Remove this Banner Ad

Toast Mathew Stokes

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Carried on the good form from last week. Has really added the 1%ers that the coaches love and has set up a few goals as a result. Really pleased for the boy as he's a very important players for us.

Let's not forget that he turned his back on a lucrative deal from WCE at the end of last year. Thouroughly deserves the accolades coming his way.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Doesnt matter if they were gimme's....high pressure game against our foes, it's not given on a platter and the little man done his job.

Just quickly....HOW ****ING GOOD WAS TV'S TACKLE ON BUDDY :)
 
That was very good from Stokes, particuarly in the second half. I hope that can be his benchmark for the rest of the year and he can keep it there, and if he does he may well hold his spot in the side. Well done :thumbsu:
 
chenyan said:
His second half was a rippsnorter thats for sure.

Lined us up and tore us to shreds, well played
Click to expand...

He had the white line fever in the second half, that's for sure. Geelong introduced you bitches to 'our little friend' and opened a can of whoop-arse that will hopefully derail your finals aspirations.:thumbsu:
 
BIGANT said:
Doesnt matter if they were gimme's....high pressure game against our foes, it's not given on a platter and the little man done his job.

Just quickly....HOW ****ING GOOD WAS TV'S TACKLE ON BUDDY :)
Click to expand...

To my mind it does matter.He is not Chappy , he can not relieve in other areas , he can not play one on on in the square , he can not help in the backline and he is not someone who can play on the ball and get a heap of touches. He is a small forward and the best small forwards do not rely on gimme goals , they create their own like his 3rd and 4th today.

For mine , he was VERY lucky to be in the side. Geelong has made a statement of sorts by playing him but there comes a point when the charity stops and the earning starts. Stokes is an adequate AFL footballer but as he cant play on ball at his size , he is limited as a footbaler. In some ways Id rather give games to Menzel. Keep todays form up and he is secure in his position but Im still not totally convinced he is in our best 22.
 
Turbocat said:
To my mind it does matter.He is not Chappy , he can not relieve in other areas , he can not play one on on in the square , he can not help in the backline and he is not someone who can play on the ball and get a heap of touches. He is a small forward and the best small forwards do not rely on gimme goals , they create their own like his 3rd and 4th today.

For mine , he was VERY lucky to be in the side. Geelong has made a statement of sorts by playing him but there comes a point when the charity stops and the earning starts. Stokes is an adequate AFL footballer but as he cant play on ball at his size , he is limited as a footbaler. In some ways Id rather give games to Menzel. Keep todays form up and he is secure in his position but Im still not totally convinced he is in our best 22.
Click to expand...

Far to critical, he has been doing his job just fine offensively all year especially considering he is there primarily for defensive pressure.

He is a far better option then Menzel and unfair to say he needs to keep up the form he is in to keep his spot he just needs to be best 22 and he is safely that in front of Duncan, Hogan, T Hunt and Menzel.
 
donbooger said:
Far to critical, he has been doing his job just fine offensively all year especially considering he is there primarily for defensive pressure.

He is a far better option then Menzel and unfair to say he needs to keep up the form he is in to keep his spot he just needs to be best 22 and he is safely that in front of Duncan, Hogan, T Hunt and Menzel.
Click to expand...

Yes , right now he is. But someone like Duncan & Menzel will have far more upside I believe. In the end , if he keeps playing like today no one will question his position in the side
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Sto ......Sto ....Sto Sto....Stooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooookkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!
 
Regarding Stokes's "gimme" first and second goals I have to point out that Hawthorn's defense were very disciplined and played very well. "Gimme" goals like that don't just happen against a defense like that; Stokes had to do some epic gut running to get into the right place to be on the end of those handballs. It's one of his great strengths.
 
Generalissimo said:
Regarding Stokes's "gimme" first and second goals I have to point out that Hawthorn's defense were very disciplined and played very well. "Gimme" goals like that don't just happen against a defense like that; Stokes had to do some epic gut running to get into the right place to be on the end of those handballs. It's one of his great strengths.
Click to expand...
There was also another occasion (which may not have been picked up on television) in the third quarter when Stokes was goalside and running towards goal and Wojcinski (I think, can't quite remember) just had to put it into his path but instead it came off the side of his boot and headed to the flank. A decent kick would have meant another certain goal.
 
Stoker's job is to get into positions where he can get those 'gimme' goals. And he does that all the time - even when the ball is not delivered to him. He runs, chases, shepherds (doesn't get enough credit for this) and tackles. To say he isn't in our best 22 because he isn't as good as Chappy, would leave only 3 in our best 22 (Gary, Jimmy and Chappy himself).
 
Turbocat said:
To my mind it does matter.He is not Chappy , he can not relieve in other areas , he can not play one on on in the square , he can not help in the backline and he is not someone who can play on the ball and get a heap of touches. He is a small forward and the best small forwards do not rely on gimme goals , they create their own like his 3rd and 4th today.

For mine , he was VERY lucky to be in the side. Geelong has made a statement of sorts by playing him but there comes a point when the charity stops and the earning starts. Stokes is an adequate AFL footballer but as he cant play on ball at his size , he is limited as a footbaler. In some ways Id rather give games to Menzel. Keep todays form up and he is secure in his position but Im still not totally convinced he is in our best 22.
Click to expand...

The Menzel thing is irrelevant for at least another 12 months until his body is ready for AFL.

I agree mostly with your first paragraph, and it is why I have said when we have a full list to pick from, Stokes is borderline best 22. But as I have always said, you pick the 22 based on performance, and yesterday he performed, so he must be given credit for that, and if he keeps performing he may (rightly) keep his spot. Time will tell.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Turbocat said:
To my mind it does matter.He is not Chappy , he can not relieve in other areas , he can not play one on on in the square , he can not help in the backline and he is not someone who can play on the ball and get a heap of touches. He is a small forward and the best small forwards do not rely on gimme goals , they create their own like his 3rd and 4th today.

For mine , he was VERY lucky to be in the side. Geelong has made a statement of sorts by playing him but there comes a point when the charity stops and the earning starts. Stokes is an adequate AFL footballer but as he cant play on ball at his size , he is limited as a footbaler. In some ways Id rather give games to Menzel. Keep todays form up and he is secure in his position but Im still not totally convinced he is in our best 22.
Click to expand...

Short memory Turbo?
At his best that was one of his strengths, the ability to get in behind opposition defences and score goals; far from being "gimmes" they're goals scored off the back of a fantastic work ethic plus the ability to read the play.

And for a "small forward" only who can't get enough of the ball he's averaging 21.38 disposals per game this year compared to Byrne's 17.80 and Varcoe's 16.10 so I'm not sure where you got that idea.

If he gets back to his 07/08 form, and there were signs of it on Saturday, I know which of the three small forwards/mids I'd be picking first heading into a tough finals series.
 
Pure_Ownage said:
The Menzel thing is irrelevant for at least another 12 months until his body is ready for AFL.

I agree mostly with your first paragraph, and it is why I have said when we have a full list to pick from, Stokes is borderline best 22. But as I have always said, you pick the 22 based on performance, and yesterday he performed, so he must be given credit for that, and if he keeps performing he may (rightly) keep his spot. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

Hate to say it, but pretty much agree to this. I didn't want Stokes back in the side - I thought he hadn't done nearly enough to earn a spot considering how stupid he was.

But, credit where it's due. He's been good since he came back. Hope he can maintain his current form. Selection headaches are a beautiful thing.
 
Partridge said:
Hate to say it, but pretty much agree to this. I didn't want Stokes back in the side - I thought he hadn't done nearly enough to earn a spot considering how stupid he was.

But, credit where it's due. He's been good since he came back. Hope he can maintain his current form. Selection headaches are a beautiful thing.
Click to expand...

Same here, I didn't thinm Stokes should have come straight back, nor have I thought of him as in the best 22, but I've always been an advocate of picking sides based on performance, so I'm not going to be a hypocrite now. Heck, I wouldn't even ask for my man to keep a spot unless he was performing. The challenge is whether Stokes can stay at the level he gave on Saturday.
 
BIGANT said:
Just quickly....HOW ****ING GOOD WAS TV'S TACKLE ON BUDDY :)
Click to expand...

This deserves its own thread if it doesn't already have one. Brilliant. Just the thing I needed to shut up some ignorant Hawks mates of mine who don't rate Varcoe.
 
AcidFiend said:
This deserves its own thread if it doesn't already have one. Brilliant. Just the thing I needed to shut up some ignorant Hawks mates of mine who don't rate Varcoe.
Click to expand...

Take a look at the Varcoe thread, plenty of love in there :D
 
Pure_Ownage said:
The Menzel thing is irrelevant for at least another 12 months until his body is ready for AFL.

I agree mostly with your first paragraph, and it is why I have said when we have a full list to pick from, Stokes is borderline best 22. But as I have always said, you pick the 22 based on performance, and yesterday he performed, so he must be given credit for that, and if he keeps performing he may (rightly) keep his spot. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

Pure , of course Menzel is a down the track footballer and Stokes is a player that is in his prime.With the amount of outs we have had Stokes should be played and expected to perform. I was just comparing Menzel to Duncan and we have managed to get games into one , not the other.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom