Tom Rockliff

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Stopped Mitchell in the second half, was actually not that bad today. The other leaders (Ollie, Boak, Ebert, Dixon, Wingard) are more to blame the Rocky

He moved for a bigger/longer contract btw, to think otherwise is silly

Thanks for that. It he's only here for the money then I'm sure he's having the time of his life.

To suggest players don't consider where a team is at when then sign a contract is either very cynical or very silly
 
Thanks for that. It he's only here for the money then I'm sure he's having the time of his life.

To suggest players don't consider where a team is at when then sign a contract is either very cynical or very silly
Carlton offers BAZILLION-dollar contracts every off-season, but no one goes there...
 
I was buoyant about Rockliff coming to us because I felt he was a better mid than most of our mids but my positivity blanketed the thought that he too could have the worse nurtured into of him under our watch.
 
Ebert should have tagged Mitchell. Let Rockliff go for the ball.
Reasonable first half as a hunter and gatherer.
Great tagging on Mitchell second half.
Last few weeks have been excellent. Great recruit for the club.

BTW if we were playing good footy, Mots and Watts would be creating havoc, but the way we are playing, anyone doing their roles would struggle. Not why we recruited them to be hard ball winners. That's Rocky's job.
 
Did a great job on Mitchell even though looking at him incurred a free kick. Genuinely professional footballer.
 
North will get players wanting to go to them now though, they have the makings of a side on the up.

I still think we could manage to land a big fish like Lynch through Kenny's old links & a bit of coin in the cap but what's the point when we play a brand of football that doesn't allow key forwards to kick goals?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

5 frees for, more than any player on the ground. 0 against.

And the frees for tally doesn’t include the three 50 metre penalties he received. So it’s more like 8 for, zero against.
 
Did a great job on Mitchell even though looking at him incurred a free kick. Genuinely professional footballer.

Do you reckon? I thought we bought Rockliff as a clearance specialist not a tagger. Mitchell had 28 possessions and Rockliff 10, I do not see that as a great job. Rockliff was apparently happy with his effort and you were happy so I guess I must be misreading Rockliff. I remember the days when Kornes and Carr would tag the opposition and pick up 20 possessions themselves. Rockliff lead the AFL in clearances a few years back and that was what i though we were getting.
 
Last edited:
Do you reckon? I thought we bought Rockliff as a clearance specialist not a tagger. Mitchell had 28 possessions and Rockliff 10, I do not see that as a great job. Rockliff was apparently happy with his effort and you were happy so I guess I must be misreading Rockliff. I remember the days when Kornes and Carr would tag the opposition and pick up 20 possessions themselves. Rockliff lead the AFL in clearances a few years back and that was what i though we were getting.

Mitchell had 21 possessions to half time with SPP on him most of that time and was cutting us to pieces. Rockliff held him to 7 after half time. You can argue the point whether another player should have gone to Mitchell, but Rockliff did the job he was asked to do.
 
Mitchell had 21 possessions to half time with SPP on him most of that time and was cutting us to pieces. Rockliff held him to 7 after half time. You can argue the point whether another player should have gone to Mitchell, but Rockliff did the job he was asked to do.
And ended up coping a $1000 fine .. did his job too well ..
 
And ended up coping a $1000 fine .. did his job too well ..

He must have made eye contact with Mitchell. Lucky not to get a game. :p
 
Mitchell had 21 possessions to half time with SPP on him most of that time and was cutting us to pieces. Rockliff held him to 7 after half time. You can argue the point whether another player should have gone to Mitchell, but Rockliff did the job he was asked to do.

The Rockliff I want is the one who dominates around the stoppages and moves the ball to advantage. I thought that was what we were crying out for and why we recruited Tom. I didn't realise that what we really wanted was a tagger.

Last year against Hawthorn Tom Rockliff had 30 disposals and 16 clearances, he has a career high of 48 disposals and once had 33 handballs among 45 disposals. Tom has a career average of 26 disposals per game. In the face of those figures you will pardon me if I do not go into raptures about a 10 possession game. It should be the opposition tagging Rockliff not the other way around and you are right, if we need to tag someone we should give the job to another player.
 
Rockys move to Mitchell was a great one. Rocky was quiet in the first half and Mitchell was racking them up

Rock kept mitchell to just 7 second half possessions (2 of them were free kicks)

Not sure why the angst against this move

The fact that Rockcliff's quite is why.

He wasn't recruited to be a tagger. It's games like Saturday that Rocky was to be the difference in. Disappointing that the coaching staff have had to resort to making him a Kane Mitchell run with. Really thought he might of turned it around after his showdown performance and looking like he was getting some real synergy with our mids.

Time to throw Wingard in the middle for some touches. We can't rely on rockcliff anymore and Wingard is doing nothing forward of the ball.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top