Preview AFL 2nd Qualifying Final - Hawthorn v Geelong, MCG, 7:50PM Friday 5 September

[cynical]

Brown will play over Walker.

Walker took some marks as a 2nd ruck going forward but they were against Brisbane and apart from those marks he didn't do much else.

Brown was a bit harder than normal, he cleared space for Hawkins (allowing him to kick 7 goals). He took marks out on the lead and delivered well, his tackling was good. He also is better suited to our fast running game where he can dish out handballs to our runners.

Pretty easy choice for mine.

The last spot is very tough Thurlow would be unlucky to miss out.

 

[Partridge]

Disagree, he took some contested grabs and kicked a few goals. I thought he looked better than Brown. But I agree it's a 50/50 decision.

Not quite. He kicked one goal - same as Brown.

Brown - 12 kicks, 3 handpasses, 5 marks, 1 goal 1, 3 tackles, 0 hitouts, 6 inside 50s.
Walker - 6 kicks, 4 handpasses, 4 marks, 1 goal 3, 2 tackles, 9 hitouts, 0 inside 50s.

It all comes down to whether they want the 2nd forward option to be able to relieve in the ruck (Walker), or in the backline (Brown). As with all the inclusions, I thought both did their job pretty well. You can equally justify or dismiss either - we shouldn't need a third ruck option with McIntosh and Blicavs, and we shouldn't key another tall defender with Lonergan, Taylor, Rivers and possibly Mackie.

Let the games commence!

 

[Partridge]

Partridge's head just exploded.

More so I laughed heartily. He wasn't even an emergency for last night. Pure fantasy.

 

[Partridge]

You need quick players against Hawthorn - Brown stays in - if things are desperate he could go back - and Rivers to CHF -

Thurlow the sub in preference to GHS - Thurlow can have a real impact - and is more versatile - half back - half forward etc

McCARTHY- allways liked him - in the preview i was rapped he was in - trouble is Scott is a conservative coach - Murdoch has had an ok year - but didnt do much last week against Hawks - id leave Lincoln in - might surprise the Hawks a bit

After last week I wanted Murdoch flayed alive. And I liked McCarthy's game and his intensity. The problem is, he's a small forward who has kicked 0 goals this year in both the pre-season and home and away games combined. Murdoch goes missing for chunks of a game, but has kicked 4 in the last 2 weeks. That's why he'll stay in.

 

[Partridge]

Tend to agree. I like GHS and if he's going to play a defensive role on the equally slow Mitchell or maybe someone like Lewis I don't mind him in but otherwise I am leaning toward Thurlow. Hawks just bolted away from us a couple of weeks ago when they got the footy.

Horlin-Smith didn't play against Hawthorn last week.

 

[Scottland2007]

How good was Blitz in the ruck! We actually won a few clearances!

 

[FredLeDeux]

Not quite. He kicked one goal - same as Brown.

Brown - 12 kicks, 3 handpasses, 5 marks, 1 goal 1, 3 tackles, 0 hitouts, 6 inside 50s.
Walker - 6 kicks, 4 handpasses, 4 marks, 1 goal 3, 2 tackles, 9 hitouts, 0 inside 50s.

It all comes down to whether they want the 2nd forward option to be able to relieve in the ruck (Walker), or in the backline (Brown). As with all the inclusions, I thought both did their job pretty well. You can equally justify or dismiss either - we shouldn't need a third ruck option with McIntosh and Blicavs, and we shouldn't key another tall defender with Lonergan, Taylor, Rivers and possibly Mackie.

Let the games commence!

That's it, the truth is that last night showed us nothing we didn't already know about either player, they both did their bit, they both displayed their known strengths and weaknesses, and the opinions of individual posters about which one should play this week will depend entirely upon what they thought about them before last night's game.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Walker is not a horrible kick. After THawk missed his , Walker calmly slotted his from the same spot 40 m out, then hit the target from 50m. His miss came as he stretched for the extra 5m on his third shot. 2/3 from those distances is AFL average (or better).

Knock him for other things if you want but his kicking is improving.

Yeah, I thought he kicked reasonably well last night. And Brown's kicking was sublime.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

so kersten is no chance to play in this game?

Would Brown or Walker be a chance to play next week, if neither had played last night, Hawkins was available (and firing) and Kersten had put in exactly the same performance as either of them did last night? Kersten has not had a game as good as either Brown or Walker did last night in a month and a half and he should have absolutely no chance of playing ahead of one of them. And the other should also be ahead of him, as an emergency.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

That's it, the truth is that last night showed us nothing we didn't already know about either player, they both did their bit, they both displayed their known strengths and weaknesses, and the opinions of individual posters about which one should play this week will depend entirely upon what they thought about them before last night's game.

Unless, of course, you like both of them.

 

[Two Planks]

I don't think my heart is going to be able to cope with James Kelly playing in the backline for an entire finals series. The nippy little guys lose him in traffic and marking contests, he looks like turning the footy over most times he gets it and is prone to some awful clangers. I would play him as the sub this week and bring him onto the ground mid third quarter and play him in the middle to help with clearances.

In : Stevie J, Motlop, Christensen, McIntosh
Out : Smedts Brown McCarthy Walker

I would play Blicavs on the ruckman that the hawks play more forward i.e Hale all night, just follow him wherever he goes.

I would start Rivers forward to try something different as at least he will compete better than Brown, Kersten and Walker.

B : Enright Lonergan Blicavs
HB : Mackie Taylor Varcoe
C : Duncan Stevie J Guthrie
HF : Motlop Bartel Christensen
F : Rivers Hawkins Stokes
Foll : McIntosh Selwood Caddy
Int : Murdoch Thurlow GHS
Sub : Kelly

 

[FredLeDeux]

Unless, of course, you like both of them.

In that case, you'll just have to pick the one you liked best before last night.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

In that case, you'll just have to pick the one you liked best before last night.

Which is probably Brown for me and it could be argued that Brown had a better game last night. But I've got no problem with them going with Walker (besides feeling a bit for Brown, who would be getting dropped - again - when he really hasn't done anything wrong), because he was also good and plays a different role. I differ a bit from Partridge here as I don't think the second string to these players' bows should be much of a consideration at all. To me, it should be about 80% based on what they provide for the team as a CHF, 19% on how Hawthorn is going to line up (e.g if Lake is struggling during the week, if Spangher/Schoenmakers are both likely to play in defence etc.) and 1% on what else they can provide in other areas.

 

[SuperCats9]

Massive game, we've just got to win to give ourselves a good chance at making another GF appearance. Nothing would be sweeter than beating those pricks and making it hard for them to go B2B.

Plus, we owe them one after last years prelim.

GO CATTERS!!

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

A Hawthorn v Essendon or North Melbourne final the following week would be delightful.

 

[Seeds]

That's it, the truth is that last night showed us nothing we didn't already know about either player, they both did their bit, they both displayed their known strengths and weaknesses, and the opinions of individual posters about which one should play this week will depend entirely upon what they thought about them before last night's game.

Not true. I've always thought both were a waste of time and if I had to choose would take Brown before last nights game. Strongly leaning towards Walker now. Was providing a much stronger contest in the air then usual. Brown was just his same old self.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Can't see anyone besides GHS being the sub, to be honest.

Sewell's 200th.

 

[Cataholic]

Not quite. He kicked one goal - same as Brown.

Brown - 12 kicks, 3 handpasses, 5 marks, 1 goal 1, 3 tackles, 0 hitouts, 6 inside 50s.
Walker - 6 kicks, 4 handpasses, 4 marks, 1 goal 3, 2 tackles, 9 hitouts, 0 inside 50s.

It all comes down to whether they want the 2nd forward option to be able to relieve in the ruck (Walker), or in the backline (Brown). As with all the inclusions, I thought both did their job pretty well. You can equally justify or dismiss either - we shouldn't need a third ruck option with McIntosh and Blicavs, and we shouldn't key another tall defender with Lonergan, Taylor, Rivers and possibly Mackie.

Let the games commence!

Can see both playing if Lonergan runs foul of the MRP.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Can't see anyone besides GHS being the sub, to be honest.

Sewell's 200th.

If he gets a game ahead of Thurlow.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

If he gets a game ahead of Thurlow.

True. But I'm confident that GHS will stay in. We need his ability at the stoppages and he's the sort of player that racks his clearances up in bunches, which suits the sub.

 

[Lana]

In McIntosh Motlop Christensen Johnson
Out Walker McCarthy Smedts Horlin-Smith

FB Rivers Lonergan Enright
HB Mackie Taylor Kelly
C Duncan Guthrie Motlop
HF Stokes Brown Christensen
FF Bartel Hawkins Murdoch
Fol McIntosh Selwood Caddy
Int Biicavs Varcoe Johnson
Sub Thurow

 

[Jon Douglas]

WE looked at times quite ordinary last night. Just gave up the ball with poor decisions and disposals too often. However we should get some class back with Bundy, SJ and Motlop. Hmac should also be a decent inclusion.

The issue comes down to what we do at CHF ? We need to keep our leg speed so Murdoch wont go who was the most likely to make way for Brown or Walker so we had a better target at CHF.

I just have a hard time seeing a team with no real CHF wining a final series.

 

[catempire]

That's it, the truth is that last night showed us nothing we didn't already know about either player, they both did their bit, they both displayed their known strengths and weaknesses, and the opinions of individual posters about which one should play this week will depend entirely upon what they thought about them before last night's game.

I'll put my hand up as the opposite - leaning to Brown but now leaning to Walker. Either is a better option than Kersten given exposed form, as per MC below...

Would Brown or Walker be a chance to play next week, if neither had played last night, Hawkins was available (and firing) and Kersten had put in exactly the same performance as either of them did last night? Kersten has not had a game as good as either Brown or Walker did last night in a month and a half and he should have absolutely no chance of playing ahead of one of them. And the other should also be ahead of him, as an emergency.

 

[fpm84]

One thing I know for sure is that we're not going to see Langford BOG and Hale and Ceglar take so many marks inside 50.

I think we're going into this finals series in much better shape than last year with a fit list and most of our top players in very good form. The likes of Guthrie, Caddy, Blicavs and Duncan have taken their games to new levels this year. Hawkins is 20x times the player he was 12 months ago. Murdoch got a game in the prelim last year by default (when Chappy was suspended), this year he's earned his finals spot. Our clearance numbers have gotten progressively better in recent weeks.

We clearly have the speed and spread to trouble them but did last week indicate we can't keep it up for four quarters?

Worst noting that for all the Hawks hype, they're rarely at their best in the finals. Their last two prelim wins have been by less than a goal to teams they were very heavily favoured to beat (us and Adelaide). It took them more than a half to put away a very banged up and injured Swans in last year's QF.

History tells us it will be close and that we're in with a real shot.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Can see both playing if Lonergan runs foul of the MRP.

No way Lonergan goes for that. 50m and nothing more. It looked like one hand came close to (but missed) the head and the other hand made contact with the shoulder.