Autopsy Round 2, 2024: Hawks go to hell

Remove this Banner Ad

A 5-10 metre burst to get away then gives him more options. Means he doesn't need to duck inside.

I'm just not sure he has that burst of speed in him even though he was quick in testing

Yeah nah...
At the ground it was clear he was barely jogging. There was also absolutely no hawk infront of him, but there was 3 melbourne players (which you can't see on the video)
 
We clearly didn’t execute the ‘plan’.

How much is coaches fault vs players is hard to know but from outside looks like more on coaching staff as team looked confused. We don’t really have footskills or marking targets to go slow. By the time we got ball into the forward half of ground dees were so well set up can see why players hesitated.
 
I think the heat on us is valid. I know improvement will come but when you can only dish up a total score of 38 whilst the oppositions 2 key defenders are out for half the game really means we’re looking at West Coast and Nth Melb territory and any criticism of where we are at or how we are being coached is warranted.
It’s fair, but also there’s context to our losses that gets overlooked.

We really should’ve taken our chances against the Bombers. What might have been. We won so many of the key metrics, but failed at being clean in the middle and finishing in front of goal.

In Round 2 we came up against a side people are perhaps underrating quite a bit. They’re well and truly in the premiership window and really should’ve been playing off in the GF last year.
They kept a far more experienced side than us to 3.4 in two quarters of footy in Round 1.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

King predicted what happened, and is a good commentator on what he says.

But the comment on direction and strategy, and ‘wasting a quarter’?

The guy would not have a clue about that. His venture into coaching didn’t last long.
 
Wish Ward had gone back and attempted that set shot rather than a poor pass inside 50.

Chandler kicked one from same end from 55m out. Surely Ward needs to back himself and go back.
and there had to be something wrong with Breust when he didn't take that one from around 40 m and tried a pass that failed
 
It’s fair, but also there’s context to our losses that gets overlooked.

We really should’ve taken our chances against the Bombers. What might have been. We won so many of the key metrics, but failed at being clean in the middle and finishing in front of goal.

In Round 2 we came up against a side people are perhaps underrating quite a bit. They’re well and truly in the premiership window and really should’ve been playing off in the GF last year.
They kept a far more experienced side than us to 3.4 in two quarters of footy in Round 1.
Taking your chances is also a skill set that is part of becoming a good team. So that’s another big failure to date. Be it nerves, not being fit enough so you’re cooked when you take the set shot, or joking around too much at training and not taking it seriously.
 
I just posted similar in the Mitchell thread - Hawthorn got 4 new forwards over the off season in Ginivin, Chol, Gunston back and Watson. It makes no sense that Hardwick was being trained as a forward. Hawthorn has hundreds of forwards and Hardwick is their most reliable back. It is just dumb.
I feel the playing Hardwick forward is confirmation of a few things. 1. Bruest is playing his last year. 2. Wingard is not really in plans but we'll support through rehab. 2. No faith in Butler, Osullivan or bennetts.

Surely you have Ginnivan, Moore, MacDonald, Bruest as starting smalls, you have Watson as a high draft pick expected to play. Then you have Wingard for second half, Butler as a 3rd year player with a few games already, Sully and JB showed promise at VFL as long shots but certainly as 8-9th in line for small forward position are capable of 1 or 2 games if injuries are bad. Why do we need 1 more.

Starting Hardwick forward against Melbourne meant instead of Kosi pickett not touching it all day like last year he got some early goals and confidence so even when we made the change it didn't work (also when hardwick was back Impy was sometimes on pickett, Hardwick on 1 of the talls)

Mitchell has had some good positional move ideas like Nash to middle but you can be too cute like Clarkson with his McEvoy to CHB nonsense.
 
Yeah nah...
At the ground it was clear he was barely jogging. There was also absolutely no hawk infront of him, but there was 3 melbourne players (which you can't see on the video)
Yep, he runs faster he meets oncoming pressure sooner and was only ever going to get to about 80 out. Did enough to evade Gawn until Lewis pushed forward giving an option.
 
I listened to MMM during the game. Apparently our pressure rating was 75 or similar in the last quarter. The commentators had to check with the statistician as they thought he was drunk. Then he confirmed that it's by far the worst pressure stat he'd ever seen. Then they all sort of laughed. For those thinking it'll turn quick, it's been one of the only consistent parts of our game since the pre-season. Consistently poor.
yes and it looked it too.... in fact, our last 1/4s being so awful is very worrying...
 
It’s fair, but also there’s context to our losses that gets overlooked.

We really should’ve taken our chances against the Bombers. What might have been. We won so many of the key metrics, but failed at being clean in the middle and finishing in front of goal.

In Round 2 we came up against a side people are perhaps underrating quite a bit. They’re well and truly in the premiership window and really should’ve been playing off in the GF last year.
They kept a far more experienced side than us to 3.4 in two quarters of footy in Round 1.
Totally agree about the Dees and in fact called it earlier in the week though I find most of our scoring opportunities are low percentage - pushed deep into the pockets or on the boundary line. When we are getting high percentage shots on goal and still missing I think that’s when we can blame goal kicking for not winning a game. We need to be able to create better forward opportunities. Anyway, I still see us showing something from round 8 ish onwards but also still feel the criticisms by the media are warranted.
 
*** maybe we need a “Positves Only” post match thread alongside this one where we can focus on the positives without the negative diatribe that comes from collective disappointment. ??
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

King predicted what happened, and is a good commentator on what he says.

But the comment on direction and strategy, and ‘wasting a quarter’?

The guy would not have a clue about that. His venture into coaching didn’t last long.

You think that 1st quarter did us any favours? On television might be one thing, but at the game it was horrible. Players didn't appear to like it and fans hated it. It was terrible. Sam said he's pretty much shelved it.

Maybe the only good thing the first quarter served was to learn that you never do it again.
 
You think that 1st quarter did us any favours? On television might be one thing, but at the game it was horrible. Players didn't appear to like it and fans hated it. It was terrible. Sam said he's pretty much shelved it.

Maybe the only good thing the first quarter served was to learn that you never do it again.

It’s useful to practice and it wasn’t the whole first quarter. Melbourne finished the game in the same way, but winners are grinners

That wasn’t my point. King wouldn’t have a clue about building a team up
 
David King made a point, which could have been summed up with the following;

"Hawthorn were not trying to win in the first quarter, they were trying not to lose."

Instead, we got 4 minutes of histrionic verbal diarrhoea.

Football players don't give a dying duck about the "entertainment industry" (except at Revolver at 3am on a Sunday) they're out there to win.

As others have said, clearly the game plan was not executed in that first quarter. And clearly the message didn't get through until after quarter time.

The remaining three quarters showed the other problems which were shown up the week prior i.e. the midfield is out of sorts without William Day in there, plus we struggle without Newcombe and Sicily firing, and some of Mitchell's personnel and positional choices have been baffling at best.

The question I took away from King's babbling stream of headline-hungry nonsense (with his stupid cartoonish botoxed eyebrows) was are we really more experienced than Adelaide, GWS and the other teams mentioned? What could possibly account for that, Gunston and Breust?
 
David King made a point, which could have been summed up with the following;

"Hawthorn were not trying to win in the first quarter, they were trying not to lose."

Instead, we got 4 minutes of histrionic verbal diarrhoea.

Football players don't give a dying duck about the "entertainment industry" (except at Revolver at 3am on a Sunday) they're out there to win.

As others have said, clearly the game plan was not executed in that first quarter. And clearly the message didn't get through until after quarter time.

The remaining three quarters showed the other problems which were shown up the week prior i.e. the midfield is out of sorts without William Day in there, plus we struggle without Newcombe and Sicily firing, and some of Mitchell's personnel and positional choices have been baffling at best.

The question I took away from King's babbling stream of headline-hungry nonsense (with his stupid cartoonish botoxed eyebrows) was are we really more experienced than Adelaide, GWS and the other teams mentioned? What could possibly account for that, Gunston and Breust?

Gunston and Breust both bring our averages up. Take them out and we're the second least experienced behind North.
 
David King made a point, which could have been summed up with the following;

"Hawthorn were not trying to win in the first quarter, they were trying not to lose."

Instead, we got 4 minutes of histrionic verbal diarrhoea.

Football players don't give a dying duck about the "entertainment industry" (except at Revolver at 3am on a Sunday) they're out there to win.

As others have said, clearly the game plan was not executed in that first quarter. And clearly the message didn't get through until after quarter time.

The remaining three quarters showed the other problems which were shown up the week prior i.e. the midfield is out of sorts without William Day in there, plus we struggle without Newcombe and Sicily firing, and some of Mitchell's personnel and positional choices have been baffling at best.

The question I took away from King's babbling stream of headline-hungry nonsense (with his stupid cartoonish botoxed eyebrows) was are we really more experienced than Adelaide, GWS and the other teams mentioned? What could possibly account for that, Gunston and Breust?
Anyone that wants to take demographic profiles seriously will never use averages, its for basic bitches which actually suits fox footy.

On SM-G955F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top