Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10446
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 148 times
- Been thanked: 1328 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Obviously taking the piss.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 7:13am He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2378
- Joined: Tue 10 Jul 2007 11:14am
- Location: Bentleigh East
- Has thanked: 272 times
- Been thanked: 628 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
The coaches obviously thought otherwise. Both gave him votes.
He took a bit to get going in 2020, but his last two games have been excellent.
He took a bit to get going in 2020, but his last two games have been excellent.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2592
- Joined: Fri 20 Jan 2012 4:57pm
- Has thanked: 2043 times
- Been thanked: 1163 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Wow. You're actively trolling now. Are you saying that you have actually tuned in to watch this game? Surely not.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 7:13am He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
Anyway - assuming that as usual, you did not - Howard was actually pretty good. Yep - had a few clangers but, so did Seb Ross (and yet, he's a Senior player who you blindly defend). So did a few others too. Was a pretty hot game. Anyway, I thought it was a good effort from the 24yo / 52 game defender to keep the hottest 29yo / 141 game key forward (other than J Kennedy) to a single goal and 8 disposals. Was also playing against his old team for the first time.
Also - backlines are a team in and of themselves these days. When teams defend well, backmen look good. When they get separated and isolated - then backmen look flat out ordinary. Collingwood's much vaunted backline? Torn a new one by WC on Sunday when Waterman, Kennedy and Darling separated them. Backmen will make mistakes and when their team gets out of jail - it will generally be because their fellow backmen come and help clean up.
Go you red, black & white warriors
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
I have just reported you for accusing me of trolling.Saintmatt wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 10:28amWow. You're actively trolling now. Are you saying that you have actually tuned in to watch this game? Surely not.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 7:13am He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
Anyway - assuming that as usual, you did not - Howard was actually pretty good. Yep - had a few clangers but, so did Seb Ross (and yet, he's a Senior player who you blindly defend). So did a few others too. Was a pretty hot game. Anyway, I thought it was a good effort from the 24yo / 52 game defender to keep the hottest 29yo / 141 game key forward (other than J Kennedy) to a single goal and 8 disposals. Was also playing against his old team for the first time.
Also - backlines are a team in and of themselves these days. When teams defend well, backmen look good. When they get separated and isolated - then backmen look flat out ordinary. Collingwood's much vaunted backline? Torn a new one by WC on Sunday when Waterman, Kennedy and Darling separated them. Backmen will make mistakes and when their team gets out of jail - it will generally be because their fellow backmen come and help clean up.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 14010
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1314 times
- Been thanked: 2092 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Did you watch the game?Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 7:13am He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2592
- Joined: Fri 20 Jan 2012 4:57pm
- Has thanked: 2043 times
- Been thanked: 1163 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Cool. It doesn't surprise me that that would be your style so, I hardly find that earth shattering. CheersSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 10:37amI have just reported you for accusing me of trolling.Saintmatt wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 10:28amWow. You're actively trolling now. Are you saying that you have actually tuned in to watch this game? Surely not.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 7:13am He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
Anyway - assuming that as usual, you did not - Howard was actually pretty good. Yep - had a few clangers but, so did Seb Ross (and yet, he's a Senior player who you blindly defend). So did a few others too. Was a pretty hot game. Anyway, I thought it was a good effort from the 24yo / 52 game defender to keep the hottest 29yo / 141 game key forward (other than J Kennedy) to a single goal and 8 disposals. Was also playing against his old team for the first time.
Also - backlines are a team in and of themselves these days. When teams defend well, backmen look good. When they get separated and isolated - then backmen look flat out ordinary. Collingwood's much vaunted backline? Torn a new one by WC on Sunday when Waterman, Kennedy and Darling separated them. Backmen will make mistakes and when their team gets out of jail - it will generally be because their fellow backmen come and help clean up.
Go you red, black & white warriors
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9053
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 353 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
I don't think you can say that. One of the two "4 voters", Dougal and Darcy Byrne-Jones, only got votes (i.e 4) from one coach.
However, he was worth votes in my opinion. His marking is becoming more certain, as it needs to be. We need 6 backs who can take a secure contested mark. It's great that they are all going for it rather than that easier punch away option all the time. Punch away is the option when you are in no position to mark. Punching because you don't have the ability to mark is no good. I know I harp on this all the time, but it is the crucial ingredient to any GF win. It won us the 66 GF. It lost us the 97, 09 and 10 GFs. After we hit the front in 10, Collingwood attacked and we punched - they goaled. Contested marks stop the attack and send the ball in the opposite direction.
The secret to contested marks on the backline is a team response to make sure that your player has the best run at the ball. This means blocking and covering. Easier said than done. There is that fine line between a "legal" block and an illegal one. That's where skill and practice comes to play. I am hopeful that our players have the skills and brains to do this. They also have the height to counter most teams. Agility levels are good too. But confidence is the key. And as we all know, it can be there in spades one moment (the last quarter against PA) but it's gone the next (the last quarter against NM or Freo).
- Joffa Burns
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7081
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 5:48pm
- Has thanked: 1871 times
- Been thanked: 1570 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Lucky the opinions of Forum Karens don't count!Secret Karen wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 7:13am He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
The coach/ coaches who gave Howard votes understood he blanketed the competitions in form key forward and was excellent all night other than a 3 minute period in the 3rd 1/4.
I guess 200cm athletic, courageous, competitive key defenders need to earn your respect
Then again, let's recap some of your prized calls this season, you've become the forums new TED
Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Thu 24 Oct 2019 12:18pm Not sure why King would be in the team for round 1, he's going to need a few games at Sandy first and earn his way to the AFL grade, he probably has to prove he's physically up to it as well.
Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 17 Jan 2020 1:22pm The odds are very high that not all 5 of our traded recruits will become best 22 players.
Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Mon 09 Mar 2020 2:03pm
No Howard misses out as we will be too tall otherwise. Remember I have Jake, Josh and Wilkie in. Another tall makes us too tall and those three have earnt their spot for R1.
I have Ryder and Marshall rotating in the FWD line. Kent doesn't get a game for R1. He's got a battle on his hands to get in the side.
Howard will get his opportunity.
<1 day ban for baiting>Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Thu 12 Mar 2020 8:40am So my logic on Howard is Carslise, Battle and Wilkie are in front of him,
Proudly assuming the title of forum Oracle and serving as the inaugural Saintsational ‘weak as piss brigade’ President.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Yes it was votes from one coach only. It would be fascinating to know which one. I'm hoping it wasn't from Ratts, he played an Ok game in a backline that worked in a very supportive way which pulled Howard out of a hole which is a good thing but still it can go the other way and has to get repeat clangers out of his game. If I'm Ratts, I'm prasing him for 3 ok quarters but letting him know his shocker in the 3rd can't be repeated, if you're having that type of conversation with a Player you probably shouldn't be giving him votesperfectionist wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 10:47amI don't think you can say that. One of the two "4 voters", Dougal and Darcy Byrne-Jones, only got votes (i.e 4) from one coach.
However, he was worth votes in my opinion. His marking is becoming more certain, as it needs to be. We need 6 backs who can take a secure contested mark. It's great that they are all going for it rather than that easier punch away option all the time. Punch away is the option when you are in no position to mark. Punching because you don't have the ability to mark is no good. I know I harp on this all the time, but it is the crucial ingredient to any GF win. It won us the 66 GF. It lost us the 97, 09 and 10 GFs. After we hit the front in 10, Collingwood attacked and we punched - they goaled. Contested marks stop the attack and send the ball in the opposite direction.
The secret to contested marks on the backline is a team response to make sure that your player has the best run at the ball. This means blocking and covering. Easier said than done. There is that fine line between a "legal" block and an illegal one. That's where skill and practice comes to play. I am hopeful that our players have the skills and brains to do this. They also have the height to counter most teams. Agility levels are good too. But confidence is the key. And as we all know, it can be there in spades one moment (the last quarter against PA) but it's gone the next (the last quarter against NM or Freo).
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10446
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 148 times
- Been thanked: 1328 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 12:03pmYes it was votes from one coach only. It would be fascinating to know which one. I'm hoping it wasn't from Ratts, he played an Ok game in a backline that worked in a very supportive way which pulled Howard out of a hole which is a good thing but still it can go the other way and has to get repeat clangers out of his game. If I'm Ratts, I'm prasing him for 3 ok quarters but letting him know his shocker in the 3rd can't be repeated, if you're having that type of conversation with a Player you probably shouldn't be giving him votesperfectionist wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 10:47amI don't think you can say that. One of the two "4 voters", Dougal and Darcy Byrne-Jones, only got votes (i.e 4) from one coach.
However, he was worth votes in my opinion. His marking is becoming more certain, as it needs to be. We need 6 backs who can take a secure contested mark. It's great that they are all going for it rather than that easier punch away option all the time. Punch away is the option when you are in no position to mark. Punching because you don't have the ability to mark is no good. I know I harp on this all the time, but it is the crucial ingredient to any GF win. It won us the 66 GF. It lost us the 97, 09 and 10 GFs. After we hit the front in 10, Collingwood attacked and we punched - they goaled. Contested marks stop the attack and send the ball in the opposite direction.
The secret to contested marks on the backline is a team response to make sure that your player has the best run at the ball. This means blocking and covering. Easier said than done. There is that fine line between a "legal" block and an illegal one. That's where skill and practice comes to play. I am hopeful that our players have the skills and brains to do this. They also have the height to counter most teams. Agility levels are good too. But confidence is the key. And as we all know, it can be there in spades one moment (the last quarter against PA) but it's gone the next (the last quarter against NM or Freo).
His shocker that mean't his direct opponent and leagues in form key forward took one mark and kicked one goal. Yep kicked one out on the full from a rushed kick but hardly a shocker.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
- Ghost Like
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6562
- Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2007 10:04pm
- Has thanked: 5788 times
- Been thanked: 1909 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
That's certainly a compendium of embarrassing quotes, yet the author continues to spam this forum. It is hard to take any topics created by the author as nothing but bait as the author finds a way to trot out the same rhetoric in any given topic.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 11:43amLucky the opinions of Forum Karens don't count!Secret Karen wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 7:13am He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
The coach/ coaches who gave Howard votes understood he blanketed the competitions in form key forward and was excellent all night other than a 3 minute period in the 3rd 1/4.
I guess 200cm athletic, courageous, competitive key defenders need to earn your respect
Then again, let's recap some of your prized calls this season, you've become the forums new TED
Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Thu 24 Oct 2019 12:18pm Not sure why King would be in the team for round 1, he's going to need a few games at Sandy first and earn his way to the AFL grade, he probably has to prove he's physically up to it as well.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 17 Jan 2020 1:22pm The odds are very high that not all 5 of our traded recruits will become best 22 players.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Mon 09 Mar 2020 2:03pm
No Howard misses out as we will be too tall otherwise. Remember I have Jake, Josh and Wilkie in. Another tall makes us too tall and those three have earnt their spot for R1.
I have Ryder and Marshall rotating in the FWD line. Kent doesn't get a game for R1. He's got a battle on his hands to get in the side.
Howard will get his opportunity.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Thu 12 Mar 2020 8:40am So my logic on Howard is Carslise, Battle and Wilkie are in front of him,
What I find amusing is the observation that Ryder & Marshall will play in the same side. I can't believe the author would go against the belief of that other quality poster, Highettman or Karenman, one of them, who believed two ruckman will no longer work and have gone the way of the dinosaurs. Which one do we believe?
- roskilde
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2409
- Joined: Sat 11 Jun 2011 7:32pm
- Location: Canberra
- Has thanked: 265 times
- Been thanked: 336 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Great you're back with more super hot takes. Perhaps Port were tanking and that's why we beat them. After all this season doesn't even count.
Go kick rocks.
Go kick rocks.
Last edited by roskilde on Tue 28 Jul 2020 12:48pm, edited 1 time in total.
This was my father's belief
And this is also mine:
Let the corn be all one sheaf--
And the grapes be all one vine,
Ere our children's teeth are set on edge
By bitter bread and wine.
And this is also mine:
Let the corn be all one sheaf--
And the grapes be all one vine,
Ere our children's teeth are set on edge
By bitter bread and wine.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5044
- Joined: Tue 13 Jun 2017 1:16pm
- Has thanked: 1444 times
- Been thanked: 1489 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
SK in your journey to football enlightenment have you ever gone toe to toe with anything the size and speed of Charlie Dixon*. Nevertheless, your studies of the all glorious rhetoric of master Kim Il Keil of the order of the dishonorable secret squirrel shine through with disrespectful omniscience worthy of a heedless and erratic old man yet to be convinced the world is not flat. Get well soon.
* For real, not on play station or in your mind while lurking near the change room facilities.
* For real, not on play station or in your mind while lurking near the change room facilities.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1265
- Joined: Sun 12 Sep 2010 1:17am
- Has thanked: 12 times
- Been thanked: 319 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
A puzzling post...
Howard is young and settling in the side and has just taken the scalp of Dixon...
He is tall athletic aggressive combative and hates to lose.... he reminds me a little bit of Max Hudghton...
We should be doing back flips that we stole this player off Port that just doesn’t happen very often...
Howard is young and settling in the side and has just taken the scalp of Dixon...
He is tall athletic aggressive combative and hates to lose.... he reminds me a little bit of Max Hudghton...
We should be doing back flips that we stole this player off Port that just doesn’t happen very often...
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19096
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Indeed.Vazelos wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 1:19pm A puzzling post...
Howard is young and settling in the side and has just taken the scalp of Dixon...
He is tall athletic aggressive combative and hates to lose.... he reminds me a little bit of Max Hudghton...
We should be doing back flips that we stole this player off Port that just doesn’t happen very often...
Port fans and his ex-teammates really got in his face. It must have really hurt them for him to leave because they looked a bit short down back and they could have really used him. I guess that just have to suck it up.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8582
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 527 times
- Been thanked: 1532 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Maybe one of our legal experts could confirm, but I’m pretty sure truth is a valid defence in a libel case.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 10:37amI have just reported you for accusing me of trolling.Saintmatt wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 10:28amWow. You're actively trolling now. Are you saying that you have actually tuned in to watch this game? Surely not.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 7:13am He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
Anyway - assuming that as usual, you did not - Howard was actually pretty good. Yep - had a few clangers but, so did Seb Ross (and yet, he's a Senior player who you blindly defend). So did a few others too. Was a pretty hot game. Anyway, I thought it was a good effort from the 24yo / 52 game defender to keep the hottest 29yo / 141 game key forward (other than J Kennedy) to a single goal and 8 disposals. Was also playing against his old team for the first time.
Also - backlines are a team in and of themselves these days. When teams defend well, backmen look good. When they get separated and isolated - then backmen look flat out ordinary. Collingwood's much vaunted backline? Torn a new one by WC on Sunday when Waterman, Kennedy and Darling separated them. Backmen will make mistakes and when their team gets out of jail - it will generally be because their fellow backmen come and help clean up.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
- asiu
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10313
- Joined: Thu 08 Apr 2010 8:11pm
- Has thanked: 1327 times
- Been thanked: 932 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
watching that unfold ,
was enlightening i thought
didn’t drop his head
didn’t do the mind game loss of attention thing
copped the comments from his old crew
n crowd (no doubt !!)
did , reset and go again
good work that man
he’s a keeper
was enlightening i thought
didn’t drop his head
didn’t do the mind game loss of attention thing
copped the comments from his old crew
n crowd (no doubt !!)
did , reset and go again
good work that man
he’s a keeper
.name the ways , thought manipulates the State of Presence away.
.tipara waranta kani nina-tu.
- bigred
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11463
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 7:39am
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 609 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
He was actually pretty good.
Had a mare few minutes in that quarter but that was the extent of it.
The way the back six is working right now is very, very good. Howard, Wilkie and Jake's three man chop out is working exceptionally well.
Had a mare few minutes in that quarter but that was the extent of it.
The way the back six is working right now is very, very good. Howard, Wilkie and Jake's three man chop out is working exceptionally well.
"Now the ball is loose, it gives St. Kilda a rough chance. Black. Good handpass. Voss. Schwarze now, the defender, can run and from a long way".....
- The Fireman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13311
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:54pm
- Has thanked: 669 times
- Been thanked: 1957 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Well this one is out of the blue....what an unusual post
for fear of getting a ban can I at least say the OP is ridiculous ?
I though Howard was grouse and immediate selection material.
for fear of getting a ban can I at least say the OP is ridiculous ?
I though Howard was grouse and immediate selection material.
- The Fireman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13311
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:54pm
- Has thanked: 669 times
- Been thanked: 1957 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
The Ban on Joffa is a bit rich, bringing up old posts is more about clarifying credibility rather than baiting.
I thought his post was insightful.
I thought his post was insightful.
- Munga
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5287
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:00am
- Has thanked: 525 times
- Been thanked: 98 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
I can see where Secret Kiel is coming from. Howard did lose the plot for a while and I was surprised he was in the votes. He got over the line in the end, but he does need to improve that composure at times.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 7:13am He had a shocker of a quarter against Port. Had it not been for the support around him to clean up his chain of clangers he could have been the sole reason we lost.
It was his first real test with pressure when a game was in the balance AND with crowd pressure and he didn't cope well at all. I want to see a much bigger sample size of him performing under those and much hotter conditions before I'm convinced he can play in a top 4 backline under finals pressure.
Gehrig emerged from scans yesterday saying he was "as sweet as a bun"
- asiu
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10313
- Joined: Thu 08 Apr 2010 8:11pm
- Has thanked: 1327 times
- Been thanked: 932 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
lol @ Karenman
.name the ways , thought manipulates the State of Presence away.
.tipara waranta kani nina-tu.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6080
- Joined: Sat 12 Sep 2015 1:03pm
- Has thanked: 337 times
- Been thanked: 1568 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
This post is a bait hook. Best to read it, shake your head and move on. Some will never learn.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2592
- Joined: Fri 20 Jan 2012 4:57pm
- Has thanked: 2043 times
- Been thanked: 1163 times
Re: Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.
Spot on. I'm pretty sure that truth is actually a defence (not just on this site but, you know - in the real world). Joffa's only crime was to not aggregate all of numpty utterings from SK that we've had to put up with over the duration. Mind you - the select few he did highlight did indeed paint an interesting insight OP's 'thought' processThe Fireman wrote: ↑Tue 28 Jul 2020 2:44pm The Ban on Joffa is a bit rich, bringing up old posts is more about clarifying credibility rather than baiting.
I thought his post was insightful.
Go you red, black & white warriors