Author Topic: Nathan Foley [merged]  (Read 126462 times)

TigerTimeII

  • Guest
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #540 on: May 01, 2011, 12:47:26 AM »
Foley stuck up a big FU tonight to everyone who said his career was over.

Without being amazing 40 touches in a game of AFL football would suggest that your probably consider "back".

half his disposals were useless
worst 40 possie game i have ever seen, he cost us many scoring opportunities and created goals for the lions

stats and possessions mean jack poo, nahas only had 26 touches and his game was 50 times better than foleys

Offline TigerLand

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5721
  • I <3 Mrs Hardwick
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #541 on: May 01, 2011, 12:59:00 AM »
Foley stuck up a big FU tonight to everyone who said his career was over.

Without being amazing 40 touches in a game of AFL football would suggest that your probably consider "back".

half his disposals were useless
worst 40 possie game i have ever seen, he cost us many scoring opportunities and created goals for the lions

stats and possessions mean jack poo, nahas only had 26 touches and his game was 50 times better than foleys


Define "useless"?

40 possessions at 83% effectiveness with 8 clearances plus 4 tackles.
16 contested 28 uncontested.

Stupid post.
Go Tigers!

Offline WA Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14257
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #542 on: May 01, 2011, 01:05:42 AM »
Great to hear he put in a solid performance, he wasn't far off doing it to those that believed in him. :clapping
DIMMA - You will be held ACCOUNTABLE...

“We are really excited about what we have brought in. We have got great depth of players that can take us where we need to go. We are just putting some cream on the top at the moment,” he said.

"Rucks:
Shaun Hampson is the No.1 man"

Hellenic Tiger

  • Guest
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #543 on: May 01, 2011, 01:23:54 AM »
I thought many of his touches were not deadly in that they cut the opposition up or set us up to break the lines but 40 touches is 40 touches and at least he got his hands on the footy that much. Good signs nonetheless. :thumbsup

Offline mat073

  • Perth's biggest tiger tragic.
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4802
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #544 on: May 01, 2011, 01:42:02 AM »
Axel is missing that "deft touch" at the moment but it was an extremely encouraging performance nonetheless.



Unleash the tornado

Offline Infamy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4426
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #545 on: May 01, 2011, 01:44:42 AM »
Still only 6 games back from almost 2 years off

Offline TigerLand

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5721
  • I <3 Mrs Hardwick
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #546 on: May 01, 2011, 01:49:35 AM »
Still only 6 games back from almost 2 years off

Exactly, 6 games in the boxes to tick is playing out a game of football and proving he can adapt to the different style of AFL if there is any difference compared to when he last was consistently fit.

40 possession game ticks that box for good.
Go Tigers!

Offline Danog

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1730
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #547 on: May 01, 2011, 02:18:15 AM »
Foley stuck up a big FU tonight to everyone who said his career was over.

Without being amazing 40 touches in a game of AFL football would suggest that your probably consider "back".

half his disposals were useless
worst 40 possie game i have ever seen, he cost us many scoring opportunities and created goals for the lions

stats and possessions mean jack poo, nahas only had 26 touches and his game was 50 times better than foleys

He directly set up our first 2 goals.  Watch it if you don't believe me. 

He may have had more, but I didn't pay as much attention after that, since I was at work.  40 possessions is nothing to scoff at.

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #548 on: May 01, 2011, 08:19:48 AM »
Still only 6 games back from almost 2 years off

your only as good as your last game.

Offline eliminator

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3811
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #549 on: May 01, 2011, 10:51:44 AM »
A good game. Set up a goal in the fourth I think with a clever chip. Some of his long handpassing was very good.

TigerTimeII

  • Guest
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #550 on: May 01, 2011, 11:04:38 AM »
Foley stuck up a big FU tonight to everyone who said his career was over.

Without being amazing 40 touches in a game of AFL football would suggest that your probably consider "back".

half his disposals were useless
worst 40 possie game i have ever seen, he cost us many scoring opportunities and created goals for the lions

stats and possessions mean jack poo, nahas only had 26 touches and his game was 50 times better than foleys

He directly set up our first 2 goals.  Watch it if you don't believe me.  

He may have had more, but I didn't pay as much attention after that, since I was at work.  40 possessions is nothing to scoff at.

i seen that
also saw how he cost the the chance to kick more goals with his skill and decision making and also saw him gift some to th elions

he gets alot of the ball for little impact

as i said nahas 26 touches and played a much better game
and jake king with less than 15 touches had more impact and influence

quantity of stats does not equal quality of stats

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #551 on: May 01, 2011, 11:33:10 AM »
16 contested poss.

What a spud.

FNM

  • Guest
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #552 on: May 01, 2011, 02:22:27 PM »
He was good
Where's the encouragement ppl? ::)

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4264
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #553 on: May 01, 2011, 02:35:03 PM »
Creating a terrific midfield with Foley getting better by the day  :thumbsup

Online WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40323
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Nathan Foley [merged]
« Reply #554 on: May 01, 2011, 04:51:36 PM »
40 possessions at 83% effectiveness with 8 clearances plus 4 tackles.
16 contested 28 uncontested.

Stupid post.

I am interested to know how they define "effectiveness" & "clangers" to be honest?

Because if you mark the ball and then play on (stupidly) and as you are getting tackled you handball the thing to the ground so you dont' get pinged for holding the ball and it ends up being a ball up what is it? How is that classified? It's not a clanger and IMHO it isn't effective, it is a "nothing" so how does that impact a players stats?

He directly set up our first 2 goals.  Watch it if you don't believe me. 

And unfortunately in the 3rd qtr he directly set up at least 2 goals for the Lions when they had their run on so they almost cancel one another out to be honest

Look I thought as the game went on Foley got a lot better but some of his "nothing" disposals as I call them hurt us.

The 40 odd touches didn't impress me as much as Guy McKenna but then again Guy has much bigger things to worry about then I do  :rollin

"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)