Author Topic: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013  (Read 7611 times)

Offline Phil Mrakov

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8213
  • They said I could be anything so I became Phil
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #150 on: May 12, 2013, 06:21:10 PM »
Mrakov ellis does fumble I agree,but so does titch I reckon yet he has been quite effective this year

Imagine them without the fumbling! Brownlow medalists!
hhhaaarrgghhh hhhhaaarrggghhh hhhhaaaarrrggghh
HHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHHAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHH

Gigantor

  • Guest
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #151 on: May 12, 2013, 06:32:24 PM »
fair suck of the sauce bottle mrakov ,wouldnt go as far as brownlow  medalists..how about all Australian ? will that do?

Offline Phil Mrakov

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8213
  • They said I could be anything so I became Phil
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #152 on: May 12, 2013, 06:56:01 PM »
fair suck of the sauce bottle mrakov ,wouldnt go as far as brownlow  medalists..how about all Australian ? will that do?

How about just Australian
hhhaaarrgghhh hhhhaaarrggghhh hhhhaaaarrrggghh
HHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHHAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHH

gerkin greg

  • Guest
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #153 on: May 12, 2013, 07:21:22 PM »

gerkin greg

  • Guest
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #154 on: May 12, 2013, 07:25:23 PM »
Had a bit to drink at the game fella?  :lol

once I worked out how to get the lid off I may have had 1 or 2

no doubt the permaban is on its way

the claw

  • Guest
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #155 on: May 12, 2013, 08:03:09 PM »
when it comes to fumbles ellis and edwards hands are vice like compared to batchelor.

for me grimes is very much an automatic in for batchelor.  gives us a genuine tall running option who is v/good in the air.

for me in time the back 6 should include morris, dea who from all reports is stiff as, to not be getting a game.  plus  mcintosh another tall quick skillful running defender who can and does play accountable footy.

all areas of the ground is a work in progress and we do need to keep on improving each area to become a force.

Offline YellowandBlackBlood

  • Long suffering….
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10688
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #156 on: May 12, 2013, 08:07:33 PM »
Had a bit to drink at the game fella?  :lol

once I worked out how to get the lid off I may have had 1 or 2

no doubt the permaban is on its way
What's with the Tivendale avatar Gerks?
OER. Calling it as it is since 2004.

Offline unplugged

  • Premiership Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 328
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #157 on: May 13, 2013, 12:46:40 AM »
Tuck and Deledio in the mid and allowed to attack the ball.  Richmond wins.  Deledio brought Martin into the game as well.  Skilled players feeding each other.  Vickery out and our forward line converts and we are able to close down and pressure the opposition more.  Big O providing first use of the ball in the middle.  There is a game plan even if it was forced on Hardwick by injury. 

Ellis kept fumbling and turning it over.  He doesn't have the tank for AFL.  Only really outdone by Edwards but Edwards demonstrated a sublime ability to read the play and his aggression was extraordinary.  How many in the back free kicks.  Nahas is so slow.  Not up to it.  Batchelor looked very ordinary.  Big difference between his best and his worst and more often we get his worst.  Jackson still turnover king.

Will struggle now without Tuck.  Would have won the last two games with him in the side and Deledio being used effectively.  But then, without the injuries, Port would have beat us.  Should be happy with the win.

gerkin greg

  • Guest
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #158 on: May 13, 2013, 01:14:12 AM »
Fruit

Offline tigs2011

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5517
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #159 on: May 13, 2013, 02:06:34 AM »
Basket

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #160 on: May 13, 2013, 08:06:17 AM »

But then, without the injuries, Port would have beat us.

WTF?   :huh

Online Willy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5233
  • All up inside ya.
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #161 on: May 13, 2013, 10:56:43 AM »
Tuck and Deledio in the mid and allowed to attack the ball.  Richmond wins.  Deledio brought Martin into the game as well.  Skilled players feeding each other.  Vickery out and our forward line converts and we are able to close down and pressure the opposition more.  Big O providing first use of the ball in the middle.  There is a game plan even if it was forced on Hardwick by injury. 

Ellis kept fumbling and turning it over.  He doesn't have the tank for AFL.  Only really outdone by Edwards but Edwards demonstrated a sublime ability to read the play and his aggression was extraordinary.  How many in the back free kicks.  Nahas is so slow.  Not up to it.  Batchelor looked very ordinary.  Big difference between his best and his worst and more often we get his worst.  Jackson still turnover king.

Will struggle now without Tuck.  Would have won the last two games with him in the side and Deledio being used effectively.  But then, without the injuries, Port would have beat us.  Should be happy with the win.

Truly one of the strangest posts I've ever read.
 :bow

Offline Yeahright

  • Moderator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9394
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #162 on: May 13, 2013, 11:09:52 AM »
Tuck and Deledio in the mid and allowed to attack the ball.  Richmond wins.  Deledio brought Martin into the game as well.  Skilled players feeding each other.  Vickery out and our forward line converts and we are able to close down and pressure the opposition more.  Big O providing first use of the ball in the middle.  There is a game plan even if it was forced on Hardwick by injury. 

Ellis kept fumbling and turning it over.  He doesn't have the tank for AFL.  Only really outdone by Edwards but Edwards demonstrated a sublime ability to read the play and his aggression was extraordinary.  How many in the back free kicks.  Nahas is so slow.  Not up to it.  Batchelor looked very ordinary.  Big difference between his best and his worst and more often we get his worst.  Jackson still turnover king.

Will struggle now without Tuck.  Would have won the last two games with him in the side and Deledio being used effectively.  But then, without the injuries, Port would have beat us.  Should be happy with the win.

Or maybe because Deledio wasn't getting tagged only going head to head. And am I the only one who thought our forward line suffered without Vickery? How many key forwards kicked goals? Just one, Jack

Online WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 41145
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #163 on: May 13, 2013, 11:17:07 AM »
Or maybe because Deledio wasn't getting tagged only going head to head. And am I the only one who thought our forward line suffered without Vickery? How many key forwards kicked goals? Just one, Jack

McGuane got 1 as well and isn't he a key forward ...sort of.... kinda?  ;D
"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)

Offline Yeahright

  • Moderator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9394
Re: Richmond vs Port Adelaide - Round 7, 2013
« Reply #164 on: May 13, 2013, 11:24:28 AM »
Or maybe because Deledio wasn't getting tagged only going head to head. And am I the only one who thought our forward line suffered without Vickery? How many key forwards kicked goals? Just one, Jack

McGuane got 1 as well and isn't he a key forward ...sort of.... kinda?  ;D

I thought he did but read the stats. And now that I've gone back to double check they changed them!  ;D