Preview Preliminary final - Hawthorn v Port Adelaide, MCG, 20 September 2014 @ 4.45pm

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm tipping a fitness test on match day that doesn't get passed by Suckling and he won't play.

He's not that bad an inclusion for this game, but he'll need to find a new string to his bow if Port sit a defensive forward on his left leg because if he doesn't, he'll be as good as useless.
 
I'm tipping a fitness test on match day that doesn't get passed by Suckling and he won't play.

He's not that bad an inclusion for this game, but he'll need to find a new string to his bow if Port sit a defensive forward on his left leg because if he doesn't, he'll be as good as useless.
But if they do sit a defensive forward on him it will allow burgoyne and birchall to get off the leash which is a positive. Sewell was a ripping finals player between 07-12 but you have to remember he was average in last years prelim and gf wins and again 2 weeks ago. I think much like Ryan O'Keeffe he is simply past his best.
 
A tough but good decision when you stop and think about it. Port run their little legs off to gain 50m with speed. Suckling does it in one move with a stealth kick without exerting as much energy. This is what I think is the strategy. The only drawback that I have seen with Suckling is not putting his body between the ball and his man.

Port will run this game until they can't run no more. Whether that happens up to 1/2 time, 3/4 time or 10mins left in the 4th. Hawthorn need to be in front at this point. It will then turn into a 4 -5 goal win.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

There is a difference between soft and being more of an outside player. Can people please recount the occasions in which he has ducked his head. If the ball was played in a 10 meter radius hallahan would be picked ahead of Smith or hill, but it ain't. You need all sorts and clearly the match committee believe an extra flanker with an elite foot is more advantageous then a contested ball winning warrior who simply is unable to get to as many contests as he used to and he doesn't have the skills or flexibility to make up for that.
 
There is a difference between soft and being more of an outside player. Can people please recount the occasions in which he has ducked his head. If the ball was played in a 10 meter radius hallahan would be picked ahead of Smith or hill, but it ain't. You need all sorts and clearly the match committee believe an extra flanker with an elite foot is more advantageous then a contested ball winning warrior who simply is unable to get to as many contests as he used to and he doesn't have the skills or flexibility to make up for that.
I think there's a bit of confirmation bias about the 'Suckling shirks contests' thing. I'm not saying he doesn't do it occasionally but he has done brave things this season which he doesn't get credit for. One that stands out for me was during the Sydney game at the G earlier this season. A very high ball gets kicked towards the edge of the centre square from a centre clearance, Suckling was right underneath it with Swans players moving in on him. He goes for the mark knowing this and got cleaned up. Was stiff not to get a free kick I thought. Exact details might be a little off but I know for certain he put his body on the line in that instance.
 
Happy a defender isn't missing for Suckers. It will mean he will play some of the game in the HFF role that Sewell has toyed with in recent weeks... He will be more damaging playing up on the wing and setting up attacking play then having to mind a dangerous Port small fwd inside 50, or be the first link in the chain.

Go Hawks!
 
Port are very good at keeping the ball in their forward half. We need the run and carry as well as long penetrating accurate kicking to counter this. Birchall, Smith, Hill, Suckling all key to achieving this.
 
I'm tipping a fitness test on match day that doesn't get passed by Suckling and he won't play.

He's not that bad an inclusion for this game, but he'll need to find a new string to his bow if Port sit a defensive forward on his left leg because if he doesn't, he'll be as good as useless.
Wrong, if that happens he has done a valuable job. Birchall will buy him a beer after the GF if that happens. If Port use their defensive forward on Suckers all he has to do is take kick ins and make sure his opponent doesn't light it up.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

If suckling has a quiet one, I bet that Birch rips Port a new one.
And that would be a win. Imo
I think this is what it's about.

It gives us Birchall, suckling, Duryea as rebounders. They can't tag them all so it'll free someone up.

Suckling's hardness has been questioned a lot but I actually think he has been a lot better in contested Situations this year. Certainly no luke hodge, but much better than he used to be.
 
I think this is what it's about.

It gives us Birchall, suckling, Duryea as rebounders. They can't tag them all so it'll free someone up.

Suckling's hardness has been questioned a lot but I actually think he has been a lot better in contested Situations this year. Certainly no luke hodge, but much better than he used to be.
And he was impressive in the Swans game at the MCG, showing surprising speed.
 
i feel we are a better team than Port, we have the knowledge of the ground, we have superstars all over the ground and when we tackle we make sure it sticks. Comon hawks i more game to abother granny.
 
Happy a defender isn't missing for Suckers. It will mean he will play some of the game in the HFF role that Sewell has toyed with in recent weeks... He will be more damaging playing up on the wing and setting up attacking play then having to mind a dangerous Port small fwd inside 50, or be the first link in the chain.

Go Hawks!

I was thinking that, but then I thought he'd be most likely the one kicking out when Port scores a behind so I can't see him straying too far forward.
 
Brad Sewell was so dominant in the Prelimanry final and Grand Final last year wasn't he? He has been brilliant all season this year also, stop crapping on about Sewell in finals this and that, he once was a champion finals player and a lock in this team, he is not anymore, Clarko and co simply wouldn't drop him if they thought he was a required player.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top