Oppo Camp Essendon V Hawthorn banter thread (Round 18)

[Doss]

Yeah, but you're winning.

Sarcasm meter not working?

I wasn't being serious about Lonergan. He was, apparently, being serious about Schoenmakers.

 

[Slattery_20]

Lonergan is head & shoulders above any Hawthorn midfielder.
Mostly head.

 

[MinerBoy]

I wasn't being serious about Lonergan.

Sigh.

Dude, I got it. Lighten up.

 

[Doss]

That's just hilarious. Ignoring the fact that for the past 6-8 weeks of that season, Hawthorn were clearly the best team and that Round 1-18 doesn't matter all that much ( a bit like this season - plenty to go). Hawthorn had the form going into the GF to be expected to win but everyone's eyes were still glazed over by Geelong. Aside from the 20 minute patch in the 2nd when Geelong did attack relentlessly, and to no avail, the Hawks comprehensively outplayed them for the rest of the match.

I see this said quite a bit, but the results don't really support that. After Round 15 that year, Geelong were 14-1 and Hawthorn 13-2 (Footscray, incidentally, were 13-1-1 but fell in a heap from that point). So from that point until Grand Final day, Geelong won 9 games straight, while Hawthorn went 6-3. This included that narrow 11 point win over Hawthorn. Hawthorn, in that time, lost by five goals to St Kilda, North and Richmond.

Hawthorn's form in the two finals were marginally better than Geelong's, granted; but be honest; most signs that day still pointed to a Geelong victory. I think a fair statement is that Hawthorn had the form to be expected to make it an incredibly tight contest.

 

[MinerBoy]

I see this said quite a bit, but the results don't really support that. After Round 15 that year, Geelong were 14-1 and Hawthorn 13-2 (Footscray, incidentally, were 13-1-1 but fell in a heap from that point). So from that point until Grand Final day, Geelong won 9 games straight, while Hawthorn went 6-3. This included that narrow 11 point win over Hawthorn. Hawthorn, in that time, lost by five goals to St Kilda, North and Richmond.

Hawthorn's form in the two finals were marginally better than Geelong's, granted; but be honest; most signs that day still pointed to a Geelong victory. I think a fair statement is that Hawthorn had the form to be expected to make it an incredibly tight contest.

Probably fair but you can pick any point in time. Up until Round 9, 10, 13...whatever. There were points were Geelong had the form and at other times Hawthorn. Geelong were more consistent but other than a mid season slump where we dropped a few games when injuries and tiredness got us a bit, we had an absolutely outstanding season. We were a less experienced and hardened side than Geelong so it was probably to be expected. Geelong themselves learnt from how we peaked that season and from that point on started implementing their own plans to be fresher at the pointy end.

However, from the point where we lost to Richmond (Rnd 20??) we steamrolled the rest of the season. Geelong got the closest I think with the 26 point GF loss. Geelong were rightful favourites but many Hawthorn people were supremely confident we would win and the result came us no surprise to us. Geelong's great record (21-1 H&A) masked the fact to many people that when the real stuff was being played, the Hawks were playing better football.

 

[MrFujiMoto]

Yeah maybe Hurley coming back with a hamstring injury and Schoenfaker may be able to stop him. Not hard when a player cant run. mate if Hawthorn suffered anywhere the the number of injuries that Essendon has this year, or for the last 10 years, you wouldnt have jagged that one flag. Funnily enough i have a few Hawthorn mates who are just like you. Proud and loud when you win and dissappear into oblivion when they are crap. So lets hope you guys fade out end of this season and for next year and you can go back to your cave and go into hybernation.

Oh you must mean like last year when we had most of our spine out for a long chunk of the season, those type of injuries? The same year that we narrowly missed a GF with that injury toll?? Since 08 we have barely put a full side on the park. And during that time we have really struggled because of it. Ironically last year was probably the worst year for us injury wise but what we were able to do was uncover talented debutants and young guys.

Your year, this year, has reminded me a lot of ours last year. When it happened to us we were able to uncover some real talent that made existing 22 players depth players this year (Bateman, Murphy and possibly Osborne).

We brought in Smith, Puopolo and Breust as debutants last year and had to put copious amounts of pressure on Shoenmakers, Shiels, Suckling who all had 25 games or under.

Without disrepecting what you guys have been able to do, being top 6 still, that is where the differance has been, the depth players and talent we were able to uncover.

I still think you guys are a threat if you get your game going, I just think you have found it harder to have the game on your terms in the last 4 weeks. You are a very fast scoring side when you are allowed to dictate and that is dangerous against any team. If you get the game on your terms and can maintain it for 4 qtrs you will give us a real shake and could easily win a tight one. If we don't allow that I think we will win by 40 plus which would set a new AFL record for consecutive games won by 40 points or more in a season.

 

[cash]

I have done some spying on the hawthorn training for the club.
Shoenmakers looks to be in ominous form.

 

[MrFujiMoto]

I hope your forwards think the same about the Cobbler, Cash. We will see how that works out for them this season.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

I hope your forwards think the same about the Cobbler, Cash. We will see how that works out for them this season.

I'd be worried if I were you. Gumby hasn't scored a behind since 2010 and if he's on Clangermakers he'll get plenty of opportunity. If he's not on Clangermakers, he'll have 3 inches on his opponent, plus massive dukes.

 

[smooth mover]

Comprehension fail.

I said we kicked 11 of those points. Thus add 11 to us and subtract 11 from them. 11 + 11 = ?

Ah so becuase you rushed through 11 of their behinds (most of which where handballed through or just ran over the line) becuase u's where too scared to run it out of the backline, but it did win u's a flag so congrats but u did stuff it up for everyone else by having the rushed behind rule changed!! Anyway back to the start, so becuase u's rushed those points u see it fit to then add that score to ur score & subtract it from their score to result in a bigger margin for u's?? That is the worst explanation of could've, should've, would've I have ever seen or heard? For starters the ball was in their forward line so how could it be that u's rush a behind & that theoretically results in a score for u's?? Maybe u's should've had the balls to run it out of the backline in the 1st place! Secondly if u didn't rush those behinds u most likely would've turned it over under the pressure & they would've kicked atleast 4 goals out of 11 shots to win the game, but becuase u's where to scared u's need those rushed behinds to win the game, YES?? So there was no comprehension fail from my end, just ur's, so maybe next time u try to come up with 1 of these complete & utter crap theories think it through cause what u have said wouldn't even make sense to a bunch of prep's!! Maybe thats what year level u are still currently studying Boy??

 

[Necromancer Beth]

I'd be worried if I were you. Gumby hasn't scored a behind since 2010 and if he's on Clangermakers he'll get plenty of opportunity. If he's not on Clangermakers, he'll have 3 inches on his opponent, plus massive dukes.

Gumbleton is better than Hurley IMO.

 

[Necromancer Beth]

Ah so becuase you rushed through 11 of their behinds (most of which where handballed through or just ran over the line) becuase u's where too scared to run it out of the backline, but it did win u's a flag so congrats but u did stuff it up for everyone else by having the rushed behind rule changed!! Anyway back to the start, so becuase u's rushed those points u see it fit to then add that score to ur score & subtract it from their score to result in a bigger margin for u's?? That is the worst explanation of could've, should've, would've I have ever seen or heard? For starters the ball was in their forward line so how could it be that u's rush a behind & that theoretically results in a score for u's?? Maybe u's should've had the balls to run it out of the backline in the 1st place! Secondly if u didn't rush those behinds u most likely would've turned it over under the pressure & they would've kicked atleast 4 goals out of 11 shots to win the game, but becuase u's where to scared u's need those rushed behinds to win the game, YES?? So there was no comprehension fail from my end, just ur's, so maybe next time u try to come up with 1 of these complete & utter crap theories think it through cause what u have said wouldn't even make sense to a bunch of prep's!! Maybe thats what year level u are still currently studying??

Nah I've met him and had a beer with him, he's definitely a fully grown adult. And he is talking more sense than anyone on here.

 

[smooth mover]

Nah I've met him and had a beer with him, he's definitely a fully grown adult. And he is talking more sense than anyone on here.

Even more than u??

 

[Necromancer Beth]

Even more than u??

Well there's always the exception.

 

[Silent Hawk]

I'd be worried if I were you. Gumby hasn't scored a behind since 2010 and if he's on Clangermakers he'll get plenty of opportunity. If he's not on Clangermakers, he'll have 3 inches on his opponent, plus massive dukes.

LOL - no behinds since 2010... was he even on the park enough since 2010???? If 'Clangermakers' was able to hold Choke to one goal last weekend, we really fear for him on Fumbleton.

 

[MrFujiMoto]

I'd be worried if I were you. Gumby hasn't scored a behind since 2010 and if he's on Clangermakers he'll get plenty of opportunity. If he's not on Clangermakers, he'll have 3 inches on his opponent, plus massive dukes.

I love stats, they can tell you anything. I think we are safe if he keeps his 2 goal average up that he has had since 2010. I love how people scrag on the Cobbler and forget the way the Hawks defence works. I think Gumby has had back luck with injury and has the ability to really hurt an opponent, but it won't be this week.

 

[Doss]

Smooth mover, it's fairly clear he wasn't actually being serious.

I think what he was trying to get at, is that 11.23 is misleading and that Geelong didn't necessarily fritter away as many opportunities as the scoreline suggests.

There may be some element of truth to that, but the fact that Hawthorn felt moved to rush 11 behinds in the first place says the Hawk defence was under a fair bit of pressure for much of the day. Geelong's movement into the forward line lacked its usual precision that day. And that's without even taking into account the goal kicking yips that affected Mooney and Ottens, and Lonergan having an absolute shocker of a day.

 

[Doss]

LOL - no behinds since 2010... was he even on the park enough since 2010???? If 'Clangermakers' was able to hold Choke to one goal last weekend, we really fear for him on Fumbleton.

Always amuses me how people call him Fumbleton. Marking is Gumbleton's strongest area, has a very good set of dukes.

Typical Internet warrior stuff.

 

[MinerBoy]

Ah so becuase you rushed through 11 of their behinds (most of which where handballed through or just ran over the line) becuase u's where too scared to run it out of the backline, but it did win u's a flag so congrats but u did stuff it up for everyone else by having the rushed behind rule changed!! Anyway back to the start, so becuase u's rushed those points u see it fit to then add that score to ur score & subtract it from their score to result in a bigger margin for u's?? That is the worst explanation of could've, should've, would've I have ever seen or heard? For starters the ball was in their forward line so how could it be that u's rush a behind & that theoretically results in a score for u's?? Maybe u's should've had the balls to run it out of the backline in the 1st place! Secondly if u didn't rush those behinds u most likely would've turned it over under the pressure & they would've kicked atleast 4 goals out of 11 shots to win the game, but becuase u's where to scared u's need those rushed behinds to win the game, YES?? So there was no comprehension fail from my end, just ur's, so maybe next time u try to come up with 1 of these complete & utter crap theories think it through cause what u have said wouldn't even make sense to a bunch of prep's!! Maybe thats what year level u are still currently studying Boy??

Yes, you're right. I make no sense.

 

[Silent Hawk]

Always amuses me how people call him Fumbleton. Marking is Gumbleton's strongest area, has a very good set of dukes.

Typical Internet warrior stuff.

We're all Internet warriors out here - Clangermakers.... please!

 

[Jade]

Gumbleton is better than Hurley IMO.

I'm so conflicted.......

 

[Necromancer Beth]

I'm so conflicted.......

Trollololololol.

 

[Jade]

LOL - no behinds since 2010... was he even on the park enough since 2010???? If 'Clangermakers' was able to hold Choke to one goal last weekend, we really fear for him on Fumbleton.

Actually come to think of it, Gumbleton would annihilate Schoenmakers. That's a mismatch.

This game just got a whole lot easier; beat the Hawks plodding midfield and we'll win by 7 or 8 goals.

 

[brendan84]

Gumbleton is better than Hurley IMO.

It's like saying a ferrari is better than a rolls royce. It's win win really.

 

[Necromancer Beth]

It's like saying a ferrari is better than a rolls royce. It's win win really.

I think Hurley is a Zastava Kora ( aka Yugo ) and Gumbleton is a Lada.