_STREET_
Street > Every ruckman ever
ray = dud
eagleton = past his used by date
used to think eagleton was okayish, but now, hes gone
eagleton = past his used by date
used to think eagleton was okayish, but now, hes gone
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Ray and Eagleton
- Thread starter The Cotch
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Banned
- #27
why didnt we play callan ward i would think he offers more then ray
54_08
Rookie
Isn't the point of outside receivers that they kill you with their possessions and deadly use of the ball? I don't mind so much that their role is outside, I do mind them butchering the ball.
Well, yes. But also, by nature of the fact that they're receivers, means if you're team gets smashed in contested ball, they've got no chance to do what they do best, which for Ray is run, and for Eagle is kick under no pressure.
Not defending them though. Ray should go. Get a 2nd rounder for him. I don't care, cut our losses. Eagleton should be delisted too.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
MrChristo
Premiership Player
What a rediculous post.
Forget players for one second...in the first meeting with Hawthorn we won the clearances 36-23 and contested ball 114-100...pretty much the same personel...
...we out-contested the Crows last week in the wet...great effort...
...so back to the really stupid comment about "receivers"...
Who have we got? I guess you've thrown in Eagleton and Ray straight up...Josh Hill...
[As an aside, one of our 'hardest' players had just about the least impact in Hahn...]
...You trying to tell me that Bateman, Murphy, Stokes, Crawford are "ball winners" compared to our list?
Also very interesting to note the numbers on the season...(well, after Rd. 21 is all I have in front of me atm...)
Geelong out in front 2511 contested possies...ESSENDON second on 2425!...Doggies third (2410)...WEST COAST 4th!!...All the way down to the Hawks...amazingly...DEAD SET LAST!! (Yep, less even than Melbourne, @ 2135)
So...getting the ball is one thing...how you use it is another all-together.
Our efficiency has been terrible in the last 6 weeks, and our clanger count (accordingly) has been sky high.
You wanna have shots our our 'runners', then do it for the right reasons at least.
...and yes, both Eagleton's and Ray's disposal were horrible Friday night.
I'll add another one who I was disappointed with...Welsh. Fumbled everything that came near him.
Aker and Cooney were a long way down from their best, and Minson just doesn't have te mentality to make is a serious player in the AFL. (Even tho he is anti-soft...stupidly so of course.)
In the first meeting with Hawthorn our disposal was superb...Eagleton himself was a standout...
...now sudenly we've lost all confidence in our skills.
Nowhere near as much to do with 'winning' the ball as you might think.
What a rediculous post.
Forget players for one second...in the first meeting with Hawthorn we won the clearances 36-23 and contested ball 114-100...pretty much the same personel...
...we out-contested the Crows last week in the wet...great effort...
...so back to the really stupid comment about "receivers"...
Who have we got? I guess you've thrown in Eagleton and Ray straight up...Josh Hill...
[As an aside, one of our 'hardest' players had just about the least impact in Hahn...]
...You trying to tell me that Bateman, Murphy, Stokes, Crawford are "ball winners" compared to our list?
Also very interesting to note the numbers on the season...(well, after Rd. 21 is all I have in front of me atm...)
Geelong out in front 2511 contested possies...ESSENDON second on 2425!...Doggies third (2410)...WEST COAST 4th!!...All the way down to the Hawks...amazingly...DEAD SET LAST!! (Yep, less even than Melbourne, @ 2135)
So...getting the ball is one thing...how you use it is another all-together.
Our efficiency has been terrible in the last 6 weeks, and our clanger count (accordingly) has been sky high.
You wanna have shots our our 'runners', then do it for the right reasons at least.
...and yes, both Eagleton's and Ray's disposal were horrible Friday night.
I'll add another one who I was disappointed with...Welsh. Fumbled everything that came near him.
Aker and Cooney were a long way down from their best, and Minson just doesn't have te mentality to make is a serious player in the AFL. (Even tho he is anti-soft...stupidly so of course.)
In the first meeting with Hawthorn our disposal was superb...Eagleton himself was a standout...
...now sudenly we've lost all confidence in our skills.
Nowhere near as much to do with 'winning' the ball as you might think.
How ridiculous is it to claim these guys can win there own ball. Ball winner is not necessarily the right term here either. The guy who runs ten metres to put on a Sheppard.The guy who jumps in front of a big bloke even though he knows he may be crunched. The guy who tackles one guy then gets up and then tackles a second and third time. Clangers aside we have to many players in the class considered as runners. Which personally I think is code for soft. Is Hodge a good runner? Yes he is. Is he considered a hard nut? Yes he is. Players you mentioned above for Hawthorn all put there bodies on the line. Sure they are also good runners but none are considered soft.
The proof is before your eyes on Friday. There is plenty off other examples off this with Eagleton and Ray to mention a couple not just pointing fingers at them but we have to many players without the heart to put there bodies on the line. That is why Hawthorn won and that is why the Swans will give us a lot off trouble Friday night. I hope they surprise me but a leopard can't change its spots.
MrChristo
Premiership Player
Yeah, fair point about sheparding etc...
...and of course giving the choice between getting the ball first and not, you'd take it every time!...
...but very little point winning possession, simply to give it away.
Anyway, like I said, we were winning earlier in the year (v. Hawthorn, v. St. Kilda, v. Sydney, v. Collingwood...all consiered 'tough', strong defensive teams) with these guys in the team.
Their courage hasn't changed. Their work rate hasn't changed...all that has changed, as I said, has been a massive fall off of our skills, for one reason or another.
(Bit hard to statistically judge the things you mention...but official 1% stats have Geelong out in front...Essendon 3rd...Melbourne 4th!...Hawthorn 13th, and our boys 14th)
Did I mention Hodge?
...and of course giving the choice between getting the ball first and not, you'd take it every time!...
...but very little point winning possession, simply to give it away.
Anyway, like I said, we were winning earlier in the year (v. Hawthorn, v. St. Kilda, v. Sydney, v. Collingwood...all consiered 'tough', strong defensive teams) with these guys in the team.
Their courage hasn't changed. Their work rate hasn't changed...all that has changed, as I said, has been a massive fall off of our skills, for one reason or another.
(Bit hard to statistically judge the things you mention...but official 1% stats have Geelong out in front...Essendon 3rd...Melbourne 4th!...Hawthorn 13th, and our boys 14th)
Did I mention Hodge?
