Changes for Round Two vs Tigers

[year of the cat]

Agree with the consensus of opinion here. Hawkins has to come in and if Rooke goes then Hogan is certainly next in line.

Blake is one who should be mentioned. Watching the first 3 quarters on tape his ruckwork, whilst competitive, often put the ball down to the advantage of a Hawk midfielder. I would give him another game but would give West or Mumford a go soon if only to keep him honest. Good to see him push forward and kick a goal though.

 

[Duskfire]

Kelly had an awesome game, why drop him? I like the idea of getting some experience into younger players but not dropping players who don't need a rest and who don't deserve it.

I like Stokes but admittedly he did seem a bit slack on Friday Night. At the moment though he would be far ahead of Varcoe.

 

[catempire]

Agree with the consensus of opinion here. Hawkins has to come in and if Rooke goes then Hogan is certainly next in line.

Blake is one who should be mentioned. Watching the first 3 quarters on tape his ruckwork, whilst competitive, often put the ball down to the advantage of a Hawk midfielder. I would give him another game but would give West or Mumford a go soon if only to keep him honest. Good to see him push forward and kick a goal though.

Blake had the best hit-out to advantage % of any ruckman on the ground (and often does).

He has shortcomings, bit this isn't one of them.

 

[thejester]

Agree with the consensus of opinion here. Hawkins has to come in and if Rooke goes then Hogan is certainly next in line.

Blake is one who should be mentioned. Watching the first 3 quarters on tape his ruckwork, whilst competitive, often put the ball down to the advantage of a Hawk midfielder. I would give him another game but would give West or Mumford a go soon if only to keep him honest. Good to see him push forward and kick a goal though.

Blake had the highest advantage % of all the ruckmen on the ground.

EDIT: Pipped at the post

 

[winty]

Can we drop Stokes? He just doesn't do enough. Has he heard about front and square? Or does he think it is some obscure mathematical concept??

I'd like to see Djerkurra given a game in his spot. OUT Stokes - IN Djerkurra

Also, the time has come: OUT - Lonergan, IN - Hawkins

The cats need to use as many games as possible to get experience into Hogan and others. This weekend is a game they can afford to include some youngsters. OUT: Kelly IN Hogan

Also, what about trying a different ruckman? OUT Blake - IN Mumford

Why stop there?

IN: VFL side
OUT: AFL side

 

[year of the cat]

Blake had the best hit-out to advantage % of any ruckman on the ground (and often does).

He has shortcomings, bit this isn't one of them.

Well I'll be dammed!!! There was one terrible tap I saw on the coverage that went directly to Sewell that could easily have resulted in a goal.

Often when Ottens comes off for a spell the momentum of the game changes from us losing centre square clearances. Wasn't at the game on Friday (running 100k in the oxfam trailwalk!!) but was told by my brother-in-law who was there that Blake rucked much of the initial part of the last quarter when we were being overrun. Is that correct? (tape ran out 20 minutes into the third quarter)

May have to take those anti-Blake glasses off.....

 

[Barnzy]

Can you guys take it easy on us? Really hope we put in a good competitive match else it could get really ugly and only saving grace on the day will be the fact I got alot of Geelong players in my DT.

Also I wouldn't drop Stokes, small fowards kill us as we lack good small defenders and Raines just got injured too. Betts 5 goals, when does that happen?

 

[Tristagi]

i think bringing in Hawkins for the Richmond game is that only change we should make voluntarily. Richmond have a very average backline and he could get on the end of a few, kick a few goals and get some confidence up which is all he needs. Also Hawkins in at full forward helps out smaller blokes like Varcoe, Stokes, Chapman and Johnson as he puts in a good contest and if he can't take the mark he will contest it and bring it to ground most times.

Also Tommahawk is a big boy and alot of the time finds himself in a two on one, something teams never have to worry about with Lonergan.

IMO our forward line looks more potant with SJ, Mooney and Chappy across half forward with Gamble, Hawkins and Stokes across the full forward line. Hawkins plays the role that Ablett did in 07 really well as the guy to either take the mark or create a contest, that was a key in 07 and Lonergan was just unable to do it in 08.

 

[winty]

Can you guys take it easy on us? Really hope we put in a good competitive match else it could get really ugly and only saving grace on the day will be the fact I got alot of Geelong players in my DT.

Also I wouldn't drop Stokes, small fowards kill us as we lack good small defenders and Raines just got injured too. Betts 5 goals, when does that happen?

I wouldn't drop Stokes either. He killed it against Richmond the last time we played. Hopefully Wallet plays McMahon on him again like he did that night.

 

[Tay29]

Well I'll be dammed!!! There was one terrible tap I saw on the coverage that went directly to Sewell that could easily have resulted in a goal.

Often when Ottens comes off for a spell the momentum of the game changes from us losing centre square clearances. Wasn't at the game on Friday (running 100k in the oxfam trailwalk!!) but was told by my brother-in-law who was there that Blake rucked much of the initial part of the last quarter when we were being overrun. Is that correct? (tape ran out 20 minutes into the third quarter)

May have to take those anti-Blake glasses off.....

It's ok I'll balance things up. Blake tapped directly to Hawthorn, in Hawthorn's forward line, at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters which lead to goals from Dew. Hit outs to advantage isn't everything. I wish there was a stat called 'hitouts directly to opposition'.

 

[vinum coupe]

I don't like the idea of Lonners going down back in Scarletts absence, and bringing a forward in. Gee if Taylor went down during a game we would be screwed trying to cover another position.

There is a break point in all areas of a side.
Lose your best CHB? ok, maybe we can cover him because the rest of the backs are tight.
Lose a tall back who marks more opposition kicks than anyone? Ok we'll have to bring the ball to ground a bit more, you midfielders need to come back a bit and help out
Lose a small back with a damaging kick? Right, one of you midfielders are coming back full time.
Lose the AA full back? oh lets just stick lonners down there and we'll just 'wing it'.

Losing another during a game with out a backup *priceless*

 

[catempire]

It's ok I'll balance things up. Blake tapped directly to Hawthorn, in Hawthorn's forward line, at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters which lead to goals from Dew. Hit outs to advantage isn't everything. I wish there was a stat called 'hitouts directly to opposition'.

It seems there's no pleasin' the Blake haters.

The first of those was actually a very well-placed tap which was heading down Miburn's throat. Roughed stuck a mit out and tapped it into Dew's path and he kicked a freak goal. These things happen.

 

[Brasil2007]

Moons has said that Big Tom would have played in round one but Bomber didn't want to change both his key marking forwards at the one time.

I'd be very surprised if he didn't play this week. Averages 2.5 goals a game over his two games against the Tiges.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is a midfielder rested as well, very hard game last week and a long campaign in the NAB cup.

 

[Tay29]

It seems there's no pleasin' the Blake haters.

The first of those was actually a very well-placed tap which was heading down Miburn's throat. Roughed stuck a mit out and tapped it into Dew's path and he kicked a freak goal. These things happen.

I actually don't hate Blake but I don't love the guy either. He'll only ever be an average player at most and think I'm pretty much realistic in that opinion. My point was that hitouts to advantage isn't the be all and end all of effectiveness. You also need to look at negative stats which, at this point of time, is missing.

I thought he did ok the other night. But year of the cat is right. Momentum tends to shift to the opposition when Blake rucks more than it does with Ottens. For all his hitouts and hitouts to advantage, I have no idea where they go.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Lonergan will never be an acceptable forward for a side like us trying to win a flag. Hawkins has/will have the bigger body and is the one we are grooming to play full forward. Get him in.

Stokes will probably play well this game because its meagre opposition, but he goes missing against teams with any sorty of defence (or who attack the man hard).

Mackie was one of our poorer performers Friday night. He has real trouble holding his feet in a contested situation and is very much an 'uncontested' player. Problem is, his skills arent good enough to be that type of player.

I wish we could play Hawthorn every three weeks. the boys need those hit-outs like that, they sort out whose fair dinkum and who's not.

 

[Micksy]

Out: Lonergan
In: Hawkins

 

[JUBJUB]

Why stop there?

IN: VFL side
OUT: AFL side

Nah,that's a bit over the top

OUT : Ablett,Bartel,Ling,Corey,Ottens [all dropped]
IN : Byrnes,Moles,T Hunt,D Simpson,Weadon

Do you think OS will approve those changes

 

[vinum coupe]

Mackie was one of our poorer performers Friday night. He has real trouble holding his feet in a contested situation and is very much an 'uncontested' player. Problem is, his skills arent good enough to be that type of player.

Are you a cat troll?

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Are you a cat troll?

Look mate, these are my opinions..either agree with them or be wrong.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Tom Hawkins will almost certainly be an IN, according to the Herald-Scum...

Tiger's Tommy ache
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25266412-19742,00.html
Jon Ralph | March 31, 2009 12:00am

• GEELONG forward Tom Hawkins is expected to be recalled to heap more pain on besieged Richmond on Saturday.

Hawkins kicked five second-half goals in a VFL practice match against Bendigo at the weekend, and is being seriously considered to take on the Tigers at Skilled Stadium.

He is regarded as the X-factor who will elevate Geelong's forward line to elite status, though coach Mark Thompson reassessed those expectations recently.

He said Hawkins might never become the "next Tony Lockett' many expect.

The Cats have given Tom Lonergan enough games to be sure he is not the answer in attack, which makes Hawkins' form this year critical.
He has played three games since being nursed through the pre-season to prevent a return of foot stress fractures.

Thompson this weekend said his absence from Round 1 was more about not taking Hawkins and Cameron Mooney into a Grand Final rematch less than fully fit.

With the Cats testing Lonergan as a swingman able to play at both ends, it is time to again trial the Mooney-Hawkins combination.
Football manager Neil Balme said the Cats would consider their forward mix.

"It took him a little while to get into the game, but he was pretty good in the end. It was his third game, so he is about right. He is now getting to the stage where he is about right to go," Balme said.

"We have to sit down (and choose our side). I think we want to play him, it's just a matter of picking the side every week."

While Hawkins is seen by many as Geelong's next forward messiah, Thompson has always preached patience with the 20-year-old.

But last week he radically downgraded expectations not only of his progress, but of his entire career.

"There's always just been an expectation from everybody that he's going to be the next Tony Lockett or the next Superman, the next super player of the AFL and, to be honest, I don't think he'll ever get there," Thompson told the Geelong Advertiser.

"I don't think he'll ever be a super, super, super player. I think he'll be a pretty good footballer - solid.

"I think he'll take time. I don't think you'll see anything outstanding for maybe two or three years.

"I think there's a lot of pressure on young Tom to be something that he's probably not going to be for a fair while and I don't know why it happens."

Geelong captain Tom Harley last night backed Hawkins to come in and make an immediate impact.

"He did start in a blaze of glory and came from the APS schools system, so it probably has taken a while to find his feet," Harley said on One Week At A Time, Channel 10's new One HD football show.

"He has had an outstanding summer. He is super lean and ready to go."

The Cats have consistently dominated Richmond over the past 15 years. They have won 11 of the past 12 matches and 23 of the past 29.

Geelong full-back Matthew Scarlett is certain to play despite suffering an ankle injury in Friday's win over Hawthorn.

Harley is also expected back in coming weeks.

Thompson said recently the defender's own prognosis of a Round 5-6 return was overly pessimistic.

 

[AM]

Hawkins not only should be in this week, they should tell him he'll be given a number of games. It's time to see whether he cuts it or not. He's got so much going for him ability wise. Just not sure about his temperament.

I'd like to see a few youngsters given a go too. Hogan and Djerrkura are two.

 

[Copernicus]

I reckon they'll give Hawkins a few games on the trot. He just needs to get stuck in and put a few scores on the board. He kicked straight in the twos on the weekend so he can do it, just needs to get in a match situation and put those boots on the right way.

I suppose we'll probably see him in for Lonergan - can't really see any other changes unless Scarlo's ankle doesn't recover sufficiently.

 

[Tay29]

Why stop there?

IN: VFL side
OUT: AFL side

At least the VFL side will kick straight.

 

[Belisarius]

Geelong watchers need to keep in mind there can be no perfect team or list in the AFL. The salary cap and the draft system are intended to equalise teams over time.

So to criticise Mackie or Hunt or Kelly seems somewhat wide of the mark. They do not have to be a walk up start who would fit into any other side in the comp. They are good players - and they fit well into the Geelong side. They may not be our best players but they compliment the side well.

Criticism should be povided if the watcher does not believe that the player is up to it for whatever reasons. If you can see that their contribution to side is minimal or comes with too many other negatives, then fair enough, make the criticism.

IMO these 3 players, who cop a reasonable whack every now and then on this site, are fine by me in the side. We can, and have, won a premiership with them in the side.

As many others on this thread have said previously, it is down forward (where none of the three players mentioned above play) that Geelong seems to be breaking down most often. Hence the call for Lonergan to make way for Hawkins. I also would like to see the second ruckman do a bit more around the ground (both players referred to here were not members of the Premiership side and a member of the losing side in 08. This does not necessarily imply that Geelong lost the GF because these two players performances on the day - but both were not that good). I do not know if Mumford will ever make it - but on the few occasions I have seen him play he seems quite agile for a big man - and quite robust. He is a rookie so Geelong supporters will have to just keep an eye out for his performances in the twos.

 

[Hood007]

I think if Varcoe has a couple more stinkers like he did on Friday, he'll get dropped for Hogan... Far too inconsistent and way too many missed tackles...

I like the guy for the future but I don't think he can be a passenger for too long especially with Hogan, Djerrkura and co waiting in the wings...