Dougal Howard - I'm Not Convinced Yet.

[CQ SAINT]

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.

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' process

I think he'd have been ok without the Forum Karen's tag. Lol

[Beno88]

The coaches obviously thought otherwise. Both gave him votes...

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).

Fair point. Hinkley and Ratten both mentioned him post game, so either way, both rated his performance.

[Saintmatt]

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.

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.

Far out man. He was playing as the key defender on an in-form monster who was getting repeat entries. Him and rest of the defence were under serious fire for the 1st 10 mins of the 3rd. That's not the defence's fault - our mids couldn't get their hands on it and hence, could't apply pressure or cover. If he plays 1 quarter like that and 3 like the others then I'm not going to be unhappy with that.

[Secret Kiel]

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.

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.

Far out man. He was playing as the key defender on an in-form monster who was getting repeat entries. Him and rest of the defence were under serious fire for the 1st 10 mins of the 3rd. That's not the defence's fault - our mids couldn't get their hands on it and hence, could't apply pressure or cover. If he plays 1 quarter like that and 3 like the others then I'm not going to be unhappy with that.

You're not good good with opposing views are you.

[Saintmatt]

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.

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' process

I think he'd have been ok without the Forum Karen's tag. Lol

I'd be more concerned with being reminded of my repeated historic idiocy than being called Karen.

[Munga]

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.

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.

Far out man. He was playing as the key defender on an in-form monster who was getting repeat entries. Him and rest of the defence were under serious fire for the 1st 10 mins of the 3rd. That's not the defence's fault - our mids couldn't get their hands on it and hence, could't apply pressure or cover. If he plays 1 quarter like that and 3 like the others then I'm not going to be unhappy with that.

Nah it was more his two kicks that weren't under ANY pressure, one straight to the opposition and the other booted high and wide straight on the full in the back pocket. I'm not making this up mate, it happened. It's constructive criticism. Or we can just stop trying to improve, people seem to be happy with that I'm sure Howard was happy with that too, not. I'm not saying he's a bad defender at all, he's been ok this year so far. Nothing wrong with ok, our squad perfomance has been pretty level this year.

[CQ SAINT]

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.

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' process

I think he'd have been ok without the Forum Karen's tag. Lol

I'd be more concerned with being reminded of my repeated historic idiocy than being called Karen.

Depends on what you are aiming for I guess.

[Mr Magic]

I reckon he's been fantastic - a great improvement over what we had at FB last year (nothing personal against Nathan Brown).
We now have a 200cm FB that can handle 'gorillas' and leading tall forwards. He's shown he's capable of not only negating the influence of the opposition's key forward but also create opportunities for us.
His play so far has allowed Wilkie, Carlisle and Coffield to be more productive knowing he (Howard) can handle his opponent without their assistance all the time.

[Devilhead]

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.

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.

Far out man. He was playing as the key defender on an in-form monster who was getting repeat entries. Him and rest of the defence were under serious fire for the 1st 10 mins of the 3rd. That's not the defence's fault - our mids couldn't get their hands on it and hence, could't apply pressure or cover. If he plays 1 quarter like that and 3 like the others then I'm not going to be unhappy with that.

You're not good good with opposing views are you.

Unfortunately when the opposing viewer actually lacks credibility it makes it very hard to take their comments seriously

[Secret Kiel]

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.

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.

Far out man. He was playing as the key defender on an in-form monster who was getting repeat entries. Him and rest of the defence were under serious fire for the 1st 10 mins of the 3rd. That's not the defence's fault - our mids couldn't get their hands on it and hence, could't apply pressure or cover. If he plays 1 quarter like that and 3 like the others then I'm not going to be unhappy with that.

You're not good good with opposing views are you.

Unfortunately when the opposing viewer actually lacks credibility it makes it very hard to take their comments seriously

So my point was equal parts observation and opinion, the observation part was his chain of clangers at a crucial ding dong in the match, fortunately it worked out well for the team but the facts are his clangers were chain of serious skill errors. What credibility do you need to recount an observation by eye? Especially one that can be evidenced by video.

[WellardSaint]

Coaches all go thru replays with players.
Any faults and bad habits in his game will be advised to him and he'll have to adjust.
Part of training

[BackFromUSA]

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.

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' process

The one day ban was for editing another persons name in a quote in order to bait them. Secret Kiel’s Nic was changed to Secret Karen.

[Gershwin]

11 1% to Howard. Next best 5 to Carlisle then 4 to Steele. They mightn’t be obvious but can win a game.

[saynta]

The OP might not be convinced with Dougal, but I am.

[saintsRrising]

He had a shocker of a quarter against Port.

A quarter?

He had two errant kicks.

He looks the good to me.

And at an age of 24yr 4mth with only 53 games he is only going to get better.

[Rocket]

Take a close look at how many times he gets his fist in and spoils !!! He has been a huge reason behind our push up the ladder ....

[st.byron]

I reckon he's been fantastic - a great improvement over what we had at FB last year (nothing personal against Nathan Brown).
We now have a 200cm FB that can handle 'gorillas' and leading tall forwards. He's shown he's capable of not only negating the influence of the opposition's key forward but also create opportunities for us.
His play so far has allowed Wilkie, Carlisle and Coffield to be more productive knowing he (Howard) can handle his opponent without their assistance all the time.

Not only that - he’s just 24 and entering his prime. Years ahead of him as a key cornerstone of the defence.

[Devilhead]

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.

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.

Far out man. He was playing as the key defender on an in-form monster who was getting repeat entries. Him and rest of the defence were under serious fire for the 1st 10 mins of the 3rd. That's not the defence's fault - our mids couldn't get their hands on it and hence, could't apply pressure or cover. If he plays 1 quarter like that and 3 like the others then I'm not going to be unhappy with that.

You're not good good with opposing views are you.

Unfortunately when the opposing viewer actually lacks credibility it makes it very hard to take their comments seriously

So my point was equal parts observation and opinion, the observation part was his chain of clangers at a crucial ding dong in the match, fortunately it worked out well for the team but the facts are his clangers were chain of serious skill errors. What credibility do you need to recount an observation by eye? Especially one that can be evidenced by video.

What player in any sport, in any club in the world doesn't make mistakes now and then?

Dougal has been a fantastic much needed addition to the team leading our young backline - we sit 4th part job to the awesome job our backline is doing of which he plays a considerable role if not the most important.

To be unconvinced because he made a few clangers whilst ignoring the fact he destroyed the leagues most in form monster forward is laughable and yes ....... lacks credibility.

[desertsaint]

i reckn he's a beauty. only going to get better. down the track i've a feeling we'll say he was the best of last years trades.

[CQ SAINT]

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.

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.

Far out man. He was playing as the key defender on an in-form monster who was getting repeat entries. Him and rest of the defence were under serious fire for the 1st 10 mins of the 3rd. That's not the defence's fault - our mids couldn't get their hands on it and hence, could't apply pressure or cover. If he plays 1 quarter like that and 3 like the others then I'm not going to be unhappy with that.

You're not good good with opposing views are you.

Unfortunately when the opposing viewer actually lacks credibility it makes it very hard to take their comments seriously

So my point was equal parts observation and opinion, the observation part was his chain of clangers at a crucial ding dong in the match, fortunately it worked out well for the team but the facts are his clangers were chain of serious skill errors. What credibility do you need to recount an observation by eye? Especially one that can be evidenced by video.

What player in any sport, in any club in the world doesn't make mistakes now and then?

Dougal has been a fantastic much needed addition to the team leading our young backline - we sit 4th part job to the awesome job our backline is doing of which he plays a considerable role if not the most important.

To be unconvinced because he made a few clangers whilst ignoring the fact he destroyed the leagues most in form monster forward is laughable and yes ....... lacks credibility.

While Howard was good, the rucks and midfielders, and a couple of lucky decisions on chopping Dixon's arms made his job a lot easier than it could have been. He also had Coffield and Paton manning up in the lanes in front of Dixon.
One thing for sure though, he backs himself, attacks the contest, moves really well and com compliments the efforts put in by our midfield when we need him to. He will only get better and even more attacking.

[SaintPav]

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.

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' process

The one day ban was for editing another persons name in a quote in order to bait them. Secret Kiel’s Nic was changed to Secret Karen.

Just appalling.

[desertsaint]

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.

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' process

The one day ban was for editing another persons name in a quote in order to bait them. Secret Kiel’s Nic was changed to Secret Karen.

Just appalling.

[Ghost Like]

I can't believe Joffa got dobbed in (reported) & that's called baiting?

[SaintPav]

i reckn he's a beauty. only going to get better. down the track i've a feeling we'll say he was the best of last years trades.

Reasonable call.

[Sanctorum]

Looking at this post from SK and all of the subsequent responses and banter, including SK "thanking" posters who have made positive comments about Dougal Howard, leads me to suspect that SK is being mischievous, putting up outrageous posts with the aim of attracting vitriolic responses from those who take him seriously...I also sometimes wonder if SK has other profiles on this forum that respond to his/her (SK's) utterances. Jekyll and Hyde.

To be honest, as someone else has suggested, best to simply ignore whatever SK comes out with, it's a waste of effort and space!

As for Dougal Howard, he has been sensational, the Saints back 6 are doing a fantastic job so far in 2020, one of the best in the comp!!