17 hours ago, Deemented Are Go! said:

Agree. 

My conern, however, is that they figure out how to shark off Maxy’s hitouts..

A vince/bugsters paradise?

Hey,  Dub did u forget richmond,  take out Dusty and what have u got oi

2 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Got this off the Sport Medicine Aust. website:

Rehabilitation and return to play
As a general rule, Grade 1 hamstring strains should be rested from sporting activity for about three weeks

So given they've confirmed he has a low strain, it would be a huge risk him returning in 2 weeks.

I get the impression Geelong think they're hopeless without Dangerfield (as evidenced by their bad loss to Sydney last year) and are willing to roll the dice.

 

They won't. Imagine the outcry if he tears it properly and misses a couple of months.

No way would Scott allow any thoughts of them being a one man team.

No Mackie

No Lonergan

No Henderson

No Scott Selwood

No Stanley

No Dangerfield

No Cockatoo

Possibly no Ablett

I'm coming over for this game and stuff me, if we don't smash these front running arse clowns I'll be fuming.

Edited March 14, 20187 yr by McQueen
Included 'for' due to obvious context.

It's a very important game, because the reality is we're unlikely to beat them down at Kardinia Park later in the year.

I don't want this mob beating us twice this year.

Geez Geelong love playing games, I would say we won’t know if danger and ablett play till 90 minutes before the bounce, reading Geelong page on big footy they think they can just chuck danger in the goal square for the game and he will kick 6 

8 minutes ago, brendan said:

Geez Geelong love playing games, I would say we won’t know if danger and ablett play till 90 minutes before the bounce, reading Geelong page on big footy they think they can just chuck danger in the goal square for the game and he will kick 6 

That would probably happen.

27 minutes ago, brendan said:

Geez Geelong love playing games, I would say we won’t know if danger and ablett play till 90 minutes before the bounce, reading Geelong page on big footy they think they can just chuck danger in the goal square for the game and he will kick 6 

no way you do that with a hammy, you need to sprint and lead up fwd.

3 hours ago, don't make me angry said:

In his all Australian year he was number 1 for hit out to advantage

I asked you about the other night against St Kilda. That was what my post referenced.

I have no problem with calling Gawn's AA year brilliant. It's everything that surrounds that season I look to, including his form in the JLT.

I want him to continue to influence around the ground and convert hit outs to advantage, rather than emulate Jamar's flash in the pan season. 

 

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

It's a very important game, because the reality is we're unlikely to beat them down at Kardinia Park later in the year.

 

We can and will beat anyone anywhere this season. I'm not worried abut Geelong in Geelong.   Hell we flogged the Crows at Adelaide Oval last season, and won in Perth finally.

The tide has turned, PD.

Edited March 14, 20187 yr by Petraccattack

53 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

That would probably happen.

Jetta would keep him quiet.

31 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

We can and will beat anyone anywhere this season. I'm not worried abut Geelong in Geelong.   Hell we flogged the Crows at Adelaide Oval last season, and won in Perth finally.

The tide has turned, PD.

We can beat anyone anywhere, but we're unlikely to.  

I'm aware where we won, but I'm also aware of Geelong's record at home.  We're not going to win all 22 games, fella.

We need to win round 1, because we're unlikely to win at Kardinia Park.

Even purely going on pre season form we should beat them. 

We just look slicker with our ball movement and stronger all over the ground.

The possibility of Danger or Ablett being out is a bonus.

3 hours ago, McQueen said:

No Stanley

 

Some Geelong supporters are actually celebrating that out.

Edited March 14, 20187 yr by Bring-Back-Powell

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

We can beat anyone anywhere, but we're unlikely to.  

I'm aware where we won, but I'm also aware of Geelong's record at home.  We're not going to win all 22 games, fella.

We need to win round 1, because we're unlikely to win at Kardinia Park.

I think the whole league of clubs in the AFL are looking to the MFC to take Geelong's pants down and smack'em as hard as it can legally be done. Play games with us? At their peril....

7 hours ago, A F said:

I asked you about the other night against St Kilda. That was what my post referenced.

I have no problem with calling Gawn's AA year brilliant. It's everything that surrounds that season I look to, including his form in the JLT.

I want him to continue to influence around the ground and convert hit outs to advantage, rather than emulate Jamar's flash in the pan season. 

 

JLT 1? He was tapping to advantage all game. I don’t know or care what the stats are, but his ruckwork stood out on the day. 

Just one person calling Gawn overrated means he’s underrated. 

19 hours ago, Demonland said:

If this was a Melbourne player he'd be out for 6 weeks. Geelong are confident he will play in 11 days.

Yeah, but we'd still say he should be right to go for round 1 

18 hours ago, Dingo said:

For what it’s worth:I was at my physiotherapy centre this morning.My physio was talking to a senior physio about Danger.The senior bloke said he has heard that Danger has back related hammy issues and there is no way he should play against the Dees.This was in Bentleigh not Geelong.

Was reading the Geelong board on BigFooty and their supporters think the same. Not the first time it's happened I believe.

16 hours ago, A F said:

I asked you about the other night against St Kilda. That was what my post referenced.

I have no problem with calling Gawn's AA year brilliant. It's everything that surrounds that season I look to, including his form in the JLT.

I want him to continue to influence around the ground and convert hit outs to advantage, rather than emulate Jamar's flash in the pan season. 

 

Rewatch the start of the 4th quarter.  Max to Oliver who gets caught with the ball twice in a row.  Defensive tap straight to Billings who got in front of Oliver and Saints goal.  This after one clean Max-Clarry combo and exit.  Max won hands down, but perhaps we were too predictable and the opposition played to that.

Wouldn’t mind an update video from mission at some point 

42 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

Rewatch the start of the 4th quarter.  Max to Oliver who gets caught with the ball twice in a row.  Defensive tap straight to Billings who got in front of Oliver and Saints goal.  This after one clean Max-Clarry combo and exit.  Max won hands down, but perhaps we were too predictable and the opposition played to that.

I remember those two plays. But as I said, he did get better as the game wore on.

20 hours ago, Dingo said:

For what it’s worth:I was at my physiotherapy centre this morning.My physio was talking to a senior physio about Danger.The senior bloke said he has heard that Danger has back related hammy issues and there is no way he should play against the Dees.This was in Bentleigh not Geelong.

The only way Dangerfield plays against us is if the club is lying (playing ducks and drakes) about him having a hamstring strain, and that he really only has hamstring tightness.

The standard recovery for a minor strain is 3 weeks, I keep reading.

Not that I really care, but if Dangerfield has a hamstring tear, he WILL NOT play. Unless Geelong is stupid, or lying. We physios have a mantra, which is decades old, yet current: there is no such thing as a 2 week hamstring. If the human hammie  had inexplicably evolved, or there were some new healing magic, it wouldn’t still be a rule. Danger is unlikely even for round 2. 

8 minutes ago, Webber said:

Not that I really care, but if Dangerfield has a hamstring tear, he WILL NOT play. Unless Geelong is stupid, or lying. We physios have a mantra, which is decades old, yet current: there is no such thing as a 2 week hamstring. If the human hammie  had inexplicably evolved, or there were some new healing magic, it wouldn’t still be a rule. Danger is unlikely even for round 2. 

There is a 2 week hummy only did my hammy once missed 1 week back playing 2 weeks after doing it,  mind you it was playing cricket, there way more sprinting in AFL. I hope he plays because he will tear it real good playing too soon, hopefully then putting him out for 4 to 6 weeks.

54 minutes ago, don't make me angry said:

There is a 2 week hummy only did my hammy once missed 1 week back playing 2 weeks after doing it,  mind you it was playing cricket, there way more sprinting in AFL. I hope he plays because he will tear it real good playing too soon, hopefully then putting him out for 4 to 6 weeks.

I'm tipping it wasn't subject to max requirements, being cricket, and the three week rule is all about relative risk, which also relates to speed, acceleration, and fatigue. Footy is a different story from cricket....at most levels.