| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Woods wrote: | Collingwood had the game in hand when the GWS players started going down.
Both teams scored 11 behinds so missed opportunities on both sides. |
Not many people say both. |
|
|
|
 |
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Before the final quarter when injuries hurt them, we closed them down with intense pressure, limiting their ability to run and carry. Despite his inability to take marks, Witts was fantastic in the ruck, and a major contributor to our win. I can't remember the last time we won the hit-outs so convincingly. Adams was ferocious all day, White played his best game yet, Crisp was a battering ram, Elliott was Elliott, Cloke was Cloke, Pendles was Pendles, and my only concerns were with the quiet games from Sidey, Seedsman and Fasolo. I thought De Goey was quite good before going off with an injured finder. He did not get a lot of possessions, but his pressure and intelligent play are great assets. He continues to look more at home in the seniors. Overall it was a good win and puts us in a good position to re-load after the break. |
|
|
|
|
mudlark
Joined: 19 Mar 2002
Location: Maroochydore Qld
|
| Post subject: | |
|
With all the hoo ha about how good Mumford has been this year,I'm just wondering how the numbnuts who posted whether to trade Witts is feeling just now?? I reckon Witts IS our No1 ruckman.
Having said that,it was a goodish win today,but the way in which GWS scored today was scary as the movement into their forward line was so easy,it was embarrassing.Was anyone accountable for their man? Goldsack put in the worst game from a defender,I think I have ever seen. I reckon he conceded 8 goals today. Maybe a bit injured but very poor. And I can't believe that Varcoe made ONE poor tackling effort and was pounced on by the nay sayers.He was VERY good today and in the votes for mine.Also that "Weak prick"??? Taylor Adams who can't kick mark or play football apparently . He's a star just as JDG will be.
NEXT. |
|
|
|
|
roar
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| mudlark wrote: | | With all the hoo ha about how good Mumford has been this year,I'm just wondering how the numbnuts who posted whether to trade Witts is feeling just now?? |
Seriously, some of you people have comprehension problems. The trading of Witts wasn't speculated because he wasn't thought of as a good player, but rather that he was actual quality and therefore is worth something at the trade table. And with Grundy also a quality ruck, he may not want to play second fiddle. All today's game has done is confirm he is of good trade value.
Numbnuts indeed.
_________________
kill for collingwood! |
|
|
|
|
Dangles
Balmey Army
Joined: 14 May 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| The bottom line is that's it better to have two quality ruckmen on your list. Because if you only have the one and he gets injured you're screwed. |
|
|
|
|
eddiesmith 
Lets get ready to Rumble
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Location: Lexus Centre
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| roar wrote: | | mudlark wrote: | | With all the hoo ha about how good Mumford has been this year,I'm just wondering how the numbnuts who posted whether to trade Witts is feeling just now?? |
Seriously, some of you people have comprehension problems. The trading of Witts wasn't speculated because he wasn't thought of as a good player, but rather that he was actual quality and therefore is worth something at the trade table. And with Grundy also a quality ruck, he may not want to play second fiddle. All today's game has done is confirm he is of good trade value.
Numbnuts indeed. |
All today confirmed was why you wouldn't bloody trade him! If Witts isn't there than White and Gault are our rucks when Grundy is out? Nothing wrong with good depth... |
|
|
|
|
roar
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^^ Not denying that but given that they are both quality, one may want to leave to be the No.1 ruck at another club. And IF the club was to contemplate traded Witts, I'm sure they would bring in another bruiser as back-up. I'm not saying it is worth doing, just that it is a topic worth discussing.
_________________
kill for collingwood! |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| roar wrote: | | ^^ Not denying that but given that they are both quality, one may want to leave to be the No.1 ruck at another club. And IF the club was to contemplate traded Witts, I'm sure they would bring in another bruiser as back-up. I'm not saying it is worth doing, just that it is a topic worth discussing. |
It's definitely worth discussion. He's the one quality player we could possibly move on if we needed to. We are also yet to find out if he and Grundy are going to work well together in the same team, they both seem to perform better as the sole ruck at the moment.
Not saying we should trade him or need to, just that he is quality and is tradeable. If it makes anyone feel better we could say the same about Grundy.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| roar wrote: | | mudlark wrote: | | With all the hoo ha about how good Mumford has been this year,I'm just wondering how the numbnuts who posted whether to trade Witts is feeling just now?? |
Seriously, some of you people have comprehension problems. The trading of Witts wasn't speculated because he wasn't thought of as a good player, but rather that he was actual quality and therefore is worth something at the trade table. And with Grundy also a quality ruck, he may not want to play second fiddle. All today's game has done is confirm he is of good trade value.
Numbnuts indeed. |
yep. would be worth a lot to some clubs who are bereft of a decent first ruck. i'd say there'd be a bit of a queue if he were to offered. you'd hope he was better value than a pick 14 for, say, someone like cameron wood.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Golden Gordon 
Joined: 06 May 2015
Location: Victoria Park
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Full credit to Taylor Adams today. Some of his disposals are still poor, but who can argue with him winning the ball so much? He had 6 tackles in the first quarter alone! Great BOG performance, especially against his old side.
_________________
You can keep your Locketts. There was only ONE Gordon Coventry! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | Good win.
Adams and Crisp were excellent.
I wonder if Oxley could play as a forward? |
If my memory serves me correct I understand Oxley played mostly forward as a junior in QLD.
Hard to believe it was only his 13th game or so.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
A good win with again some disappointing lapses. We have yet again given a team far too much space on the counter attack and gave up plenty of easy marks inside the 50.
Pendlebury was excellent in close with 10 clearances, Adams only the one but did get a lot of the ball. Broomhead played the best full game of his career and is showing some great signs, glad that they kept him in for the full game to test him against a young team (this unfortunately meant that Kennedy was again given the vest; should have been Seedsman). Crisp was brilliant again with 28 touches, 4 clearances and a goal.
Down back I thought Frost struggled on McCarthy at times but Brown dominated Cameron. Williams continues his good form, starting to come good.
Witts did excellently in the ruck, though barely sighted around the ground. White was our best up forward till injuries hit and Cloke was given an easier run late.
The scoreboard flattered us in the end with their second half injuries hurting, but still a good solid win.
_________________
Well done boys!
Last edited by AN_Inkling on Sun Jun 14, 2015 6:08 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
yin-YANG
Joined: 03 Oct 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Trade Witts - yeah right on stupido keep one ruck and when he gets injured???
Great win for the Pies today against a fast midfield. With Cloke kicking straight we are getting full value for our forward advances. Varcoe is proving to be a gem and is much more valuable than H. Adams will be a star and in 3 years when Heath is 33 Adams will be a key part of our mids.
Williams and Langdon looking very solid down back and the olives - Tooves, Sack, and Brown have stepped up this year to provide a real foundation to build our attacks.
A lot of upside with Broomy and Oxley showing they are headed in the right direction.
Quiet game from De Goey but still looking the goods - Seeds was lucky not to be subbed and BK was unlucky to get such a limited game - but this team was very solid - Great win Pies!
_________________
Love us or Hate us... we are Collingwood - you can't ignore the Mighty Magpies!!! |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| yin-YANG wrote: | Trade Witts - yeah right on stupido keep one ruck and when he gets injured???
|
I've never advocated trading Witts, but these strawman arguments are stupid. If we did trade Witts (or Grundy for that matter) we would obviously only do so if we could bring in another ruck as backup.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Dangles wrote: | | The bottom line is that's it better to have two quality ruckmen on your list. Because if you only have the one and he gets injured you're screwed. |
Correct weight.
You'd have to be mad to trade one of 2 ruckman. Hawthorn have at least 3. The concept of trading some quality for a good pick is a good idea. However, when there are only 2 Ruckman then that idea is less than satisfactory.
Get an extra draft pick at what cost? To pick another Ruckman given the team would be one Ruckman down?
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
