Rumour Blake to GWS

[Stig_90]

Yeah, you wonder why he retired in the first place. A team like GWS or Port would have taken him last year. Hopefully he gets another crack.

 

[AM]

Yeah, you wonder why he retired in the first place. A team like GWS or Port would have taken him last year. Hopefully he gets another crack.

You would think that had any club expressed an interest he would have jumped at the opportunity.

 

[Vdubs]

I thought he might have been a chance to go to GWS last year at least as back up, good luck to him I hope he does go and play a few games. He is still young and could play for a while yet, the biggest problem with Blake is not that his work around the ground is not good enough it's his attitude.
If he had a better attitude and was prepared to work harder on his game he'd still be at Geelong.

Why do you say that unless you've been told directly by MC. Having spoken to staff at Geelong, I got the impression his biggest problem was self-confidence. After contributing significantly in the 09 GF, it should have been easier for him to build on that, but, not to be. I saw plenty of his games, in particular v Pies 2010 which we won, where he was very good and did beat Jolly that night, all over the ground. His problem seemed to be when Ottens returned, we simply needed a more mobile #2. I still believe he could have been a worthwhile #1 this year, with help from West. His attitude at training etc. has not been questioned. His self-preparation was second to none. His physical condition was exemplary.

 

[Vdubs]

Lot of stories re Blake. I think it is just as simple as cs thinking he was a spud.

Not unrelated to CS having seen him v 211 whilst at Freo, and none of our rucks have impressed v 211. Hope DS will.

 

[CF]

The impression I got from Blake's time at the club was that he just wasn't popular with the players or the Coaches. His work ethic was always very good but he just didn't have many friends. Hard to build confidence when team mates treat you like shit and then openly ignore you at times during a game when you worked hard to make good position. I know his questionable skills added to this but there was definite improvement in his roving skills as he progressed. Kicked some great goals and took a few nice contested grabs here and there.

He was not perfect as a player I agree but I do hope he gets another chance because his old man was spud until he was 27 and then he nearly won the Brownlow medal. So you never know...

 

[AM]

The impression I got from Blake's time at the club was that he just wasn't popular with the players or the Coaches. His work ethic was always very good but he just didn't have many friends. Hard to build confidence when team mates treat you like shit and then openly ignore you at times during a game when you worked hard to make good position. I know his questionable skills added to this but there was definite improvement in his roving skills as he progressed. Kicked some great goals and took a few nice contested grabs here and there.

He was not perfect as a player I agree but I do hope he gets another chance because his old man was spud until he was 27 and then he nearly won the Brownlow medal. So you never know...

I have no idea how he was regarded by the players but he appeared to be liked. I can recall the on-field reaction he got when he kicked his first goal.

Your comment that ".....there was definite improvement in his roving skills as he progressed" isn’t something with which I’d agree. My recollection is of Bomber sending him back to the twos to work on his mobility, requesting him to get to more contests, and improve his marking. He either wasn’t able to achieve that or didn’t have the desire to.

I recall seeing him in the twos at Sandringham in that period and he was the same Mark Blake. Very good tap ruckman but someone who wasn’t a natural athlete, whose disposal hadn’t improved, nor had his overhead marking. On that day he seemed disinterested too, ending up in a forward pocket.

Chris Scott came to the same conclusion as Bomber saying “........he was now behind the club’s more versatile talls” in a Hun article at the time Blakey left.

I’d like to see him get another crack and never understood why he didn’t pursue that option when he left us. Maybe that speaks to his attitude.

 

[Vdubs]

I have no idea how he was regarded by the players but he appeared to be liked. I can recall the on-field reaction he got when he kicked his first goal.

Your comment that ".....there was definite improvement in his roving skills as he progressed" isn’t something with which I’d agree. My recollection is of Bomber sending him back to the twos to work on his mobility, requesting him to get to more contests, and improve his marking. He either wasn’t able to achieve that or didn’t have the desire to.

I recall seeing him in the twos at Sandringham in that period and he was the same Mark Blake. Very good tap ruckman but someone who wasn’t a natural athlete, whose disposal hadn’t improved, nor had his overhead marking. On that day he seemed disinterested too, ending up in a forward pocket.

Chris Scott came to the same conclusion as Bomber saying “........he was now behind the club’s more versatile talls” in a Hun article at the time Blakey left.

I’d like to see him get another crack and never understood why he didn’t pursue that option when he left us. Maybe that speaks to his attitude.

I noted strongly at the time, Bomber did not do that while Ottens was OUT, only when he had an apparent embarrassment of riches, and while experimenting with the more mobile Tomahawk at the time. Prior to that he even commented on being happy with Blakes performances while Ottens was AWOL or whatever.

 

[AM]

I noted strongly at the time, Bomber did not do that while Ottens was OUT, only when he had an apparent embarrassment of riches, and while experimenting with the more mobile Tomahawk at the time. Prior to that he even commented on being happy with Blakes performances while Ottens was AWOL or whatever.

Maybe Brad didn't have the truckload of deficiencies Blakey did VD. Just sayin......

 

[Vdubs]

Maybe Brad didn't have the truckload of deficiencies Blakey did VD. Just sayin......

nor the resilience, they were a good combo, 09!

 

[iameviljez]

Yeah, no Dean Cox, but definitely no Kent Kingsley.

Really? I think Kingsley's the harshly-done-by whipping boy around here. Blake... well, he's not suited to the modern game, put it that way.

 

[Vdubs]

Really? I think Kingsley's the harshly-done-by whipping boy around here. Blake... well, he's not suited to the modern game, put it that way.

We differ, KK was the antithesis of what has made us successful since 07. At least Blake gave it his best shot every week.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I’d like to see him get another crack and never understood why he didn’t pursue that option when he left us. Maybe that speaks to his attitude.

My recollection is that Blake and Geelong had agreed to seek a trade and there was zero interest. So instead of rolling the dice that someone would take a punt on him in the draft, he went with the 'You can't sack me, because I quit!' option. But, with several clubs having issues with ruck depth in 2012, it's conceivable that Blake's stocks have risen, without him even intending it.

 

[iameviljez]

We differ, KK was the antithesis of what has made us successful since 07. At least Blake gave it his best shot every week.

Where does a rumour of KK not putting in come from?

 

[catman 71]

I know people love to rip into him, but is there any evidence for this? Not just speculation? To me he was a 1980s/1990s player in the wrong era for his kind of ruckman. Simple as that. If all you wanted was a good tap ruckman he'd get a game anywhere. Unfortunately for him the game demands more now.

I agree somewhat. I think that if Blake had been around in the 70's/80's, he would have been one of the top ruckman in the league. Back then, you didn't need athleticism (e.g. Mick Nolan), and he won a lot of ruck contests, so he would have been good value back then.

However, one thing that would kill him today is the sub rule. I doubt that clubs can afford to carry a ruckman, who can do little else on the ground, unless he gets subbed off every game. If he could play other positions, it could work, but it is either the ruck or the bench for him. No club would risk using him, and be a player down because of the sub rule.

Also, if the plan was to sub him off every game, what if someone else got an injury, then Blake would have to ruck the entire game. You can't have him start as the sub, as most teams use pacy players for this role.

 

[Vdubs]

I agree somewhat. I think that if Blake had been around in the 70's/80's, he would have been one of the top ruckman in the league. Back then, you didn't need athleticism (e.g. Mick Nolan), and he won a lot of ruck contests, so he would have been good value back then.

However, one thing that would kill him today is the sub rule. I doubt that clubs can afford to carry a ruckman, who can do little else on the ground, unless he gets subbed off every game. If he could play other positions, it could work, but it is either the ruck or the bench for him. No club would risk using him, and be a player down because of the sub rule.

Also, if the plan was to sub him off every game, what if someone else got an injury, then Blake would have to ruck the entire game. You can't have him start as the sub, as most teams use pacy players for this role.

Blake is a workhorse, thrived on the contest, and hated coming off all the time.
Was easily fit enough to play like Jolly, Goldstein.
Simple. Just to come off periodically for a spell, not the reverse.

 

[Vdubs]

Where does a rumour of KK not putting in come from?

Evidence-based fact, rumour not necessary.