Essendon vs Adelaide

[Barto]

This bloke is an exception, they only come around every blue moon!

For sure, it's a damned insult. Lesser lights get more consideration and hacks dont get to 300 games.

[CUTTERMAN]

This bloke is an exception, they only come around every blue moon!

Or in Adelaide's case 4-5 times in 10-12 years. I see where you're coming from but it's the same for McLeod and Goody and was the same with Hart and Riccuito. I think it's a perfectly good way to manage a list provided there's the deserved respect that goes with it. Which in this case I think there is.

[Psyber]

Based on his performances lately he may be doing better than he would on a fixed contract if his management made sure the contract clauses were right....

[JK]

Great game of footy, which really surprised me because it looked like the Crows were in for a dirty day given some of their skill errors in the 1st quarter (some of which were abominable).

I think the Bombers were always going to hit some games where they were going to feel the pain of David Hille's injury, and this was a prime example I thought ... Also thought that whilst Porplyzia was exceptionally well held, it wasn't a bad thing to see someone as damaging as McVeigh spending so much time near the Crow goals.

Crows have to move heaven and earth to keep this young group together, they really can build a top notch nucleus from them.

Also, as I mentioned elsewhere, been surprised by many people's thoughts (not necessarily in here) on Otten's game .. Yeah Lucas kicked 4, but at least 2 of them were from terrible turnovers not of Otten's doing, which left him with zero chance of preventing the goals .. Think he really takes the bit between the teeth, particularly when the game is in the balance, and provides great run for someone so young.

[Psyber]

I agree CP. I though Ottens and the rest of the defence played well overall. A lot of Essendon's scoring seemed to come from turnovers on the middle of the ground catching the defenders out of position, and that is part of the game plan - they are not expected or intended to be man on man with their opponent all the time.
[I do wonder about the wisdom of that sometimes, but that is not the players' judgement or decision.]

[Farmy]

I agree CP. I though Ottens and the rest of the defence played well overall. A lot of Essendon's scoring seemed to come from turnovers on the middle of the ground catching the defenders out of position, and that is part of the game plan - they are not expected or intended to be man on man with their opponent all the time.
[I do wonder about the wisdom of that sometimes, but that is not the players' judgement or decision.]

I agree, but his name is Otten, not Ottens.

[Psyber]

I agree CP. I though Ottens and the rest of the defence played well overall. A lot of Essendon's scoring seemed to come from turnovers on the middle of the ground catching the defenders out of position, and that is part of the game plan - they are not expected or intended to be man on man with their opponent all the time.
[I do wonder about the wisdom of that sometimes, but that is not the players' judgement or decision.]

I agree, but his name is Otten, not Ottens.

Yeah.. I made a typo with the word before his name too - I meant "I thought Otten ..."
I should have checked but I was about to go out and in a bit of a rush.

[NO-MERCY]

This bloke is an exception, they only come around every blue moon!

Or in Adelaide's case 4-5 times in 10-12 years. I see where you're coming from but it's the same for McLeod and Goody and was the same with Hart and Riccuito. I think it's a perfectly good way to manage a list provided there's the deserved respect that goes with it. Which in this case I think there is.

I think the respect from the clubs point of view would be give the bloke a 2 year deal, he hasn't had the injuries the other blokes have had ( he's in far better shape ). The club can do better.
I'll put my money on Edwards winning the Golden jacket this year.

[CUTTERMAN]

Yeh well they won't NM, so it doesn't matter. Tyson I think would be happy with that, all other guys before have accepted the reasoning behind it so that tells me that there is a good understanding between players, club and coach.

[Gozu]

The problem is the Crows know Edwards isn't going anywhere. They can keep offering him one year deals because of it.

[Dutchy]

Great win by the Crows, they should really take a step back and enjoy what they have achieved over the past 3 weeks, sensational...

[Psyber]

The problem is the Crows know Edwards isn't going anywhere. They can keep offering him one year deals because of it.

The Crows policy for all players over 30 is a sound one, and, if it is to work, you don't make exceptions to a sensible policy, or everyone will want one.
Tyson presumably knows and accepts this, and I expect has a satisfactory performance related deal.

[Gingernuts]

Great win by the Crows, they should really take a step back and enjoy what they have achieved over the past 3 weeks, sensational...

Hehehe, you'd be particularly happy if they took that step back this week wouldn't you Dutchy?

[Rik E Boy]

The Crows winning a shootout game? WTF??

Fantastic game of football, the best of the round and one of the bette matches this year. The question has to be asked, why didn't they try more of this during 2005 and 2006? Might have scored themselves a premiership.

regards,

REB

[FD88]

The Crows winning a shootout game? WTF??

Fantastic game of football, the best of the round and one of the bette matches this year. The question has to be asked, why didn't they try more of this during 2005 and 2006? Might have scored themselves a premiership.

No offense mate but I have no idea how you could ask that question. The Crows played fast, attacking football for much of 2005 and 2006 and gave themselves the best chance to bring a flag home in both years; things didn't fall their way in terms of keeping the best personnel on the park when they needed them most, but suggesting that the brand of footy cost them is miles off the mark imo.

[hearts on fire]

Crows choked in 2005 & 2006.......

[Rik E Boy]

The Crows winning a shootout game? WTF??

Fantastic game of football, the best of the round and one of the bette matches this year. The question has to be asked, why didn't they try more of this during 2005 and 2006? Might have scored themselves a premiership.

No offense mate but I have no idea how you could ask that question. The Crows played fast, attacking football for much of 2005 and 2006 and gave themselves the best chance to bring a flag home in both years; things didn't fall their way in terms of keeping the best personnel on the park when they needed them most, but suggesting that the brand of footy cost them is miles off the mark imo.

Fast attacking football on the rebound with 15 in the back half is not the same thing as Fast attacking football IMO. You've been playing tempo football for many years.

regards,

REB