Preliminary Finals

[Maddog37]

Re: Preliminary Finals

No doubt it is simplistic but they lack class/size and had 8 clangers between them. Next year if the Hawks get Ruff and Gilham back fit and firing and Savage and Bruest step up they will be very good again.

[1eyedog]

Re: Preliminary Finals

No doubt it is simplistic but they lack class/size and had 8 clangers between them. Next year if the Hawks get Ruff and Gilham back fit and firing and Savage and Bruest step up they will be very good again.

Bateman's two turnovers in the last quarter, one in the middle of the ground the other on the outer wing led to Collingwood's two last goals, one to Swan and one to Ball. It could be argued that he was the difference for all the wrong reasons.

[Maddog37]

Re: Preliminary Finals

Bateman's two turnovers in the last quarter, one in the middle of the ground the other on the outer wing led to Collingwood's two last goals, one to Swan and one to Ball. It could be argued that he was the difference for all the wrong reasons.

Looks cooked does young Chance.

[Topdog]

Re: Preliminary Finals

Simplistic. They lost by three points and it wasn't Gibson or Hale who cost them. Gibson was outstanding in fact.

Agree it's way too simplistic but I thought Gibson was poor

[Mantis]

Re: Preliminary Finals

Looks cooked does young Chance.

He has been cooked since the 2008 GF and he ain't all that young.