SA Footy

Grahaml wrote:Fair to say that Dangerfield is the better player. If both run free you'd be backing Dangerfield to have a big game. But on the flip side whose output is more important? Dangerfield has some really good midfielders around him with a top notch ruckman. Vince is almost the only one in that Melbourne side with some class and pedigree of playing well.

No doubt at all there will be always be some blokes more worried about their opponent than other blokes. That's always going to happen. I just don't see a bloke surviving in this day and age where his game is measured purely and simply by what his opponent did.

Flying the flag can be done in many ways. Dangerfield should be strong minded enough to know that the team winning is more important. Sure, there will be a tendency to try the tactic if it affects him regularly (I don't think it will personally for long) but if sides aren't picking up wins doing it they won't persist for long. It's all about winning now. I doubt many will admit it, but there have been more than a few blokes over the journey who would have been happier to get 35 and lose than 15 and win.

And the point about the fines is that it's against the rules. Keep breaking the rules and the team ends up suffering. A melee isn't the solution. Make Vince run around a few blokes getting in his way. Get Dangerfield to run around Jacobs or Walker a few times and see if the tagger wants to try to go through a shepherd from a big bloke. Those are far more effective and legal methods that wouldn't be considered flying the flag.

Spargo wrote:And, THUD!

JK wrote:

Spargo wrote:And, THUD!

Backed the Dogs at $3.50, $3.85 and $4.00, and seriously considered the 40+. Crows only been impressive in 2-3 quarters against the Roos from what I've seen (granted I didn't see any of the Collingwood match).

“It will be a long season, there will be some ups and downs. Maybe as a footy club, it’s 3-0 zip and we read the paper and everything is going beautifully,” said Walsh whose side faced a 10-goal hiding before saving face with five in the last stanza.

“We bathed in those victories. Failure is feedback and it is what we do about it now.”

bennymacca wrote:I reckon lynch goes alright in general, but I do agree, he and Jenkins have been well below their best.

Tex also needs to find a way to get himself into the contest when he is well held. Even if that means playing well up the ground for a while.

bennymacca wrote:Disagree about hartigan. There was about three times where he brought the ball to ground or the ball came in at stringers feet and then he got walked around

JK wrote:Hartigan actually reminds me a bit of a young Rance, who I always thought was an ordinary footballer. Seems to have turned that around, and no doubt the Crows would be hoping for the same with Hartigan.

Ron Burgundy wrote:

JK wrote:Hartigan actually reminds me a bit of a young Rance, who I always thought was an ordinary footballer. Seems to have turned that around, and no doubt the Crows would be hoping for the same with Hartigan.

Good call and agree.

What this game showed and what i as a supporter knew, was that against teams that move the ball fast, our defence will be found wanting.

Our challenge and the way we can win games of football is two fold;
- Find a way to slow the ball movement
- Make sure we use the ball better

I havent seen the stats but id imagine the disposal efficiency would be disgraceful. If we turn the ball over as much as we did yesterday, the ball will move in faster than we can handle and will be scored against heavily.

bennymacca wrote:I reckon lynch goes alright in general, but I do agree, he and Jenkins have been well below their best.

Tex also needs to find a way to get himself into the contest when he is well held. Even if that means playing well up the ground for a while.