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.
Couldn’t hold a mark contested or not tonight, but still drew the defenders and let others step up.
Yeah one thing Dix and the media have done really well this season is convince oppo clubs he is our only path to goal. I reckon in recent weeks clubs have spent all their focus on Dix which makes it easier for us to let our other forwards get free.
To be fair, we are paying him circa $800k pa to take marks - so I bloody well expect him to stick some in the next two (?) games.
If he took even half of his marks last night, we would have won by 5+ goals.
Hawkins missed a few shots but not much at all. We could have easily lost that if some of his kicks were a few inches further to the left.The difference between Charlie and Hawk is his willingness to crash the pack and bring his team mates into the game. We were able to attack the coal face and our smalls thrived on it.
He didn't mark any but he earnt one free in a dangerous spot too.
Hawkins on the other hand wanted the easy mark over the back where he could push in the back and avoid contact or the easy lead up (which we forced wide). Playing him from the back shoulder took out the over the back so we forced him (and Geelong) wide).
Charlie plays a game that stacks up in finals (even if he doesn't mark it), Hawk does not (if the oppo are wise).
Inb4 Geelong complains he left the field outside the interchange and we get disqualified.
"In that way we got lucky." That is the exact conclusion the general media are making. 'Hawkins missed 6 shots at goal & so they were unlucky & should/could have won that.'Hawkins missed a few shots but not much at all. We could have easily lost that if some of his kicks were a few inches further to the left.
Madness to say that doesn't stack up in finals. He had an off night kicking wise. In that way we got lucky.
Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
Dixon or bust they reckon hahahahbahabahahahahhahajaha
Hawkins doesn't stack up in finals. His record speaks for itselfHawkins missed a few shots but not much at all. We could have easily lost that if some of his kicks were a few inches further to the left.
Madness to say that doesn't stack up in finals. He had an off night kicking wise. In that way we got lucky.
Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
"In that way we got lucky." That is the exact conclusion the general media are making. 'Hawkins missed 6 shots at goal & so they were unlucky & should/could have won that.'
However that doesnt take into account all the macro factors:
1] Only ONE of his kicks was in the "easy" bracket. For the rest he was forced to go way wide, and were 30/70 at best.
2] The last few attempts we had got into his mind, and had him totally rattled - Ala the play-on kick from a close angle
No "LUCK" involved! We dried up his supply. Our defence was much tighter and supportive of each other, and so he was forced wide, and/or go low percentage.
If we are are going to talk about luck, then lets do it both ways!
- Charlie dropped two marks from dead-set easy positions to score.
- Mckenzie dropped a mark he would take 99 times out of a hundred to allow Danger to get his "goal of the millennium."
- Twice Rozee slips over when we are in prime position to score
- I could go on....
Lets leave that rhetoric to the poorly researched Vic media to make their excuses!
The harder (hardery) you work the luckier you get.Like we apparently got lucky with Hawkins's inaccurate goal kicking, Geelong got lucky with Charlie's poor marking which is something he has been very good at all season
"In that way we got lucky." That is the exact conclusion the general media are making. 'Hawkins missed 6 shots at goal & so they were unlucky & should/could have won that.'
However that doesnt take into account all the macro factors:
1] Only ONE of his kicks was in the "easy" bracket. For the rest he was forced to go way wide, and were 30/70 at best.
2] The last few attempts we had got into his mind, and had him totally rattled - Ala the play-on kick from a close angle
No "LUCK" involved! We dried up his supply. Our defence was much tighter and supportive of each other, and so he was forced wide, and/or go low percentage.
If we are are going to talk about luck, then lets do it both ways!
- Charlie dropped two marks from dead-set easy positions to score.
- Mckenzie dropped a mark he would take 99 times out of a hundred to allow Danger to get his "goal of the millennium."
- Twice Rozee slips over when we are in prime position to score
- I could go on....
Lets leave that rhetoric to the poorly researched Vic media to make their excuses!
Yeah, but you haven't seen him kick 6/6 in a high-pressure final, where the defence were forcing him to kick from row 3!I've seen Hawkins kick those goal often enough to know it was luck that he missed. I've seen Dixon drop enough marks to know that it would be luck if he stuck them, ditto Rozee being a little bit off this year in moments like that.
Allowing their full forward to have SIX shots on goal is never a sustainable practise. We'd be foolish to think that that will happen again.
he dislocated a finger and notably distressed when trying to put it back in
Since the Cats loss and particularly the last three games we have been delivering the ball better and to different
Nah. We stopped him getting EASY shots on goal and rattled him. It wasn’t luck so much as pressure.I've seen Hawkins kick those goal often enough to know it was luck that he missed. I've seen Dixon drop enough marks to know that it would be luck if he stuck them, ditto Rozee being a little bit off this year in moments like that.
Allowing their full forward to have SIX shots on goal is never a sustainable practise. We'd be foolish to think that that will happen again.
That was Joel Selwood, not dixon