Can we remain the hardest side in the comp?

[The Old Dark Navy's]

We all know that Carlton were the hardest side at the ball in the league last year. That combined with our class showed a brand of football that we have rarely seen from the Blues.

A big part of that was Aaron Hamill. He had the size and the never say die attitude that was very imposing on the forward line. I lost count of the occasions he ran down opposing backmen bottling up the play on the forward line. Players like Adrian Hickmott seemed to pick up more in the ball hardness area as a result. It was like every effort by one player inspired the next player and it became contagious. All those one percenters that Parko loved.

Can we reproduce that toughness? Apart from Brett Ratten, where is it going to come from? Do Carlton need an enforcer type like Hamill or Earl Spalding to play at their best? I loved this brand of footy. It got rid of the Blues soft tag and I want to see more of it.

------------------
mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body

[homework_boy]

Earl Spalding at his best will do it for ya!

[amazonstud]

Old Dark Navy's,
Where will it come from this year? To tell you the truth I think Hulme, Freeborn, Ratten,Manton,Hotton, McKay, Mansfield Hickmott, Beaumont, Rice, Nelson and Porter are all hard at the ball. However I don't think that's what is stopping the Blues form taking the next step.

Centre Half Back and Full forward are the problem areas. With the retirement of Sexton and injuries to SOS and Kouta we lacked big key position players. I don't think Fevola is big enough for the full forward spot and is more suited to a Brad Pearce type role. Perhaps Merrington can take the next step and make Full Forward his own.

Hopefully Hotton has put on more bulk and can hold down Centre Half Back as he's one of the only players we have with size. Christou has the pace and can pinch hit in the position but not the height and seems better off the flank. Vance or Prendergast will probably be given the chance to take the other tall backman spot.

[The Dutchman!]

Do you really think you were the hardest at the ball last year? I mean really?

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Dutchman, yes I do! Harder than I have ever seen a Carlton side. Being the hardest doesn't always equate to being the best however. Where Essendon had it over us was in depth and pace and ultimately, a slight skill ascendency. The players probably from 16-22 for the Bombers were of a higher standard than the Blues opposites. It can be a fine line between winning and losing and if Essendon were the superior side in every single facet of the game, they would have won each match by 20 goals. In 1995, the Blues were dominant but it was our skill that did it rather than our pace or toughness.

AmazonStud, I know all the players you mentioned are hard at the ball but it only seemed to gel together last season and some of the lasting images are of Hamill chasing hard in the forward 50 and doing the physical stuff. He had more tackles than any forward last season and it did seem to inspire the rest of the team. They all proved they could do it. I'm just hoping that they can keep doing it without needing inspiration from anywhere else. It's a joy to watch.

[goatmaster]

As a neutral I will say in my opinion Carlton were harder at the ball than Essendon. ODN summed it up well.
As long as you have Ratten & McKay (2 of my personal favourite players ) you will never be short on for hard guys.

[natmac67]

I kinda recall Franchina being pretty hard at it, you are right though ODN Hamill was a master at being a defensive forward, but I have no doubt someone (and hopefully more than one) will take over that role.

------------------
Nat

[Bloodstained Angel]

Hotton seems to be a useful 'hard guy' type of players for you guys...

[Dan26]

Originally posted by The Old Dark Navy's:
We all know that Carlton were the hardest side at the ball in the league last year.


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Yeah, this coming from somebody who believes that Essendon were number one in every facet of the game last season. FYI Dan, it wasn't just my opinion, every Carlton game I watched, the commentators commented on it. In round 20, the game was tough and hard despite us losing Kouta and Bradley early. It certainly wasn't hardness that lost us that game. It was lack of a bench (depth) and a slight difference in talent. There, I'm a Blues fan and acknowledge (as I have before) that we were inferior talent wise to the Bombers last year. We were not inferior in every facet. Look at the likes of Ratten and Hamill with their tackling. We no longer have an abundance of players that don't get dirty. Certainly no Matthew Lloyd. You are biaised as usual.

Your presence here is no longer required!!!

[Dan26]

Ha ha ha

Oh, the biasness is unbelievable. Yes, you were tough. You have to be to win 16 home and away games. But the one area Essendon has improved on since mid 1998 is their toughness. Rating toughness, as you seem to want to do is impossible. You can't measure how hard a player goes in. But lets just say, as a Bombers fan, I couldn't ask for anything more from my players in terms of effort. You might have been "as tough" as the Bombers, but I don't think you were tougher. How can you be tougher than a team which gives 100% ?

[TheGlove]

REMAIN THE HARDEST TEAM IN THE COMP???

You have to BE the hardest team in the comp to remain there.... Who are you kidding??

TheGlove

[ptw]

I read an interesting article on sex before a football game (or lack thereof) by Brent Crosswell (sp ?) yesterday !!!!
http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

ptw

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Originally posted by Dan24:
Ha ha ha

Oh, the biasness is unbelievable. Yes, you were tough. You have to be to win 16 home and away games. But the one area Essendon has improved on since mid 1998 is their toughness. Rating toughness, as you seem to want to do is impossible. You can't measure how hard a player goes in. But lets just say, as a Bombers fan, I couldn't ask for anything more from my players in terms of effort. You might have been "as tough" as the Bombers, but I don't think you were tougher. How can you be tougher than a team which gives 100% ?

Yes, well I saw it last year. I read it all over the place. The so-called footy experts were touting it. In fact, we got a strange tag of 'bullies' attached to us last year. I think Dan, you are confusing hardness with toughness. They are not the same thing. Anybody can attack the ball, regardless of size or strength. The Bombers did not have to do this to win as their skill level won the year for them more often than not.

Talk about my bias. I am claiming one successful facet of the game for the Blues last season and the up-themselves element of the Bombers have come out of the woodwork to proclaim they are the best at EVERYTHING. I was giving the Bombers credit for the skill level but if you insist it was their attack on the ball that won the year for them, I will just lower my opinion on their skill level. You can't have everything. Stick together in numbers and try to 'shout' somebody in the chat room without listening to the reasoning is too easy. It's still an unwinnable argument though. If the Bombers dominated in every facet of the game, I would estimate that total dominance to be worth 10 goals a quarter. Don't forget, tougher, faster, more skill, better goal kicking ability, better defense, better attacking skills, etc etc etc over the course of a game, over the course of a season, it must have been like Victoria playing the ACT all year. Funny, I remember plenty of games where the Bombers put on a 10 minute burst to shake of an opponent. It's a fine line between winning and losing alright. If you can say that Essendon were at least Carlton's equal in attacking the ball, then it is not such a far fetched argument on my part to see the decision my way. is it? Come in here ranting and raving when it actual fact, you believe it is a close thing.

Thanks for your input Dan, we'll take it from here.

------------------
mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I think the last couple of Bombers games and the Blues/Crows game has proved which team's game is built around being hard at the ball. Adrian Hickmott is a kamikaze. The Blues were not totally switched on in this game but still got away with it. Add Ratten, Franchina, Kouta and Sos and our prospects are getting better. Jim Plunkett is a bolt from the blue (pardon the pun).

[Westy Boy]

Originally posted by The Old Dark Navy's:
Jim Plunkett is a bolt from the blue

Sorry to get off the topic ODN (and entering enemy territory http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/wink.gif), but I just wanted to tell you a bit about Jimmy. If you read the doggies forum here (and I mentioned it on our official one upteen times), you'll see how much of a fan of his I was. I was devestated that he left. He was on our list until the final revision of the squad on the last day of delistings. http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/mad.gif

He is gonna be a gun IMO, being the perfect replacement for a Bradley etc.... instead of replacing libba/Romero as it should have been! You guys should be rapt to get this bloke sooo cheaply (45th pick, rookie draft). Bomber Thompson and Mick Malthouse were looking at him, having also been impressed by his talents. Brittain has been all praise for him too. He came second in the VFL best and fairest last year..... having only playing about 13 games. Terry and the doggies will regret this day for a long, long time. http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/frown.gif As with Powell, Plunkett is an (rare) example of young players who we've developed successfully into consistent performers .... only to let go them go for nothing. Our loss, your gain.

I'll let one of your very knowlegdeable fans on the Coach's Box (i checked it out too! http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/biggrin.gif... fantastic site BTW), sum it up.

" Plunkett again fed off some of the best handballs since Rats and G.Williams. We have to get his guy on the list. He just does everything right. He scraps, he skilful, he creates, he is aggressive, he's brave and he works hard."

Anyway, sorry about the doggie talk for a Carlton forum ... so i'll leave now.... and drown my sorrows. http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/frown.gif

BTW- Just wondering... how do the doggies rate in the hard at it stakes ODN? http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/wink.gif

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The Doggies rate quite well in the hard at it stakes Westy but IMO probably rate higher in general toughness. The intimidation, the niggling, the body to body stuff. Thanks for the Plunkett info. I miss a lot of stuff I shouldn't. There is no media coverage up here of such things.

[Sticks]

Carlton are one of the hardest sides at the footy in the comp the fact they win so much of the ball is proof of that,but essendon are very good in that area as well and I think the North "weak as piss" jibes from a couple of years ago prompted the bombers to recruit some hardnuts like the Johnson's, Solomon etc to rectify that problem.Mind you if I wanted a team to back me up in the carpark in a punch up I think I would be wanting some of the North boys on my side...Martyn,Archer,McCartney,Pickett..lets hope they never draft Barry Hall!!

[Dan26]

Originally posted by Sticks:
Carlton are one of the hardest sides at the footy in the comp the fact they win so much of the ball is proof of that,but essendon are very good in that area as well and I think the North "weak as piss" jibes from a couple of years ago prompted the bombers to recruit some hardnuts like the Johnson's, Solomon etc to rectify that problem.

That's a very good point. It is one of the reasons why Essendon, in my opinion have been the hardest side in the comp for the last 2 years. I'm not just saying this for wanting of the Bombers to be number one at everything. I wouldn't have said it back in 1998 I can tell you. A Herald-Sun survey last year, revealed the most fans rated Essendon as the leagues toughest side.

Carlton were magnificent in that respect in 2000. Their one-percenters were admirable. They were probably better at those one-percenters than Essendon. But the ability to hurt an opposition player physically, is where Essendon were better than Carlton.

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Once again I think you are confusing attack on the ball with general toughness and attack on the player. There IS a difference.