Post Match: Up Yours Jefferey!

Post by **RudeBoy** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 2:13 pm

I'm one of those who would probably favour Cameron as our second ruckman, because of his better value around the ground, particularly when he floats down forward. However, I think that Richards has been doing a serviceable job so far, and can only improve given a few more games under his belt. his extra reach at centre bounces is something we've missed for a while. I'd love to see Cam back in the side, but at present, I just can't find a spot for him (or Wakelin!). it just demonstrates how much more depth we've got this year.

themilleys · Post by **themilleys** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 2:14 pm

Richards delivered some really effective tap work in the 3rd quarter when it really counted. The bump Maxwell laid on Williams in the last quarter was sensational. Oh, and Jimmys' crushing tackle on Williams in the first quarter wasnt half bad either.

uey · Post by **uey** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 2:19 pm

RudeBoy wrote:I'm one of those who would probably favour Cameron as our second ruckman, because of his better value around the ground, particularly when he floats down forward. However, I think that Richards has been doing a serviceable job so far, and can only improve given a few more games under his belt. his extra reach at centre bounces is something we've missed for a while. I'd love to see Cam back in the side, but at present, I just can't find a spot for him (or Wakelin!). it just demonstrates how much more depth we've got this year.

RudeBoy - you may have shed some light on this phenomonom of Collingwood supporters on this board blindly seeing through the importance of Richards. Is it just a Cam Cloke or Fanning personal favoritism issue?? Why would you "probably favour Cameron as 2nd ruck"? Why ... can someone please tell me WHY????????

When Richards if he can stay fit will be in the top 10 first rucks in the comp, with his eyes shut.

Post by **RudeBoy** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 2:37 pm

uey wrote:
RudeBoy wrote:I'm one of those who would probably favour Cameron as our second ruckman, because of his better value around the ground, particularly when he floats down forward. However, I think that Richards has been doing a serviceable job so far, and can only improve given a few more games under his belt. his extra reach at centre bounces is something we've missed for a while. I'd love to see Cam back in the side, but at present, I just can't find a spot for him (or Wakelin!). it just demonstrates how much more depth we've got this year.
RudeBoy - you may have shed some light on this phenomonom of Collingwood supporters on this board blindly seeing through the importance of Richards. Is it just a Cam Cloke or Fanning personal favoritism issue?? Why would you "probably favour Cameron as 2nd ruck"? Why ... can someone please tell me WHY????????

When Richards if he can stay fit will be in the top 10 first rucks in the comp, with his eyes shut.

uey - I'm not sure how my view was "blindly seeing through the importance of Richards". I actually went on to say that Richards work at centre bounces is something we've long missed and that he has earned his spot in the side, and that he should only get better! Despite being a fan of C2, I also said that i couldn't squeeze him into our side at present. I'm not sure that we actually disagree on much at all.

3rd degree · Post by **3rd degree** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 3:11 pm

Despite being a fan of C2, I also said that i couldn't squeeze him into our side at present. I'm not sure that we actually disagree on much at all.[/quote] - Are you sure ? Rudeboy ?

If not Judge Roughneck is going to lock you up ?

skaman · Post by **skaman** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 3:18 pm

Judge 1000 years....court in session!!!!!

Stop that Rudeboy! Rudeboys dont cry!

hawkus · Post by **hawkus** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 3:22 pm

RudeBoy wrote:I'm one of those who would probably favour Cameron as our second ruckman, because of his better value around the ground...

With a turning circle like a mac truck I reckon he is more of a liability around ground than an asset. He is too easily turned inside out and too easily run away from... his kicking for goal isn't that great when you look at the options we do have in the forward line. And now we have fraser and richards back, no need for him in the ruck either, those 2 are way better than him in the ruck.

The only cloke worth keeping is T.Cloke, excellent contested marking and good kicking at goal, perfect forward line player. Other clokes aren't going to make it...

I was also a fan of egan but i 've seen now he isn't good enough to make it... not as quick as you think he is and his skills aren't nearly good enough and he isn't hard enough at it. Doesn't have anything to warrant selection in my eyes.

Davies is good and hard at it, but at the moment I just don't see where he would fit... there are quicker more skillful players than him right now so I just can't see why you'd select him over other options.

Pendles I'm hoping will be good, haven't seen him yet tho...

Post by **RudeBoy** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:09 pm

skaman wrote:Judge 1000 years....court in session!!!!!

Stop that Rudeboy! Rudeboys dont cry!

Love your work skaman.

Johnson#26 · Post by **Johnson#26** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:14 pm

ad4eva wrote:
pies417 wrote:Glad Richards proved me wrong, but glad Carracella proved me right! At this time of the season a wins a win.

Eleven more wins to go! Then build on that.... He we come!
Richards is too slow, too dopey please bring in Camma, he adds mungral, he adds bulk and adds more to the team the Richards...

Give him time in the twos then if he performs well bring him back...

Bit harsh on Guy - I thought he improved a hell of a lot on last week's effort.

Magpie_Dan · Post by **Magpie_Dan** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:35 pm

I knew Joffa would stand on the fence and wave hes jacket around because there was so much hype about the 2 jackets clashing for the first time.

Interesting what happened though with the 2 security coming down DEFINATELY ON THEIR WAY TO BOOT JOFFA OUT, I KNOW THIS BECAUSE THE SAME 2 DICKHEADS KICKED ME OUT OF THE CRICKET IN THE SUMMER. Then the security gaurd at the fence, the one who runs up the ground with the goal umpire waved them away and everything was OK:? I didnt want Joffa to be kicked out by any means but I think this was already organised but it would have been interesting if someone else had stood up on the fence and waved the kacket around!

3rd degree · Post by **3rd degree** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:43 pm

RudeBoy wrote:
skaman wrote:Judge 1000 years....court in session!!!!!

Stop that Rudeboy! Rudeboys dont cry!
Love your work skaman.

And she wanted to be something but she no she never will

Post by **stoliboy** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:25 pm

piedys · Post by **piedys** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:25 pm

Cam wrote:i thought dixon was going to do a barlow on us at one stage.

And play his only good game for the year so SOON? perhaps....

Dyso

Lone Ranger · Post by **Lone Ranger** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:37 pm

Snoop Dog wrote:
Lone Ranger wrote:
Snoop Dog wrote:Much like last week we played 2 good qtrs and 2 pretty poor ones. Only difference was that this week there was no Neil Craig to outfox MM.
Couldnt just be satisfied with a solid win could you. Just had to still find a way to have a dig. Very sad.

I think you would find most people who are not tainted with to much bias would say there is nothing unfair about that commnet. It certainly wasnt meant as a dig, rather a statement of fact.

You could not argue that we played 2 poor quarters yesterday. The first half was very scrappy. All the Aw and C9 commentators thought so.

Equally, Craig reacted by changing his plan when we got over the top of them last week. It worked for him and they went on to win. Smart coaching. Yesterday, Clarkson did not react to Rocca......and you would have to be on another planet to think the failure to do that cost them a number of goals. Commentators on AW and 9 agreed.

No problem at all with the comments on poor quarters. But what purpose did the MM comment related to last week serve. We all argued our cases last week about that but you just had to bring it up again and show your anti MM bias. If you want to have a go at MM, at least discuss something relevant from this week.

DaVe86 · Post by **DaVe86** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:39 pm

It is widely regarded our disposal is poor, and truthfully at times it is below a reserves standard.

But yesterday classy players got the ball. Lonie, Buckley, Didak, Thomas got their hands on it, whilst Johnson did quite well. Got heaps of it and pumped it long.

Thats why despite the criticsm that Lonie gets, he deserves to keep playing, because he is the sort of player we require. Didak and Lonie will hit targets. If Leon Davis can get a bit of it, we could actually be dangerous. O'Bree, Licuria and Johnson are never going to be fantastic kicks, but they continue to do their jobs so its ok. Brodie HOlland is also a very underrated player and did a decent job tagging.

Essentiall, our midfield is not terrible as many think...but i do think for us to be competitive that Didak and Lonie and Davis have to really stamp their mark on the competition, and truthfully, buckley needs to relax a bit and remember he is a champion. He has made a few uncharacteristic errors of late. It hurts us double if he is going to play backline this year. But we now potentially have some classy players around the ball

This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.

Post Match: Up Yours Jefferey!