player ratings tonight

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:42 pm

Just on Lovett. If everyone is in going for the hard ball who do we feed it out too? He is supposed to be the guy we get it to out of the stoppages.

dingus · Post by **dingus** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 1:09 pm

not everyone needs to make a point of getting to every contest, but when a contest presents itself and you either go in, or lose possession, you f****** go in. Lovett will not f****** go in under any circumstance.

I don't want him to seek out contests, but to shirk the issue when it presents itself is cowardly and selfish. On Friday, Lovett played like a selfish coward.

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:59 pm

Well you are wrong. His role is to be on the outside of the pack for our in and under guys to get it out to him. How can you judge a players cahracter like that, when we are all on the out side looking in? We can judge their skills and ability, but not their character. Its quiet obvious he wants to get the handpass and to run up the ground, which is what we need him to do. Would you rather Lovett dishing it out to Jason Johnson to go for a gallop?

Sismis · Post by **Sismis** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:14 am

Lovett dragged down 5 tackles. Only four on the ground had more. he went for the ball one handed (and missed) ONCE! The pace advantage gained when this move comes off far outweighs the disadvantage of a ONE time failure. If that is the only black mark you can find against him then I fail to see how can be so harsh on him. He is coming back into some real from and his pace is vital to this clubs hopes. Kicked one goal and was instrumental in at least four more. As for yelling at your team mates. What was he saying? We have a very young team who needs guidance and in the heat of battle sometimes you have to yell to be heard. As a defender I am constantly screaming at my team mates to find their opponents, there is no malice intended or percieved, it is just doing what needs to be done for the team. He sure as hell wasn't the only guy out there yelling at his teamates, nor should he be.

McPhee was dominant in the air taking 11 marks (equal game high)at least four of which were contested. The majority of these marks were on the half back line from kickouts where he set up play. This is a welcome return to form, remember 2 years ago when that was our set play out of defense? We were at one time the best rebounders in the league because of it. 2 weeks ago he was woeful at hitting targets, are we still blaming him for that? I can't think of one example where didn't use the footy well on friday. Actually his shot at goal was ordinary, there's one.

Both played very well and I for one believe they are going to be pitovtal to our next couple of weeks.

Dyson will struggle to be at the team next year. Hislop in his first game showed more. his intermittant brilliance is not enough, he needs to learn how to chase and use his speed to set up play.

Watson was exceptional, hard to believe this is the guy who was scared to kick the ball. I saw real leadership in him on Friday, never failed to the hard stuff.

Mrs Mercuri · Post by **Mrs Mercuri** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:44 pm

Boyler_Room wrote:Without having seen the game, the votes I heard on the radio (and the player ratings they gave) suggested that Watson was probably the best in and under player on the ground, and McVeigh was close to our best player for the night.

Watson's rating of 8/10 seems to agree with that, but McVeigh's 5???

Yeh i admit i wasn't at the game but i listened to it. I didn't think McVeigh was anywhere near our best on the night.... but again those rankings were just my thoughts on the game, obviously a lot of people will disagree. i just felt like posting for each individual player.

tonysoprano · Post by **tonysoprano** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:36 pm

dingus wrote:On Friday, Lovett played like a selfish coward.

Maybe a bit harsh - but agree he should certainly show more desperation at the footy and not shirk a contest.

Gatsid · Post by **Gatsid** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:47 pm

Essendon4eva wrote:Well you are wrong. His role is to be on the outside of the pack for our in and under guys to get it out to him. How can you judge a players cahracter like that, when we are all on the out side looking in? We can judge their skills and ability, but not their character. Its quiet obvious he wants to get the handpass and to run up the ground, which is what we need him to do. Would you rather Lovett dishing it out to Jason Johnson to go for a gallop?

But when the hard contest presents and Lovett is the only bomber there is he supposed to wait for someone to run 100 metres knock a guy or two over then dish it out to Lovett or should Lovett be going in for that ball. The truth is your wrong, because if you like the way Alwyn plays then he's been playing his role wrong this year because he is an outside small forward who goes in for the ball, so perhaps we tell him not too when he gets back from injury?

bowzer · Post by **bowzer** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:19 pm

i think rama getting a 6 is abit far fetched, nothing against the bloke but he looked rusty, sluggish, didnt chase and didnt do a whole lot of running.

MH_Bomber · Post by **MH_Bomber** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:24 pm

I agree Rama was rusty but what an effort to get himself up for selection after all the dramas. I think it will take some time for him to get with the pace of the game.

McPhee whilst good in the air seems to be making some shocking decisions of late.

Lucas was insisting on playing most of the night from behind which hurt us.

Nash was great.

The following players simply must begin to believe in themselves Dyson and Johns. They need more game time. Its like they're afraid of making a mistake for fear they will be dropped.

Mrs Mercuri · Post by **Mrs Mercuri** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:07 pm

It will be interesting to see what the club decides to do with both Johns and Dyson at years end, with Campo saying he wants to play on that increases the pressure on Ricky to perform. As for Johns, i don't know what his contract status is like but time is very quickly running out for him at this club.

j-mac31 · Post by **j-mac31** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:21 pm

What Campo says should have no bearing on whether Dyson stays. The club need to decide whether it is worth keeping Campo and then look at how that affects the rest of the list, rather than re-signing him because he wants to play on.

Hocking's great game today puts pressure on Dyson to perform, because he would be a great addition to the senior list.

Could be bye bye Lonergan at year's end too. Probably (hopefully) Heffernan to.

Mrs Mercuri · Post by **Mrs Mercuri** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:57 pm

j-mac wrote:What Campo says should have no bearing on whether Dyson stays. The club need to decide whether it is worth keeping Campo and then look at how that affects the rest of the list, rather than re-signing him because he wants to play on.

Hocking's great game today puts pressure on Dyson to perform, because he would be a great addition to the senior list.

Could be bye bye Lonergan at year's end too. Probably (hopefully) Heffernan to.

Hocking is a great player in the making and has been turning it on for Bendigo over the past few weeks, wouldn't surprise me if he is added to the senior list either this yr or at years end. Not sure what has happened to Lonergan, he was Bendigo's leading goalkicker last year but has gone missing this year along with Andrew Lee. Dyson needs to keep his spot in the senior side or it could be curtains for him.

bombercol · Post by **bombercol** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:09 am

I thought Campo last night, until injured was very good and I thought stiff to be dropped the week before.

I think Campo will get another year, especially with Hirdy retiring. Both going is a lot of experience walking out the door. Campo showed last night he can still strut his stuff.

Dyson is still young, has some ability, and is tradeable. I think Dyson has still got another year to go on his contract, provided he's not on too much $, we could get something for him, where we wouldn't for Campo.