda was telling.

    Leave a comment:


  • liz
    replied
    Originally posted by NMWBloods
    We can lack someone to spark when the team is in a rut. It does happen through what seems like a slow, irresistable force of will, such as it did last night or in the '06GF, but I'd like to see an individual player grab the game when we're down and make something happen. Goodes and Hall are capable of that, but did not last night (and do not do it enough).

    Kirk is capable - and as I posted earlier, I think it was he who set the standard in the second half. As he did in the GF last year.

    And I think Hall was trying very hard to spark the team last night. It can be hard to do it when you're playing in the forward line and the problems are happening further up the ground. But while his play-on tactics and attempted tackle busting didn't always work, I think it was a sign of him desperately trying to make something happen within that horrendously clogged up forward line when the more traditional approach wasn't working. Even though it was hardly one of his classic games, he was one of the few who tried to play a four quarter game, I reckon.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chow-Chicker
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr_Juicy
    You have to protect the head at all costs. It was not a legitimate tackle, it was reckless.
    Gee, if we go this path then every knock to the head etc will be deemed reckless, reportable and suspendable. Can you image motor racing going down the path that of every collision, a driver will be charged with dangerous driving?

    Leave a comment:


  • NMWBloods
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr_Juicy
    I think you will find if you read his whole post, that he gave three reasons why we should have in fact won the game. I think he is lamenting on lost opportunities as to why we lost the game.. Qui?
    Thanks Mr_Timely but he wasn't really that clear!

    Leave a comment:


  • NMWBloods
    replied
    Originally posted by liz
    But most of them contributed something in the second half once the ball started to run their way, in contrast to the stodgy nothingness of the first half.
    We can lack someone to spark when the team is in a rut. It does happen through what seems like a slow, irresistable force of will, such as it did last night or in the '06GF, but I'd like to see an individual player grab the game when we're down and make something happen. Goodes and Hall are capable of that, but did not last night (and do not do it enough).

    Leave a comment:


  • NMWBloods
    replied
    Originally posted by Glenn
    A legitimate attempt to tackle is sticking one arm out to grab someone?
    Yes.

    I don't recall anyone here saying Hall should have been reported for his coathanger on Wirrpanda in the '05GF!

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr_Juicy
    replied
    Originally posted by NMWBloods
    If people get reported for legitimate attempts to tackle that happen to be high then the game is finished.
    You have to protect the head at all costs. It was not a legitimate tackle, it was reckless.

    Leave a comment:

Working...