Franklin and Mitchell

[Shinboners]

Care to explain why Hawthorn are $6.50 to win the flag and your sorry mob are $41?

Why bother playing the rest of the season then?

Out of interest, what were Geelong's Premiership odds after round 2 in 2007?

 

[budge11]

Have to admire your optimism.

That said, if you flood like you always do against us it will make it difficult I suppose...

*sigh*

We play football to shut your entire team down and destroy your game plan... you guys play a game that concentrates on one man who's 172cm tall through ''physical attention''. I mean, you must have nullified his impact on the game though right? Oh wait...

 

[mark73]

Have to admire your optimism.

That said, if you flood like you always do against us it will make it difficult I suppose...

We've had good teachers...

 

[Cynic]

*sigh*

We play football to shut your entire team down and destroy your game plan... you guys play a game that concentrates on one man who's 172cm tall through ''physical attention''. I mean, you must have nullified his impact on the game though right? Oh wait...

We play an attacking free flowing form of game that doesn't handle defensive teams like Kangaroos unfortunately.

That said you can only work with the cattle you have so I can't say it's a bad thing for you to play boring football.

 

[Event Horizon]

We play an attacking free flowing form of game that doesn't handle defensive teams like Kangaroos unfortunately.

That said you can only work with the cattle you have so I can't say it's a bad thing for you to play boring football.

We play boring football? When was the last time you saw us play? I bet you it was in last year's final. Yes the games that you lose do seem boring more often than not...

And what makes you think you play a free flowing form of a game? Against Melbourne it may have been free flowing, but I seem to recall your game against St Kilda last year that almost finished 0:0. There is nothing free flowing in a style that involved players running back and forward between the two 50m arcs all day. You've been listening to Garry Lyon too much...

 

[mark73]

We play boring football? When was the last time you saw us play? I bet you it was in last year's final. Yes the games that you lose do seem boring more often than not...

The funny thing is, the 3 worst skilled games we played last year, and a lot will vouch for this, were against Hawthorn. They were the main games where kicks were flying everywhere, targets were continually missed and flooding had gone mad. Now, if I'm not mistaken, Hawthorn were criticised last year for "the worst match of the season" against St.Kilda, criticised for flooding tactics (bringing about Floodthorn), and we were noted for playing fast attacking football, although we did put an extra man behind the play in the SF. So you be the judge.

And what makes you think you play a free flowing form of a game? Against Melbourne it may have been free flowing, but I seem to recall your game against St Kilda last year that almost finished 0:0. There is nothing free flowing in a style that involved players running back and forward between the two 50m arcs all day. You've been listening to Garry Lyon too much...

Their supporters base everything on the media. You've just seen that first hand with that other knob crapping on about odds. But hey, if it makes them happy.

 

[Cynic]

We play boring football? When was the last time you saw us play? I bet you it was in last year's final. Yes the games that you lose do seem boring more often than not...

And what makes you think you play a free flowing form of a game? Against Melbourne it may have been free flowing, but I seem to recall your game against St Kilda last year that almost finished 0:0. There is nothing free flowing in a style that involved players running back and forward between the two 50m arcs all day. You've been listening to Garry Lyon too much...

Watched you play against Richmond and enjoyed seeing Wells & Campbell show a bit but really you play at a very lethargic pace to be honest.

You lack rebound out of defence, due to Sinclair & Smith being injured, so you just tend to play ugly kick to kick football to slowly move the ball into the forward line giving all the players who have flooded back into defence a chance to get forward.

I think St.Kilda have already shown they play shutdown football like the Kangaroos against opposition that worry them.

 

[Benno_900]

Yer true. What will be the excuse this time? lets see you haven't blamed the umps yet.

I thought that was the reason they lost the semi last year?

 

[budge11]

Na na they were missing Tim Clarke

 

[Cynic]

I thought that was the reason they lost the semi last year?

Actually we lost fair and square to the Kangaroos who outsmarted as tactically.

By flooding the midfield you were able to contain our much more talented mids which obviously reduced the value of forwards could deliver.

That said game on on Saturday and hopefully the Hawks have matured enough to deal with the midfield flood again to make it a good game

 

[Event Horizon]

Watched you play against Richmond and enjoyed seeing Wells & Campbell show a bit but really you play at a very lethargic pace to be honest.

You lack rebound out of defence, due to Sinclair & Smith being injured, so you just tend to play ugly kick to kick football to slowly move the ball into the forward line giving all the players who have flooded back into defence a chance to get forward.

I think St.Kilda have already shown they play shutdown football like the Kangaroos against opposition that worry them.

I think that our stop start bits of play you're referring to are more to do with fitness than lack of players. Yes it's true that Sinclair and Smith are normally in our best 22 when fit, but even without them we have enough run out of defence. I am a bit worried about our fitness levels, as that same symptom was shown early in 2006 when we were slowing the game down because we couldn't run at frenetic pace all day. In 2007 we solved that problem but it could be that the games are even faster early in 2008.

My hope is that this will gradually improve for us week by week. The bottom line is though, we tend to lose when our in and under players lose the battle for the clearances, and we tend to win when they don't. Very few exceptions to that rule. So if we're on around the packs on Saturday, we will be very hard to beat.

 

[Event Horizon]

Actually we lost fair and square to the Kangaroos who outsmarted as tactically.

By flooding the midfield you were able to contain our much more talented mids which obviously reduced the value of forwards could deliver.

That said game on on Saturday and hopefully the Hawks have matured enough to deal with the midfield flood again to make it a good game

So who are your more talented mids? This is another thing that absolutely annoys me - the notion that we don't have talent on our list.

I'll give you Mitchell and Hodge (Crawf isn't playing) but apart from that, all your mids are at best hard working types. I put Lewis into that category as well. I haven't seen too much from him to suggest he is a class act.

From our side, we have Harris who isn't too far behind Mitchell, we have Wells who can be on or off admittedly, but his talent isn't in question and we have Boomer Harvey who is no less talented than anyone in our team. I am not even going to put Grant into this list.

So where is your midfield more talented?

And by the way, your mids were beaten not by flood (we aren't fit enough to flood) but by negating opponents (Rawlings and Lower on Hodge and Mitchell) and a bit of physicallity.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Their supporters base everything on the media. You've just seen that first hand with that other knob crapping on about odds. But hey, if it makes them happy.

You see this is where you are wrong. Bookmakers base their odds on both the likelihood of an outcome happening and the weight of money that suggests that it will. Bookmakers are not the media as you claim above. Bookmakers in the main, drive expensive cars and live in mansions. They are more often right then wrong. Their odds have little if anything to do with what is happening in the media. I knew you were a little on the dim side but I am aghast at how stupid you actually are.

Nobody, not the media, the fans, the bookmakers, or the punters think that your mob are any good. Yet, on the flipside there are plenty from all of those groups that believe that Hawthorn are the real deal.

You can harp on about last years results all you like and call me as many names as you wish but the fact is that not one of your arguments stands up. This is not uncommon from you though. You are a professional shitstirrer, but typical of BigFooty lack any real substance. The fact of the matter is that last years results count for ZERO on Saturday and on form Hawthorn rightfully go in as favourites.

 

[Woodson]

You can harp on about last years results all you like and call me as many names as you wish ....
.... The fact of the matter is that last years results count for ZERO on Saturday and on form Hawthorn rightfully go in as favourites.

So it's ok to harp on Thumping the insipid Dees... who the Bulldogs hammered also... (since when do the WB thump teams????) and as far as the bookies.. they know North don't fetch heavy gamblers so it's ok to peg the gullible Hawks supporters for maintaining their comfortable lifestyles.

What else you got Cryptkeeper??

 

[RooBoy74]

So Cryptkeeper if all these so called bookies are rich, they must be making lots of money of Hawthorn suckers like you ey?

Then its typical of Hawthorn, just like in the final last season. When all is lost start punching people. Shameful.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

So it's ok to harp on Thumping the insipid Dees... who the Bulldogs hammered also... (since when do the WB thump teams????) and as far as the bookies.. they know North don't fetch heavy gamblers so it's ok to peg the gullible Hawks supporters for maintaining their comfortable lifestyles.

What else you got Cryptkeeper??

You clearly don't understand how bookmakers operate. No good bookmaker will set a market based on an unrealistic outcome. Based on your logic, Collingwood because of their huge supporter base would go in as a short priced favourite every week. Bookmakers are not worried about the $5, $10, $20, $50 or even the $500 punter that likes to dabble on his team every week. They are worried about the big boys that bet in $1000 or even $10000 (and bigger) units. They are worried about the professional that will outlay big capital, not on sentiment but when he thinks he is getting value. That is why they set their prices based on likely outcomes and not sentiment.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

So Cryptkeeper if all these so called bookies are rich, they must be making lots of money of Hawthorn suckers like you ey?

Then its typical of Hawthorn, just like in the final last season. When all is lost start punching people. Shameful.

I'd expect you to come on and back up your mate...but go back and look over the sequence of the postings and you will see that it was in fact your mate (mark73) that dished up the first and most pathetic personal insult.

 

[The Teflon Dean]

Name, % in game, Avg disposals, Interchanged, disposals per 100% game time

2007 statistics


D. Harris, 68%, 20.2, 123, 29.71


S. Mitchell, 93%, 25.8, 45, 27.74

What's Harros TOG like this year? Anyone have the figures handy?

 

[theduckfan]

You see this is where you are wrong. Bookmakers base their odds on both the likelihood of an outcome happening and the weight of money that suggests that it will. Bookmakers are not the media as you claim above. Bookmakers in the main, drive expensive cars and live in mansions. They are more often right then wrong. Their odds have little if anything to do with what is happening in the media. I knew you were a little on the dim side but I am aghast at how stupid you actually are.

Nobody, not the media, the fans, the bookmakers, or the punters think that your mob are any good. Yet, on the flipside there are plenty from all of those groups that believe that Hawthorn are the real deal.

You can harp on about last years results all you like and call me as many names as you wish but the fact is that not one of your arguments stands up. This is not uncommon from you though. You are a professional shitstirrer, but typical of BigFooty lack any real substance. The fact of the matter is that last years results count for ZERO on Saturday and on form Hawthorn rightfully go in as favourites.

North Melbourne v Hawthorn, 2007 Finals Series.

I cant remember the odds but id say that hawks would have been the favorites. Anyone care to remind how that game went?

 

[SA HAWK]

Last year last year blah blah blah. By all means if you beat us this week give it to us but last year means absolutely nothing now.

 

[Woodson]

You clearly don't understand how bookmakers operate. No good bookmaker will set a market based on an unrealistic outcome. Based on your logic, Collingwood because of their huge supporter base would go in as a short priced favourite every week. Bookmakers are not worried about the $5, $10, $20, $50 or even the $500 punter that likes to dabble on his team every week. They are worried about the big boys that bet in $1000 or even $10000 (and bigger) units. They are worried about the professional that will outlay big capital, not on sentiment but when he thinks he is getting value. That is why they set their prices based on likely outcomes and not sentiment.

It's the demographics I'm having a play on.. as that wasn't hard to work out.. But, you've at least educated a few readers on these boards that didn't know the bookies odds system.

 

[shinboner magic]

Have to admire your optimism.

That said, if you flood like you always do against us it will make it difficult I suppose...

So we are the ones that flood are we,how many forwards do you play in your forward half.I would say about 4 at most so where do your other 2 so called forwards go,they push down to the wings and your wingmen push down to your backline to help your undersized and underskilled backmen.

Ok then I will ask you again who floods again,the team that was in the worst game of last season or a club that plays attacking and accoutable football.

 

[RooBoy74]

Last year last year blah blah blah. By all means if you beat us this week give it to us but last year means absolutely nothing now.

Except of course if Hawthorn won, then we wouldnt have heard the end of it.

 

[pharro]

Actually we lost fair and square to the Kangaroos who outsmarted as tactically.

By flooding the midfield you were able to contain our much more talented mids which obviously reduced the value of forwards could deliver.

That said game on on Saturday and hopefully the Hawks have matured enough to deal with the midfield flood again to make it a good game

Midfield flood? That would be a brand new pejorative - well done to you, very creative.

 

[Cynic]

So we are the ones that flood are we,how many forwards do you play in your forward half.I would say about 4 at most so where do your other 2 so called forwards go,they push down to the wings and your wingmen push down to your backline to help your undersized and underskilled backmen.

Ok then I will ask you again who floods again,the team that was in the worst game of last season or a club that plays attacking and accoutable football.

It's a common mis-perception that Hawthorn comes out with the intention of flooding. Unfortunately due to our superior endurance we are able to have players run back to protect any forward thrusts by the opposition often leaving exhausted opponents in their wake.