
- May 22, 2012
- 3,724
- 6,503
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Box Hill
I would be okay with one midfielder on the HFF, anymore is unjustified. Also would LOL if for some reason they put Mitchell on the HBF.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
AFL Rounds 18 to 24: Pick one player from each round. Add up their scores. Highest total wins!
Post your entry here »
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Exactly! The AA team is an honourary thing. Why not reward the best players in the league. As long as they still put in some small and tall forwards and backs, I'm fine with it. I'd rather see Danger, Sydney Kennedy, Etc be in the team than put a forward who has had a clearly worse year. It's meant to be a hybrid of best players in positions with the best players in the league.If I was the coach of a team and was asked "You can have Dangerfield or Gunston, only proviso is whoever you pick must stay at HFF all game?" I would laugh hysterically as I gave Paddy his jumper and say to him "Can you believe they just asked me that?"
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Oh noes... Isaac Smith named at half forward on Hawthorn's team sheet for tonight's final... the humanity...
I hate how clubs put midfielders on the forward flank....
The AA selection needs to decide whether the team is the best 22 that could be made, or the best players in each position. At the moment they're sitting on the fence, with some years being the best 22, and others being the best for each position.
It is fair enough to say that Jack Gunston is a better HFF flank than Dangerfield. But Dangerfield is the better player overall. So who gets the HFF flank spot? Danger or Gunston?
That isn't what I am arguing though. I know the 6 lines are irrelevant. Doesn't stop them being used as a reference though. Commonly, a roaming high half forward will be named on the HFF. I know the position is useless, but it has its reasons. Otherwise we may as well not have a teamsheet, just name the plyers in alphabet order. It is a good reference point. Would it be fair to Josh Kennedy if Dangerfield took his position at CHF just because "There are no positions anymore"?What if i told you... there was no half forward flank...
Get your head out of the 80s... the visual representation of a football side along the 6 lines is no longer relevant to actually how people line up
That isn't what I am arguing though. I know the 6 lines are irrelevant. Doesn't stop them being used as a reference though. Commonly, a roaming high half forward will be named on the HFF. I know the position is useless, but it has its reasons. Otherwise we may as well not have a teamsheet, just name the plyers in alphabet order. It is a good reference point. Would it be fair to Josh Kennedy if Dangerfield took his position at CHF just because "There are no positions anymore"?
The sheer desperation with which the AFL needs a new system for accurately conveying rosters and positions is absurd.What if i told you... there was no half forward flank...
Get your head out of the 80s... the visual representation of a football side along the 6 lines is no longer relevant to actually how people line up