Difference between other players having more impact to the initial claim that he had “virtually no impact”.
Even then it’s questionable these players had more impact.
16 contested possessions, 795 metres gained, 5 score assists, 6 clearances, 7 inside 50s, 10 tackles.
You said he had virtually no impact, which is clear bullshit, no matter who you compare him to.
Cornes and King talking about Stewart, Nicks identified him before the game as the worry and as they pointed out we did nothing again. Other teams have tagged him out of it, we did nothing. Meanwhile, Scott tagged Rankine and shut him out.
That’s why this moron will never win a flag, too dumb...
For once I’d like someone in the media call out his bullshit.
Which inexperienced players cost us? As you pointed out, we had some shocking experienced players.
Why the **** was Nank only given 45% TOG? 10 touches, 231 metres gained, 70% disposal efficiency, 4 intercepts, 2 score involvements.
Suppose can’t have him play too well and make them look silly when they drop him for Laird.
So at stoppage when Soligo was standing next to Smith he wasn’t competing with Smith for the ball?
Actually was 40 in the end and 795 metres gained suggested he had impact. It’s ridiculous to suggest with 40 touches he virtually had no impact.
Have they changed the rule so the home team doesn’t necessarily win if it’s a draw? I’m sure I read somewhere that it comes down to some of period in each teams first innings.
But then I keep hearing Vics will win if it’s a draw.
Did I dream it?