controlled agression

[thegur]

i'll preface this with the fact I have only watched the first quarter so far ....

it's obvious that Port came out to, dare I say it "headhunt" ... which is quite ironic that a coach can be so deadpan in disgust the previous week, yet obviously endorse those tactics the next (and most weeks) ... it wouldn't be so bad if he joked a little about the Bulldogs tactics, in other words conceeding that those type of tactics are acceptable, "hey, we use them too"..., but Williams only has the right to go on if his players act like angels ...

from just the first quarter, IMO, Carr will go for a week at least, depending on how much force Cousins and the umpire say he used ... Primus will get two if he made contact, he raised his elbow after all ... and Burgoyne ... well he should go .. unduly rough play, I remember Justin Madden (I think) getting a week for lifting someone up and dumping them....

but what ****es you off the most about all of this? I don't care about the reports (*at the time, after all we get the free kick) to be honest .. i actually prefer physical football ... what ****es me off the most, is we accepted it ...

where were the Eagles players making the solid bumps?

why were the Eagles not running the Port players into the ground after they tackled them?

why were we not gang tackling?

where was out physical pressure?

oh, and incidenlty, one of my picky points most of the season ... our tackling .. how can they have so many more tackles, yet we had so little of the ball??? we just don't play physical football well

running football, the quick midfield running into space, it's all brilliant when we have the ball and the other team is not applying pressure, but when it's close and tough, where were our Daniel Chick's and Phil Read's? or do we only have two players capable of roughing things up?

rant over

thegur

 

[ozzult]

Agree totally. Essendon played hard footy with us earlier in the year, and we were bamboozled by it.

I believe we can play that style of footy and also handle it, we just need a bit more experience.

 

[The Passenger]

once again i'll bring a point that i made a while ago - we would benefit 100% by bringing in a former rugby league player or two to teach our guys how to tackle effectivelly and gang-tackle. not only to just stop the opposition in their forward motion, but to really hurt and tire the opposition.

for those out there who have played league or union, they'll agree with me as to just how tiring it is to be tackled hard, and constantly. Not just physically but mentally because you're constantly thinking '**** i'm gonna get the ball and i'm gonna get smashed'

 

[jod23]

Originally posted by Black Thunder
once again i'll bring a point that i made a while ago - we would benefit 100% by bringing in a former rugby league player or two to teach our guys how to tackle effectivelly and gang-tackle. not only to just stop the opposition in their forward motion, but to really hurt and tire the opposition.

for those out there who have played league or union, they'll agree with me as to just how tiring it is to be tackled hard, and constantly. Not just physically but mentally because you're constantly thinking '**** i'm gonna get the ball and i'm gonna get smashed'

It would do wonders. We need to improve our tackling. I think we are generally hard at the ball but we can be rattled. All we needed yesterday was a Chick to come in a polax someone to get the team going. We had nobody who could do that yesterday.

If Wilson was in the forward line and knocked out a few players, Chick, Read and Kerr in the midfield...it really hardens your team up. We had nothing of that yesterday. Their were countless times I said "good tackle" only to just finish saying it and they shake the tackle.

We need to get better in this area. I suppose a positive point is that we are an very good side yet still have many weaknesses we can improve on to become even better.

 

[larrikin]

This was where the Eagles of the early 90's made their names - tackling. Mainwaring, Hart, Worsfold, Pyke, Brennan, Evans, Heady. They all loved it tough and tight. Our side isn't far from there, we have some potential tough nuts. Hunter loves the physical stuff, Read has proved it over time. There are others. Chick, Green, Wooden, Embley, Jones and Humm have all shown they like it physical, maybe in finals footy these guys will have a greater impact.

I reckon show them some video from '92. It certainly fires me up!!!!!!

 

[The Passenger]

Originally posted by jod23
I suppose a positive point is that we are an very good side yet still have many weaknesses we can improve on to become even better.

I agree - look how good we are, and I still believe we haven't seen us play as good as we can this year.....

We played well in the Carlton game, but that was a joke, but the end they were so disinterested it became a training run.

But there are still plenty of areas were I can see improvement, and thats aside from the natural imporvement our guys will make as they get more exprience and mature (you gotta remember very few of our guys are older than 22).

 

[GoEagles]

I am suprised that under Woosha we aren't a very physical side. I think that our tackling has improved slightly since the Judge era, although we need to have a greater physical approach on field to match some other leading sides in the competition.