Who's omission hurt us the most?

[mrtwister 652]

In hindsight (as it is such a wonderful thing), who did we miss the most today?

ps I know Clark isn't one of the options. It would have made the question pointless.

[dee-luded 2,959]

None of the above.

[stuie 7,374]

Tough one, instinct says Jones, but with Clark being out it stuffed our structure when McDonald went down...

Definitely not Jamar though, we still won the hitouts, and Martin would have had twice as many possessions as a standard Jamar game

[Deers 202]

ps I know Clark isn't one of the options. It would have made the question pointless.

Don't ask it, then.

We lost Clark and with him we've lost our compass.

We went limp every time the ball crossed halfway.

I don't care about the other three.

[mrtwister 652]

Point taken.

Thank you for taking the time to post.

[Watts Jurrah Dunn? 735]

Mongrel was the thing we missed most today.

Just a pack of nice guys.

[Nasher 33,616]

None of the above.

Amen! Clark would have made a huge difference today.

Of the options available; a million times Jones. No contest for mine. Would've loved to see TMac continue on Brown too though. He probably would've been smashed, but the experience would be valuable.

[Deers 202]

Point taken.

Thank you for taking the time to post.

No no - don't patronise me just because I exposed a critical flaw in your thinking process.

It's not pointless if you included Clark in the poll - more a "waste of time" because we all know Clark hurts us the most by the width of the earth.

Without him, you've definitely made it pointless.

Instead of creating "pointless" polls, why don't you share some of your observations from today's game?

[mrtwister 652]

No no - don't patronise me just because I exposed a critical flaw in your thinking process.

It's not pointless if you included Clark in the poll - more a "waste of time" because we all know Clark hurts us the most by the width of the earth.

Without him, you've definitely made it pointless.

Instead of creating "pointless" polls, why don't you share some of your observations from today's game?

The reason I ommitted Clark is because it was always known he would be out. It can be difficult to adjust to late minute withdrawals and even more difficult for early departures like McDonald.

It IS obvious that Clark is the most significant change from last week and we missed him dearly but I was more interested to gauge the opinions of other posters as to whom they thought hurt us the most out of the late/last minute changes.

Personally, I thought McDonald was the biggest loss as it really made us shake up the backs which would have changed a number of roles that were planned from the first bounce. I wouldn't have minded him playing Brown all day but at least Frawley could have ran it out a bit more and created (maybe) some uncontested possessions through the middle.

[jumbo returns 6,741]

Hard to cover Jones' clearance work...

[Jaded No More 68,966]

Mitch "I love you so much" Clark!

Our forwardline was a horrendous hot mess of garbage this afternoon.

[rpfc 28,539]

Clark does so much for our forward line. And Davey was useful last week too. We had more I50s but couldn't keep it in there.

And Jones in the middle is a little leader of men.

And Frawley, who played, was missing most of the day...Thrashed by a great player. Brown kicked a few on Watts but Frawley was nowhere for the rest of the day.

[Jaded No More 68,966]

And Frawley, who played, was missing most of the day...Thrashed by a great player. Brown kicked a few on Watts but Frawley was nowhere for the rest of the day.

Not even the best defenders can be expected to go it alone.

Frawley lost McDonald, Rivers and Garland down back. Even Joel MacDonald was running in the middle with Simon Black.

Kinda hard defending by yourself, with a bunch of inexperienced kids and makeshift defenders.

Dunn WTF?!

Edited July 1, 2012 by Jaded

[Nasher 33,616]

Clark does so much for our forward line. And Davey was useful last week too. We had more I50s but couldn't keep it in there.

I had the thought earlier that we could've won if Clark had played, but decided it was probably a bit too crackpot to post. Rationale was that early in the game when we were getting the inside 50s, a few more of those non-marks, behinds and non-scores might've been goals, and the "vibe" of the game would've been completely different. 10 goals is probably a bridge too far though.

[Moonshadow 17,676]

The answer would be Juice, according to Picket Fence.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Amen! Clark would have made a huge difference today.

Of the options available; a million times Jones. No contest for mine. Would've loved to see TMac continue on Brown too though. He probably would've been smashed, but the experience would be valuable.

Thats right.

But the truth is, No One player, would have changed things 'Much' today.

We were down collectively many experienced players over the last couple of weeks including Bartram.

The collective spread of experienced players missing is crucial, whilst we have so many young players under 23.

But we have to persist & keep recruiting class first & + experience if we can..... Boak, if we can trade some players for him?

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

Mitch Clark. We actually had a lot of inside 50s yesterday.

I reckon he would've kicked 5 or 6 goals. He typically kicks 4 or 5 with absolutely no good service and far fewer inside 50s.

[Guest lambtotheslaughter]

Miller, Maric, Bruce and Cheney

[Sleeve 67]

Trent Ormand-Allen

[The Chazz 4,077]

Malthouse?

[H_T 3,049]

Of the options available; a million times Jones. No contest for mine. Would've loved to see TMac continue on Brown too though. He probably would've been smashed, but the experience would be valuable.

I reckon Tom was a big loss overall yesterday, it threw our structure out - despite missing Clark - we were forced to activate our sub early and I would have confidence in him being able to withstand any run provided by Brown and then some. Brown is now fit and even looked to have Frawley out on his feet.

I don't think Brown would have smashed him at all. Frawley is defensively minded mostly and is more worried about his opponent, whilst Tom would have provided some run outside50 as well as keep Brown in check. My belief is he would have had Brown run more.

We were one tall down and McDonald was subbed for a mid.

[rpfc 28,539]

Malthouse?

You can't miss what you never had.

[45HG 1,549]

I know it's against the intentions of the thread, and for that I apologise, but I just cannot go past the absence of Mitch Clark.

His athleticism, presence and confidence feed our team immensely - not to mention his skill - and I feel that, had he played, it would have been a very different ball game. I feel we controlled much of the first quarter with really no avenue to goal only to go in two behind on some lapses (Zorko 50 metres in space, although that was as Tom was coming off the field - almost feel play should've been halted for that, as with a blood rule. Hell, umpires will wait a minute for the light to come on but not for both sides to have 18 on the pitch?).

Of the list I'd say Jones. Martin played an ok game, and given our inside 50s I don't think clearances were the problem as such. McDonald was a big loss but, considering we only kicked 8 goals, I can't think the withdrawal of a young defender cost us.

Geez I wish Clark was there though.