Author Topic: Jack Graham that is [merged]  (Read 164907 times)

Offline The Machine

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3577
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #945 on: July 08, 2023, 01:57:27 PM »
And then I kicked an important goal from 55m and don't forget the match winning goal, but hey,  keep bagging me ::)

 :bow

Well I did so just keeping my bagging in perspective :shh

Offline FooffooValve

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 958
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #946 on: July 08, 2023, 03:18:33 PM »
Yep some his kicks coming out of defence were diabolical, then there was that shocking attempt on goal from 20 out that went low and flat and straight into the group of Sydney defenders all standing in the way.

I went back and looked at the full replay. He missed that snap (should have done better) and had one dodgy kick out of defence when he had more time, but nobody up field gave him a great option. He also had a long 50m kick out of the back pocket which Sydney marked, but that happens about 50 times a game these days, so not beating him up for that. Coughed up a free on the wing but at least was trying to keep the ball moving.  And one left foot under pressure kick out of back half stoppage which was ridiculously called as insufficient intent. After half time, the thing I noticed was that he was very clean below his knees (very underrated on a wet night) made pretty much every possession count, tackled with real bruising intent,  then kicked two last quarter goals (one absolute ripper) and tried his guts out around the ground with pressure, tackles and will. You would also notice that he was in the game deep forward and deep in defence - hard two way running which shows up on the tracker pretty much every week.

If that's a diabolical game then I'll take diabolical every week thanks.

Offline Damo

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3868
  • Member of famed “Gang Of Four”. Ground the airbus!
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #947 on: July 08, 2023, 04:01:31 PM »
And then I kicked an important goal from 55m and don't forget the match winning goal, but hey,  keep bagging me ::)

 :bow

Well I did so just keeping my bagging in perspective :shh

Being honest Machine, I didn’t have you in the best 8 (being kind)
Even taking into account the goals you kicked in the last

Offline Tiger_In_Sicily

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #948 on: July 08, 2023, 04:13:48 PM »
Yep some his kicks coming out of defence were diabolical, then there was that shocking attempt on goal from 20 out that went low and flat and straight into the group of Sydney defenders all standing in the way.

I went back and looked at the full replay. He missed that snap (should have done better) and had one dodgy kick out of defence when he had more time, but nobody up field gave him a great option. He also had a long 50m kick out of the back pocket which Sydney marked, but that happens about 50 times a game these days, so not beating him up for that. Coughed up a free on the wing but at least was trying to keep the ball moving.  And one left foot under pressure kick out of back half stoppage which was ridiculously called as insufficient intent. After half time, the thing I noticed was that he was very clean below his knees (very underrated on a wet night) made pretty much every possession count, tackled with real bruising intent,  then kicked two last quarter goals (one absolute ripper) and tried his guts out around the ground with pressure, tackles and will. You would also notice that he was in the game deep forward and deep in defence - hard two way running which shows up on the tracker pretty much every week.

If that's a diabolical game then I'll take diabolical every week thanks.
:clapping

Online MintOnLamb

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • You have to think anyway, so why not think big? DT
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #949 on: July 09, 2023, 12:13:47 PM »
No matter what people comment about Jack, I would rather he play for RFC than anyone else

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 17863
  • Proud Gang of Four member #albomustgo
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #950 on: July 09, 2023, 12:50:20 PM »
 :lol :lol :lol
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire." 

- Gustav Mahler


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline Hard Roar Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7576
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #951 on: July 09, 2023, 01:11:30 PM »
He’s very much a role player - run with and negative in nature.
A good option up forward as he can still win the ball while applying pressure.

I was expecting him to be a dominant contested beast in the guise of Ollie Wines in that first year or two.

He’s looking more and more like Sam Powell-Pepper without the offensive flair.
“I find it nearly impossible to make those judgments, but he is certainly up there with the really important ones, he is certainly up there with the Francis Bourkes and the Royce Harts and the Kevin Bartlett and the Kevin Sheedys, there is no doubt about that,” Balme said.

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 39000
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #952 on: July 09, 2023, 01:31:49 PM »

He’s had 12 disposals in the first three quarters for five CLANGERS

Every time he touched it was heart in mouth

Will be interested in your views after watching the replay and concentrating on it

Watched the replay yesterday arvo.

My view hasn't changed. Think FooffooValve has highlighted what I saw on the night and on the replay.

Yep he had a couple of ordinary kicks. But so to did a few others who haven't had their disposal referred to as "diabolical" (Dan Rioli in particular says hi  ;D)

I hope folks are not suggesting the kick in the 3rd that the umpire called "insufficient intent" is a clanger? With MRJ less than 2 metres away it shouldn't have been a free.

I noticed on Thursday night he played HF, in the middle, on the wing and also headed down back. This "role" is what he's been doing since we had a change in coach. Not one role but multiple of roles. But no one seems to acknowledge that.

When it's all said and done he kicked 2 super important goals that helped in keeping our season alive and surely he deserves some credit no matter how begrudgingly from some for that  :huh

We all have players we love to whack, I know I'm guilty of it. I've done it with Ross over time and most recently Young but I always try to give credit when it is due.

Guess what I m suggesting is sometimes we need to take the blinkers off and acknowledge that these players have done OK even if it's through gritted teeth and even causes us pain  ;)
"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 Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 17863
  • Proud Gang of Four member #albomustgo
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #953 on: July 09, 2023, 01:46:54 PM »
The point is the usual suspect suspects are carrying on like it was great game from go to woe and he was in the bests , rather than a good last quarter after a serviceable third quarter and a poor first half. :shh
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire." 

- Gustav Mahler


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline The Machine

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3577
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #954 on: July 09, 2023, 01:54:22 PM »
The point is the usual suspect suspects are carrying on like it was great game from go to woe and he was in the bests , rather than a good last quarter after a serviceable third quarter and a poor first half. :shh


Yeah he was not great in the first 1.5 quarters, however as the game went on he was a very important player. His running power was evident and his 2 goals being the icing on a solid outing. His year to date disposal efficiency is a handy 77.6 which has him in the top bracket. 

Offline Tiger_In_Sicily

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #955 on: July 09, 2023, 02:30:58 PM »
Omg the whole team was crap in the first 1.5 qtrs.. seriously.

Offline Assange Tiger 😎

  • Bong Lord
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3393
  • Leader Of AT's Outsiders
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #956 on: July 09, 2023, 04:02:26 PM »
Jack Graham is without a shadow of a doubt an irreplaceable player. There’s no one that could play a similar role and impact on games more than he does, no one. Same thing with Kmac.

The sooner people realise that you can’t upgrade on players the better.
I work in Africa and they were taking the pee out of me for saving Africa.......
"Living the dream ,not as a slave to the system. If that makes me a tosser, then I'm a proud tosser... I have plenty of time to toss"

Offline Damo

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3868
  • Member of famed “Gang Of Four”. Ground the airbus!
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #957 on: July 09, 2023, 04:22:28 PM »
Jack Graham is without a shadow of a doubt an irreplaceable player. There’s no one that could play a similar role and impact on games more than he does, no one. Same thing with Kmac.

The sooner people realise that you can’t upgrade on players the better.

Unless you aren’t one of the chosen ones
Eg Noah Cumberland

Offline Tiger Khosh

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3740
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #958 on: July 09, 2023, 04:41:52 PM »
This thread is beginning to mirror the Cumberland thread.

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 39000
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #959 on: July 09, 2023, 05:08:00 PM »
This thread is beginning to mirror the Cumberland thread.

Sadly it is
"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)