Remove this Banner Ad

Sam Nostradmus Newman

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gasometer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Explain to me how being 'arrogant' causes you to kick like shit at goals?

See Cameron Mooney's shot from 10 meters, the big head tried to belt the ball into the top tier, he tried to make a statement, here shove that Hawks. Arrogance and failure in one example.

On another issue the Cats came undone because they didn't share the ball in the front half the way they had all year.
Several goals were missed because players didn't give off to better options. Why, pressure perhaps?

Of the second quarter misses most were snap shots or hurried shots under alot of pressure or well wide off the goals. Ottens, Mooney and Stokes (I think) missed easier shots, the rest were not gimmes.

As for F50 entries, we normally rack up a dozen more of these when we play the Roos. To no avail however, because they usually end up coming straight back over our head on the counter attack. 'Bombing' entries are a bit like junk possies accumulated when the ball is shared accros half back.

They count for nothing much at all.
 
They came out with Plan A and it failed. Yet they stuck to Plan A and finished off with plan A too.

The plan was fine, it was the execution that was lacking.

Would have been silly to abandon what had been working for them all year.
Exactly. And this "not having a Plan B" rubbish is just nonsense.

Any team that loses any game seems to have no "Plan B".
 
cats were kept in it by the umps and cats still didn't get close. they were arrogant and didnt want to work for it apart from gablett and selwood.


Rubbish . . . Hawks were kept in it by bad kicking from the Cats Then The Hawks Capitalised. Remember if Half The Behinds they kicked were goals it's a different story. But as they say bad kicking is bad football
 
The ones they got from free kicks. The downfield free and the one from the 100 meter penalty were particularly pathetic..

We've been on the wrong end of two or three of those this year.

I think one of the other frees you scored from was there, but probably cancelled out due to Franklin not being paid frees when held by Scarlett. Also that crap free paid against Franklin in the 50 deemed a push when Scarlett fell over!

Anyway, Geelong lost so it all worked out in the end.

Look, could you stop going around saying we got 4 goals from rubbish free kicks if you've got nothing to back it up.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

They came out with Plan A and it failed. Yet they stuck to Plan A and finished off with plan A too.


So true .
They were so **** sure of themselves they didnt have plane B , C or D .

That is weak coaching and administration .
 
Rubbish . . . Hawks were kept in it by bad kicking from the Cats Then The Hawks Capitalised. Remember if Half The Behinds they kicked were goals it's a different story. But as they say bad kicking is bad football

That is rubbish. Half Geelong's behinds were rushed by Hawthorn. Why was Geelong's kicking so bad? Answer, pressure both actual and perceived.
 
Shane: Do you think the Cats are certainties again this year?

Sam: Yeah, I do. The only reservation I have about Geelong – and this is only one half of 1 per cent –


He thought Geelong were certainties and that effectively there was only a 0.5% chance of them losing.

I can't believe the number of people praising his football nous.

People he got it wrong.
 
Rubbish . . . Hawks were kept in it by bad kicking from the Cats Then The Hawks Capitalised. Remember if Half The Behinds they kicked were goals it's a different story. But as they say bad kicking is bad football



And IF my Aunty had balls she would be my Uncle! IF, If, Ifs dont count for nothing!The Hawks won because they stepped up the tempo in the third quarter when it counted and Geelongs history of choking under intense pressure was on show again.
Geelong looked pretty ordinary for a big slice of the game against the Dogs and know doubt the Hawks coaching panel would have learnt some lessons from that game.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

There is no doubt that geelong played like rubbish from quarter time on,poor decisions,poor football,selfish football,lack of want compared to Hawthorn....but so what?
They never ever take em back and give you another go,and in every book you read or stats you look up it will read something like
2005 Sydney
2006 West Coast
2007 Geelong
2008 Hawthorn

It happens every game every season,one team makes more mistakes than the other,usually due to an inibility to handle pressure,whether physical,mental or otherwise and gets turned over.
Better team won on the day.
 
You did some different laws of averages back at school to me. If you have won 44 out of 46 games, law of averages would say that you are a 95.7% chance of winning your next one. Therefore you are more likely to drop one later rather than sooner.

Really champ.

This year Hawthorn had won 21 games and lost 1. That is a magnificent record, fact is, most would say that you are going to lose another game sooner rather then later with a record like that.

FFS, most people with half a brain can see that Saturdays game was not the one horse race many people predicted. Sam Newman saying that Geelong may lose the Grand Final (he said a 0.5% chance, hardly a predicition) is nothing exclusive.

People on here are in hysterics at Sams football knowledge for prediciting it, FFS, you said it was a 0.5% chance. That is nothing but prediciting a cats win FFS.
 
Sam is almost always right, it's just people get sucked into his gimmicks, and don't pay attention to how intelligent and accurate he is about the game.

if not one of the most truthful words said on bigfooty. id take newmans words over all of the journos put together.
 
People here are attributing silly sam with prophetic gifts he simply doesn't possess. He tipped Geelong to win the flag! 99.95%. His cocky 08PURR numberplates are accessories to the fact. Anyone for a bargain on ebay?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

People here are attributing silly sam with prophetic gifts he simply doesn't possess. He tipped Geelong to win the flag! 99.95%. His cocky 08PURR numberplates are accessories to the fact. Anyone for a bargain on ebay?

He tipped them to win the flag? Of course he did, most of us did, and all Cats fans. Doesn't change the fact he outlined how the loss would happen.

And cocky to get those plates? The guy is a millionaire and owns a giant yacht, thats a drop in the ocean for him.

Sam is very smart. He knows his footy. And contrary to popular belief is a smart person aswell.
 
He tipped them to win the flag? Of course he did, most of us did, and all Cats fans. Doesn't change the fact he outlined how the loss would happen.

And cocky to get those plates? The guy is a millionaire and owns a giant yacht, thats a drop in the ocean for him.

Sam is very smart. He knows his footy. And contrary to popular belief is a smart person aswell.

Do you really believe that arrogance alone was the reason geelong lost? If so, you are attributing sam with a foresight he does not possess. Geelong lost because they wilted under real pressure, Sam didn't even mention that could be a possibility!

Yes everyone knows that Sam is very wealthy and reasonably intelligent, but he is not objective when talking about Geelong.
 
See Cameron Mooney's shot from 10 meters, the big head tried to belt the ball into the top tier, he tried to make a statement, here shove that Hawks. Arrogance and failure in one example.

On another issue the Cats came undone because they didn't share the ball in the front half the way they had all year.
Several goals were missed because players didn't give off to better options. Why, pressure perhaps?

Of the second quarter misses most were snap shots or hurried shots under alot of pressure or well wide off the goals. Ottens, Mooney and Stokes (I think) missed easier shots, the rest were not gimmes.

As for F50 entries, we normally rack up a dozen more of these when we play the Roos. To no avail however, because they usually end up coming straight back over our head on the counter attack. 'Bombing' entries are a bit like junk possies accumulated when the ball is shared accros half back.

They count for nothing much at all.

Hawthorn supporters never cease to amaze me.

You suddenly changed your game plan ( without knowing it ) to win the Grand Final.

You have been running a moving zone defence for the last 2 years ( very effectively ) , in which you conceded an average of 40 Inside 50's per game. This is obviously an effective tactic as it should restrict the number of goals kicked by the opposition.

Suddenly, HFC decided the moving zone defence was an ineffective tactic and allowed Geelong 62 Inside Forward entries.

Strange logic !
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom