Dawson bashing - it's laughable.

Sam23 · Post: # 1119817Post **Sam23** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 1:38am

I cannot believe after his performance tonight that he is copping some heat from some of the posters on here?

Cannot believe it.

Terrible mistake to take Krakouer high. But lets try and name 3 players that didn't make a poor mistake tonight that they shouldn't have?

He has a tag in the AFL community as a poor player, but I'd hoped that Saints supporters could look past that, obviously they can't.

Cloke, the premier forward of the competition, 10 touches 6 marks 2 goals.

Josh Kennedy, 10 touches 6 marks 1 goal.

Petrie, 9 touches 1 mark 2 goals.

Probably the 3 power forwards of the league this year and he has beaten them all.

He can be crude at times, and sometimes can make a blue, but gee - come on take off the Zac bashing glasses.

SainterK · Post: # 1119819Post **SainterK** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 1:40am

Had him in my votes.

Was solid, very solid.

His last quarter was actually jump out of my chair worthy.

Saints Angel · Sat 13 Aug 2011 1:41am

If anyone cared to look up the stats of Zac Dawson this might stop them bashing him. Good on your Zac.

Saints Angel · Sat 13 Aug 2011 1:42am

If anyone cared to look up the stats of Zac Dawson this might stop them bashing him. Good on your Zac.

St Lenny · Post: # 1119830Post **St Lenny** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 1:44am

Totally agree, great game tonight.

Devilhead · Post: # 1119834Post **Devilhead** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 1:57am

And the the Zac Bashers are nowhere to be seen

Admirable game from Zac tonight - completely nullified the premier forward of the comp

As for Zac's high hit on Krakhead - no doubt there was a little staging there which helped the umpire make his decision

The OtherThommo · Sat 13 Aug 2011 3:45am

A little staging??????

Dan Warna · Post: # 1119886Post **Dan Warna** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 8:28am

wasn't bashing any saints player. Some had average disposal, and while I'd be looking at peake and polo and gilbert for their disposal, their courage, intensity, etc was awesome.

Peake especially played like a man who wanted to win and was willing to put his body on the line.

Today I wouldn't question the heart of any saints player. I would question their skills under pressure.

Devilhead · Post: # 1119891Post **Devilhead** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 9:07am

Dan Warna wrote:wasn't bashing any saints player. Some had average disposal, and while I'd be looking at peake and polo and gilbert for their disposal, their courage, intensity, etc was awesome.

Peake especially played like a man who wanted to win and was willing to put his body on the line.

Today I wouldn't question the heart of any saints player. I would question their skills under pressure.

and skills under no pressure

Moods · Post: # 1119897Post **Moods** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 9:13am

It's funny as the game wore on, someone around me (in standing room) asked how many goals Cloke had kicked. I said, 2 the same as Riewoldt and about as effective as Riewoldt. No-one, Collingwood or StKilda disagreed with me. Next time Zac went for the ball no-one in our area bagged Zac......

plugger66 · Post: # 1119902Post **plugger66** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 9:16am

Zac was good last night but I do wish he had a football brain. Why did he do that silly tackle, high shephard at the start of the 3rd. Take that out and he had a very good game.

cunnassaints66 · Sat 13 Aug 2011 9:50am

plugger66 wrote:Zac was good last night but I do wish he had a football brain. Why did he do that silly tackle, high shephard at the start of the 3rd. Take that out and he had a very good game.

in my eyes a very good game is when you keep your opponent goalless

plugger66 · Post: # 1119918Post **plugger66** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 9:51am

cunnassaints66 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:Zac was good last night but I do wish he had a football brain. Why did he do that silly tackle, high shephard at the start of the 3rd. Take that out and he had a very good game.
in my eyes a very good game is when you keep your opponent goalless

Well you then know bugger all about footy.

Wrote for Luck · Sat 13 Aug 2011 9:59am

that silly high tackle didn't even make high contact if you watch it back.

plugger66 · Sat 13 Aug 2011 10:02am

millarsaint wrote:that silly high tackle didn't even make high contact if you watch it back.

Well it did and even if it didnt why would you try and shephard like that. All he had to do was bump him not tackle him.

hayes66 · Post: # 1119927Post **hayes66** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 10:06am

I dont want to "zac bash" as i dont mind him, but it seems most people are at extremes either way. The fact is he is not a very gifted player but he can put in a good performance on occasion and tries hard. This week he was pretty good and I thought his last quarter was fantastic so the "pro zacs" win the argument but he will play a shocker (all to frequently) again and the anti zacs will come out. This represents how I fill with him, he is neither here nor there. Early in the year I thought he was horrible in a few games but now his fought back in a couple. I think he might be good enough to be in the team but I dont like relying on him as our main key back, as he does get beaten too easily sometimes. I think the "pro zacs" are a little too contempt with mediocrity, yeah zacs not too bad, but at times him as key back is where our team is lacking and its not wrong to want to get better than zac dawson.

Moods · Post: # 1119930Post **Moods** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 10:11am

hayes66 wrote:I dont want to "zac bash" as i dont mind him, but it seems most people are at extremes either way. The fact is he is not a very gifted player but he can put in a good performance on occasion and tries hard. This week he was pretty good and I thought his last quarter was fantastic so the "pro zacs" win the argument but he will play a shocker (all to frequently) again and the anti zacs will come out. This represents how I fill with him, he is neither here nor there. Early in the year I thought he was horrible in a few games but now his fought back in a couple. I think he might be good enough to be in the team but I dont like relying on him as our main key back, as he does get beaten too easily sometimes. I think the "pro zacs" are a little too contempt with mediocrity, yeah zacs not too bad, but at times him as key back is where our team is lacking and its not wrong to want to get better than zac dawson.

No worries hayes66 - your entitled to your opinion. Just curious. can you tell me the last time Zac played a shocker and who it was against?

Zac Attack · Sat 13 Aug 2011 10:14am

when you attempt a tackle like that you deserve to be shot down big time. that was awful.

Wrote for Luck · Sat 13 Aug 2011 10:24am

plugger66 wrote:
millarsaint wrote:that silly high tackle didn't even make high contact if you watch it back.
Well it did and even if it didnt why would you try and shephard like that. All he had to do was bump him not tackle him.

I agree but I disagree that it actually made high contact.

CURLY · Post: # 1119946Post **CURLY** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 10:33am

Zac Attack wrote:when you attempt a tackle like that you deserve to be shot down big time. that was awful.

Very soft call by the ump. Krakour went low when he saw Dawson coming to shepard many umpires would simply ignore it for what it was.

plugger66 · Sat 13 Aug 2011 10:34am

CURLY wrote:
Zac Attack wrote:when you attempt a tackle like that you deserve to be shot down big time. that was awful.
Very soft call by the ump. Krakour went low when he saw Dawson coming to shepard many umpires would simply ignore it for what it was.

Well if they did that it would be an error. Why wouldnt he have blocked instead of tackled. You cant tackle blokes who running after someone.

hayes66 · Post: # 1119950Post **hayes66** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 10:37am

Moods wrote:
hayes66 wrote:I dont want to "zac bash" as i dont mind him, but it seems most people are at extremes either way. The fact is he is not a very gifted player but he can put in a good performance on occasion and tries hard. This week he was pretty good and I thought his last quarter was fantastic so the "pro zacs" win the argument but he will play a shocker (all to frequently) again and the anti zacs will come out. This represents how I fill with him, he is neither here nor there. Early in the year I thought he was horrible in a few games but now his fought back in a couple. I think he might be good enough to be in the team but I dont like relying on him as our main key back, as he does get beaten too easily sometimes. I think the "pro zacs" are a little too contempt with mediocrity, yeah zacs not too bad, but at times him as key back is where our team is lacking and its not wrong to want to get better than zac dawson.
No worries hayes66 - your entitled to your opinion. Just curious. can you tell me the last time Zac played a shocker and who it was against?

yeah from what i remember i thought he was disappointing last time we played pies and hawks earlier in the year, the first time we played the crows definitely stands out as a bad game.

CURLY · Post: # 1119959Post **CURLY** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 10:51am

plugger66 wrote:
CURLY wrote:
Zac Attack wrote:when you attempt a tackle like that you deserve to be shot down big time. that was awful.
Very soft call by the ump. Krakour went low when he saw Dawson coming to shepard many umpires would simply ignore it for what it was.
Well if they did that it would be an error. Why wouldnt he have blocked instead of tackled. You cant tackle blokes who running after someone.

Seen the umps many times just ignore a blatant attempt to milk a free.

plugger66 · Sat 13 Aug 2011 11:00am

CURLY wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
CURLY wrote:
Zac Attack wrote:when you attempt a tackle like that you deserve to be shot down big time. that was awful.
Very soft call by the ump. Krakour went low when he saw Dawson coming to shepard many umpires would simply ignore it for what it was.
Well if they did that it would be an error. Why wouldnt he have blocked instead of tackled. You cant tackle blokes who running after someone.
Seen the umps many times just ignore a blatant attempt to milk a free.

You are not answering the question and anyway if they ignored that last night it would have been an error.

CURLY · Post: # 1119973Post **CURLY** » Sat 13 Aug 2011 11:06am

plugger66 wrote:
CURLY wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
CURLY wrote:
Zac Attack wrote:when you attempt a tackle like that you deserve to be shot down big time. that was awful.
Very soft call by the ump. Krakour went low when he saw Dawson coming to shepard many umpires would simply ignore it for what it was.
Well if they did that it would be an error. Why wouldnt he have blocked instead of tackled. You cant tackle blokes who running after someone.
Seen the umps many times just ignore a blatant attempt to milk a free.
You are not answering the question and anyway if they ignored that last night it would have been an error.

Was it a error to not pay frees to Kosi and Roo when they were repeatadly taken high in marking contests? Maybe yes maybe no we see them payed then at times there not the same as Dawsons.