| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | | swoop42 wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | | swoop42 wrote: | Just as Dwyer is to Beams, Thomas is to Elliott.
|
I don't get it. I kinda get the Dwyer/Beams comparison, they're both crap  . But Thomas/Elliott? What's the comparison? |
They are very similar in terms of looks, height and body shape. |
Right. I forgot for a moment that you rate your footballers based on their looks (*remembers Dawes*). |
I don't rate footballers by there looks but I'll certainly comment about two footballers who could easily be brothers based on there looks. |
Just kidding  . Agree with you on Thomas and Elliott. Not so sure on Beams and Dwyer (I don't think I can picture Dwyer well enough to compare).
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
 |
neil 
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| John Wren wrote: | | Piesnchess wrote: | | John Wren wrote: | | Piesnchess wrote: | | IM probably from the old school of footy, but can someone tell me, why cant we play Grundy in the ruck, interchanging with Witts at full forward, even if its wet ? Big guys don't get any smaller as the game goes on into the second half, as ol jack dyer used to say. Surely, interchanging these two big units at FF, may strike terror into the tigers. ? |
full forward has gone the same way as the dinosaurs. |
Perhaps not permanent FF, just in that general vicinity, to take pressure off cloke, monster units would have to take at least one backman away from clokey  |
station him about 45m out to create contests and to allow white and cloke to lead up the flanks? |
Witts is not yet damaging enough as a forward to force the opposition defender to have to stay with him.
Of course not playing him means he remains less threatening.
How does he go in the VFL a stay at home FF? and do the opposition guard him the whole time?
The three prong forward line is very threatening.
And Grundy needs help in the ruck
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
warburton lad
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Would like to see big Witts line up on the goal line and just come steaming out when the ball comes forward of centre.
How many defenders would quake at the sight of a 209 centimetre, 113 kilogram behemoth about to plough them into the dirt??
Unleash the beast.
It's reasonable to expect that, at his stage of development that he will not 'clunk' many marks, but he can create opportunities for the small forward types when he cleaves open packs with his girth.
Would give Grundy an invaluable chop-out in ruck contests too.
The lad won't get better plying his trade for another twelve months in the twos for goodness sake!
_________________
Firm in the belief that number 17 flag is only months away... |
|
|
|
|
September Zeros
Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Behind you
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I got to agree lad. There's some hard yards ahead for us as supporters and part of those hard yards are watching the kids take steps. Witts needs to play his share (all be it not a lions share) of games in 2014 or he'll simply not develop at the highest level. Plus the Grundy relief is imperative.
Now..... Everyone needs to work hard today, be nice to others, help a few grannies cross the street etc etc.....we need good karma for tonight's game or they'll voodoo us with those menacing drums again.
P.S. Here's a little trip down memory lane
http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/video/2014-04-10/flashback-rocca-brothers-take-down-richmond
_________________
No Pressure, No Diamonds
They used to be a happy team at hawthorn.
________________ |
|
|
|
|
Stupied
Joined: 14 Mar 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | swoop42 wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | | swoop42 wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | | swoop42 wrote: | Just as Dwyer is to Beams, Thomas is to Elliott.
|
I don't get it. I kinda get the Dwyer/Beams comparison, they're both crap . But Thomas/Elliott? What's the comparison? |
They are very similar in terms of looks, height and body shape. |
Right. I forgot for a moment that you rate your footballers based on their looks (*remembers Dawes*). |
I don't rate footballers by there looks but I'll certainly comment about two footballers who could easily be brothers based on there looks. |
Just kidding . Agree with you on Thomas and Elliott. Not so sure on Beams and Dwyer (I don't think I can picture Dwyer well enough to compare). |
Given that Beams' sister has confused the two during a game, I would say that he and Dwyer could very easily be passed off as brothers. |
|
|
|
|
slydog81
Joined: 05 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Surely Witts wont play in the wet?
Keneddy In.
_________________
We're always up to mischief! |
|
|
|
|
3rd degree 
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Location: John Wren's tote
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Bring in the Stick of Q!
_________________
" Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".
www.facebook/the hybernators |
|
|
|
|
Warbler
Joined: 12 Mar 2003
Location: Tyaak Vic
|
| Post subject: | |
|
What does Kennedy have to do to get a game ?
Grundy was stuffed last week . He doesn't yet have the tank to ruck all game .I like bringing Witts in , both to give Grundy a break & to get some more experience into Witts .
GO PIES |
|
|
|
|
slydog81
Joined: 05 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Warbler wrote: | What does Kennedy have to do to get a game ?
Grundy was stuffed last week . He doesn't yet have the tank to ruck all game .I like bringing Witts in , both to give Grundy a break & to get some more experience into Witts .
GO PIES |
Whats our record with witts in? hasnt been too good from memory and I see no reason why they should play 5 talls in the wet.
Id rather see Q stick in these conditions that Witts.
But hopefully common sense prevails and BK plays.
_________________
We're always up to mischief! |
|
|
|
|
roar
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Rick wrote: | | Still worries me that Clarke can be an emergency. |
Ha ha ha!
_________________
kill for collingwood! |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man 
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Not Going to game Tonight 
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think the one reason we have Richmond's measure, is pace. They don't have a lot of it. Teams that do, worry us. Richmond are not a brilliant running team, and it's teams that run who are able to open us up. Wet conditions, if they eventuate, just add to this. Skills are not less important in the wet, but pace, I think is. They also lack quality small forwards and we find it easy to pick off their entries. At the other end, they've always had trouble containing Cloke, hopefully that will continue.
Witts and the weather? I think he can still play. Richmond are playing two rucks and a ruck/forward, just as we would be. The only issue that I see is, as a forward his best asset, strangely enough, is his leading. If it is a wet night, that becomes difficult and his impact reduced. If there is no Witts, then White and Keeffe will need to play much more ruck than they have in other games this season, as Grundy definitely needs support.
Pretty confident about this one. I think it will be the Pies by 27 points.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
We just might play Kennedy and leave Grundy out, with Witts and White to do the ruckwork. We would miss Grundy's greatest strength, which is his follow-up work after the tap to take ground balls and lay tackles while the clearance is still in dispute, but gain Witts' height and strength in the ruck contests. Witt's other advantage over Grundy, his ability to lead and mark from the goal square will be nullified by the weather. Nevertheless, there probably isn't much to choose between Witts and Grundy as first ruck in this game, we would give Grundy a valuable rest, give Witts another game's worth of experience and keep him up to speed and current, and finally - let's face it - if we can't beat Richmond with or without Grundy tonight, we aren't going to be there in September, so we might as well regard it as a development game.
(I'm predicting a comfortable win for the Pies, regardless of who we bring in or leave out. the Tiges will give us a good fight and cannot be taken lightly, but we are in another class and should show that. Pies by three goals, not without a fright when Richmond play their one good quarter for the night.)
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Big T
Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Location: Torino, Italy
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 3rd degree wrote: | | Bring in the Stick of Q! |
This.
Q Stick over Witts for mine. If we play Witts and look slow and predictable, and lose, then heads must farking role.
Q Stick is an obvious in over Witts.
_________________
Buon Giorno |
|
|
|
|
Big T
Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Location: Torino, Italy
|
| Post subject: | |
|
And surely now is not the time to be getting experience into guys who are clearly not up to it yet. The season is on the line tonight.
_________________
Buon Giorno |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
