Tom Boyd

[Ozil]

Had a good long laugh at Cameron and Patton.

Boyd got the millions that were set aside for Patton, and he didn't shit the bed in a prelim like Cameron. I'm sure their banter was of the most refined wit, but Tom had the last laugh.

 

[Bulldog1954]

We wouldn't be in the grand final without him Worked his ass off against the Giants most influential player, whilst Griffen had no impact

 

[DemonTim]

I understand the game perfectly well, if you or other people think Boyd's output has been good in the last 3 finals I would question your understanding of it.



Mumford had over double the hitouts that Boyd had (46 to 21) so I don't know where you are getting the idea from that he was completely negated.

He's played his part. Or do you think beverage is a terrible coach gifting finals games to him? Surely he should get the sack if so, playing a terrible player for no ransom in do or die finals

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

The people who can't see how important he's been in the finals, and last night, are either idiots, or purely just want to see him fail.
"Oh, but he hasn't kicked any goals". Probably cause he's played a **** ton in the ruck. Even more when Roughy went down.
"Oh, but he's so lazy and doesn't go for the hardball". Are you ******* high? He's regularly on the bottom of packs tapping the ball out or giving quick hands.

He's playing some good footy at the moment. **** anyone that is giving him shit for not kicking 6 a game.

Bigfooty is full of dickheads. Don't let them get you down.

Boyd helped carry his team to a GF. He held his own against a much more experienced guy that all the footy media would have you think is unstoppable.

Hats off to him.

Enjoy the week, Doggies. Screw the haters.

 

[Astro_]

I understand the game perfectly well, if you or other people think Boyd's output has been good in the last 3 finals I would question your understanding of it.



Mumford had over double the hitouts that Boyd had (46 to 21) so I don't know where you are getting the idea from that he was completely negated.

Mumford had little influence playing against a part time ruckman in Boyd.

For the dogs to win it was an area that had to be nullified. You would know this if you understood the game perfectly well. 46 hitouts, not many effective.

 

[DAWESOME!!]

Glad to see him coming on and contributing well to his team getting into a GF.

 

[Fat Nyfe]

He's playing with heart and passion at the moment which is the most important thing for Bulldogs fans leading up to a grand final. I want to like the guy but I can't help but feel he makes poor decisions and is too slow in general.

 

[Danog]

He might never be that KPF but once he gets his full footy engine at 23 he's going to be the first 200cm ruck/midfielder in footy

So you've never seen Blicavs play then?

 

[JeffDunne]

He certainly has some weaknesses in his game as expected but his ground ball work in the finals has been nothing short of excellent.

Examples?

 

[Plugger35]

He's played his part. Or do you think beverage is a terrible coach gifting finals games to him? Surely he should get the sack if so, playing a terrible player for no ransom in do or die finals

Well I don't think Beveridge has much choice with Redpath out injured, if he was fit then it's quite possible that Boyd wouldn't have been selected.

Mumford had little influence playing against a part time ruckman in Boyd.

For the dogs to win it was an area that had to be nullified. You would know this if you understood the game perfectly well. 46 hitouts, not many effective.

I thought Mumford was actually quite influential in the ruck but the GWS midfielders didn't use it to their advantage as much as they should have.

I know Supercoach stats aren't the be all and end all but Mumford scored 107 SC points compared to Boyd's 67 SC points so to say that Mumford had little influence is rubbish, Boyd just restricted him from being more influential than he was.

 

[Moist Biscuit]

Well I don't think Beveridge has much choice with Redpath out injured, if he was fit then it's quite possible that Boyd wouldn't have been selected.



I thought Mumford was actually quite influential in the ruck but the GWS midfielders didn't use it to their advantage as much as they should have.

I know Supercoach stats aren't the be all and end all but Mumford scored 107 SC points compared to Boyd's 67 SC points so to say that Mumford had little influence is rubbish, Boyd just restricted him from being more influential than he was.

I don't think the dogs give a shit, they are in the grand final and Boyd played a part in that.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Mumford had over double the hitouts that Boyd had (46 to 21) so I don't know where you are getting the idea from that he was completely negated.

After free kicks, hit outs are the most useless stat in the game. I'd be surprised if the Bulldogs have won any hitout H2Hs this season, and now they're in the Grand Final.

Dogs won the clearances 53-38.

Boyd had 14 touches to Mumfords 10.

Boyd had 5 clearances to Mumfords 4. (Boyd had 2 centre clearances to Mumfords 1.)

Boyd had 9 contested possessions compared to Mumfords 6.

Boyd had 4 I50s compared to Mumfords 1.

Boyd beat Mumford in every stat that matters for a ruckman last night (Mumford won the tackles, I guess you could argue that's important for a ruckman.) I'm only disappointed that AFL.com's stats don't include score involvements, cos I'm certain Boyd would've won that too.

 

[DemonTim]

Well I don't think Beveridge has much choice with Redpath out injured, if he was fit then it's quite possible that Boyd wouldn't have been selected.



I thought Mumford was actually quite influential in the ruck but the GWS midfielders didn't use it to their advantage as much as they should have.

I know Supercoach stats aren't the be all and end all but Mumford scored 107 SC points compared to Boyd's 67 SC points so to say that Mumford had little influence is rubbish, Boyd just restricted him from being more influential than he was.

So you haven't been following the Footscray VFL side then? Plenty of blokes that are pushing to play if Boyd is a huge liability like you're trying to say

Let's just face it, you and the other saints fan that share your view, just don't like boyd, you don't like the dogs, and you want to take pot shots whenever you can. You don't get to a grand final if you're a liability to your team.

 

[JeffDunne]

Boyd was jumping early against Mumford to negate his influence. Probably lucky he didn't get pinged a few times for it but it was a smart tactic.

Not sure why the Giants were using a third man up around the ground either. That was stupid.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Examples?

He had at least 2 one-handed pick ups at stoppages last night. Not a big deal in a league of Patrick Dangerfields and Rory Sloanes, but they were both pretty damn impressive for a 2-metre ruckman that people have already written off.

I said about 100 pages ago in this thread that Boyd obviously isn't a million-dollar forward yet, but at the very least he was going to turn into a very serviceable (if overpaid) ruckman in the Kurt Tippett model. I kind of think he showed everyone what I meant last night.

 

[Underdog]

So you've never seen Blicavs play then?

Blicavs isn't 200cm tall...

Not that I agree with his suggestion. It's one thing to excel at ground level against other talls, it's another thing to do so against smalls.

 

[Plugger35]

After free kicks, hit outs are the most useless stat in the game. I'd be surprised if the Bulldogs have won any hitout H2Hs this season, and now they're in the Grand Final.

Dogs won the clearances 53-38.

Boyd had 14 touches to Mumfords 10.

Boyd had 5 clearances to Mumfords 4. (Boyd had 2 centre clearances to Mumfords 1.)

Boyd had 9 contested possessions compared to Mumfords 6.

Boyd had 4 I50s compared to Mumfords 1.

Boyd beat Mumford in every stat that matters for a ruckman last night (Mumford won the tackles, I guess you could argue that's important for a ruckman.) I'm only disappointed that AFL.com's stats don't include score involvements, cos I'm certain Boyd would've won that too.

Yet Mumford scored 40 more Supercoach points than Boyd and the Supercoach scores are supposed to reflect a player's influence on a game.

Personally I noticed Mumford's influence on the game much more than Boyd's who for the most part seems invisible in games I watch him play.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Quite funny when a player who on $1m a year is being applauded for having an ok game.

The best thing he did was move out of the forward line, the bulldogs looked much better going forward when he wasnt there

Sent from my SM-P555 using Tapatalk

The money is irrelevant.

He was recruited for long AND short term reasons. And now hes playing in a Grand Final.

If the Giants had won the same thing would have been true of Scully.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Yet Mumford scored 40 more Supercoach points than Boyd and the Supercoach scores are supposed to reflect a player's influence on a game.

Personally I noticed Mumford's influence on the game much more than Boyd's who for the most part seems invisible in games I watch him play.

Great result for a part time ruckman to restrict Mumfords dominance that was predicted even against Roughead

 

[nobbyiscool]

Yet Mumford scored 40 more Supercoach points than Boyd and the Supercoach scores are supposed to reflect a player's influence on a game.

Personally I noticed Mumford's influence on the game much more than Boyd's who for the most part seems invisible in games I watch him play.

I don't even know how to begin replying to a post that suggests Supercoach points are a valid metric for measuring a players output...

 

[Lach72]

He's been very good most of the year...and was fantastic yesterday

 

[Danog]

Blicavs isn't 200cm tall...

Not that I agree with his suggestion. It's one thing to excel at ground level against other talls, it's another thing to do so against smalls.

Wow 198cm. Such difference

 

[ManOfClay]

Yet Mumford scored 40 more Supercoach points than Boyd and the Supercoach scores are supposed to reflect a player's influence on a game.

Personally I noticed Mumford's influence on the game much more than Boyd's who for the most part seems invisible in games I watch him play.

You don't watch games.

 

[JeffDunne]

He had at least 2 one-handed pick ups at stoppages last night. Not a big deal in a league of Patrick Dangerfields and Rory Sloanes, but they were both pretty damn impressive for a 2-metre ruckman that people have already written off.

I said about 100 pages ago in this thread that Boyd obviously isn't a million-dollar forward yet, but at the very least he was going to turn into a very serviceable (if overpaid) ruckman in the Kurt Tippett model. I kind of think he showed everyone what I meant last night.

I don't think people have written him off. He's clearly got talent.

What people question is his willingness to contest. Last night GWS players got into him after some pretty piss-weak attempts to spoil. One at least cost his team a goal when Lobb marked it. Boyd was more worried about self preservation. Lobb is taller and has far better skills than Boyd. Has more courage too.

I don't remember the pickups you describe as your description tells me nothing. When & context would be important.

But my biggest criticism of him in all situations is he plays small for a big guy. Doesn't crash packs, doesn't block for his midfielders and usually becomes a spectator when the ball is on the deck.

His biggest influence on the game last night was one of subtraction. The moment he was forced into the ruck and out of their forward line, their F50 efficiency improved dramatically. Sure that's not all on him but it's become a trend in recent weeks. He's a liability as a forward (which is what he was recruited for).

 

[The 747]

Boyd was jumping early against Mumford to negate his influence. Probably lucky he didn't get pinged a few times for it but it was a smart tactic.

Not sure why the Giants were using a third man up around the ground either. That was stupid.

Yeah I was wondering why they were going third man up, when their gun ruckman was up against a clearly fatigued kid. One less at the fall of the ball where they were getting beaten.