Rnd 7 vs Hawthorn at the MCG on Sunday 28 April 2024, 12 PM Sydney time

[Roadrunner]

Danger Game exhibit A - Richmond

What a botched opportunity!

Richmond simply wanted it more than we did in that game- they could have beaten most on that form.
Liz’s point is valid in that every game is potentially a “danger” game, but the lower placed teams can and do seem to raise their game when playing against us, so in that sense they can’t be underestimated.

[Blood Fever]

I don't really understand this concept of "danger game". If it's just a game where we might lose if we don't play close to our bests, then surely ever game is a danger game? And so labelling individual games as a "danger game" becomes a bit pointless?

Agree. Competition very even. A little bit off in terms of intensity can mean trouble.

[liz]

Richmond simply wanted it more than we did in that game- they could have beaten most on that form.
Liz’s point is valid in that every game is potentially a “danger” game, but the lower placed teams can and do seem to raise their game when playing against us, so in that sense they can’t be underestimated.

I'm not sure why they should do it against us, rather than against GWS, Carlton, Geelong, Collingwood etc.

[stevoswan]

The term has the implication that, regardless of ladder position, this is an adversary that we struggle against.

Only when coached by Clarkson. I'm so relaxed....we'll smash them.

[stevoswan]

Agree. Competition very even. A little bit off in terms of intensity can mean trouble.

You don't think they will have learnt from the Richmond game? I'll say it again, we'll smash them.

I might sound cocky....but I'm confident our boys will not be.

[Trever]

I don’t think any changes are in contention this week.

Rampe must be close and Parker can play 60% minutes in the reserves.

I would like Campbell to be fully backed in the starting side. Make Cunningham or Lloyd the sub instead. Campbell’s kick is a weapon that opens up the field.

Wow. Got that correct. Even correctly predicted Parker in the reserves. If Cunningham or Lloyd are the sub, then I’m changing career to a stock picker.

[Mel_C]

You don't think they will have learnt from the Richmond game? I'll say it again, we'll smash them.

I might sound cocky....but I'm confident our boys will not be.

I hope you're right. I want to enjoy the game live without having heart failure!

[MarshallG]

TWO FREE TICKETS TO TOMORROW'S GAME

Level 2 Section N29 Row M.
"Club Members Location" so you will be surrounded by like minded friends.

I have COVID, cannot attend.

You will need the Ticketek app.

First person to PM me with phone number or email gets them.

All the facts are above, no further correspondence entered into.

Carna Bloods.

[Mel_C]

I saw a photo of Buddy, Jesinta and the 2 kids on Twitter. The kids are wearing ugly Hawthorn jumpers. The good news is his daughter has a grumpy look on her face and is hopefully thinking that she'd rather be wearing red and white!

[The Big Cat]

Danger Game exhibit A - Richmond

What a botched opportunity!

Some suggestion that some sort of sickness bug went through the club leading into that game.

[Kafka's Ghost]

Last game of the round vs the struggling Hawks.

If we win, GWS win and Geelong lose, we could have a NSW top 2 (depending on %), which will make some VFL supporters really livid about academies etc.

Hard to change a winning team, but if Parker is ready for a full/half game, it seems Campbell will come out.

Or if Parker is going to play more forward than midfield, maybe Hayward as sub?

Watching Parker in the VFL today he needs at least another game in the 2s to get going. Some things good, some things understandably rusty. Decision-making very questionable at times.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Sandridge]

You don't think they will have learnt from the Richmond game? I'll say it again, we'll smash them.

I might sound cocky....but I'm confident our boys will not be.

Your confidence was justified, Stevo!

GO BLOODS!

[Maltopia]

Watched the game and lots of positives
including:

- RB had a monster first half, 18 possessions or so by then
- Four quarter effort/intensity
- Great game also by Ollie and Blakey
- Great percentage boost

Some negatives for me:

- They had more inside 50s than us and our margin was boosted by their low accuracy from some gettable shots, whereas we could do no wrong apart from eg an early poster by Papley. We were getting freakish snaps etc. Guess it was our day and we will take it
- Our inside 50s were quite poor/hacked in the second half, and we were actually losing to a bottom four team for most of the last quarter. Deep in the fourth, it was 1.3 for them (which should have been 2.1 or 2.2) versus 1 goal for us. We ended up winning the last quarter due to an amazing hand ball from Logan to Heeney who made awesome running snap, and one other freakish goal I think.

Despite that, am happy with the win overall and whoever misses for Parker next week will be a bit unlucky (probably Campbell who was given less
20 minutes as sub in the last two games).

[liz]

I agree that the scoreboard somewhat flattered how much control we had around the ground, particularly in the second half. However, Longmire's post-match press conference hints that they were conscious of next week's game against a strong opposition, with a six day turnaround (and a longer turnaround for GWS). In some ways that's a quite unLongmire thing to say. He's always about focusing on the immediate opponent. However, given the game was completely won, and we still retained the ability to keep the score ticking along through superior ball use, I guess it makes sense that they backed off the running a bit. The tackling and pressure was still at a reasonably strong level for the whole game.

I also saw something interesting on First Crack last night, where they showed the Swans setting up a ring of players around the outside of stoppages (around the ground, not centre bounce stoppages, for obvious reasons) and allowing the Hawks players to control the inside of stoppages. That might explain why the Hawks won the ground ball contests but how we were able to stop them doing much damage with the ball, and to win it back quickly. And when we did win a stoppage, we had a plethora of players already on their way to the outside. It's probably not a strategy that is wise against a side with the ability to not only win the ball at stoppage but also to run it out. And another comment from Longmire in his press conference suggested that maybe they took this tactic too far and will review it during the week. But it was effective yesterday.

[i'm-uninformed2]

I agree that the scoreboard somewhat flattered how much control we had around the ground, particularly in the second half. However, Longmire's post-match press conference hints that they were conscious of next week's game against a strong opposition, with a six day turnaround (and a longer turnaround for GWS). In some ways that's a quite unLongmire thing to say. He's always about focusing on the immediate opponent. However, given the game was completely won, and we still retained the ability to keep the score ticking along through superior ball use, I guess it makes sense that they backed off the running a bit. The tackling and pressure was still at a reasonably strong level for the whole game.

I also saw something interesting on First Crack last night, where they showed the Swans setting up a ring of players around the outside of stoppages (around the ground, not centre bounce stoppages, for obvious reasons) and allowing the Hawks players to control the inside of stoppages. That might explain why the Hawks won the ground ball contests but how we were able to stop them doing much damage with the ball, and to win it back quickly. And when we did win a stoppage, we had a plethora of players already on their way to the outside. It's probably not a strategy that is wise against a side with the ability to not only win the ball at stoppage but also to run it out. And another comment from Longmire in his press conference suggested that maybe they took this tactic too far and will review it during the week. But it was effective yesterday.

It caught my eye - mainly because it was the opposite of what we did v Gold Coast's more talented midfield. In that game, we pressed in tight, pulled Adams up from half forward, muddied their clean exits in the scramble, and then backed our run and spread from there. It was good coaching, and I like the fact Horse is mixing up his strategy depending on the opponent. He's also dropped the hard, purely negative tags. Jordon had a bit of one on Anderson, and Rowie will occasionally seek to quell someone for five minutes - but he's instead backing our collective system and strengths to prevail. I like it.