Review Round 1

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Reality is physical size and body shape has alot to do with how someone plays the game. If Shaq was 5 foot 10 he wouldnt have played NBL.
We had people here trying to say Doedee was going to replace Jake. He was never going to do that. He doesnt have the physical ability to do so. But he can be a medium defender along with Kelly.
What will be interesting is if the game moves towards the Richmond style of smaller faster forwards, in which case a player like Tom can be more valuable than another key type.

I do agree, but equally the position Lever does play is really expected to be played by mid sized defenders currently. Hence why you can state Doedee can replace Lever as an intercept defender, you just have to accept you lose the characteristics that made Lever a luxury in the role.

We are not yet at the point that expecting a KPD sized defender to play loose is the norm, though it is something that will most likely be the norm within 20 years.
 
Question on the Gibbs 'dangerous tackle' - 5AA reported this AM that Chamberlain said he can't see immediately after the bounce because he has trouble with his technique.

Sounds like he should have a week or 2 off to work on his technique - I'd have th ought seeing the play was the umpires first priority
 
aa
Fog has to play next week. People who are assessing his performance like you’d assess a 100-gamer are missing the point.

If everyone is fit I would drop one of the senior forwards next week. Don’t ask me who, you won’t like the answer.

Not assessing him as 100 game player, But assessing him as a best 22 in the Crows team.
And unfortunately, he not ready, more so with Walker and Lynch coming back,
Fogerty is not a Key Forward. and he did not play good enough to warrant his position over others.
As it stands its either Forgety or McGovern One has to make way for Walker and it will not be McGovern.
 
Question on the Gibbs 'dangerous tackle' - 5AA reported this AM that Chamberlain said he can't see immediately after the bounce because he has trouble with his technique.

Sounds like he should have a week or 2 off to work on his technique - I'd have th ought seeing the play was the umpires first priority

Razor Ray is making s**t up to save the hide of his colleague. The look on his face said it all. He saw it well enough to make a definitive, verbal assessment that it was okay and was blown away when that other dickhead blew his whistle four kilometres away from the play. It just goes to show umpires are completely at sea, and at odds with each other, over the interpretations of the AFL’s bullshit rules.

And why is the officiating umpire bound to accept the call of the non-officiating umpire?
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It’s round 1, let’s hold off a little bit and then judge the strictures for this year. Has Pyke learned? We’ll see.

Its a worry though that a team can roll over us despite leading 20 pts deep in the 4th.

Pyke needs to shoulder a lot of the blame for that.
 
Question on the Gibbs 'dangerous tackle' - 5AA reported this AM that Chamberlain said he can't see immediately after the bounce because he has trouble with his technique.

Sounds like he should have a week or 2 off to work on his technique - I'd have th ought seeing the play was the umpires first priority

If this is the case, admitting it is the last thing an umpire should admit.

Expect to see a LOT of holding and punching off the ball whenever Chamberlain is mid bounce.
 
Question on the Gibbs 'dangerous tackle' - 5AA reported this AM that Chamberlain said he can't see immediately after the bounce because he has trouble with his technique.

Sounds like he should have a week or 2 off to work on his technique - I'd have th ought seeing the play was the umpires first priority
Does immediately mean 2 hrs?
 
Fogarty > Jenkins.

I wouldn't care in the slightest if Jenkins was dropped
Not last night!

JJ was easily our most dangerous forward.

It's a nonsense to think otherwise.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top