Greg Baum Let's Himself Down

[jezza]

The bonding trail
By Greg Baum
http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2005/04/19/1113854199447.html


"The most obvious is the rapid rise in the stocks of the reconstructed Hawks, featuring moral wins over Richmond and Essendon"


Apparently Hawthorn had a "moral victory" over us. Anyone care to explain just how that could be reasoned? Sure, against Essendon there was an umpiring decision at the end of the game that helped change the result, but how on earth was it a moral win over us?

I've heard the usual rubbish excuses like "Hawthorn lost the game, Richmond didn't win it", but that just doesn't cut it with me. They may say "well if we kicked straighter we would have won", doesn't the same thing go for Richmond, if we'd not turned the ball over more we would have won by more.

Anyway, this struck me as very poor journalism that's jumping on the bandwagon of a team that has won one match only. Normally I find Greg Baum's articles quite good, but this is of a low standard. Anyone else feel the same?

 

[jezza]

And further more, I know it's largely because of Anzac Day, but isn't it funny there's all this talk about how the Kakoda trip being so great for the Hawks just after they have beaten Brisbane, and yet no mention of it after the first 3 rounds of the season.

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

Everyone is doing cartwheels over the hawks mate.Let em go I reckon.We are quietly slipping under the radar for a change.

 

[Harry Bosch]

How can they be moral victors over both us and Essendon? , Yes they had 4 more shots at goal in our game but the next week Essendon finished with 7 more shots at goal.

Stupid moron journos

 

[Thrice3]

All of a sudden everyone has jumped on the Hawthorn bandwagon, I think it's good for them, glad it isnt happening to us, it alleviate's pressure on expectation for us to perform. Now they've beaten Brisbane people's expectations of the Hawks have risen, we've only beaten Freo, Dogs and Hawks(not alot according to many) and winning expectations are still low, this is working in our favour, let the next few weeks unfold!

 

[madtiger2005]

After we beat Hawthorn all I read was Hawthorn should be happy but could have won and Franklin played great. Franklin looks like an exciting type but 2 of his goals came from stupid Richmond mistakes lol. One came from a stupid 50m given away from Bowden and another from Hartigan trying to take on the defence and getting caught.

 

[CJH]

I agree Jezza!

All up, it was a decent article but the only comment I made to myself at the end was that stupid line about a 'moral victory'.

It is utter crap. Firstly, how can losing to a side that finished worse than you be a moral victory? Secondly, we won because we actually played the better football. Statistics will tell you that Hawthorn had more of the ball and also more Inside 50's BUT an analysis of where the scoring occured showed that we had more shots from in front of goal - hence the more accurate kicking.

So although we didn't have the quantity of Hawthorn, we had the superior quality.

 

[CJH]

After we beat Hawthorn all I read was Hawthorn should be happy but could have won and Franklin played great. Franklin looks like an exciting type but 2 of his goals came from stupid Richmond mistakes lol. One came from a stupid 50m given away from Bowden and another from Hartigan trying to take on the defence and getting caught.

On the other hand, doesn't Franklin remind you of a young Richo circa 1992? Tall and skinny, all arms and legs and frisking about like a 2 day old colt!

 

[Croat tiger]

The bonding trail
By Greg Baum
http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2005/04/19/1113854199447.html


"The most obvious is the rapid rise in the stocks of the reconstructed Hawks, featuring moral wins over Richmond and Essendon"


Apparently Hawthorn had a "moral victory" over us. Anyone care to explain just how that could be reasoned? Sure, against Essendon there was an umpiring decision at the end of the game that helped change the result, but how on earth was it a moral win over us?

I've heard the usual rubbish excuses like "Hawthorn lost the game, Richmond didn't win it", but that just doesn't cut it with me. They may say "well if we kicked straighter we would have won", doesn't the same thing go for Richmond, if we'd not turned the ball over more we would have won by more.

Anyway, this struck me as very poor journalism that's jumping on the bandwagon of a team that has won one match only. Normally I find Greg Baum's articles quite good, but this is of a low standard. Anyone else feel the same?

definately a closet hawk supporter with an inane statement like that.

 

[IDGAF]

The bonding trail
By Greg Baum
http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2005/04/19/1113854199447.html


"The most obvious is the rapid rise in the stocks of the reconstructed Hawks, featuring moral wins over Richmond and Essendon"


Apparently Hawthorn had a "moral victory" over us. Anyone care to explain just how that could be reasoned?

No i can`t Jezza

The fact that we were probably out-played for the bulk of the day but still showed the polish , and intestinal fortitude to get over the line in the end would probably show to me that we had the moral victory .

What damage will we do when we play 4 solid quarters against them ?

I find most editorial journlists a waste of time reading these days to be honest ... they are mere opinions from pinheads who have never even played the game before , who went to intelligence school to learn how to write " creatively "

Take it with a grain of salt

 

[wagstaff]

It's annoying how the only reason he seems to write that Hawthorn had a 'moral victory' over us is so to back up the basic trajectory of his article - sloppy journalism from an overrated journo.

Mind you, if there's any side who gets granted more moral victories then others by the media in the last few years its the Bulldogs. In their last three matches they've been given some sort of 'moral victory' - there was their failed comeback against the Demons (why did they let them get so far in front in the first place?), their narrow defeat against us and then their comfortable six goal loss by the Eagles last week, a game they never looked like winning. They've been treated like that post-Wallace, all talk about promising youngsters amounting to nothing. It should be noted that the Dogs haven't beaten us since Wallace left them.

And further more, I know it's largely because of Anzac Day, but isn't it funny there's all this talk about how the Kakoda trip being so great for the Hawks just after they have beaten Brisbane, and yet no mention of it after the first 3 rounds of the season.

Good point, although the coverage is probably to do with the doco about it being broadcast on Fox Footy this week as well as Anzac Day coming up.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

I've heard the usual rubbish excuses like "Hawthorn lost the game, Richmond didn't win it", but that just doesn't cut it with me. They may say "well if we kicked straighter we would have won", doesn't the same thing go for Richmond, if we'd not turned the ball over more we would have won by more.

And if our backline had kicked straighter, then our forward line would have had as many shots at goal as the Hawks.

For some reason a form of sympathy is often lavished onto a team whose forward line are inept with their disposal, but these same media types are not nearly as forgiving when a club's backline or midfield miss targets.

 

[Bentleigh]

"The most obvious is the rapid rise in the stocks of the reconstructed Hawks, featuring moral wins over Richmond and Essendon"

Deadset Tosser.

 

[Harvey Leadpipe]

On the other hand, doesn't Franklin remind you of a young Richo circa 1992? Tall and skinny, all arms and legs and frisking about like a 2 day old colt!

I thought the same thing CJH, although he's got a better kicking style. Good luck to the Hawks, no-one would take this journo seriously. He's got as much creditability as Channel 7 have for getting Dicko to host My Restaurant Rules. What would either of these tossers know about anything?

 

[jezza]

The question would have to be asked, what value does a "moral victory" over the reigning wooden spooners have? I think a team is setting very mediocre standards if they start talking about moral victories over lowly teams.

 

[roo_stew]

I am happy for Hawthorn or the Bulldogs to have as many moral victories as they like...lets Richmond just be immoral and take the 4 points!

 

[the_optimist]

Werd.

I'll take the literal victory and 4 pts any day of the week. If you got 4 points for moral victories, hawks would be in the 8. Unfortunately this remains the realm of Mr Baum.