Injury Game v Adelaide

Remove this Banner Ad

The Hill "injury" is very worrying for me.
They showed vision of it on the news on the weekend.
Adelaide player pretty much just gave him a 1 handed push( like a sharp get outta here push) to the top of chest and shoulder area.
Hill then walks away in pain, arm dropped and clutching at shoulder that already had tape on it.
The hill is soft idiots would have a field day over that vision as it really was very soft.

Must have a serious problem with shoulder.
Im guessing dislocated needing possible surgery to get it 100% right or keep playing and hope it gets better like they tried with Fyfe.

Other worrying thing for me is the result, i know its practice, we had less rotations etc.
Just the game reminded me alot like the final against them.
We jumped them early and were looking like winners, Adelaide then made small changes to structures and players and then out played us and grabbed the win.
Think it shows their coach has very good game day skills and is able to adjust things which made us struggle.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Adelaide then made small changes to structures and players

Umm... Six new players to minus two (Hill and Walters) in the third and forty-four to twenty-five bench rotations, is not small changes to structure and players, it's stratagem against strategy.
Adelaide played to win on the day, we played to win round one.
 
The Hill "injury" is very worrying for me.
They showed vision of it on the news on the weekend.
Adelaide player pretty much just gave him a 1 handed push( like a sharp get outta here push) to the top of chest and shoulder area.
Hill then walks away in pain, arm dropped and clutching at shoulder that already had tape on it.
The hill is soft idiots would have a field day over that vision as it really was very soft.

Must have a serious problem with shoulder.
Im guessing dislocated needing possible surgery to get it 100% right or keep playing and hope it gets better like they tried with Fyfe.

Other worrying thing for me is the result, i know its practice, we had less rotations etc.
Just the game reminded me alot like the final against them.
We jumped them early and were looking like winners, Adelaide then made small changes to structures and players and then out played us and grabbed the win.
Think it shows their coach has very good game day skills and is able to adjust things which made us struggle.

Looked to be the second hit to me.
They drop in 6 fresh players in a 37 degree day. That's a fine adjustment?
Sonny and Hill also came off
 
Yeah could be reading too much into it and i guess the game was played when the temp was at its hottest.

I still think rotations etc is currently overdone and overhyped.
Anyone who goes to a game sees how much effort players waste running on and off the ground.
I still believe that energy and effort could be better used by simply swapping positions with someone.
Would also help in less confusion of players wondering who to play on and which hole they should be filling etc.
Give it a few years and we will see the trend headed back towards a more realistic number imo.
 
Umm... Six new players to minus two (Hill and Walters) in the third and forty-four to twenty-five bench rotations, is not small changes to structure and players, it's stratagem against strategy.
Adelaide played to win on the day, we played to win round one.

Blatantly not true, they just came in with some different objectives. If they were aiming to win with an advantage like that they could have belted us.

I was encouraged by the result personally. Good hit out against good opposition, Im sure the boys will feel more confident from it.
 
Sounded like most of the players they brought on were youngsters/debutants. I'd like to see us paste a full strength Carltank this weekend to really measure where we are at.
 
Blatantly not true

Not truth, just an opinion.

However, opinions, particularly those that are potentially untrue, are not necessarily plucked from the ether with any less consideration and/or reasoning than an opinion which, perhaps by chance, turns out to be closer to what is the, widely agreed upon, truth.

I have deduced from the fact that the crows, who were losing by thirty-five points at the time, introduced six players (two being best eighteen midfielders), to play against fatigued opposition, at half time and almost doubled the rotations of Fremantle for the quarter, under the impression that the advantage they would gain would transfer to the scoreboard where they would run us down, thus laying a positive foundation for what was coincidentally the start of their planned members day for season '13, I can't fathom the benefits of playing guns like Dangerfield, Vince and Callinan against broken down, fatigued opposition.

That said, I am perfectly content to be blatantly wrong.
 
Not truth, just an opinion.

However, opinions, particularly those that are potentially untrue, are not necessarily plucked from the ether with any less consideration and/or reasoning than an opinion which, perhaps by chance, turns out to be closer to what is the, widely agreed upon, truth.

I have deduced from the fact that the crows, who were losing by thirty-five points at the time, introduced six players (two being best eighteen midfielders), to play against fatigued opposition, at half time and almost doubled the rotations of Fremantle for the quarter, under the impression that the advantage they would gain would transfer to the scoreboard where they would run us down, thus laying a positive foundation for what was coincidentally the start of their planned members day for season '13, I can't fathom the benefits of playing guns like Dangerfield, Vince and Callinan against broken down, fatigued opposition.

That said, I am perfectly content to be blatantly wrong.

This is the truth,the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me etc,etc,etc
 
Not truth, just an opinion.

However, opinions, particularly those that are potentially untrue, are not necessarily plucked from the ether with any less consideration and/or reasoning than an opinion which, perhaps by chance, turns out to be closer to what is the, widely agreed upon, truth.

I have deduced from the fact that the crows, who were losing by thirty-five points at the time, introduced six players (two being best eighteen midfielders), to play against fatigued opposition, at half time and almost doubled the rotations of Fremantle for the quarter, under the impression that the advantage they would gain would transfer to the scoreboard where they would run us down, thus laying a positive foundation for what was coincidentally the start of their planned members day for season '13, I can't fathom the benefits of playing guns like Dangerfield, Vince and Callinan against broken down, fatigued opposition.

That said, I am perfectly content to be blatantly wrong.

Maybe the Crows had planned for Danger, Vince, etc. to play half a game. Maybe they weren't ready for a full game. Maybe they thought they'd be less likely to get injured in the second half when the game has slowed down a bit.

Seems more likely to me that Freo planned to get a full game into every player they took over, whereas Adelaide had a handfull of blokes who only needed half a game. I doubt that the coaching staff of either club was particularly interested in the scoreline.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sounded like most of the players they brought on were youngsters/debutants. I'd like to see us paste a full strength Carltank this weekend to really measure where we are at.

Who exactly needs to measure where we are at? The career coaches who understand our players and the needs over the season and how much to manage their workload and 'tap them out' where necessary? Or the fans who are fickle at best, want results but get their knickers in a knot at every opportunity that presents?

Nothing matters until season proper
 
Not truth, just an opinion.

However, opinions, particularly those that are potentially untrue, are not necessarily plucked from the ether with any less consideration and/or reasoning than an opinion which, perhaps by chance, turns out to be closer to what is the, widely agreed upon, truth.

I have deduced from the fact that the crows, who were losing by thirty-five points at the time, introduced six players (two being best eighteen midfielders), to play against fatigued opposition, at half time and almost doubled the rotations of Fremantle for the quarter, under the impression that the advantage they would gain would transfer to the scoreboard where they would run us down, thus laying a positive foundation for what was coincidentally the start of their planned members day for season '13, I can't fathom the benefits of playing guns like Dangerfield, Vince and Callinan against broken down, fatigued opposition.

That said, I am perfectly content to be blatantly wrong.

Its not really fair to them to make out that we just didn't care and they went out to win, yet they only got up at the death with some serious advantages. You knew what you were doing. Meh, doesn't really matter anyway.
 
Who exactly needs to measure where we are at? The career coaches who understand our players and the needs over the season and how much to manage their workload and 'tap them out' where necessary? Or the fans who are fickle at best, want results but get their knickers in a knot at every opportunity that presents?

Nothing matters until season proper

This.

I hate Freo losing even in a scratchie. That's me being short sighted. Ross and co. are putting time into the match fitness of specific players. Some players have also had a good run for their WAFL clubs and am really exited to watch Freo against the dogs in Peel followed by Peel playing after the match.
 
Its not really fair to them to make out that we just didn't care and they went out to win, yet they only got up at the death with some serious advantages. You knew what you were doing. Meh, doesn't really matter anyway.

They only got up at the death with some serious advantages because the first half they let us walk all over them. They needed any advantage they could get just to close the gap on what was initially a very poor game for them.

The assumption that they should of belted us if they were out for the win in the second half emplies it was a close contest until then, which it wasn't.
 
This.

I hate Freo losing even in a scratchie. That's me being short sighted. Ross and co. are putting time into the match fitness of specific players. Some players have also had a good run for their WAFL clubs and am really exited to watch Freo against the dogs in Peel followed by Peel playing after the match.

I hate Freo losing anything :p That's me as a supporter too - I want them to smash everything they come across. But then I also know it's no good coming out firing Essendon style for the first half of a season only to fall over when it actually matters :p So I figure I won't pay too much attention to assessing the club and where it's at - unless they start on a losing run during the season and then hell hath no fury like a supporter scorned :p You'll see me with my KFC bucket throwing drumsticks at the interchange
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top