Lethal on Melbourne & Hogan

[Demonated 252]

12 hours ago, america de cali said:

Bemusing  when keyboard warriors read something they don't  like from legends of the game and somehow think they know more than them.

Lloyd criticised Hogan and I agreed with him as he made some good points based on his own observations. I can't say I liked him as a player but he does put in work and try to provide a level of analysis. Matthews from what I have heard, both in regards to Melbourne and other teams, seems to be lazy in his reporting and analysis. Same goes for Bartlett generally, tends to stir the pot without any depth of knowledge.

I'd say it's more bemusing just accepting the opinions of others based on their standing in the game. Matthews commentating in our win vs Bulldogs last year demonstrated a clear lack of knowledge towards our team. Like I said, the average poster here would know more than Matthews about Melbourne, because we don't watch them twice a year and make sweeping statements based on that. I respect him greatly as a player/coach, but he doesn't receive automatic credibility because of who he is IMO.

[Adam The God 29,373]

2 minutes ago, Demonated said:

Lloyd criticised Hogan and I agreed with him as he made some good points based on his own observations. I can't say I liked him as a player but he does put in work and try to provide a level of analysis. Matthews from what I have heard, both in regards to Melbourne and other teams, seems to be lazy in his reporting and analysis. Same goes for Bartlett generally, tends to stir the pot without any depth of knowledge.

I'd say it's more bemusing just accepting the opinions of others based on their standing in the game. Matthews commentating in our win vs Bulldogs last year demonstrated a clear lack of knowledge towards our team. Like I said, the average poster here would know more than Matthews about Melbourne, because we don't watch them twice a year and make sweeping statements based on that. I respect him greatly as a player/coach, but he doesn't receive automatic credibility because of who he is IMO.

Probably the same sort of people that believe everything they read in the press. Conservative because they're too lazy to actually analyse anything. Regards, Sassmagas.

[John Crow Batty 8,778]

7 minutes ago, Demonated said:

Lloyd criticised Hogan and I agreed with him as he made some good points based on his own observations. I can't say I liked him as a player but he does put in work and try to provide a level of analysis. Matthews from what I have heard, both in regards to Melbourne and other teams, seems to be lazy in his reporting and analysis. Same goes for Bartlett generally, tends to stir the pot without any depth of knowledge.

I'd say it's more bemusing just accepting the opinions of others based on their standing in the game. Matthews commentating in our win vs Bulldogs last year demonstrated a clear lack of knowledge towards our team. Like I said, the average poster here would know more than Matthews about Melbourne, because we don't watch them twice a year and make sweeping statements based on that. I respect him greatly as a player/coach, but he doesn't receive automatic credibility because of who he is IMO.

What did Matthews say about our win against the Bulldogs last season? Not sure I heard it.

[TGR 1,367]

39 minutes ago, america de cali said:

What did Matthews say about our win against the Bulldogs last season? Not sure I heard it.

For those of you that were at the G versus the dogs when we won, we actually struggled in the first half when the game was open.  After half time, we closed their space down and Roos brought the old Swans trick to win the game.  We also had McCartney with fresh intel.  But if you want to ignore the Etihad demolition, and point to this MCG win, good on you.

 

The game has changed remarkably.  Read Paul Chapman's article last Friday, and also why the Suns at $6 were the easiest money of all time last round.  It is virtually impossible with the way the game is now adjudicated (by umpires with pressure from McLaughlin) to shut a game down with congestion.

 

 

Fact is, that Matthews made more sense about Watts after 1 game of football, than most posters here (and ology) over an 8 year period.  Bit like me with Morton.

[Demonated 252]

38 minutes ago, america de cali said:

What did Matthews say about our win against the Bulldogs last season? Not sure I heard it.

He went from uneducated opinions of Hogan, to constantly babbling about 'Fitzgerald' and how he has never played as a backman, to very obscure observations on most of our players. It really gave the impression that he hadn't watched us in a long time, which is fair enough I guess. I've noticed this is the case for him with quite a few teams. He may know 5/6 teams quite well, but he still has to commentate on others which can be a problem as he is completely ignorant on them.

I don't hold anything against him, but I would approach a lot of his opinions with caution. Someone like Lloyd I believe actually puts in the effort of watching other games and learning about teams/players.

[TGR 1,367]

When Matthew Lloyd criticises Melbourne over the past 5-6 years, the peanuts go crazy.  When Caro had a go at us (and she has a go at em all), again, we (supporter-base crumbled).

Lloyd was actually bullish about us after round 1, suggesting we are on-track for 10 wins.

The intelligence of a supporter-base comes down to just accepting quality judgement from people that don't kiss butt.  We haven't done it well.  Those posters that criticised the club during the downward spiral of the last decade, actually walked against a tide of applause.

Many of us just deserve light-weight sycophantic opinion such as Mark Doran, Finey, Robbo (general after the war), Harf and the rest.  That is what you deserve in bucket loads.

Why don't we just ban negative opinion about this footy club.  In other words, ban objectivity.  We can't handle it.  We think we can.  But we can't.

FWIW, I agree with Matthews:  Hogan isn't a multi-dimensional mobile tall.  I am buying shares in Frost, who needs to pull his finger out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dee-luded 2,959]

3 hours ago, chook fowler said:

I'm not sure that he is. Whenever I've heard Hawthorn people interviewed and that includes Beveridge and Bolton they have praised Clarkson for being a good listener, taking onboard input from others, generally being very collaborative and able to build strong reIationships. I don't get the sense he is a fire and brimstone type at all.

the great firebreather coaches also listened chook. 

If they didn't listen,  look, & learn,  they would never be the success which they were.    I think you would have to put Norm Smith in this bracket chook.

[dee-luded 2,959]

1 hour ago, TGR said:

When Matthew Lloyd criticises Melbourne over the past 5-6 years, the peanuts go crazy.  When Caro had a go at us (and she has a go at em all), again, we (supporter-base crumbled).

Lloyd was actually bullish about us after round 1, suggesting we are on-track for 10 wins.

 

The intelligence of a supporter-base comes down to just accepting quality judgement from people that don't kiss butt.  We haven't done it well.  Those posters that criticised the club during the downward spiral of the last decade, actually walked against a tide of applause.

 

Many of us just deserve light-weight sycophantic opinion such as Mark Doran, Finey, Robbo (general after the war), Harf and the rest.  That is what you deserve in bucket loads.

 

 

Why don't we just ban negative opinion about this footy club.  In other words, ban objectivity.  We can't handle it.  We think we can.  But we can't.

 

 

 

FWIW, I agree with Matthews:  Hogan isn't a multi-dimensional mobile tall.  I am buying shares in Frost, who needs to pull his finger out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is right...  

Also,  take commentary with salt...  accept what makes sense & disregard the rest,  without getting panties twisted.

 

I think some of our supporter are in love with our players,  instead of their wives/partners.   They seem to have the drunk goggles on half the time for those they are In-Love with,  & so the rage they have building inside,   is saved & dished on the poor few leftover. 

 

.

[Dr. Gonzo 23,704]

2 hours ago, TGR said:

When Matthew Lloyd criticises Melbourne over the past 5-6 years, the peanuts go crazy.  When Caro had a go at us (and she has a go at em all), again, we (supporter-base crumbled).

Lloyd was actually bullish about us after round 1, suggesting we are on-track for 10 wins.

 

The intelligence of a supporter-base comes down to just accepting quality judgement from people that don't kiss butt.  We haven't done it well.  Those posters that criticised the club during the downward spiral of the last decade, actually walked against a tide of applause.

 

Many of us just deserve light-weight sycophantic opinion such as Mark Doran, Finey, Robbo (general after the war), Harf and the rest.  That is what you deserve in bucket loads.

 

 

Why don't we just ban negative opinion about this footy club.  In other words, ban objectivity.  We can't handle it.  We think we can.  But we can't.

 

 

 

FWIW, I agree with Matthews:  Hogan isn't a multi-dimensional mobile tall.  I am buying shares in Frost, who needs to pull his finger out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

People can accept criticism when it's backed with facts but when it doesn't make sense we should just accept it because of who said it?

[dee-luded 2,959]

5 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

People can accept criticism when it's backed with facts but when it doesn't make sense we should just accept it because of who said it?

Salt Gonzo.  do you take acception to every comment made in the media.  & then go to the trouble of sitting down to write about comments ?  Why take so much notice of mostly fools on TV?

 

I listen,  when I watch the footy,  accept what I think makes sense, & just let other stuff go by,  at worst with a snicker.

 

I don't understand why some people get so uptight about a misspelled surname,  or what seems a silly comment ?

[chook fowler 19,251]

I must confess to actively disliking Matthews for his on field thuggery and I believe he is a very remote and aloof character off-field with few footy friends. I think modern coaches are much more multi-dimensional and would be more effective with the current generation of players.

[rjay 24,601]

2 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

I must confess to actively disliking Matthews for his on field thuggery and I believe he is a very remote and aloof character off-field with few footy friends. I think modern coaches are much more multi-dimensional and would be more effective with the current generation of players.

He didn't involve himself much with the Hawks during his playing time 'chook', played the game, got changed and headed home from what I hear.

[dee-luded 2,959]

17 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

I must confess to actively disliking Matthews for his on field thuggery and I believe he is a very remote and aloof character off-field with few footy friends. I think modern coaches are much more multi-dimensional and would be more effective with the current generation of players.

 

13 minutes ago, rjay said:

He didn't involve himself much with the Hawks during his playing time 'chook', played the game, got changed and headed home from what I hear.

many an aloof appearing person is really socially insecure, & avoids much social interaction hiding themselves.  (shyness covered up)

the onfield ruggedness is possibly a fantasy played out,  alter ego style.

 

Clark Kent rushes to change in a phone box,  takes off to save the day,  then returns to change privately & is then Clark Kent once again.

Doesn't mean he is a snob,  or arrogant. 

 

but he did what he did for his family.    'the Hawks players'  & supporters.   Satisfied he returns to being shy & normal.

[praha 11,120]

3 hours ago, TGR said:

The game has changed remarkably.  Read Paul Chapman's article last Friday, and also why the Suns at $6 were the easiest money of all time last round.  It is virtually impossible with the way the game is now adjudicated (by umpires with pressure from McLaughlin) to shut a game down with congestion.

Not impossible from an adjudication point of view. If you're not controlling the play then you are going to get calls against you, out of frustration and out of constantly being second to the ball and contest.

You can most certainly play congested football so long as you have a consistent, two-run attack in transition. Hawthorn does this well but their defensive capabilities are blinded by the fact their midfield and forward like are so prolific. The Dockers struggled were ultimately found out last year not because they played a "defensive" style. It was because they are severely lacking forward options. We've seen this in the first two rounds with their more attacking style: they simply don't have the cattle to kick a winning score.  Melbourne's problem is that it doesn't run two ways. This was an issue Neeld highlighted when he arrived, and Roos emphasised. What we have seen against both GWS and Essendon is that, if we attack and don't score, we're not quick enough to get back defensively (although we did a great job of pushing the Giants to the flanks), and if we defend and get the ball out, we're not quick enough on the rebound. I don't think that's lack of speed. I think it's lack of urgency, and certainly complacency which came into play last round. If you

[Gator 17,260]

55 minutes ago, rjay said:

He didn't involve himself much with the Hawks during his playing time 'chook', played the game, got changed and headed home from what I hear.

My eldest Brother was on the Hawthorn senior list with Matthews for 3 years.  

I don't think they spoke a word off the training track.

[Willmoy1947 3,967]

Does anyone on D'land know if Hogan has played any substantial football on the backline?

[mo64 5,490]

1 hour ago, chook fowler said:

I must confess to actively disliking Matthews for his on field thuggery and I believe he is a very remote and aloof character off-field with few footy friends. I think modern coaches are much more multi-dimensional and would be more effective with the current generation of players.

You mean they're more understanding of flogs who want everything their own way?

Matthews had the same philosophy as one of the great coaches in modern day sport, Gregg Popovich. Matthews said that you spent 90% of time on 10% of players, with a veiled reference to Aker. Popovich's view on talented players who want to play like individuals is "cut 'em". 

[chook fowler 19,251]

It seems Matthews continues to be a polarising figure.

[Dee Dee 1,101]

On 7 April 2016 at 2:43 PM, willmoy said:

Does anyone on D'land know if Hogan has played any substantial football on the backline?

I understand he did time at CHB in his junior days (or so I read). And he saved the day down back in round one this year.

Now on Matthews and his comments regarding Hogan: I saw a bit of Hogan at Casey in 2014 and it was noticeable that he was anything but a stay at home full forward, and this he transferred into his senior career. When I heard Matthews make comment on Hogan as a stay at home FF I was quite bemused. But then when you generally watch the top few teams you tend not to know much about the rest. 

 DISCLAIMER: dee dee is not and never has been a Matthews fan, he wouldn't last 10 minutes today playing the way he did back then.

[Gator 17,260]

3 minutes ago, Dee Dee said:

DISCLAIMER: dee dee is not and never has been a Matthews fan, he wouldn't last 10 minutes today playing the way he did back then.

He'd adjust and not be the thug he was then. 

Best player I've seen. 

[Bobby McKenzie 2,322]

On 6 April 2016 at 2:19 PM, Tony Tea said:

Hogan struggles to lead because we have too few players who bust the lines and are able to put the ball down his throat.

This is doubly complicated when the ball carriers are unable to get forward of the centre which means they are too far from goal and cannot reach the key forwards who in turn are unable to lead backwards into the space behind them. In effect, they have an attacking option taken out of their armoury.

In short, our lack of speed is making it tough for Hogan.

Why then did Hogan do well last season? Just curious.

[dee-luded 2,959]

18 hours ago, mo64 said:

You mean they're more understanding of flogs who want everything their own way?

Matthews had the same philosophy as one of the great coaches in modern day sport, Gregg Popovich. Matthews said that you spent 90% of time on 10% of players, with a veiled reference to Aker. Popovich's view on talented players who want to play like individuals is "cut 'em". 

sounds like Roosy,  but he's warm & fuzzy.

8 hours ago, Bobby McKenzie said:

Why then did Hogan do well last season? Just curious.

Roosy's  gameplan ?

Edited April 7, 2016 by dee-luded

[Ted Lasso 18,783]

On 4/7/2016 at 2:43 PM, willmoy said:

Does anyone on D'land know if Hogan has played any substantial football on the backline?

He played CHB in the national champs as a 17 year old for WA and was quite good, i think in time he could develop into a really good player at either end, but we need the forward.

[Johnny Karate 559]

All the commentary about Hogan at the moment is hyperbolic over reaction.

Does he need to stop the petulant tantrums? Absolutely, but even when he was playing well last season - him shouting and swearing at his team mates was a common sight.

I expect the attitude problems and his stuttering run up (and hopefully dunderheads kicking the ball woefully toward him) will be fixed over time. Champions always improve.

[Tony Tea 2,800]

On 8 April 2016 at 0:46 AM, Bobby McKenzie said:

Why then did Hogan do well last season? Just curious.

Because there were enough games where Hogan was one out, or where the ball was delivered to him better, which has not been the case as much this year.