Bombertalk

Your thoughts on these guys...

Both hopeless

If it was me, I would trade Hooker.

I think the whole side is rooted, physically and mentally and your stuff ups just look a million times worse when your playing in the backline. I think both players have worth, but I think our side looks better with Hurley back.(well it looks good with him forward too when we are winning....heck we need two of him).

I would make our 3 back talls post fletcher: Hurley, Carlisle and Pears.

Its not that I don't think Cale Hooker isn't a decent player when in form, I just think Hurley can do his job better and is more versatile. Pears I just think if given time will refind his touch. Would be perfect if he was given a season with Carlisle and Hurley as permanent company.

Persevere with Pears as he had a bad injury.

Hooker can fk off though.

Too slow, cant mark, poor decisions, not strong in contests.

Agreed... If we had to trade one I would offer Hooker, I have a feeling a few clubs may enquire about him ( StK, GWS, Carl, Fre)

After yesterday, Hooker will garner little more than a late third round draft pick - maybe.

Pears is perhaps worth keeping but if the right offer cam along, grab it.

Long term we need Hurley in defense. He has the potential to become one of the best CHB's in the comp. a key role that we have been very week in for a long time. Then you have Fletcher for one more year with his ultimate replacement being the very impressive Jake Carlisle. Hibberd is also a really exciting option as a medium sized defender. so defensively we are not nfar off.

However it's in the mid field that we need to find some class and fast. Nothing will happen at this club if we don't do this and here's some food for thought. Watson, Winderlich and Stanton will probably be gone in three years or at least at the end of their careers. We need a succession plan and we need it now

So yeah, anyone is tradeable if it adds depth and quality to our midfield

JockStrap wrote:After yesterday, Hooker will garner little more than a late third round draft pick - maybe.

Pears is perhaps worth keeping but if the right offer cam along, grab it.

Long term we need Hurley in defense. He Has the potential to become one of the best CHB's in the comp. a key role that we have been very week in for a long time. Then you have Fletcher for one more year with his ultimate replacement being the very impressive Jake Carlisle. Hibberd is also a really exciting option as a medium sized defender. so defensively we are it far off.

However it's in the mid field that we need to find some class and fast. Nothing will happen at this club if we don't do this and here's some food for thought. Watson, Winderlich and Stanton will probably be gone in three years or at least at the end of their careers. We need a succession plan and we need it now

So yeah, anyone is tradeable if it adds depth and quality to our midfield

One of them will be up for trade.

little_ripper wrote:If it was me, I would trade Hooker.

I think the whole side is rooted, physically and mentally and your stuff ups just look a million times worse when your playing in the backline. I think both players have worth, but I think our side looks better with Hurley back.(well it looks good with him forward too when we are winning....heck we need two of him).

I would make our 3 back talls post fletcher: Hurley, Carlisle and Pears.

Its not that I don't think Cale Hooker isn't a decent player when in form, I just think Hurley can do his job better and is more versatile. Pears I just think if given time will refind his touch. Would be perfect if he was given a season with Carlisle and Hurley as permanent company.

This is a bloody good post and sums up my thoughts on the backline. We have seen the better side of Pears before he got injured and I reckeon he is worth perservering with. My thoughts on Hooker apopear elsehwere but do not contradict what is in this post.

But to paraphrase a famous saying, "It's the midfield, Stupid!!!"

I feel a bit for Hooker.... He's obviously not the right man to play on the bigger blokes such as a Cloke, but who else do we have? Of course he's going to get belted.

He's perfect at taking that third tall in the opposition forward line, not the first or second.

Whether we have a spot for him is another question... I think he'll be up for trade, but if not i'm happy to keep him... If it's not him it's going to be someone else. Hurley does have to go back IMO.

Hurley BACK - Fevolenko FORWARD

Done.

Hooker had a very tough assignment on Saturday as Cloke was really fired up after all the recent publicity and had one of those days where everything seemed to work for him.

So I think he has a bit of an excuse. Having said that, Hurley is definitely a better prospect in defence as is Carlisle.
Pears is the great unknown - showed so much promise early in his career but has never really re-captured that.
He might attract more trade interest than Hooker and therefore if we want to strengthen the midfield (did I say if!?) then Pears might have to be sacrificed.

Our defence looks so much better with Hurley back. Our forward line looks so much better with him forward. Basically it comes down to which we can cover better without him. At the moment, we could probably cover the forward line better.

A fit crameri, Ryder, and Gumby/Joe (pending preseason- probably asking a bit) could be quite dangerous. Carlisle in the back line, with Hurley and fletch might be best for next season. One of pears or hooker goes, one stays. Coaches have more of an idea who is better for the club than we do as I presume there is a bit of off field stuff involved with these two as well.

Hooker at his best is just as good as Pears at his best. Something many fail to see.

Pears best is vastly superior to Hookers. His skills, decision making and pace (at his best) leaves Hooker for dead.

Hooker's only role, as far as I can tell, is to take the opposition's 3rd tall (if one exists) and try and take marks as the 3rd man up. He is a fantastic overhead mark. This is the extent of his value though. He isn't athletic enough to cover the number 1 or 2 forward and his kicking is average at best.

We certainly can't afford to play both at once. I'd be up for trading both if other teams were interested, but if we keep one, I'd rather keep Pears.

I heard the last little bit on SEN yesterday before the game started and R Connolly had a massive go at them - something about looking like a pair of drunks running around. Humour aside, he really hit the nail on the head when he said the worst thing about them is that they both started off with plenty of potential, but haven't gone anywhere.

gringo wrote:Pears best is vastly superior to Hookers. His skills, decision making and pace (at his best) leaves Hooker for dead.

Hooker's only role, as far as I can tell, is to take the opposition's 3rd tall (if one exists) and try and take marks as the 3rd man up. He is a fantastic overhead mark. This is the extent of his value though. He isn't athletic enough to cover the number 1 or 2 forward and his kicking is average at best.

I agree, but Pears hasn't been anywhere near his best for 3 or 4 years.

ROFL. Hooker a good tall third defender? Really? Dont you have to do at least one of the following?

a. Read the play
b. Not panic
c. kick
d. handpass
e. tackle
f. chase.......or at least occasionley catch someone when you do
g. have some f****** clue at all

robbie67 wrote:g. have some f****** clue at all

He has got this. Whenever he f**** up you can tell he knows it too.