View Full Version : So :D:D:D:Ding disappointed...
sheller891
30 Apr 2006, 17:46
Another winnable game - another loss
Should be at least 3-1.
This is terrible - what was monfries thinking with his bannana...
Can't blame one player though - FUUCK, can't explain my frustration at losing by a point...
cschreuder61
30 Apr 2006, 18:12
You guys were unlucky. You really came to play, and it looked like we just expected you to tire but you didn't.
Monfries would be feeling pretty low.
bmwofoz
30 Apr 2006, 19:12
Another winnable game - another loss
Should be at least 3-1.
This is terrible - what was monfries thinking with his bannana...
Can't blame one player though - FUUCK, can't explain my frustration at losing by a point...
I fully understand, but we should beat Richmond and Carlton, if not then this year will become a right off.
I'm a big fan of Monfries, and while it was an act of stupidity, I'm sure a day will come when he does something that wins a game.
nicho_magic
30 Apr 2006, 19:38
You guys were unlucky. You really came to play, and it looked like we just expected you to tire but you didn't.
Monfries would be feeling pretty low.
he shouldn't be. he's young and not a bad word has been said about him until this mistake. Yes he should of gone the drop punt but... he'll learn. he's going to be a fantastic footballer for essendon, and the way he has played of late, is well above his years.
dissapointing to lose another close one, really need to regroup now and finish some of these great starts off.
Wolfpac
30 Apr 2006, 19:49
And besides, Hille's shot from the goal square was a much worse miss. Entertaining game, but 1 point loses are a bitch. When was the last time we lost by a point anyway?
nonchalance
30 Apr 2006, 20:07
Hille's miss was worse than Monfries', for mine.
Monfries was overexcited, Hille was stupid - and he was :D:D:D:D all day, which compounds it.
Hille, Monfries and Bradley. All cases of could have, should have but didnt. No point dwelling on it though.
Darealrath
30 Apr 2006, 20:43
I love the endeavour but bloody hell it's getting frustrating coming so close again.
Take solace from the fact that in 1981 (Sheedy's first year) Sheedy was so frustrated about starting the season 1-5, that he threatened to pull on the boots. We lost 5 games, none by more than about 3 goals or so in the first 6 rounds. Almost identical to this year.
We promptly won the next 15 games straight.
Now, that's not going to happen again, but it just goes to show you that it's a long season.
bacon buster
30 Apr 2006, 21:54
couldn't fault the effort. i think if we play like that in the next two weeks, we have a chance to get our season back on track somewhat.
dezzie#14
30 Apr 2006, 23:12
Im not trying to be sour here, well done to Hawthorn. But i notice watching the replay on fox footy that early in the third quater, there was a free kick awarded to slattery in Hawthorns goalsquare against Williams and the ball rolled over the line and the goal umpire awarded Hawthorn a point, even though the free kick was awarded to Slattery. Should the point have not been counted due to play being stopped because the free kick was awarded? could this have been the point that costed us the game? i was wondering if anyone saw it or picked up on it?
Longy413
30 Apr 2006, 23:29
The point wasn't counted.
windyhill
30 Apr 2006, 23:45
hawfforn missed some sitters, it all evened out in the end...crawford, stupid, should have nailed us then and there, try`s to be the smart arse......
LoneStar
1 May 2006, 09:30
Great finish to a good game today. I know you'd very disappointed with the one point loss & remember the feeling of a two point loss to Bombers in round 3 last year. Always brings the "could-of, should-of, would-of" moments to the forefront and highlights what might have been.
I thought the Bombers' effort was outstanding with a short break and sloppy conditions. Think the slow going of the wet helped neutralise the Hawk's speed, but the Bomber's really kept their legs the whole way thru despite the heavy track.
It's always good to beat Essendon when you're a Hawks' supporter, but to get the win in a close, exciting contest is especially satisfying. Bombers gave it a good effort and supporters should be disappointed but proud! Good luck against the Tigers next weekend!
MACDAICOS
1 May 2006, 10:11
MONFRIES>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>DIDAK :thumbsu:
Pevers-Legend
1 May 2006, 12:02
MONFRIES>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>DIDAK :thumbsu:
Glad to see you agree.
MACDAICOS
1 May 2006, 12:21
Glad to see you agree.
lol..............Yeah mate all the way!!! What a match winner!!!
Pevers-Legend
1 May 2006, 15:31
lol..............Yeah mate all the way!!! What a match winner!!!
Yes, he will be a matchwinner. Already doing more than that front runner you speak about was doing in his second season.
Remind me again, isn't Didak a top 3 pick who is supposed to be your saviour in the middle?:eek:
MACDAICOS
1 May 2006, 15:41
Yes, he will be a matchwinner. Already doing more than that front runner you speak about was doing in his second season.
Remind me again, isn't Didak a top 3 pick who is supposed to be your saviour in the middle?:eek:
HeHe........Remind me again who kicked 3 goals in the last quarter against Essendon last week? HeHe...........
Didn't wanna answer? :confused:
FatBoy's Wombats
1 May 2006, 17:21
MONFRIES>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>DIDAK :thumbsu:
Please don't even associate the two. There is only room enough in this world for one germ like Didak ;) Give the kid a break he will learn from it. Lot of could ofs and should ofs, but it was pretty good game all things considered by both teams. I thought Hird was really good in the second half and kept you in the game when we were up particularly early in the last. Jimmy has allways been a favourite player of mine, do you guys reckon he has lost a bit of what made him so special as a player? Just watching him he uses all his experience to great effect, but seems to have a little less of the X-factor which made him what he was.
Please don't even associate the two. There is only room enough in this world for one germ like Didak ;) Give the kid a break he will learn from it. Lot of could ofs and should ofs, but it was pretty good game all things considered by both teams. I thought Hird was really good in the second half and kept you in the game when we were up particularly early in the last. Jimmy has allways been a favourite player of mine, do you guys reckon he has lost a bit of what made him so special as a player? Just watching him he uses all his experience to great effect, but seems to have a little less of the X-factor which made him what he was.
No one's perfect, Didak included, last qtr against Adelaide ring a bell.
Monfries was a steal, will be a top 5 player to come out of his draft, easily.
I can't help but wonder where your team would be if you had gone for quality youth instead of the Alveys, Zantucks, Justin Murphys and other duds. I know they can be 'top-ups' for an already good team, but you didn't properly rebuild after 2000-01, and I reckon are paying the price....set you back a couple of years I say.
You better win against the Tigers!
Longy413
1 May 2006, 19:01
Alvey we got for nothing in the Jacobs trade for nothing, you could argue that we could have used an extra draft pick in the 6th Round instead. He was 22 at the time.
Zantuck was in the PSD and was also 22, Murphy for Cory McGrath.
In each of those cases we effectively gave up the opportunity to draft a youngster in the vacinity of pick 70.
The chances of finding a player at that pick were probably about as good as young players in Alvey or Zantuck getting things right.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, it was a gamble, it didn't pay off. But we would have had to be incredibly lucky with late picks in the draft to suggest we'd be in a better position at the moment.
The chances of finding a player at that pick were probably about as good as young players in Alvey or Zantuck getting things right. What's the advantage of getting guys for nothing, if they are going to do nothing? Also, which pick was Hirdy in the draft? Chris Grant was 106, and has been a stalwart for us. Brian Harris, now the Dogs's full-back and one of the best in the league, was high 70s. At least the young kids you may have got could have developed into top-players, and that's more than I will say for Ty or Alvey!
Pevers-Legend
1 May 2006, 19:08
HeHe........Remind me again who kicked 3 goals in the last quarter against Essendon last week? HeHe...........
Fisrt time he has done anything against us. A front runner to the max. He has all the skills yet seems so inconsistent, I wonder why? woudn't have an ego would he?
Keep your new FIGJAM and we'll keep Gus.
Pevers-Legend
1 May 2006, 19:09
What's the advantage of getting guys for nothing, if they are going to do nothing? Also, which pick was Hirdy in the draft? Chris Grant was 106, and has been a stalwart for us. Brian Harris, now the Dogs's full-back and one of the best in the league, was high 70s. At least the young kids you may have got could have developed into top-players, and that's more than I will say for Ty or Alvey!
And how many have not come off. Diamonds in the rough, not often. Go look at who Calrotn have selecte with their bottom picks. Not much to write home about.
What's the advantage of getting guys for nothing, if they are going to do nothing? Also, which pick was Hirdy in the draft? Chris Grant was 106, and has been a stalwart for us. Brian Harris, now the Dogs's full-back and one of the best in the league, was high 70s. At least the young kids you may have got could have developed into top-players, and that's more than I will say for Ty or Alvey!
How often do 70+ picks actually work out. That's 2 in the last 15 years is it?
1 in 15 for us. Murphy was very servicable for a year and a half, was our best finals player in '04. Ty and Alvey were both young still, with senior experince, so they were already ahead than 70+ picks, both gambles that didn't work, just like any 70+ pick.
Longy413
1 May 2006, 19:11
What's the advantage of getting guys for nothing, if they are going to do nothing?
We didn't get them at the club to do nothing, we got them to the club to fill specific weaknesses and with the hope they would further develop the obvious skills they already had.
Also, which pick was Hirdy in the draft? Chris Grant was 106, and has been a stalwart for us. Brian Harris, now the Dogs's full-back and one of the best in the league, was high 70s.
You don't get Hird's and Grant's that late anymore. Too much work is put into the draft for that to happen. And players like Harris are very much an exception to the rule. Of course it happens, but sometimes young players from other clubs also improve out of sight in a new environment.
For every Brian Harris there is an Adam McPhee.
Drafting Zantuck and Alvey hasn't hurt us. Having poor drafts between 1999 and 2001 has.
You make valid points, and I don't want to overstate the value of guys in the 70s and 80s. I just think across the board your side looks like there has not been a concious decision to replace ageing players with youth, and in this day and age I don't reckon you can 'cheat' the draft cycle of low finishes=high draft picks. Look at the Roos, Dons. Even Brissy appear to be recycling, though it is causing them pain, but when did your mob do it properly?
Boris_Bewick
1 May 2006, 19:26
Jimmy has allways been a favourite player of mine, do you guys reckon he has lost a bit of what made him so special as a player? Just watching him he uses all his experience to great effect, but seems to have a little less of the X-factor which made him what he was.
That would be because he is over 33 years of age and his battered body is not doing the things it used to be able to do. Hird has had countless injuries over his career and it is a credit to him that he is even running around at this level at 33, and amazing he would still be in the top 30 players in the comp. You can see it in matches now Hird wills his body to play footy and to get through matches.
The only thing that would make him seem less of a player than what he was is age. That's why Voss is slowing down, and Buckley is no longer playing 100% midfield.
cranypete
2 May 2006, 08:28
Monfries would be feeling pretty low.
no left foot
Longy413
2 May 2006, 08:57
no left foot
Hardly the problem.
FatBoy's Wombats
2 May 2006, 11:54
That would be because he is over 33 years of age and his battered body is not doing the things it used to be able to do. Hird has had countless injuries over his career and it is a credit to him that he is even running around at this level at 33, and amazing he would still be in the top 30 players in the comp. You can see it in matches now Hird wills his body to play footy and to get through matches.
The only thing that would make him seem less of a player than what he was is age. That's why Voss is slowing down, and Buckley is no longer playing 100% midfield.
True unluckiest footballer running round, i reckon both he and Voss sorry to say it, have slipped out of that group of 30 now, Bucks is still there i think.