Preview AFL Round 1 - Hawthorn v Geelong, MCG, Monday April 6 3.20PM

[Teriyakicat]

Yeah, but we convince ourselves on here of all sorts of things too.

Oh, Partridge!! Really? No we don't! We speak only the truth here on our board!

 

[BlightysCats]

In my opinion, if Thurlow manages to play 3 good games at the end of the year he will have done well.
History is littered with players who have had interrupted preseasons and underwhelming seasons.

And he had a very serious injury. He missed a huge chunk of training. His body would have used every ounce of energy trying to recover. His fitness wouldn't have stagnated, it would have zoomed backwards.

No doubt he could end up being behind the 8 ball all season, he was in hospital for only 6 days and didn't need surgery luckily, so hopefully we can take his word for it and he is fit come the early part of the season. If he isn't so be it.

 

[BlightysCats]

The way i see it for geelong is that people are underrating them, saying as though this side is finished. But if you look closer its quite the opposite.
You finished 2nd in 2013, but realistically probably should of finished 1st, the games you dropped (Collingwood, Brisbane and Adelaide) were all to teams year were actually much better than.
Last year was probably your worst year for a while, and you still finished equal 1st.
Now, over the offseason you have added Clarke (Massive for your structure) and Cockatoo (who i think is probably the best pickup of the draft) and you have got another pre-season into all your young guys.
Honestly, if you dont make top 4 i would be quite surprised.

In a strange way it's kind of unnerving hearing a rational well thought out pro Geelong statement from a Hawks supporter.

 

[MinerBoy]

The Hawks have had a Golden run with injuries too.

When?

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

When?

Well it wasn't last year.

 

[BlightysCats]

When?

All of 2013, full squad to pick from come finals apart from Cyril (who you got back for the Grand Final) in 2014. I'm not saying you weren't the best team the last two years but sometimes luck plays its part and you guys have had astonishing luck with injuries over the last two seasons especially come finals.

 

[Sttew]

This can be true, however, in 2011 when you played the saints, most tipped you to loose but in the end you got up by a point. After that they struggled and you went on to win another premiership. Could just be reading into it to much, but that set the tone for your seasons. I think this round 1 game has a simerlar feeling about it.

Possibly, although I think Ross Lyon had run his race at St Kilda by 2011

 

[MinerBoy]

All of 2013, Full squad to pick from come finals apart from Cyril (who you got back for the Grand Final) in 2014. I'm not saying you weren't the best team the last two years but sometimes luck plays its part and you guys have had astonishing luck with injuries over the last two seasons especially come finals.

I don't disagree that come finals time we had our best side on the park but that was more good management than good luck. We took our right whack with injuries all through the year but battled on with what we had, accumulated the wins required for top 2 despite many top liners out, and never rushed back any player for the benefit of the short term. Every player was given 'overs' in terms of recovery time to ensure we were more likely to have the best available when it counted, however that came at the expense of playing with many teams well below our best 22 during the H&A.

We had Mitchell, Rioli, Lake, Gibson, Shiels just off the top of my head all miss large parts of the season.

2013 was probably a better run but even then we had something like 4 knee recos to contend with. Whitecross and Suckling were both best 22 players who missed the GF but many would argue (especially you blokes) that Schoenmakers missing was a blessing in disguise.

 

[Teriyakicat]

I don't disagree that come finals time we had our best side on the park but that was more good management than good luck. We took our right whack with injuries all through the year but battled on with what we had, accumulated the wins required for top 2 despite many top liners out, and never rushed back any player for the benefit of the short term. Every player was given 'overs' in terms of recovery time to ensure we were more likely to have the best available when it counted, however that came at the expense of playing with many teams well below our best 22 during the H&A.

We had Mitchell, Rioli, Lake, Gibson, Shiels just off the top of my head all miss large parts of the season.

2013 was probably a better run but even then we had something like 4 knee recos to contend with. Whitecross and Suckling were both best 22 players who missed the GF but many would argue (especially you blokes) that Schoenmakers missing was a blessing in disguise.

And that is the opposite to what the Cats have been doing over the past few years, probably more to do with the depth of our team than anything else. A good example is playing Billie Smedts the same week that he declared that he was still quite a while from being ready to play AFL- then watching the poor bugger struggle in the seniors for a few weeks....

good point about Clangers, btw Made me lol

 

[romeoh]

The difference is of course that geelong have never taken a backwards step when facing physical intimidation. The Hawks might have been better conditioned, coached and skilled than us an last year - but they couldnt have come close to bullying us like they did the swans.

The last time the cats were bullied was by the Lions in early 2000s. And we turned that around by 2006.

That was pis$ weak by the swans. Embarrassing for a top line team that prides itself on competing and battling. Especially coached by a hard man like Longmire. I still shake my head.

No way were the Hawks that much better than the swans. All things equal- with the right mindset and intensity the swans should have creamed them. Hell, I still think Port should have smashed them in the semi.

Yep cannot work the Swans out. Brought the intensity of an off season practice match like bw Geelong and Modewarre!
And agree on Port-they had them just didn't realize-like us against Brissy in 2004 prelim?
So as good as Hawks are, we will see.
But the Hawks win very convincingly, games that are even money e.g. the last 2 flags-both Freo and Swans intimidated and didn't bring their best games. (us in 2008). Games are over at quarter time. So they know how to win and have something uncompromising in their culture that enables them to win big games.

 

[Corio cat]

In my opinion, if Thurlow manages to play 3 good games at the end of the year he will have done well.
History is littered with players who have had interrupted preseasons and underwhelming seasons.

And he had a very serious injury. He missed a huge chunk of training. His body would have used every ounce of energy trying to recover. His fitness wouldn't have stagnated, it would have zoomed backwards.

Fair comments VC, so if he plays by round 4-6 and plays some good AFL footy this year e.g 10 + games, I feel it will be quite something from where he's been?.
For what it's worth I think it's achievable because I wandered across a full on Cats scratch match last friday at Geelong Grammer. Watched at least an hour, paid particular attention to the no.40 as he was in a play when I arrived, he was in a passage and had multiple possies from the back pocket and ended kicking a running goal to cap it off from 50. Was only a praccy but he didn't come off ground for a spell, looked good in contests and had a lot of it. No doubt has a lot more to do but I feel he's in a lot better condition than some say on here... size looked good too.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I don't disagree that come finals time we had our best side on the park but that was more good management than good luck. We took our right whack with injuries all through the year but battled on with what we had, accumulated the wins required for top 2 despite many top liners out, and never rushed back any player for the benefit of the short term. Every player was given 'overs' in terms of recovery time to ensure we were more likely to have the best available when it counted, however that came at the expense of playing with many teams well below our best 22 during the H&A.

We had Mitchell, Rioli, Lake, Gibson, Shiels just off the top of my head all miss large parts of the season.

2013 was probably a better run but even then we had something like 4 knee recos to contend with. Whitecross and Suckling were both best 22 players who missed the GF but many would argue (especially you blokes) that Schoenmakers missing was a blessing in disguise.

Refer to my thread on the main board last year for clarity on my beliefs.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Fair comments VC, so if he plays by round 4-6 and plays some good AFL footy this year e.g 10 + games, I feel it will be quite something from where he's been?.
For what it's worth I think it's achievable because I wandered across a full on Cats scratch match last friday at Geelong Grammer. Watched at least an hour, paid particular attention to the no.40 as he was in a play when I arrived, he was in a passage and had multiple possies from the back pocket and ended kicking a running goal to cap it off from 50. Was only a praccy but he didn't come off ground for a spell, looked good in contests and had a lot of it. No doubt has a lot more to do but I feel he's in a lot better condition than some say on here... size looked good too.

That's really good news that he is right in amongst it, contrary to our understanding, as you've said, CC. for the thumbnail report. Did anyone else catch your notice??

 

[Corio cat]

That's really good news that he is right in amongst it, contrary to our understanding, as you've said, CC. for the thumbnail report. Did anyone else catch your notice??

It seemed MC are not sure of the best ruck option, it seemed a probables v possibles game, Daws, Hmac and then stanley all spent time as first ruck for probables, Stanley looked by far the best IMO as he covered the ground so well compared to the other 2, rucked as efficiently, IMO he will be our no.1 when match fit. Hawk dominated kola..

 

[BlightysCats]

I don't disagree that come finals time we had our best side on the park but that was more good management than good luck. We took our right whack with injuries all through the year but battled on with what we had, accumulated the wins required for top 2 despite many top liners out, and never rushed back any player for the benefit of the short term. Every player was given 'overs' in terms of recovery time to ensure we were more likely to have the best available when it counted, however that came at the expense of playing with many teams well below our best 22 during the H&A.

We had Mitchell, Rioli, Lake, Gibson, Shiels just off the top of my head all miss large parts of the season.

2013 was probably a better run but even then we had something like 4 knee recos to contend with. Whitecross and Suckling were both best 22 players who missed the GF but many would argue (especially you blokes) that Schoenmakers missing was a blessing in disguise.

Good management is a key part of it but when a bloke does a knee or bad hamstring injury or bad ankle injury or whatever on the brink of finals it's pretty hard for conditioning guys to do much about it....that really just comes down to a bit of luck.

 

[Teriyakicat]

It seemed MC are not sure of the best ruck option, it seemed a probables v possibles game, Daws, Hmac and then stanley all spent time as first ruck for probables, Stanley looked by far the best IMO as he covered the ground so well compared to the other 2, rucked as efficiently, IMO he will be our no.1 when match fit. Hawk dominated kola..

Thanks, CC.
Do you think we might see both HMac AND Big Daws together in R1, as we did last season?
Can't wait to see Stanley in action

 

[Cataholic]

In a strange way it's kind of unnerving hearing a rational well thought out pro Geelong statement from a Hawks supporter.

Strange??

It throws my whole universe out of kilter.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Strange??

It throws my whole universe out of kilter.

You can find a good apple in every barrel.

 

[Cataholic]

You can find a good apple in every barrel.

True.

The few good ones generally come here for sensible debate.

 

[MinerBoy]

Good management is a key part of it but when a bloke does a knee or bad hamstring injury or bad ankle injury or whatever on the brink of finals it's pretty hard for conditioning guys to do much about it....that really just comes down to a bit of luck.

Yep, for sure. It's hard to even cover those last minute ones (see Guerra 2012, Whitecross 2013) because they hit you right on the brink of the big day. Get the same injury earlier and you have weeks/months to form contingencies and see who/what works best.

I guess my point was that it's great to have a best 22 come GF day, but getting there is almost the hardest part and to qualify so highly throughout the H&A despite so many injuries is a mammoth effort and certainly not a result of luck. I would call it over coming a lot of bad luck.

 

[Partridge]

Yep, for sure. It's hard to even cover those last minute ones (see Guerra 2012, Whitecross 2013) because they hit you right on the brink of the big day. Get the same injury earlier and you have weeks/months to form contingencies and see who/what works best.

I guess my point was that it's great to have a best 22 come GF day, but getting there is almost the hardest part and to qualify so highly throughout the H&A despite so many injuries is a mammoth effort and certainly not a result of luck. I would call it over coming a lot of bad luck.

Totally agree. I've never an 'lucky' team win a premiership. Not once. The effort to win 16-18 home and away games (at least) to get a top 4 spot, then win two finals, winnows out the effects of luck. It's also yet another convenient excuse people find not to win as well. Anything to avoid admitting that your team isn't good enough.

Injuries no doubt are the variable you can't control. But you can control the effects. The absolutely unbreakable rule as far as I'm concerned is 'don't play injured players'. It almost never works, and if you do manage to get through to the business end, half your list could be struggling because they're carrying niggles that weren't managed properly. Geelong recently set a benchmark in this in the 2013 Preliminary Final (that isn't an excuse either). For whatever outdated reason, football clubs just cannot deal with this reality, and insist on ignoring it year after year after year. The newest excuse related to this is the 'but we had no depth' argument. Well, tough s**t. If your recruiting and list development is as great as you tell everyone it is (and every club does), then you should trust them to do the job when required. If they can't, then your list isn't that good after all. Very simple.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Totally agree. I've never an 'lucky' team win a premiership. Not once. The effort to win 16-18 home and away games (at least) to get a top 4 spot, then win two finals, winnows out the effects of luck. It's also yet another convenient excuse people find not to win as well. Anything to avoid admitting that your team isn't good enough.

Injuries no doubt are the variable you can't control. But you can control the effects. The absolutely unbreakable rule as far as I'm concerned is 'don't play injured players'. It almost never works, and if you do manage to get through to the business end, half your list could be struggling because they're carrying niggles that weren't managed properly. Geelong recently set a benchmark in this in the 2013 Preliminary Final (that isn't an excuse either). For whatever outdated reason, football clubs just cannot deal with this reality, and insist on ignoring it year after year after year. The newest excuse related to this is the 'but we had no depth' argument. Well, tough s**t. If your recruiting and list development is as great as you tell everyone it is (and every club does), then you should trust them to do the job when required. If they can't, then your list isn't that good after all. Very simple.

I presume that is a dig at my post above, Partridge?

The point I was making was that a restricted A-grade player could still make a contribution which is levels above the next player in line. e.g. Stevie J at 80% is probably still >>> the midfielder-in-waiting. Likewise someone like Selwood.
It certainly isn't a new concept and has been spoken about and rehashed at length in quite a few threads over the past 6 months.

 

[Hello Kitty]

I need to vent!!! In all the places in Australia, who would ever imagine that in a Rugby League bastion town on the NSW Central Coast my cleaner would be a Hawthorn fan?
We were engaging in some light-hearted banter about Monday's game + instead of saying "La, la, la, la, la, la, la, la, I can't hear you" I was singing our magnificent Club song + HE changed the words to 'WAS the greatest team of all, now it's Hawthorn'!
No amount of quoting the records we've broken + he still said that Hawthorn is better There was a knife on my desk so I did the Psycho stabbing scene gesture + he fled laughing!

 

[Partridge]

I presume that is a dig at my post above, Partridge?

The point I was making was that a restricted A-grade player could still make a contribution which is levels above the next player in line. e.g. Stevie J at 80% is probably still >>> the midfielder-in-waiting. Likewise someone like Selwood.
It certainly isn't a new concept and has been spoken about and rehashed at length in quite a few threads over the past 6 months.

Nope. I've seen it become quite popular in the off-season. If it's a dig at anyone it's the club. You've got to trust in your list management.

I completely get why some would prefer a 80% Johnson or Selwood, but to me, the game is just too demanding now. Even full forwards have to run up and down the ground. I can't see how playing anyone less than full fitness is anything but a weakness to exploit.

That's purely my own viewpoint though.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Nope. I've seen it become quite popular in the off-season. If it's a dig at anyone it's the club. You've got to trust in your list management

totally agree-and there are still large gaps in the levels between our experienced and inexperienced players. I can see the value in playing someone like Johnson who, for argument's sake, might be only chugging along at 80%. His footy is probably still at a higher level than a possible replacement who might either be totally overwhelmed on the big stage or might play out of his socks- nobody knows until they play him. But someone like Johnson also offers invaluable on-field coaching which might add another *5-10% (*again, just for argument's sake) to each young player around him by directing them to the right spaces and match-ups. I know we all want to play uninjured players in front of injured players but I would expect the MC to have crunched the numbers on players like this and, in the finals, continued to play them- win some, lose some. I think it didn't come off this time but it certainly was a master stroke in 2011 and I think they will continue to play injured players in these situations