Remove this Banner Ad

Player Watch #7: Zane Duursma - 14 goals so far in 2026 - R.Beveridge says club yet to open contract talks with Duurs

  • Thread starter Thread starter giantroo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I’m biased towards a set of hands and mercurial talent in the forward line over a small forward. But would many take wizard over him or wait to more development from Zane before making that call?
Im a zane corner man. Imagine what Zane would be doing in Hawthorn colours? He’d kick 80 goals.
 
He’s obviously playing a role within the team at the moment. Once he gets some more games and experience under his belt and becomes a more focal point of our forward line he will regularly kick bags of goals.

Right now he is feeding off scraps and is our 3rd leading goalkicker.

I’ve often read about Whitlock becoming the Darling replacement. In my opinion we will go with Larkey, Trembath and Zane as our 3 tall structure where Duursma provides us with more flexibility. Curtis, Dovaston, Spargo, Simpkin etc as our smalls

Edit: different discussion, however that means Zurhaar is surplus to needs. If I was Clarkson I would be throwing him on the trade table.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

As hopeful I am for how Zane's career turns out I'd say the overwhelming majority are taking Watson still as things stand currently.

Yeah well I blardy remember posting on these here boards prior to the 1991 draft.

I said we should take Dunkley Swans picked him with #54
And we took Tim Leng with pick #34. Of course he was the first ever Chinese ruckman drafted, unfortunately he was 5ft 3. That was of course before the Chinese found those vitamins that their swimming team use on a regular basis.
Had Tim be on those, he'd have been near 7ft and 3 axe handle wide across the shoulders.
 
He is playing well enough at the moment that we should cease the comparisons.

We probably should have taken Steele Sidebottom over Jack Ziebell, but we didn't spend Ziebell's entire career whining about it.
 
Yeah well I blardy remember posting on these here boards prior to the 1991 draft.

I said we should take Dunkley Swans picked him with #54
And we took Tim Leng with pick #34. Of course he was the first ever Chinese ruckman drafted, unfortunately he was 5ft 3. That was of course before the Chinese found those vitamins that their swimming team use on a regular basis.
Had Tim be on those, he'd have been near 7ft and 3 axe handle wide across the shoulders.
Not a day goes by that I don't regret this. Joke / basket case of a club. Sack whoever was before Nev Stibbards.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

He is playing well enough at the moment that we should cease the comparisons.

We probably should have taken Steele Sidebottom over Jack Ziebell, but we didn't spend Ziebell's entire career whining about it.
Well, now that you mention it...
 
Im a zane corner man. Imagine what Zane would be doing in Hawthorn colours? He’d kick 80 goals.
This is just copium mate and based on nothing except trying to makes oneself feel better.

We produce the same amount of inside 50s as Hawks, they’ve just been about 0.9 goals more efficient per game.

The main difference is their forwards know how pressure better than ours.
 
This is just copium mate and based on nothing except trying to makes oneself feel better.

We produce the same amount of inside 50s as Hawks, they’ve just been about 0.9 goals more efficient per game.

The main difference is their forwards know how pressure better than ours.
absolutely not. They have better vision going inside 50. They hit up gunston better than we hit up our forwards.

They are superior in organising their delivery. They also havent played west coast, carlton, richmond.

I love stats, used to suggest anything you want. You havent got the data to prove anythig. Its round 9. Maybe you should use last season as thats at least a complete season.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

absolutely not. They have better vision going inside 50. They hit up gunston better than we hit up our forwards.

They are superior in organising their delivery. They also havent played west coast, carlton, richmond.
Yes, 0.9 goals superior
 
absolutely not. They have better vision going inside 50. They hit up gunston better than we hit up our forwards.

They are superior in organising their delivery. They also havent played west coast, carlton, richmond.

I love stats, used to suggest anything you want. You havent got the data to prove anythig. Its round 9. Maybe you should use last season as thats at least a complete season.
They just have more space inside their F50. Something we just don't seem to do. It has to be a structure thing, or speed of ball I'm not sure.
 
They just have more space inside their F50. Something we just don't seem to do. It has to be a structure thing, or speed of ball I'm not sure.
I suspect it's a bit of both but would lean more to speed of ball movement being the main reason. Not sure what the stats are this season, I'm sure it's improved, but last season IIRC were 18th in the league for transitioning the ball from the back 50 to the forward 50.
 
I suspect it's a bit of both but would lean more to speed of ball movement being the main reason. Not sure what the stats are this season, I'm sure it's improved, but last season IIRC were 18th in the league for transitioning the ball from the back 50 to the forward 50.
If we could get that to a top 8 level, we could be anything
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom