Opinion New jumper numbers available for 2015: 4,17,20,32,35,37,44

Remove this Banner Ad

Given Burton got 35, should go like this for draftees

35 Burton
37 Lovell
40 Hardwick (assuming Hartung changes)
41 Surman (assuming Howe changes)

Then no idea from there for Stewart and Glass because only 44 is available unless Miles, Pitto, JML, Llang or Shem upgraded. Potentially Pitto takes Hales 20, so then it would be

43 Stewart
44 Glass
 
1- HOWE, 2- Roughead, 3- Lewis, 4- HARTUNG, 5- Mitchell, 6- Gibson, 7- McEvoy, 8- Duryea, 9- Burgoyne,10- Hill, 11- Whitecross, 12- Frawley, 13- O'Rourke, 14- Birchall, 15- Hodge, 16- Smith, 17- BURTON, 18- Ceglar, 19- Gunston, 20- PITTONET, 21- Sicily, 22- Bruest, 23- O'Brien, 24- Stratton, 25- Schoenmakers, 26- Sheils, 27- Spangher, 28- Puopolo, 29- Langford, 30- Brand, 31- Litherland, 32- MILES, 33- Rioli, 34- Hetherley, 35- LOVELL, 36- Webster, 37- HARDWICK, 38- Willsmore, 39- Woodward, 40- FITZPATRICK, 41- GLASS, 42- SURMAN, 43- STEWART, 44- Miller-Lewis, 45- Langford, 46- Tatupu.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

1- HOWE, 2- Roughead, 3- Lewis, 4- HARTUNG, 5- Mitchell, 6- Gibson, 7- McEvoy, 8- Duryea, 9- Burgoyne,10- Hill, 11- Whitecross, 12- Frawley, 13- O'Rourke, 14- Birchall, 15- Hodge, 16- Smith, 17- BURTON, 18- Ceglar, 19- Gunston, 20- PITTONET, 21- Sicily, 22- Bruest, 23- O'Brien, 24- Stratton, 25- Schoenmakers, 26- Sheils, 27- Spangher, 28- Puopolo, 29- Langford, 30- Brand, 31- Litherland, 32- MILES, 33- Rioli, 34- Hetherley, 35- LOVELL, 36- Webster, 37- HARDWICK, 38- Willsmore, 39- Woodward, 40- FITZPATRICK, 41- GLASS, 42- SURMAN, 43- STEWART, 44- Miller-Lewis, 45- Langford, 46- Tatupu.
how?
 
1- HOWE, 2- Roughead, 3- Lewis, 4- HARTUNG, 5- Mitchell, 6- Gibson, 7- McEvoy, 8- Duryea, 9- Burgoyne,10- Hill, 11- Whitecross, 12- Frawley, 13- O'Rourke, 14- Birchall, 15- Hodge, 16- Smith, 17- BURTON, 18- Ceglar, 19- Gunston, 20- PITTONET, 21- Sicily, 22- Bruest, 23- O'Brien, 24- Stratton, 25- Schoenmakers, 26- Sheils, 27- Spangher, 28- Puopolo, 29- Langford, 30- Brand, 31- Litherland, 32- MILES, 33- Rioli, 34- Hetherley, 35- LOVELL, 36- Webster, 37- HARDWICK, 38- Willsmore, 39- Woodward, 40- FITZPATRICK, 41- GLASS, 42- SURMAN, 43- STEWART, 44- Miller-Lewis, 45- Langford, 46- Tatupu.
Can't see Burton getting 17 but love the idea of Howe getting No.1, that number has been missing for too long for no reason.
 
New recruits won't get low numbers. Players who haven't yet played an AFL game won't get them yet either.

They need to be earned.

Were Smith and Puopolo the last 2 to go straight into low numbers?
 
New recruits won't get low numbers. Players who haven't yet played an AFL game won't get them yet either.

They need to be earned.

Were Smith and Puopolo the last 2 to go straight into low numbers?
Langford played his first game in 29 in 2013 but I can't remember what number he joined us on
 
Can't see the number 1 coming back - although I'd love to. With that said I'm not sure how the rookies will be scattered but I think the players getting number upgrades will be Howe, Hartung and Heatherley in line with his promotion and likely seniors call up.

I'd like to see Hartung in 4, Heatherley in 17 and Howe in 20.
 
Will Langford wore number 48 in 2011 and 2012.
He was upgraded from rookie list though. Those really late numbers always go to rookies. So I guess Heatherley is in line for an upgrade too.
 
Lovell just needs to be patient and keep a high number until Mitchell retires. Burton the same... just needs to hold out in case TOB doesn't make it. :p

I'd like to see Howe get the famous number 17 and stamp his own name all over it. Figuratively speaking. Hartung should drop the 0 and just get 4 (deserves a nice low number), which leaves 20 for Pittonet and 32 for Miles. That's how I see it going.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Interested to see so many say Pittonet to get a lower number over Heatherly and Lithers. If either of those two want an upgrade in numbers then they've earned it more so than the first and second year players.
 
Interested to see so many say Pittonet to get a lower number over Heatherly and Lithers. If either of those two want an upgrade in numbers then they've earned it more so than the first and second year players.

Only because 31 is reasonably low (does it need to be lower?).

The number 34 should be a destination number, thanks to JK2. Why leave it?
 
Only because 31 is reasonably low (does it need to be lower?).

The number 34 should be a destination number, thanks to JK2. Why leave it?

I don't know what the mentality is sometimes when it comes to number selection. I kind of like seeing Billy run around in 40 - makes him stand out. I also like wearing 33 on my back just like Cyril. However - if a player saw a lower number as a sort of rite of passage in making the team then I think players like Heatherley and Literhland would have more of a claim than the new draftees and second year players.
 
New recruits won't get low numbers. Players who haven't yet played an AFL game won't get them yet either.

They need to be earned.

Were Smith and Puopolo the last 2 to go straight into low numbers?
Any mature age recruit the club have picked up gets a lower no. Ben Ross was given 21 even when drafted as a rookie
 
Would be interesting if Hartung went from 40 to 4 and then should happen to take over No5 when Mitchell retires eventually (hopefully not for a while yet) - it would emulate the journey of Andy Collins.
 
Any mature age recruit the club have picked up gets a lower no. Ben Ross was given 21 even when drafted as a rookie
That's true. So Fitzpatrick is likely to get something.

Howe - 1
Hartung - 4
Fitzpatrick - 20
 
who knows, just another supporter who hates the hawks and will try make anything and everything up to try make our success not successful and our players who are good not good
It was written in gest by backoneout a hawks supporter
 
Can the whole number 1 supporter number bs be brought up at the AGM for change, or is that something of complete difference. I think it may have something to do with team mantra, like there being no number 1 in the team, that they are in this as a whole. Miss seeing it on the field however
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top