In game thread Pies v Crows Comments here thanks!

Match previews, reviews, reports and discussion.

Moderator: bbmods

Barham
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 1:10 am
Location: Albury

Post by Barham »

Lockyer good? he looked rushed everytime he had the ball, he seems scared of contact. And at times he looked comical chasing a Crow player. Was going about as fast as the bird that finished fourth in the marathon at the comm games
User avatar
Cam
Posts: 15355
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 6:01 pm
Location: Springvale
Has liked: 19 times
Been liked: 28 times

Post by Cam »

I'm a Lockyer bagger, full on, but he was one of the reasons why we were so close for so long. He provided alot of run off half back and I didn't think he took short steps tonight.

25 possessions, 7 marks and 6 tackles is a fair return. Credit where credit is due.
Get back on top.
johncitizen
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 1:15 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by johncitizen »

The game sucked bigtime ! Adelaide is a very good team but we seemed to tire in the last quarter. A lot of good camp Arizona turned out to be. lol Daisy was a pleasure to watch, Egan must make way for Caracella and we need Burns back as well..Our kicking was woeful tonight. :-(
Joel
Posts: 21161
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 1999 8:01 pm
Location: Mornington Peninsula
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 1 time

Post by Joel »

Cam wrote:I'm a Lockyer bagger, full on, but he was one of the reasons why we were so close for so long.
There is absolutely no way Lockyer was a reason we were in the contest. Zilch. I cringed everytime he got the ball tonight. Time after time he sprayed kicks, shirked the contest, and was generally soft as butter.
He provided alot of run off half back and I didn't think he took short steps tonight.
What's the point in providing run, if you second guess everything you do.
25 possessions, 7 marks and 6 tackles is a fair return. Credit where credit is due.
I wouldn't mind seeing the turnover stats, or the clanger stats. Lockyer was very average tonight.
User avatar
Cam
Posts: 15355
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 6:01 pm
Location: Springvale
Has liked: 19 times
Been liked: 28 times

Post by Cam »

Well I disagree Joel, we'll leave it at that.
Get back on top.
Barham
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 1:10 am
Location: Albury

Post by Barham »

Stats can be very misleading in todays game Cam.

Basset 19, Bode 16, Burton 22. Edwards 31, Goodwin 33, Hart 25.

I tend to take more notice of the effective kicks, defensive rebouds, inside fiftys etc.

I just dont think he is suited to the modern game. But hey, i hope he proves me wrong.
mgh3536
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 8:01 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by mgh3536 »

Cam, Lockyer was awful, as Joel said, panicked and sprayed the ball all over the place, took wrong options, forget about stats these days, with so many soft receivers and sideways chips.

LOnie played well, I think he has lost a couple of kg's and was tackling!!

Fraser the big plus, when he was rested they won against Richards
User avatar
Cam
Posts: 15355
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 6:01 pm
Location: Springvale
Has liked: 19 times
Been liked: 28 times

Post by Cam »

Crow stats were skewed but I thought ours were pretty true. We played reasonably direct.
Get back on top.
User avatar
gregpie
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 7:29 pm
Location: tullamarine

Crows match

Post by gregpie »

Very disappointing game.
I thought our forward line was non existent!
In their defence however, wtf is the point of bombing the ball in long?
Tarrant and Rocca were completely non effective. Surely Malthouse could see this? we needed a smaller more mobile forward line who would make leads just as Riccuto did for the Crows! Was'nt Carey bought to the club to do something with our forwards? We really need somebody like a Pavlich who leads instead of just contesting the mark.

If we get beaten by the freakin Hawks next week I'm gonna eat my 2006 membership cap!

greg
Post Reply