Bevan: How long has he got?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Bloody Hell
    Senior Player
    • Oct 2006
    • 3085

    Originally posted by Bas
    Yakety Yak, Don't talk back!


    Couldn't help myself. I'm with you on Bevo.
    To be fair I think almost all are with Bevo.

    The only call for his head came from the opening post, who retracted it further down. I don't think anyone has said he's not in the best 22.
    The eternal connundrum "what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object" was finally solved when David Hasselhoff punched himself in the face.

    Comment

    • pinkemu
      Silver member, not Gold
      • Sep 2006
      • 419

      Originally posted by Bloody Hell
      To be fair I think almost all are with Bevo.

      The only call for his head came from the opening post, who retracted it further down. I don't think anyone has said he's not in the best 22.
      Bloody Hell , where did that come from?

      Comment

      • Bloody Hell
        Senior Player
        • Oct 2006
        • 3085

        Originally posted by pinkemu
        Bloody Hell , where did that come from?
        ...taking injuries into account.
        The eternal connundrum "what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object" was finally solved when David Hasselhoff punched himself in the face.

        Comment

        • Lohengrin
          On the Rookie List
          • Jul 2008
          • 641

          Originally posted by connolly
          The point is he was taken apart by Johnston in the first quarter.
          Oh really, enough with the absurdity - two shots from near the boundary line and one over the shoulder, and all about 40m out is hardly "taken apart". And yet strangely, you think having four goals kicked on you in a quarter is fine.
          Last edited by Lohengrin; 12 May 2009, 08:57 PM.

          Comment

          • Darren Thomson
            On the Rookie List
            • Jul 2008
            • 291

            Considering we are picking our best 22 from a pool of 29 rather than 38 Bev is in the 22. He goes hard at it, that's good enuf for me


            Paul Roos for PM

            Comment

            • BSA5
              Senior Player
              • Feb 2008
              • 2522

              Can't be bothered quoting, because it's been brought up numerous times, but to those, particularly Connolly, who defend Bevo by saying that he never stopped trying, I couldn't agree more that he never stopped trying, but that doesn't make his game any less of a shocker. Credit to his character (which I've never doubted), but that doesn't change the fact that his performance was horrible.

              I like Bevo as a player, I reckon he's definitely in our best 22 (wasn't so sure at the start of last year, in fact I admit I remember calling for his head), and the fact that he never gives up is a big reason for that, but he had an absolute shocker against Geelong, and there is absolutely no denying that. He isn't the reason we lost. It doesn't make him a dud player. Even superstars have shockers occasionally. He'll move on from it, and so should we, but there's no use making excuses for him.
              Officially on the Reid and Sumner bandwagon!

              Comment

              • connolly
                Registered User
                • Aug 2005
                • 2461

                Originally posted by Lohengrin
                Oh really, enough with the absurdity - two shots from near the boundary line and one over the shoulder, and all about 40m out is hardly "taken apart". And yet strangely, you think having four goals kicked on you in a quarter is fine.
                Well why was Bolton moved off Johnston at the 20 minute mark of the first quarter? While the thinking music is playing perhaps you can also consider that Bevo was moved onto a bigger opponent who was in red hot form after pantsing the captain and our number one defender. Bevan did not have four goals kicked on him in a quarter. One goal by Stokes which he is being held responsible occured while he was playing on the forward line!
                Bevo bandwagon driver

                Comment

                • pinkemu
                  Silver member, not Gold
                  • Sep 2006
                  • 419

                  I think the word shocker has been thrown around like it's the new hip thing in town, all the kids are sayin it.

                  Comment

                  • connolly
                    Registered User
                    • Aug 2005
                    • 2461

                    Originally posted by BSA5
                    Can't be bothered quoting, because it's been brought up numerous times, but to those, particularly Connolly, who defend Bevo by saying that he never stopped trying, I couldn't agree more that he never stopped trying, but that doesn't make his game any less of a shocker. Credit to his character (which I've never doubted), but that doesn't change the fact that his performance was horrible.

                    I like Bevo as a player, I reckon he's definitely in our best 22 (wasn't so sure at the start of last year, in fact I admit I remember calling for his head), and the fact that he never gives up is a big reason for that, but he had an absolute shocker against Geelong, and there is absolutely no denying that. He isn't the reason we lost. It doesn't make him a dud player. Even superstars have shockers occasionally. He'll move on from it, and so should we, but there's no use making excuses for him.
                    I am not making excuses he was beaten on a number of occasions. I do object to the perjorative of "shocker". The real shockers were played by those players that went missing or turned it up after the Cats got on top in the second quarter and were beaten pointless in contested possessions. I think we know who they were.
                    Bevo bandwagon driver

                    Comment

                    • Lohengrin
                      On the Rookie List
                      • Jul 2008
                      • 641

                      Originally posted by connolly
                      Well why was Bolton moved off Johnston at the 20 minute mark of the first quarter? While the thinking music is playing perhaps you can also consider that Bevo was moved onto a bigger opponent who was in red hot form after pantsing the captain and our number one defender. Bevan did not have four goals kicked on him in a quarter. One goal by Stokes which he is being held responsible occured while he was playing on the forward line!
                      Johnson kicked 3 behinds on Bolton. He kicked 4 goals on Bevan in the equivalent of a quarter. So if 3 behinds is a "pantsing" what is 4 goals?

                      Bevan was on Stokes for all 3 of his goals. Quite clearly in the vision you can see Bevan near him in each case.

                      Comment

                      • ROK Lobster
                        RWO Life Member
                        • Aug 2004
                        • 8658

                        Originally posted by connolly
                        I am not making excuses he was beaten on a number of occasions. I do object to the perjorative of "shocker". The real shockers were played by those players that went missing or turned it up after the Cats got on top in the second quarter and were beaten pointless in contested possessions. I think we know who they were.
                        1. It's "pejorative". I thought you were better educated.
                        2. A shocker is a shocker. Regardless of how hard he tried he had an absolute dog of a day. I think it is far enough to call it a shocker.

                        Comment

                        • goswannie14
                          Leadership Group
                          • Sep 2005
                          • 11166

                          Originally posted by connolly
                          I am not making excuses he was beaten on a number of occasions. I do object to the perjorative of "shocker". The real shockers were played by those players that went missing or turned it up after the Cats got on top in the second quarter and were beaten pointless in contested possessions. I think we know who they were.
                          You're not still blaming Davis? IIRC he's not even on the list any more.
                          Does God believe in Atheists?

                          Comment

                          • connolly
                            Registered User
                            • Aug 2005
                            • 2461

                            Originally posted by Lohengrin
                            Johnson kicked 3 behinds on Bolton. He kicked 4 goals on Bevan in the equivalent of a quarter. So if 3 behinds is a "pantsing" what is 4 goals?

                            Bevan was on Stokes for all 3 of his goals. Quite clearly in the vision you can see Bevan near him in each case.
                            One Johnston goal came directly from a Bolton mistake. Stokes beat Bolton for one of his goals and one came from a turnover from a Bevo pass where no one had dropped back to cover Stokes. If a defender goes forward you would expect your team mates to pick up a loose man.
                            Bevo bandwagon driver

                            Comment

                            • Melbournehammer
                              Senior Player
                              • May 2007
                              • 1815

                              actually i don't think that is quite right - bevan sought to pass to jolly and stokes was chasing bevan but ran past him and when the ball spilled (because bevan sought to pass the ball to the centre circles to jolly with three geelong players within 5 metres - which we have already done and you and i have different views about) was still running towards goal while bevan was (perhaps justifiably) ball watching or running to where he kicked it (which is also perhaps justifiable) - by the time bevan turned stokes had 15 metres on him and he wasn't going to get that back.

                              Comment

                              • reigning premier
                                Suspended by the MRP
                                • Sep 2006
                                • 4335

                                Can someone start "The Connolly is right and everyone else is wrong thread" please? We need somewhere where he can post all day about how great Bevan is and give the rest of us some peace.

                                Seriously, 13 @@@@ing pages of what???? Haven't you all learnt by now arguing with Connolly is like trying to reason with a screaming 4yo with ADD in the lollies section of Woollies as to why he/she can't have a can of Red Bull and a Mars bar??? Sure you need to teach the child but in the end, a slap on the ass is the only real solution. He's NEVER EVER going to admit that Bevo had a shocker even if everyone else agrees that Bevo is a gutsy player and deserves his spot in the team. It's beyond his capability of reasoning.

                                Get over it, move on.

                                Comment

                                Working...