NTRabbit
Brownlow Medallist
Who is hawthorn's current chb?
I'll give you a clue - his last name is Gibson.![]()
He's named on their list at CHB, but he's not a key defender. This week the Hawks are playing with a single, solitary KPD, James Frawley.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

ADE v GEE · HAW v WB · NM v FRE · GCS v BL · WCE v PA · SYD v StK · ESS v CAR · COL v MEL ·
Weekend Wrap and "Liked, Learned, Hated" right here -- How did tipping go?
Who is hawthorn's current chb?
I'll give you a clue - his last name is Gibson.![]()
And you're suggesting the solution is to purposefully play a weaker defense? How bad they're going isn't rekevant to us putting our best defensive structure on the deck.
I cant come at that. I believe we are always in contention every year.
Gibson = leverGibson gets monstered by the genuine KPF's as well though, just like Cheney. However, they can play on the 3rd tallest forward as they are smart at reading the play and using their body.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Lol, Gibson has regularly played as a kpp defender... Tho agree hawks prefer him as the 3rd tall so he play more off his man.He's named on their list at CHB, but he's not a key defender. This week the Hawks are playing with a single, solitary KPD, James Frawley.
But you still do it every week!!!! And it's not even your opinion, "I support the selectors you guys are idiots" doesn't count
Defense is something done by the whole team, and changing the structure of the back 6 because the midfield was too weak to work in the best structure indicates that our midfield is, in fact, too weak to win a premiership.
So you think every team is in contention every season?
Gibson = lever
Cheney = neither!
Wut. You take a lot out of that that isn't designed for what I was saying but more for something you want to get across. Ask me some more questions and let's manufacture something else for you to manipulate.And you're suggesting the solution is to purposefully play a weaker defense? How bad they're going isn't rekevant to us putting our best defensive structure on the deck.
Oh, I think I get it, if the midfield was better we could afford to carry our favoured out of form plodders.
They should believe it and play as if they are.So you think every team is in contention every season?
Lol, Gibson has regularly played as a kpp defender... Tho agree hawks prefer him as the 3rd tall so he play more off his man.
You are in denial!
I'm hoping the angry ginger gets a bit of one-on-one time with Gray…we should be hammering Gray and Wingard like Betts cops it every week.
Wut. You take a lot out of that that isn't designed for what I was saying but more for something you want to get across. Ask me some more questions and let's manufacture something else for you to manipulate.
You dont see Lever as more of a third tall then?Just because the Hawks played him there out of lack of alternatives doesn't make him a KPD, it just makes him a third tall defender who is better at playing tall than any of the others.
He was always a third tall defender playing out of position, and the only time he wasn't is when the Hawks actually had enough real key defenders that they could play him in his own position. This year Lake is gone, and Ryan Schoenmakers remains a bad KPD playing as an ordinary KPF because Roughead is out, and they're already making Gunston play out of position, so Gibson is being forced to play out of position once more.
It's definitely a match up thingAnd I hope the idea of Eddie's experiment playing on the ball and high forward are a thing of the past...naming him in the forward pocket is permanent I hope, play him close to Tex and Jerka who can knock off the campaigners that try to rough him up...not too mention it's where he can do the most damage!!
I wouldn't have brought it Hartigan, but can understand the reasoning. Would have preferred Knight to replace VB and keep the same defensive structure as last week. He has a different opinion to you, as do I, doesn't make anyone right or wrong. I'll be interested to see how the structure works this week.His entire argument is based on a structure and player's attributes that he manufactured in his head. He was wrong and he's perpetuating this by claiming we've panicked. Teague admitted they probably erred last week in not going in with the extra tall. They get it wrong, they're not perfect. But I see you think they got it right again this week. Batting 1000 Baccs, you're a superb judge mate.
We need more from our mids.I took your comment to be in the context of agreeing with Rabbit that we should stick with last weeks flawed structure because the midfield is ordinary. If it was an isolated comment with no context then I apologise and agree. Although, I reckon we'll improve with Brouch getting up to speed and I'd like to see Lyons or CEY in to get Sloane more gut running up and down the ground.
You dont see Lever as more of a third tall then?
On FSN, the ticker had "Hartigan replacing the injured Van Berlo".... Lol
I agree with the first part, but Cheney can definitely play on KPF's in the 185-190cm range (of which there are plenty more of now). I think he's our best matchup for someone like Stringer.Gibson = lever
Cheney = neither!
I wouldn't have brought it Hartigan, but can understand the reasoning. Would have preferred Knight to replace VB and keep the same defensive structure as last week. He has a different opinion to you, as do I, doesn't make anyone right or wrong. I'll be interested to see how the structure works this week.
There's still no denying at the end of the day we have a major midfield problem.