View Full Version : Votes - Round 3.
2 - S.Black, N.Lappin, C.Scott, C.McRae, J.Akermanis
1 - C.Johnson, B.Scott, J.Leppitsch, M.Pike, T.Notting
Voss was excellent before going off with injury, and I also thought that Copeland and Bradshaw had reasonable games.
Likewise, Charman and McLaren both did well in the ruck, and also worked very hard around the ground - which was probably the most impressive aspect of their efforts.
CarterS
14 Apr 2002, 01:43
3 - S.Black
2 - D.Bradshaw
1 - J.Akermanis
next would be Leppitsch or Michael for both were brilliant in the back line.
lioness
14 Apr 2002, 02:03
3 - S Black
2 - J Leppitsch
1 - C Scott
Roylion
14 Apr 2002, 10:04
Interesting to hear the discussion on 3AW yesterday on Kevin Sheedy's comments on the Brownlow. The general consensus appeared to be that the existing system was OK, except for the scoring. Graham Bond believed that a a change to the Brownlow voting system from a 3,2,1 to a 5,4,3,2,1 system was warranted.
I agree.
Hence my votes from now on will be using the 5,4,3,2,1 system.
5. Black
4. Akermanis
3. Bradshaw
2. Lappin
1. McRae
Others who played well were Scott, Pike, Johnson, Michael and Notting. Voss played well until injured. Charman did quite well in the ruck.
cjwalkley
14 Apr 2002, 13:36
5 - Black
4 - Lappin
3 - Akermanis
2 - Bradshaw
1- Michael
Very honourable mention to Jamie Charman....his ruck work was outstanding and if he can get to the stage of playing 20 minutes each quarter will be invaluable. Also looked good around the ground.
Originally posted by Roylion
Graham Bond
Bond is another one of these stats people who gets the Brisbane Lions records wrong, and seems to think he's correct in doing so.
SpecialBruce
14 Apr 2002, 22:39
5. J Akermanis - No such thing as a Brownlow curse
4. C Mcrae - Good game
3. S Black - Another good game
2. D Bradshaw - 6 Goals is a good effort, considering of the 5 he kicked last week. Lynch was held up, so Bradshaw stepped up.
1. C Scott - Good game down back.
Hard to give votes, there are 5 or 6 players that could have polled votes, but those 5 people get the nod IMO.
FattyLumpkin
14 Apr 2002, 22:59
3. Lappin
2. Black
1. Aka
Fatty
adey115
14 Apr 2002, 23:13
5. Lapps
4. Blackie
3. Bradshaw
2. Aka
1. Macca
'onourables to Pikey, Mal....
3. Kelsey
2. Nicholls
1. Allen
:rolleyes: :eek:
:D
campbell
15 Apr 2002, 09:27
Smokin they did real good for you blokes, just like Goldspink in the Prelim.
Originally posted by campbell
Smokin they did real good for you blokes, just like Goldspink in the Prelim.
I admit that in the PF we were on the right end of the stick. No doubt about it.
It seems others cant do the same.
BTW - Im just stirring, but I wouldnt go around thinking your a 50pt better side than Essendon, thats all.
Maverick
15 Apr 2002, 10:03
3 - Michael
2 - Copeland
1 - Black
BrainOfMorbius
15 Apr 2002, 11:25
Originally posted by Smokin
I admit that in the PF we were on the right end of the stick. No doubt about it.
It seems others cant do the same.
Frankly Smokin, if you're consistently first to the ball, you're bound to win the bulk of the frees. Your boys were just outplayed and the free kick count reflected that.
who said anything about "free kick count"?
There is no doubt we got outplayed. Not by 50 points tho.
In crucial times we just were subject to some crucial decisions that didnt go our way.
Would not have changed the result - but little things in footy go a long way and with a bit of luck, if we had of kicked the first 2 or 3 in the second half the whole complexion of the game changes, would you not agree?
Altho for a team who go so outplayed, the statistics were pretty close. Inside 50's, possession, centre breaks etc.
Our ball use let us down tho - we had enough of it no doubt, but what we did with it was terrible. Obviously, your pressure had something to do with that and credit goes to Brisbane.
When your hot your hot, and on cold nights everything seems goes wrong.
Your hot now - but not many sides in the past 100 or so years have been able to remain hot from start to finish. Many of our guys, bar Hird and say JJ really are not in fantastic form - your ball winners and generally your team is. Hard for players to keep good form going for 25 or so weeks. Id rather be in hot form come finals, not now.
Yes, we shoulda lost - never doubted that.
Just dont get carried away with the final result, thats all.
keatings_gal
15 Apr 2002, 12:33
well....
i will go for the 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 system....
it will be hard
Black
C Scott & B Scott
Pike
Charman
Notting
Originally posted by Smokin
I admit that in the PF we were on the right end of the stick. No doubt about it.
It seems others cant do the same.
Neither could you at the time. It took a GF loss to see you humbled, however.
Originally posted by Smokin
BTW - Im just stirring, but I wouldnt go around thinking your a 50pt better side than Essendon, thats all.
What, you're worried that people might think that, just in case it happens to be . . . . true?? :eek:
Originally posted by Smokin
who said anything about "free kick count"?
There is no doubt we got outplayed. Not by 50 points tho.
Scoreboard would tell otherwise. I also notice that most Essendon supporters have failed to acknowledge the face-saver goals that they scored towards the end of the last quarter when the sting had gone out of the Lions game.
Originally posted by Smokin
In crucial times we just were subject to some crucial decisions that didnt go our way.
Would not have changed the result - but little things in footy go a long way and with a bit of luck, if we had of kicked the first 2 or 3 in the second half the whole complexion of the game changes, would you not agree?
Yes, but likewise if Essendon had actually played better themselves, they might have also had a chance of winning.
For years, Essendon have won under similar circumstances, and yet, you never heard many Essendon supporters saying "well, we were good, but not as much as the scoreboard indicated".
Facts are, umpiring will influence the game to a certain extent. If a side is better than the opposition, it will be able to rise above external factors to prove better on the night.
In fact, for many years that was OUR problem - not being a good enough side to rise to a challenge. Likewise, good sides make their own luck - as Essendon often do.
Originally posted by Smokin
Altho for a team who go so outplayed, the statistics were pretty close. Inside 50's, possession, centre breaks etc.
Actually, although Essendon had almost similar stats in regards to inside 50's, I think you'll find that we had far more possessions inside 50m, once we had the ball there. For instance, possessions inside 50m for the first half were 24 (Lions), to 12 (Bombers). Likewsie, we had 5 more scoring shots in the same time.
Originally posted by Smokin
Our ball use let us down tho - we had enough of it no doubt, but what we did with it was terrible. Obviously, your pressure had something to do with that and credit goes to Brisbane.
When your hot your hot, and on cold nights everything seems goes wrong.
Agree.
Originally posted by Smokin
Your hot now - but not many sides in the past 100 or so years have been able to remain hot from start to finish. Many of our guys, bar Hird and say JJ really are not in fantastic form - your ball winners and generally your team is. Hard for players to keep good form going for 25 or so weeks. Id rather be in hot form come finals, not now.
Yes, we shoulda lost - never doubted that.
Just dont get carried away with the final result, thats all.
Exactly. I don't think too many people are getting carried away with the result, however. In fact, I would have said most of the talk on the result has come from Essendon supporters saying "don't read too much into the result at this stage". Funny that! Is that just good advice, or is it a case of positive thinking on Essendon fans' behalf? ;)
At any rate, I agree. The Lions have a long season ahead. Sure, they play Essendon again in Round 18 - who really cares? We've got every other side in the competition to play over the course of the season, and any one team could beat us on any one day. In fact, I really could not care less, if we go undefeated or not (apart from wanting to break the record, of course - but that's understandable).
It's inevitable that the Lions will lose somewhere along the track. Nothing to do with being "due", but rather, that we won't be able to maintain our highest standards every week, and for sure, someone will be good enough to threaten that scenario. (I think the S.A. teams are the most likely, at this stage - both play well against us, and have beaten us at home).
If Essendon are setting themselves for a big one, in Round 18, then they are missing the point entirely. I mean, both Lions and Dons fancy themselves as premiers, and rightly so. Winning in Round 18 is not the answer to winning another premiership. Rather, it's the make-up of the whole season, regardless of who you win or lose to along the way.
For the moment, we're 'probably' the best team in the league, so, to some extent, the real contenders have an idea of the benchmark required, when teams play at their best - in regards to winning in the finals/GF. For Essendon, it's not about beating us in Round 18, or even getting ahead of us on the ladder. Rather, I would have thought it was about building a unit, which on the average, and overall, is better than the Lions. You can't guarantee what will happen on a certain occasion, but if you can build a side which is generally better, that is possibly the best you can do.
It's up to the Lions to maintain the standard they have set, perhaps not every week, but on the average - over the course of the season. Once it's finals time (pending we reach the finals, of course), THEN is the time to be at your best every week, with cut-throat matches being decided as to who is 'really' better than who.
Originally posted by Stocka
Scoreboard would tell otherwise. I also notice that most Essendon supporters have failed to acknowledge the face-saver goals that they scored towards the end of the last quarter when the sting had gone out of the Lions game.
Your flattering yourselves.
The sting was taken out of the game after we got crucified by the umps at the start of the 3rd then you went forward and kicked a couple goals, making it a 6 goal game. That was when the game was over.
Yea, we kicked a couple late ones - dont forget you were given two absolute gifts in a 30 second spree. That Bradshaw "mark" was pathetic - Jacobs had about 3/4 of that mark, then after that kick you got another one for the malee. You should not have been given the first goal - then you got TWO!
Late in the game the sting was taken out by both sides.
How was Aka's goal in the last - that floating ball was going out of bounds, then floats to the right and sneaks thru. At the same end we hit the post 3 times. It was just one of those nights for us. Every now and then a team will have one. I recall not much went right for you guys when you played Carlton early last year either. These games happen.
On the rest of your post - I agree mate.
Regardless of what Robert "Spaztic" Walls says, Essendon will not go to sleep everynight wondering how to beat Bris. Nor will round 18 be the Grand Final. The aim has to be to peak round 22, thats for both teams.
We experienced it last year - we started great then faded. You started slow then peaked perfectly.
I also think its too early to say its an Ess v Bris GF either. There are a couple teams who shouldnt be written off just yet.
BrainOfMorbius
15 Apr 2002, 14:14
Originally posted by Smokin
who said anything about "free kick count"?
Well, what were you referring to when you nominated the umps as our best players then?
There is no doubt we got outplayed. Not by 50 points tho.
Largely a matter of opinion. Fair enough if you think that. Personally I thought it was a good reflection of the dominance of the Lions in that particular game. When the game was there to be won, the ball was hardly ever in the Dons' forward 50.
Just dont get carried away with the final result, thats all.
Yes sir, Mr Essendon Fan sir! Sheesh. What's that word that often describes Bomber supporters? I'm thinking of an 8-letter word starting with A... arrow-something...? :)
Smokin, if the Bombers had won we'd never hear the end of it. No offence intended, but if we want to engage in a little joy after the win on our own board, it's none of your business.
Originally posted by Smokin
Your flattering yourselves.
Opinion. I'd rate mine above yours. ;) (Well, we did win - such situations can afford 'some' arrogance! Just jaggin' ;)).
Originally posted by Smokin
The sting was taken out of the game after we got crucified by the umps at the start of the 3rd then you went forward and kicked a couple goals, making it a 6 goal game. That was when the game was over.
Yea, we kicked a couple late ones - dont forget you were given two absolute gifts in a 30 second spree. That Bradshaw "mark" was pathetic - Jacobs had about 3/4 of that mark, then after that kick you got another one for the malee. You should not have been given the first goal - then you got TWO!
Mate, you're reiterating the same points I debunked in my previous post!
I can't specifically remember Bradshaw's mark - although, I don't recall any of his being particularly suspect either (although, there were one or two others that were, favouring both sides).
The Black free kick may have been tenuous, yes, but then again, the point is, that the better side would most likely not have engaged in the situation in the first place (generalisation, I know, but not without its merits).
The Lions also fell victim to this sort of thing a few years back, with the likes of Leppitsch, and C.Scott often giving away needless free kicks for goals (even if they were soft). It's one of those things that players 'should' know not to do - if you want to be the best, you don't do it.
Originally posted by Smokin
Late in the game the sting was taken out by both sides.
In which case, I'd say it is hard to judge a seriously accurate margin, between the two sides at this stage.
We might have had a few extra goals, due to umpiring influence in the 3rd, however, nothing that Essendon couldn't have cut back in the last quarter, if they "weren't truly outplayed by 50 odd points".
However, whether or not that was the margin on the night, I don't think this would be the 'actual' margin between the two teams. As to the result on the night, yes, there were various factors that influenced the 50 point margin - however, not to such a major extent that I feel we didn't deserve it. If a team itself believes "well, we were beaten by 50 odd points, but really we were better than that, the real result was around 20 because of things out of our control", then it doesn't say much for their own responsibility for their performance on the night.
With that said, it didn't really bother me if we outplayed you by 50 or 100 points on the night - as long as we got the 4 points.
The main issue is see, is whether or not, Essendon on average 'are' 50 points behind the Lions. In which case, I would definitely say no.
Originally posted by Smokin
How was Aka's goal in the last - that floating ball was going out of bounds, then floats to the right and sneaks thru. At the same end we hit the post 3 times. It was just one of those nights for us. Every now and then a team will have one. I recall not much went right for you guys when you played Carlton early last year either. These games happen.
I reckon good teams often make their own luck. As the the Lions do now, Essendon, and many other sides before them, have also done. It's probably easiest to put it down to hard work, and a positive psyche. Likewise, the opposite is also true.
Originally posted by BrainOfMorbius
Well, what were you referring to when you nominated the umps as our best players then?
As I said - I was just stirring.
Dont take it so seriously.
We can argue till the cows come home but it will make no difference.
Yes - you beat us! Congratulations!
But you were blessed! :D
Im sure there is one thing we can agree on -
There is still a long way to go.
Enjoy your reign Lions fans - while it lasts!
BrainOfMorbius
15 Apr 2002, 15:54
Originally posted by Smokin
As I said - I was just stirring.
Dont take it so seriously.
Ah, that's OK. I didn't realise you were just stirring. Just as well for you, isn't it? Means you don't have to justify yourself.
Don't worry mate, just stirring! :)
See you in round 18!
Originally posted by BrainOfMorbius
Ah, that's OK. I didn't realise you were just stirring. Just as well for you, isn't it? Means you don't have to justify yourself.
Don't worry mate, just stirring! :)
See you in round 18!
Stirring as in using it as THE excuse for the loss.
By naming 3 umps as the best - that is sorta suggesting they were the difference. Of course they werent.
Yes, See you in round 18 - and hopefully on the last weekend of September as well!
BrainOfMorbius
15 Apr 2002, 16:16
No worries Smokes. Look, I can handle a stir. If you'd left it at that you'd be fine. For my money though, your third and fourth posts in this thread went beyond the 'stir' area and into the 'petulant display' zone.
I can see that's not what you meant to do though.
Good luck to you and your boys for the rest of the year.