Autopsy Round 14, 2025: Hawks sink the Crows

[TheFourPillars]

Sic will play in defence. He like newk was getting a lot of attention every week. He is a match winner playing as a defender. Will start there

 

[CHUBBSS]

Here's the video of the final seconds. Ginnivan fumbles the ball on the ground or "knocks it away" before the umpire pays the free kick, so how the **** could it have been 50?

Video

Maybe this needs to be in the head****ed thread instead?

What about when the crows player intentionally trips Ginny…

 

[peetoo]

I noticed a little tactic among the crows of holding an opponents arm then allowing them to take possession. They are not the initiating attacking team they seem to be

 

[Newmo89]

Six Points: Adelaide Crows, Round 14, 2025 by Talking Hawks

Liam and Tim discuss the main takeaways from the Hawks nail-biting 3 point victory over the Crows in Round 14 including Barrass' Beastly Game, Impressive Impey and Pivotal 4th Quarter Moments.Give TH a 5-star review! Subscribe on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TalkingHawksFollow on Facebook...

bit.ly

Talking Hawks 6 points podcast

 

[grumbleguts]

Jeff White is really insightful with his analysis. Surprised he isn't picked up by one of the channels.

He probably would be if he knew what "check side" meant. He was calling everything "check side" snaps, bananas, everything.

 

[grumbleguts]

If Butler tackles like he has the last couple of weeks, we won't lose another game. He has that uncanny knack of leaving an arm for the opportunity to dispose, but with enough downward pressure that the leg can't lift to kick it. Cyril was a master of this. But Butler's tank means one chase down can be followed up by another and another.

 

[unitedhawk2]

For those criticising the Chief for his objective, unbiased commentary, please give it a rest please.

I have absolutely no doubt that every bone in his body would be silently barracking for the boys but the fact that he is able to mask that and call the game as he sees it is a huge credit to his professionalism.

One particular colleague of Dunstall, whose first name starts with G and surname with W, could learn a lot about unbiased, objective commentary from the great man.

 

[SSSSSS]

For those criticising the Chief for his objective, unbiased commentary, please give it a rest please.

I have absolutely no doubt that every bone in his body would be silently barracking for the boys but the fact that he is able to mask that and call the game as he sees it is a huge credit to his professionalism.

One particular colleague of Dunstall, whose first name starts with G and surname with W, could learn a lot about unbiased, objective commentary from the great man.

I'm not asking for Dunstall to glaze the Hawks but in an effort to look unbiased he goes to the opposite end of the spectrum and can rarely get a positive word in for the Hawks.

I'm not bothered by it like some others here but it's glaringly obvious that his commentary isn't balanced when he calls a Hawks game.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

For those criticising the Chief for his objective, unbiased commentary, please give it a rest please.

I have absolutely no doubt that every bone in his body would be silently barracking for the boys but the fact that he is able to mask that and call the game as he sees it is a huge credit to his professionalism.

One particular colleague of Dunstall, whose first name starts with G and surname with W, could learn a lot about unbiased, objective commentary from the great man.

Tonight was the final straw for me.

He was my childhood hero and I still love the bloke but he just can't do hawks games.

At one point in the last he said something like "It would almost be a shame if they (Adelaide) lose from here". Come one man, he doesnt believe that, its pure pandering. "Jeez there wasn't much in that" "He didn't mean that, that was lucky" etc etc

He goes way too far the other way so that is far more biased against Hawthorn than any other commentator

I just wish he would stay away from our games so I can resume adoring the bloke to an unnatural level

 

[grumbleguts]

For those criticising the Chief for his objective, unbiased commentary, please give it a rest please.

I have absolutely no doubt that every bone in his body would be silently barracking for the boys but the fact that he is able to mask that and call the game as he sees it is a huge credit to his professionalism.

One particular colleague of Dunstall, whose first name starts with G and surname with W, could learn a lot about unbiased, objective commentary from the great man.

It's not unbiased though. We all understand brown and gold blood flows throughout his veins, but in his bid to APPEAR unbiased he actively whinges about Hawthorn free kicks, sooks when oppo free kicks that aren't even there aren't paid. During the Brisbane game his colleagues were actively ribbing him about it.

The problem is all the headf**ked "freekickhawthorn" acolytes out there swallow it up and thinks its gospel because it comes from Dunstall. All people want is sound, unbiased commentary, not some forced bullshit rhetoric entirely designed to appear unbiased, because statements like "Oh come on umpire! you can't pay that!" for clear frees just sounds so forced. If he just called the game as it was happening with what his eyes saw it'd be fine, but he can't.

 

[TylerDurden]

 

[unitedhawk2]

Tonight was the final straw for me.

He was my childhood hero and I still love the bloke but he just can't do hawks games.

At one point in the last he said something like "It would almost be a shame if they (Adelaide) lose from here". Come one man, he doesnt believe that, its pure pandering. "Jeez there wasn't much in that" "He didn't mean that, that was lucky" etc etc

He goes way too far the other way so that is far more biased against Hawthorn than any other commentator

I just wish he would stay away from our games so I can resume adoring the bloke to an unnatural level

When Whateley made his "Oh, that was hot!" comment as soon as Brodie Smith was caught HTB late in the game, the Chief immediately explained that Smith's prior opportunity was when he side-stepped a Hawks defender. Dunstall just calls it as he sees it - and he's very good at it.

On the examples you gave:

• "It would almost be a shame if they (Adelaide) lose from here" - well, Adelaide should've won that game; they should've been too far ahead by half-time if they'd kicked straight. Dunstall was just stating the obvious.
• "Jeez there wasn't much in that" "He didn't mean that, that was lucky" - I don't know which incidents you're referring to here but would be surprised if they weren't his objective opinions on the incidents in question.

When we watch a game with brown-and-gold glasses, as we all do, it can sometimes seem unfair when one of our own legends doesn't view it through a brown-and-gold lens. Let's remember he was doing his job on Fox Footy, not Hawks Radio or Hawks TV.

 

[ahhhhhh]

For those criticising the Chief for his objective, unbiased commentary, please give it a rest please.

I have absolutely no doubt that every bone in his body would be silently barracking for the boys but the fact that he is able to mask that and call the game as he sees it is a huge credit to his professionalism.

One particular colleague of Dunstall, whose first name starts with G and surname with W, could learn a lot about unbiased, objective commentary from the great man.

Honestly that is a ridiculous take. My non-supporting Hawthorn mates think it's too far.

It's just constant negativity about Hawthorn and quite frankly it's getting to the point where it's unprofessional.

He had always tried to sound like he's not supporting Hawthorn, which I understand, but this year has gone to a whole new level.

 

[Slainte]

That is pure speculation. I have got no idea what happened at half time, but the main reason we applied more pressure in the second half is that Adelaide's pressure fell off. As they tired, they had more difficulty getting quick, clean and accurate disposal and we were better able to pounce. Our players didn't need to be shouted at. They had the legs to come home with a wet sail.

 

[grumbleguts]

When Whateley made his "Oh, that was hot!" comment as soon as Brodie Smith was caught HTB late in the game, the Chief immediately explained that Smith's prior opportunity was when he side-stepped a Hawks defender. Dunstall just calls it as he sees it - and he's very good at it.

On the examples you gave:

• "It would almost be a shame if they (Adelaide) lose from here" - well, Adelaide should've won that game; they should've been too far ahead by half-time if they'd kicked straight. Dunstall was just stating the obvious.
• "Jeez there wasn't much in that" "He didn't mean that, that was lucky" - I don't know which incidents you're referring to here but would be surprised if they weren't his objective opinions on the incidents in question.

When we watch a game with brown-and-gold glasses, as we all do, it can sometimes seem unfair when one of our own legends doesn't view it through a brown-and-gold lens. Let's remember he was doing his job on Fox Footy, not Hawks Radio or Hawks TV.

This isn't the greatest take, given his commentary colleagues rib him about it. When Hawthorn gets any free at all, he's sometimes asked "So what was wrong with that one, Chief?" implying he's going to find something wrong with the decision and he often does, and the brown and gold glasses doesn't wash when neutral supporters think he's gone too far as well.

Starting to prefer Underwood's commentary.

 

[Sixpence]

For those criticising the Chief for his objective, unbiased commentary, please give it a rest please.

I have absolutely no doubt that every bone in his body would be silently barracking for the boys but the fact that he is able to mask that and call the game as he sees it is a huge credit to his professionalism.

One particular colleague of Dunstall, whose first name starts with G and surname with W, could learn a lot about unbiased, objective commentary from the great man.

If you can't separate Dunstall the Legendary Hawk and Dunstall the Commentator, that's on you. Criticism of one of the roles doesn't reflect on the other.

He and Derm are both horrible to listen to as commentators. They try too hard to sound unbiased that it ends up sounding like they're rooting against us (which we know they're not). Every free we give away is legit and every free we win, we're "lucky". It's unbearable.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

When Whateley made his "Oh, that was hot!" comment as soon as Brodie Smith was caught HTB late in the game, the Chief immediately explained that Smith's prior opportunity was when he side-stepped a Hawks defender. Dunstall just calls it as he sees it - and he's very good at it.

On the examples you gave:

• "It would almost be a shame if they (Adelaide) lose from here" - well, Adelaide should've won that game; they should've been too far ahead by half-time if they'd kicked straight. Dunstall was just stating the obvious.
• "Jeez there wasn't much in that" "He didn't mean that, that was lucky" - I don't know which incidents you're referring to here but would be surprised if they weren't his objective opinions on the incidents in question.

When we watch a game with brown-and-gold glasses, as we all do, it can sometimes seem unfair when one of our own legends doesn't view it through a brown-and-gold lens. Let's remember he was doing his job on Fox Footy, not Hawks Radio or Hawks TV.

Dont patronise me dude.

His tone did shift in the last 10 minutes, I noticed that, but I disagree that he is objective.

Most commentators support a team or used to play for a team. Thats fine, they all have baises and most of them own it. Dermie for example.

Piggy is a very knowledgeable commentator and embraces the 'one sided hawks thing' on shows like the bounce. But for some reason, he over compensates when calling hawks games and for me, he is getting worse as we become more relevant again.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

It's not unbiased though. We all understand brown and gold blood flows throughout his veins, but in his bid to APPEAR unbiased he actively whinges about Hawthorn free kicks, sooks when oppo free kicks that aren't even there aren't paid. During the Brisbane game his colleagues were actively ribbing him about it.

The problem is all the headf**ked "freekickhawthorn" acolytes out there swallow it up and thinks its gospel because it comes from Dunstall. All people want is sound, unbiased commentary, not some forced bullshit rhetoric entirely designed to appear unbiased, because statements like "Oh come on umpire! you can't pay that!" for clear frees just sounds so forced. If he just called the game as it was happening with what his eyes saw it'd be fine, but he can't.

This is the major annoyance for me. Lots people are idiots and form their opinions based off the experts they are listening to.

After the game on Thursday the overwhelming rhetoric on all the platforms was how lucky we were with the umps again. It was 14-4 against us in the first half and the two worst decisions (even GW and JR called them howlers) of the match gave Tilthorpe and ANB a shot on goal.

But because piggy, Reiwoldt and Wheatley spend most of the match complaining about every Hawks free and justifying every Crows free, the idiots buy into the freekickhawthorn bullshit even more.

There was a free paid in the ruck contest up forward in the dying minutes when the Crows needed a goal. The comms box heard the whistle, asked which way and all three broke into sarcastic snorts of 'of course' when it turned out it was for Meek. It was blatant barracking all night (except when Dunstall started justifying Hawks frees halfway through the 4th for some reason) but this was just ludicrous. Gerard was giddy with indignation.

Dunstall is being a coward imo. Its disappointing.

 

[MasterSamurai]

When Whateley made his "Oh, that was hot!" comment as soon as Brodie Smith was caught HTB late in the game, the Chief immediately explained that Smith's prior opportunity was when he side-stepped a Hawks defender. Dunstall just calls it as he sees it - and he's very good at it.

On the examples you gave:

• "It would almost be a shame if they (Adelaide) lose from here" - well, Adelaide should've won that game; they should've been too far ahead by half-time if they'd kicked straight. Dunstall was just stating the obvious.
• "Jeez there wasn't much in that" "He didn't mean that, that was lucky" - I don't know which incidents you're referring to here but would be surprised if they weren't his objective opinions on the incidents in question.

When we watch a game with brown-and-gold glasses, as we all do, it can sometimes seem unfair when one of our own legends doesn't view it through a brown-and-gold lens. Let's remember he was doing his job on Fox Footy, not Hawks Radio or Hawks TV.

He's a miserable twat, move on. I been saying this for the past few years, he is ****ing awful. Not sure what your game is mate , but people don't just make up shit to hate on a club legend. He shouldn't be commentating on Hawthorn games. Derm not far behind.

 

[Siri]

Nah! Those trying to justify Dunstall's commentary are blinded by the fact he's a HFC and AFL legend. He's been ragging on us for far too long. He has an M.O. I'm over it.

 

[kazzooka]

Tonight was the final straw for me.

He was my childhood hero and I still love the bloke but he just can't do hawks games.

At one point in the last he said something like "It would almost be a shame if they (Adelaide) lose from here". Come one man, he doesnt believe that, its pure pandering. "Jeez there wasn't much in that" "He didn't mean that, that was lucky" etc etc

He goes way too far the other way so that is far more biased against Hawthorn than any other commentator

I just wish he would stay away from our games so I can resume adoring the bloke to an unnatural level

Agreed, Meek took a diving mark that was clearly a mark and Dunstall questioned it when nobody else did.

There was no need.

 

[TONYC3163]

Agreed, Meek took a diving mark that was clearly a mark and Dunstall questioned it when nobody else did.

There was no need.

The one that looked like it may have hit the ground as he took it.
I bet he wasn’t the only one to question it.

 

[Dipper]

One particular colleague of Dunstall, whose first name starts with G and surname with W, could learn a lot about unbiased, objective commentary from the great man.

How dare you cast aspertions on our resident intellectual colossus, we should be eternally grateful that one of the great minds of our time has decided to share his genius with the footy public.

To give just one example, late on in the game Watson received a free and the camera panned to the crowd to show a young boy wearing a wizard hat. Our very own Noam Chomsky observed "A wizard fan I suspect"

Amazing! Even Sherlock Holmes couldn't have solved that one with so little evidence at hand. Gerard would no doubt have modestly shrugged that it was "Elementary" but it was only elementary to the permanently cleverest man in the room.

 

[Rhayader]

I was pretty annoyed about the umpiring (in the back, anyone?) in the first half. But mostly about the way we were playing.

The commentary definitely exacerbated the vibe to the point where I found myself not enjoying watching, which is rare for me.

It was so bad - even by my already low expectations - I almost muted them. Intentionally antagonising half your audience doesn’t seem like a great business model tbh …

That said, I can’t say I’ve spent any time thinking about it since. (Well, until now)

 

[smeltitdeltit]

The one that looked like it may have hit the ground as he took it.
I bet he wasn’t the only one to question it.

Looked to me like it was caught before the ground and didn’t bounce or anything. Certainly not an absolute definite 100% for sure for sure for sure non-mark like JD called it.