One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: Ramps on February 14, 2010, 10:40:36 AM
-
For mine the team should be:
Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
Chris Newman David Gourdis Kelvin Moore
Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
Jack Riewoldt David Astbury Mitch Morton
Troy Taylor Ben Griffiths Robin Nahas
Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Tyrone Vickery Ben Nason Jayden Post Richard Tambling
-
Tuck or Foley -> Nason
Moore was average. Would rather Connors/Webberly/Roberts/Taylor/Astbury at this stage
-
Tuck or Foley -> Nason
Moore was average. Would rather Connors/Webberly/Roberts/Taylor/Astbury at this stage
Ok Webberley for Moore lol.
-
Promoting Gou from the rookie list Ramps?
Gutsy move, and some may say a little premature given that he is yet to produce consistency at VFL level.
-
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Jayden Post Richard Tambling
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
HF: David Astbury Jack Riewoldt Troy Taylor
F: Mitch Morton Ben Griffiths Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors Andrew Collins
I would use Newy as another mid so Moore off the bench to HBF when Newy in the midfield.
No Fev to monster our full-backs this time around.
Taking a chance with Griffiths at FF straight up but the only other choice is either move Postie forward which isn't what Hardwick had planned or stick with Polly who is too slow.
Having said all that I still have a feeling Hislop will get a go up forward because he had 4 shots at goal despite missing them all :P and he applies some forward line defensive pressure along with Nahas. Just a fact we can't replace most of the side and add size and experience in one summer.
-
FB: Edwards Mcguane Newman
HB: Farmer Post Gourdis
C: Tambling Cotchin Collins
HF: Cousins Astbury Morton
FF: Nahas Griffiths Reiwoldt
FOLL: Graham Deledio Martin
INT: Vickery Jackson Foley Thursfield
EMER: Connors Thomson Polo
That's a pretty exciting team with no weak links at all. Just need to get a few games into them ;D
-
FB: Edwards Mcguane Newman
HB: Farmer Post Gourdis
C: Tambling Cotchin Collins
HF: Cousins Astbury Morton
FF: Nahas Griffiths Reiwoldt
FOLL: Graham Deledio Martin
INT: Vickery Jackson Foley Thursfield
EMER: Connors Thomson Polo
That's a pretty exciting team with no weak links at all. Just need to get a few games into them ;D
Would change Edwards for Connors, Farmer for Thursfield and Collins for Cousins. Also Graham for Simmonds, put Gourdis on the bench and put Moore in, gee lets just hope they are all fit because it's hard to get everyone in isn't it??
-
FB: Edwards Mcguane Newman
HB: Farmer Post Gourdis
C: Tambling Cotchin Collins
HF: Cousins Astbury Morton
FF: Nahas Griffiths Reiwoldt
FOLL: Graham Deledio Martin
INT: Vickery Jackson Foley Thursfield
EMER: Connors Thomson Polo
That's a pretty exciting team with no weak links at all. Just need to get a few games into them ;D
Would change Edwards for Connors, Farmer for Thursfield and Collins for Cousins. Also Graham for Simmonds, put Gourdis on the bench and put Moore in, gee lets just hope they are all fit because it's hard to get everyone in isn't it??
I'd prefer edwards over connors. I still don't trust connors with his cockiness lol and his pulling out of contests. Would love Cousins experience in our young forward line and Collins can run around on the wing. Think Simmo will struggle now that he hasn't really trained for 2 months. We need to balance our defence with talls and smalls. I could easily swap Thursty with Gourdis in the starting lineup :lol
-
Don't you think you have gone a bit small down there with Farmer and Edwards though when they will have Waite, Kruz, Fevs replacement, fisher...... all talls.
-
sheesh im addicted to these team threads.
few changes for me my core 25 30 players has been basically the same since the end of the draft.
B/ Farmer Thursfield Moore/Gourdis/Grimes.
HB/ Tambling Post Webberley/Dea/Connors
C/ Collins Martin Newman
HF/ Cotchin Riewoldt Astbury/Taylor
F/ Morton Griffiths Nahas/Roberts.
R/ Simmonds Deledio Cousins/Foley.
Int/ 2nd ruckman take your pick. jackson, (thomson/tuck) edwards.
yep thats the thirty. perhaps contin who i think already will give more than thomson or tuck.
i can without flinching draw a line thru graham, hislop, king, mcguane, mcmahon, polak, polo, tuck, white, thats ten without blinking apart from hislop ive been calling for the other heads for yrs.
i have grave concerns over connors, edwards, jackson, moore, rance, thomson, thursfield,gourdis, nahas, sheesh thats another 9 and you can bet a reasonable percentage wont make it. with all imo we should be aiming to do better long term.so in the short term they can provide a srevice long term they have to go.
i havent mentioned rookies or newbies but we can be sure there will be a percentage that dont make it.
sheesh the work to be done is enormous we havent even bottomed out yet.
-
Hey Claw, love your enthusiasm but who will play round one mate that is the thread, I would love to see some of the players you have
mentioned but unless Griffiths comes on and is 100% fit in another 5 weeks I can't see him playing. Grimes, Webberley, Taylor, Roberts and Dea IMO would also be unfit or not match prepared for round one, well maybe not Taylor.
-
15.Farmer 40.Moore 2.Thursfield
3.Deledio 16.McGuane 17.Newman
32.Cousins 9.Cotchin 30.Tambling
8.Riewoldt 39.Astbury 14.Polo
20.Morton 38.Griffiths 26.Nahas
5.Simmonds 41.Foley 36.Martin
23.Jackson, 44.Taylor, 29.Vickery, 37.Post
:)
this thread should merge with the "R1 2010" thread!
:)
-
Gee willickers Batman.
HUGE ask for Griffiths who is coming back from injury and hasn't played a game yet. You must all be going on gut feel. Hope your gut feel is correct and I hope we don't break the boy.
Amazing how fast Polak has disappeared from calculations.
-
Gee willickers Batman.
HUGE ask for Griffiths who is coming back from injury and hasn't played a game yet. You must all be going on gut feel. Hope your gut feel is correct and I hope we don't break the boy.
Amazing how fast Polak has disappeared from calculations.
well RROFO, Polak was not our worst on Saturday Night. he kept chasing/pressure everytime the ball was in our fifty.
clearly Hardwick has told him, you do this and that, you will get a chance to play.
Polak did not get much of an opportunity on Saturday Night, not many inside fifties and our forward structure is still non-existent.
i don't think he will be promoted onto the senior list, that is why Griffiths (if fit) will play.
if not, i will think of somebody else!
:)
-
B: Farmer Thursfield McGuane
HB: Newman Post Moore
C: Cotchin Foley Cousins
HF: Astubry Riewoldt Morton
F: Nahas Griffiths Tuck
R: Vickory Deledio Martin
Int: Simmonds Jackson Tambling Gourdis
Emerg: White Taylor Collins
-
The side for round 1 does not matter to me at this stage as long as it has not got the same spinless, weak, unskillful players from previous years that have let us all down time and time again!
I don't mind going through some more pain but what will send me over the edge is if i have to watch most of the same players running around that clearly imo are not good enough for this level.
Unless Thirsty has learnt to kick and put on some muscle, he plays for Coburg. (gives nothing to the side other than a fist from behind a leading forward)
Unless Tuck has learnt to chase and to kick he plays for Coburg. (been a solid player for the club but we will not improve if he is in the side)
Unless Edwards has put on 10kg and learnt how to tackle he plays for Coburg. (to small and has nothing to hide that fact weather it be speed, goal senses, or even skill)
Unless Jackson has grown a football brain and learnt to kick, he plays for Coburg. (great athelete but has not even got close to enough skill to be able to help this club move forward)
Hislop, Thompson are just not even close.
IMO all these players have had enough chances and have come up short one way or another. It's time to move forward without them OR if by some miracle they go back top Coburg, play REALLY well and fight there way back in then OK. But until then play the kids and find out if they have what it takes or at least if they might.
A few others that really need to stand up for this club are Tambling and Moore (both have had 1 good season but that does not make a footballer) White, Polo, and Conners.
All have been on the list a while and just have not shown enough to say they deserve to be at Tigerland.
We all talk about us in a re-building stage, well it's tme to start with the kids....
The more kids round one the better IMO...
-
sheesh im addicted to these team threads.
few changes for me my core 25 30 players has been basically the same since the end of the draft.
B/ Farmer Thursfield Moore/Gourdis/Grimes.
HB/ Tambling Post Webberley/Dea/Connors
C/ Collins Martin Newman
HF/ Cotchin Riewoldt Astbury/Taylor
F/ Morton Griffiths Nahas/Roberts.
R/ Simmonds Deledio Cousins/Foley.
Int/ 2nd ruckman take your pick. jackson, (thomson/tuck) edwards.
yep thats the thirty. perhaps contin who i think already will give more than thomson or tuck.
i can without flinching draw a line thru graham, hislop, king, mcguane, mcmahon, polak, polo, tuck, white, thats ten without blinking apart from hislop ive been calling for the other heads for yrs.
i have grave concerns over connors, edwards, jackson, moore, rance, thomson, thursfield,gourdis, nahas, sheesh thats another 9 and you can bet a reasonable percentage wont make it. with all imo we should be aiming to do better long term.so in the short term they can provide a srevice long term they have to go.
i havent mentioned rookies or newbies but we can be sure there will be a percentage that dont make it.
sheesh the work to be done is enormous we havent even bottomed out yet.
You have 10 defenders and Mcguane can't even make it, but you have Simmonds in the team who hasn't trained for 2 months. Are you ok? ;)
-
I am afraid that whether some of you like it or not Polak will be playing at FF come round one. Hardwick had him there again at training today from reports and I think Hardwick has him in his plans to play there. At least until someone else can show him that they belong there more than Polak and at the moment we don't have anyone IMO.
-
Gee willickers Batman.
HUGE ask for Griffiths who is coming back from injury and hasn't played a game yet. You must all be going on gut feel. Hope your gut feel is correct and I hope we don't break the boy.
Amazing how fast Polak has disappeared from calculations.
well RROFO, Polak was not our worst on Saturday Night. he kept chasing/pressure everytime the ball was in our fifty.
clearly Hardwick has told him, you do this and that, you will get a chance to play.
Polak did not get much of an opportunity on Saturday Night, not many inside fifties and our forward structure is still non-existent.
i don't think he will be promoted onto the senior list, that is why Griffiths (if fit) will play.
if not, i will think of somebody else!
:)
Sorry Stripes, I wasn't having a go at you. Actually I wasn't having a go at anyone. I simply feel that it is very unlikely that Griffiths will play round 1. I see he was running laps again at training yesterday, has he actually played any football yet? Only about a month to go now, if he doesn't get a move on he's going to have little to no match fitness for the season.
My comment about Polak was only an observation. I can see why you might think what I said was a criticism of him but that's not the way I operate.
Before NAB round 1 a lot of people had him off the rookie list and at FF. After NAB round 1 he does not seem to figure in anyone's calculations. Personally I think he will line up at FF against Carlton, simply because he is the best option we have. Griffiths bay be the better long term prospect but I can't see the point in rushing him in when he is not ready and running the risk of breaking him.
There's a difference between getting games into young players and playing a youngster who is not physically ready. At least a few games at Coburg would be prudent.
That's how I see it anyway.
-
My team for round one:
B: Farmer-Thursfield-McGuane/Gourdis (if Luke's not match-fit)
HB: Newman-Post-Connors
C: Deledio-Cousins-Cotchin
HF:Edwards-Vickery-Astbury
F:Morton-Riewoldt-Nahas
Foll:Simmonds-Tuck-Martin
INT:Graham-Jackson-Webberley-Collins
If Simmonds isn't fit by rd1, I'd start with Graham in the ruck, and Browne on the bench. If Jackson isn't fit, I'd be looking at Dea or Roberts on the bench.
Notable exclusions are Polak,Tambling, Polo, Hislop, Moore, Thomson, White and Rance, none of whom impressed me in the least on Saturday night. Some I've never been fans of. Others, like Tambling, I've completely run out of patience with. Of these, Rance for me was the most crushing disappointment. I was always a big rap for the kid, good height and size,courageous,reasonable pedigree and a high draft pick. Yet the complete and utter lack of awareness or accountability on his direct opponent, dumb decision-making, and poor skill that he displayed last Saturday night left me in severe doubt that he will make the grade.
-
While he was bad in the NAB Cup, I don't think Franklin was ever the right match up for him
Franklin has always been held better by more agile defenders
-
sheesh im addicted to these team threads.
few changes for me my core 25 30 players has been basically the same since the end of the draft.
B/ Farmer Thursfield Moore/Gourdis/Grimes.
HB/ Tambling Post Webberley/Dea/Connors
C/ Collins Martin Newman
HF/ Cotchin Riewoldt Astbury/Taylor
F/ Morton Griffiths Nahas/Roberts.
R/ Simmonds Deledio Cousins/Foley.
Int/ 2nd ruckman take your pick. jackson, (thomson/tuck) edwards.
yep thats the thirty. perhaps contin who i think already will give more than thomson or tuck.
i can without flinching draw a line thru graham, hislop, king, mcguane, mcmahon, polak, polo, tuck, white, thats ten without blinking apart from hislop ive been calling for the other heads for yrs.
i have grave concerns over connors, edwards, jackson, moore, rance, thomson, thursfield,gourdis, nahas, sheesh thats another 9 and you can bet a reasonable percentage wont make it. with all imo we should be aiming to do better long term.so in the short term they can provide a srevice long term they have to go.
i havent mentioned rookies or newbies but we can be sure there will be a percentage that dont make it.
sheesh the work to be done is enormous we havent even bottomed out yet.
You have 10 defenders and Mcguane can't even make it, but you have Simmonds in the team who hasn't trained for 2 months. Are you ok? ;)
ah im fine. thanks for asking.
yep imo there are 10 defenders well 12 if you include mcguane and rance in competition for 6 spots.
mcguane is in competition for a kp spot. im afraid both post and thursfield are better options moving forward. so mcguane is not in competition with 12 hes in competition with 2.
the best third tall option we have is moore sheesh he wants to produce as well. i think gourdis showed a bit and with his pace and decent size he may make a decent third tall option only trouble is you wont want him kicking out of defence.
grimes is the other a tall defender but still skinny does have good footskills and reads it well. if thursfield and moore dont produce play grimes and gourdis we have to look forward mcguane is a spud whos had 5 yrs but most ferals love him because he has a dip.
farmer tambling dea webberley connors and newman are all in competition for the 3 smaller defender spots. i havent included newman because i believe he will play in the midfield. i dont suppose you want mcguane to have one of these spots do you.
the back 6 must have a combination of size, hmm sorry rules out mcguane. speed sheesh sorry rules out mcguane. strength omg it rules out mcguane. smarts do i need to say it, it rules out mcguane. skills yep you guessed it it rules out mcguane. accountability sheesh does he have accountability.well he tries anyway.
the love for this bloke never ceases to amaze me. hes a trier nothing more.
oh i forgot head up the arse supporters like you never look weaknesses waste of time pointing out deficiencies.
sheesh simmonds hasnt trained i hadnt realised still hes a better option than graham training or no training.
i know lets just throw vickery in by himself to carry the entire ruck.never mind hes chronically under sized atm.
better of throwing browne in at least he has some meat on his bones.
-
Gee willickers Batman.
HUGE ask for Griffiths who is coming back from injury and hasn't played a game yet. You must all be going on gut feel. Hope your gut feel is correct and I hope we don't break the boy.
Amazing how fast Polak has disappeared from calculations.
I think it just shows how few KP options we have up forward with such a young list. It's either go with a young inexperienced tall who is part of our future or someone with a mature KP body but isn't part of our long term future. You're right RROFO it was more "hope" with Griffiths than reality at this stage :-\. Polly will probably still line-up in round 1 at FF as a temporary option to get us through 2010. I would like us to try Postie again based on his effort in the second Essendon game last year but Hardwick has him playing down back this year.
-
Yep I would like to see Post up forward again, I think he has more to offer there and is more mobile. Back line could be:
B: Farmer Moore McGuanne
HB: Newman Thursfield Gourdis/Rance (sorry but he just has to make it.. :thumbsup)
-
mcguane is in competition for a kp spot. im afraid both post and thursfield are better options moving forward. so mcguane is not in competition with 12 hes in competition with 2.
sheesh simmonds hasnt trained i hadnt realised still hes a better option than graham training or no training.
i know lets just throw vickery in by himself to carry the entire ruck.never mind hes chronically under sized atm.
better of throwing browne in at least he has some meat on his bones.
Mcguane is every bit as good as Thursty you clown. They'll be perfect for 2nd and 3rd tall forwards with Post taking the best tall forward usually and Gourdis or Rance taking the fourth tall. Mcguane and Thursty are both hitting the scales at 90kg and 191-192cm now and both are good stoppers. I'd take Graham and Vickery ahead of Simmonds. Both have 5cm reach advantage in the ruck and both can hit a target 15m away ;)
-
Backmen need to be more than just stoppers these days. They need to be also strong rebounders to set up counterattacks and hence have good foot skills so you're not just turning the ball straight back to the opposition and gifting them goals. That's why Postie is playing in defence this year because he appears to be the compete package that just needs to become stronger and more experienced. Thursty is a good stopper but if he has a weakness it is he's hardly a rebounding defender. McGuane's footskills aren't great while Gourdis and Rance are ordinary kicks at this stage.
With our newbie talls very young and inexperienced we are really hamstrung with a lack of genuine decent KPP options. We have to rob Peter to pay Paul when juggling our KPPs :-\.
-
mcguane is in competition for a kp spot. im afraid both post and thursfield are better options moving forward. so mcguane is not in competition with 12 hes in competition with 2.
sheesh simmonds hasnt trained i hadnt realised still hes a better option than graham training or no training.
i know lets just throw vickery in by himself to carry the entire ruck.never mind hes chronically under sized atm.
better of throwing browne in at least he has some meat on his bones.
Mcguane is every bit as good as Thursty you clown. They'll be perfect for 2nd and 3rd tall forwards with Post taking the best tall forward usually and Gourdis or Rance taking the fourth tall. Mcguane and Thursty are both hitting the scales at 90kg and 191-192cm now and both are good stoppers. I'd take Graham and Vickery ahead of Simmonds. Both have 5cm reach advantage in the ruck and both can hit a target 15m away ;)
lol so mcguane is every bit as good as thursfield sheesh so that makes thursfield a dud as well.
so your alright with undersized talls who either cant kick have no brains or just dont get the ball. yep fantastic we will catch up to all the other sides with those two dynamos.
and you want to play rance and gourdis as 4th talls. i suppose you are going to fit in somewhere some genuine skillful smaller running types.
oh wait a minute skillful is a dirty word when mentioning names like rance mcguane gourdis.
its laughable that you think one of the most god awful awkward skilless dumb players to ever pull on a pair of footy boots in graham is a footballer. and to top it all of you want to throw the chronically undersized vickery into the hardest role in the game.
na petal chop a leg of simmonds and i would take him in front of those two. in 2 or 3 yrs hopefully i wont still be saying it in regards vickery.
mate i have to say i come on here for intelligent thoughtful debate. and what do i get? an imbecile. you can be assured i will be ignoring the utter rubbish you post from here on in its not worth the bother dealing with one who is so well best not say that.
-
mcguane is in competition for a kp spot. im afraid both post and thursfield are better options moving forward. so mcguane is not in competition with 12 hes in competition with 2.
sheesh simmonds hasnt trained i hadnt realised still hes a better option than graham training or no training.
i know lets just throw vickery in by himself to carry the entire ruck.never mind hes chronically under sized atm.
better of throwing browne in at least he has some meat on his bones.
Mcguane is every bit as good as Thursty you clown. They'll be perfect for 2nd and 3rd tall forwards with Post taking the best tall forward usually and Gourdis or Rance taking the fourth tall. Mcguane and Thursty are both hitting the scales at 90kg and 191-192cm now and both are good stoppers. I'd take Graham and Vickery ahead of Simmonds. Both have 5cm reach advantage in the ruck and both can hit a target 15m away ;)
lol so mcguane is every bit as good as thursfield sheesh so that makes thursfield a dud as well.
so your alright with undersized talls who either cant kick have no brains or just dont get the ball. yep fantastic we will catch up to all the other sides with those two dynamos.
and you want to play rance and gourdis as 4th talls. i suppose you are going to fit in somewhere some genuine skillful smaller running types.
oh wait a minute skillful is a dirty word when mentioning names like rance mcguane gourdis.
its laughable that you think one of the most god awful awkward skilless dumb players to ever pull on a pair of footy boots in graham is a footballer. and to top it all of you want to throw the chronically undersized vickery into the hardest role in the game.
na petal chop a leg of simmonds and i would take him in front of those two. in 2 or 3 yrs hopefully i wont still be saying it in regards vickery.
mate i have to say i come on here for intelligent thoughtful debate. and what do i get? an imbecile. you can be assured i will be ignoring the utter rubbish you post from here on in its not worth the bother dealing with one who is so well best not say that.
Ummm Mark Blake. Mcguane is a nice kick too. You're a fool 8). Most likely you're a 150kg armchair fan who kicks like a girl ;)
-
Keep to the footy discussion ppl without resorting to personal insults and namecalling because you disagree with what is said by another poster ::)
-
Claw is right tho. :shh
-
Claw is right, I like his choice of words, ""Imbecile"" :thumbsup
-
Claw is right tho. :shh
Not about McGuane. He might never be an A grader but is a better footballer than Thursfield will ever be and his kicking is not near as bad as the perception held by many - it looks bad because it's awkward but his efficiency with kicking is quite acceptable. Of course there is always room for improvement but that goes for every single player doesn't it.
-
Claw is right tho. :shh
Claw chooses Moore over Mcguane and Simmonds over Graham. You sure he's right? ::)
-
Claw is right tho. :shh
Not about McGuane. He might never be an A grader but is a better footballer than Thursfield will ever be and his kicking is not near as bad as the perception held by many - it looks bad because it's awkward but his efficiency with kicking is quite acceptable. Of course there is always room for improvement but that goes for every single player doesn't it.
well we will have to agree to disagree.
look the one thing that is constantly overlooked is the defense has been ordinary and chronically undersized for years. we are supposed to be rebuilding and in doing so striving to be better in the long term.
for 5 yrs or more we have gone with newman moore, mcguane, thursfield, yet people generally dont want to change this.
it hasnt worked the 3 so called talls have been very inconsistant are very shoddy in many areas and if we are to strive to do better we must try different players back even id it means in the short term we go backwards for awhile.
sheesh the aim should not be to hang onto underperforming chronically deficient players forever. the aim should be to BUILD a well balanced skilled accountable unit that can be a potent attacking weapon as well.
in looking forward i think we do need to find a fb. hopefully we have our chb in post.
in honesty i cant see a place for rance im critical of the skills and smarts of the players hes in competition with for a spot so i dont see the point in replaceing them with exactly the same deficient type. the only thing that does save him atm is his age and experience and perhaps size we may be able to do something with him but i would not hold my breath.
moore who most on here seem to have written of ,i would play as a genuine running hbf. ive called for this for yrs. pace a plenty. agility. is a solid kick, does have smarts, and is an ideal size to play on taller types and smalls. these are attributes mcguane and thursfield do not have so on potential and talent alone hes miles in front.
in wrapping him up to me is crunch time for kelvin he needs to show 08 was not a one off. he needs to stay healthy and he needs to perform at the rquired level. there can be no more excuses for kelvin perform or perish.
we need a small nuggety accountable quick skilled player we need some very good kicks who have some smarts run and size
rather than mindlessly persevering with what has failed for a long time i believe we need to change and aspire to become at least competetive and on a par for excellence with the top teams defences.
to me seeing as we are close to ground zero now is the time to change. id rather we go with something like this
b/ farmer - ***** - moore.
hb/ dea - post - webberley.
personally id be tempted to throw gourdis into fb. thursfield is the other option. tambling is one who may play hb instead of webberley atm. the idea is to actually change as quickly as we can that which has not worked. not keep on doing the same old same old.
its funny we all to a man recognise the back halfs short comings. we all recognise we are REBUILDING but most are averse to change.
its so and so is a bit better than so and so never mind both are not up to standard and have never been.
why are so many averse to change. why do so many defend so doggedly underperformers i dont get it.
-
Claw is right tho. :shh
Claw chooses Moore over Mcguane and Simmonds over Graham. You sure he's right? ::)
pppffftt i choose moore as a running back you think mcguane can perform that role.
mcguane plays primarily chb i choose post for that role in the hope that we can improve in that position.
atm i prefer either thursfirld at fb or i would give young dave gourdis a go there. i still maintain we need a quality fb.
simmonds or graham oh deary me why am i even entering into a debate with an imbecile.
simmonds has had two very injury interrupted seasons where hes been god awful but simmonds has shown hmself over his career to be more than a handy footballer what has the dinosaur graham shown other than he cant run has no skills and is not up to standard.
i wonder whos been the one saying we need a mature ruck recruit because im prepared to recognise neither graham or simmonds are long term solutions.
-
Look, alot of the reason our defence has struggled is because of the midfield being beaten and the forwards/midfielders not chasing hard enough and allowing the opposition more forward entries. It's great that Post is playing CHB. He gives us the extra height we need. I really like both Mcguane and Thursfield as stoppers and their weakness has been their lack of size. Wallace didn't push them enough to bulk up, but they are currently getting the bulk they need now. 192cm and 90kg is a good size for 2010 and for 2011 they should aim for 93kg. In 2010 we have Post(195cm/93kg), Mcguane(192cm/90kg), Thursfield(191cm/90kg) and Gourdis/Rance(194cm/94kg). I think we have a pretty good future defence and I'm not going to write Rance off after playing 5 minutes on Franklin. He literally spent 5 minutes on him in his first proper hit out for the year. We should play 4 tall defenders(3 on ground, 1 on interchange). I'm really liking what Edwards has shown since midseason 2009. Edwards, Newman and Farmer should be our small defenders. Having Farmer gives us the luxury of playing Tambling on the wing to replace White. I don't see the need to have a 190cm small defender. They will be playing on small forwards remember
FB: Edwards Mcguane Newman
HB: Farmer Post Gourdis/Thursfield
-
why do so many defend so doggedly underperformers i dont get it.
In my case it's simple - I don't think McGuane is an under performer. I think he is an adequate and serviceable half back flanker (not KPP) with room for improvement as he gets older and more experienced, and at present I don't see anyone showing more that should replace him. Over time we should be looking to upgrade every single player on our list but today is today and we still need to strike a balance between list management, player development and team performance. IMHO today we don't have anyone better than McGuane for the role he should fill (and that isn't KPP).
And to compare McGuane to Moore for last season (remembering that Moore is 3 years older, has 2 more years AFL experience), McGuane averaged more kicks, marks, handballs, rebound 50's, uncontested possessions, long kicks, run and bounce, and effective disposals. The only areas Moore was significantly better were skill errors and frees against - the rest of the main (or important) categories they were almost the same.
-
This is the team for Rd 1
B Webberley McGuane Edwards
HB Cotchin Post Rance
C Cousins Deledio Tambling
HF Newman Reiwoldt Morton
F Astbury Polak Nahas
R Simmonds Martin Jackson
Int Connors, Collins, Graham (very lucky), Moore
No Foley injured and Griffiths for Polak if fit
-
why do so many defend so doggedly underperformers i dont get it.
In my case it's simple - I don't think McGuane is an under performer. I think he is an adequate and serviceable half back flanker (not KPP) with room for improvement as he gets older and more experienced, and at present I don't see anyone showing more that should replace him. Over time we should be looking to upgrade every single player on our list but today is today and we still need to strike a balance between list management, player development and team performance. IMHO today we don't have anyone better than McGuane for the role he should fill (and that isn't KPP).
And to compare McGuane to Moore for last season (remembering that Moore is 3 years older, has 2 more years AFL experience), McGuane averaged more kicks, marks, handballs, rebound 50's, uncontested possessions, long kicks, run and bounce, and effective disposals. The only areas Moore was significantly better were skill errors and frees against - the rest of the main (or important) categories they were almost the same.
Correct. Looking at Mcguanes games the last 2 years, it wasn't very often at all he had more than 3 goals kicked on him in a match. I think he's a nice penetrating kick and provides some pretty good run down the middle at times. His turn overs will reduce with experience and his size will increase.
-
why do so many defend so doggedly underperformers i dont get it.
In my case it's simple - I don't think McGuane is an under performer. I think he is an adequate and serviceable half back flanker (not KPP) with room for improvement as he gets older and more experienced, and at present I don't see anyone showing more that should replace him. Over time we should be looking to upgrade every single player on our list but today is today and we still need to strike a balance between list management, player development and team performance. IMHO today we don't have anyone better than McGuane for the role he should fill (and that isn't KPP).
And to compare McGuane to Moore for last season (remembering that Moore is 3 years older, has 2 more years AFL experience), McGuane averaged more kicks, marks, handballs, rebound 50's, uncontested possessions, long kicks, run and bounce, and effective disposals. The only areas Moore was significantly better were skill errors and frees against - the rest of the main (or important) categories they were almost the same.
stats scmackts who gives a poo. do the stats show moore strugled with injury for most of the season or that es struggled with injury for most of his career. its this alone that has me cut him some slack. the one yr hes been totally injury free was 08.
so mcguane isnt a kpp what the hell are we doing with him then. i can tell you hes more of a kpp than a running back. thats just laughable you wish him to play as a running defender. well your right about one thing hes not a kpps hole.
-
Look, alot of the reason our defence has struggled is because of the midfield being beaten and the forwards/midfielders not chasing hard enough and allowing the opposition more forward entries. It's great that Post is playing CHB. He gives us the extra height we need. I really like both Mcguane and Thursfield as stoppers and their weakness has been their lack of size. Wallace didn't push them enough to bulk up, but they are currently getting the bulk they need now. 192cm and 90kg is a good size for 2010 and for 2011 they should aim for 93kg. In 2010 we have Post(195cm/93kg), Mcguane(192cm/90kg), Thursfield(191cm/90kg) and Gourdis/Rance(194cm/94kg). I think we have a pretty good future defence and I'm not going to write Rance off after playing 5 minutes on Franklin. He literally spent 5 minutes on him in his first proper hit out for the year. We should play 4 tall defenders(3 on ground, 1 on interchange). I'm really liking what Edwards has shown since midseason 2009. Edwards, Newman and Farmer should be our small defenders. Having Farmer gives us the luxury of playing Tambling on the wing to replace White. I don't see the need to have a 190cm small defender. They will be playing on small forwards remember
FB: Edwards Mcguane Newman
HB: Farmer Post Gourdis/Thursfield
ah when all else fails lets fall back to the old its someone elses fault. never mind the chronic weakness in their games if one just opens his eyes and looks.
look you talk numbers but ignore quality i ask whwere is the quality why do they have so many deficiencies in their games.
you talk as though these blokes have never tried to gain size, how great it must be to be so naieve. muscles mcguane has never bulked up because he is incapable. take a good look at his frame his hips and thighs. his skills are poo and hes one dunb footballer.
this football club has failed miserably over the yrs because it fails to do what must be done with the mcguanes of this world.
i would rather get belted by 100 points every week playing footballers who have a chance to develop into well rounded players down the track than persevere with the mcguanes of the footy world where they may enable us to win half a dozen games but we go no where .
if people really believe such deficient players like mcguane are the answer all i can say is i feel sorry for you.or should i be envious it must be bliss to be so oblivious.
hmm 16th and a spoon with underperformers who will get no better or 16th and a spoon with young blokes who may in time be capable of taking us somwhere. i know what my priority would be.
-
stats scmackts who gives a poo.
The coaches and football department - the ones who are charged with delivering our next premiership. Thought a football sage such as yourself would know that.
do the stats show moore strugled with injury for most of the season or that es struggled with injury for most of his career. its this alone that has me cut him some slack. the one yr hes been totally injury free was 08.
Aaaahhh, you cut Moore slack after delivering for 1 season out of his 6 so far because he is very injury prone yet McGuane who has shown significant improvement in each of his 4 so far gets none. Interesting. What was that comment about defending dogged under performers?
so mcguane isnt a kpp what the hell are we doing with him then. i can tell you hes more of a kpp than a running back. thats just laughable you wish him to play as a running defender. well your right about one thing hes not a kpps behindhole.
He's 2cm taller than Moore so he is no more 'equipped' to be a KPP than Moore is. Horses for courses and in all facets McGuane is a better proposition off half back than Moore with more time and upside to his game and career. Simple really.
-
Claw - I think you're being far too critical of a young group of defenders, especially McGuane. You could have Matty Scarlett playing as full back for us and it wouldn't help that much given our midfield was providing so little pressure that it allowed pinpoint delivery to the opposition forwards. There's only so much a defender can do.
-
Claw - I think you're being far too critical of a young group of defenders, especially McGuane. You could have Matty Scarlett playing as full back for us and it wouldn't help that much given our midfield was providing so little pressure that it allowed pinpoint delivery to the opposition forwards. There's only so much a defender can do.
no im not being critical at all.
based purely on a strengths and weakness basis the majority of our existing tall defenders would not have been touched with a barge pole in this yrs draft. some deficiencies canot be fixed.
based on performance they rate very poorly. sheesh we are in rebuild. you know that stage when you actually try something new. mcguane is no longer young either. yr 6 and at the end of yr 6 i bet my bottom dollar mcguane still has exactly the same deficiencies at the end of it..
-
Claw - I think you're being far too critical of a young group of defenders, especially McGuane. You could have Matty Scarlett playing as full back for us and it wouldn't help that much given our midfield was providing so little pressure that it allowed pinpoint delivery to the opposition forwards. There's only so much a defender can do.
no im not being critical at all.
based purely on a strengths and weakness basis the majority of our existing tall defenders would not have been touched with a barge pole in this yrs draft. some deficiencies canot be fixed.
based on performance they rate very poorly. sheesh we are in rebuild. you know that stage when you actually try something new. mcguane is no longer young either. yr 6 and at the end of yr 6 i bet my bottom dollar mcguane still has exactly the same deficiencies at the end of it..
Go look at Mcguanes last 2 seasons. Almost every game he has kept his opponent to 3 goals or less. He's 192cm and 90kg and will improve further as a player this year :)
-
based purely on a strengths and weakness basis the majority of our existing tall defenders would not have been touched with a barge pole in this yrs draft. some deficiencies canot be fixed.
The only deficiency I believe can't be fixed is the natural ability to kick, mark and handball. It can certainly be worked on and improved but it needs to be done to a certain level to be satisfactory for senior AFL standard and if you don't have a good enough starting base then it's never going to happen. The rest of the complex skill set of the modern day footballer are all based around attitude, discipline and fitness - all very teachable, learnable and achievable over time.
I don't see any critical deficiencies in McGuane's, Moore's or Thursfield's games that can't 'potentially' be corrected or improved. The thing McGuane and Thursfield have on their side is much more time, most importantly 'young time', when they have much more capacity to improve and succeed. And they are also now rid of the non-developmental Wallace era, something that wouldn't have helped in their growth so far.
I disagree totally that any of these 3 wouldn't have been touched with a barge pole - Moore and Thursfield would have been seriously considered by some clubs, McGuane would definitely have had multiple suitors and been taken.
mcguane is no longer young either.
WTF? Turned 23 last week - 4 years in the system, 54 games to his name including all 22 last year. He is exactly at the point when we should start to see him produce consistent good football. If he was offered up for trade at this age and stage of his career other clubs would jump at the chance - he is young enough and good enough.
yr 6 and at the end of yr 6 i bet my bottom dollar mcguane still has exactly the same deficiencies at the end of it..
What are his deficiencies exactly as you see them?
-
What are his deficiencies exactly as you see them?
Apparently a 192cm, 90kg, 23 year and 4 day old good stopping, athletic, penetrating kicking key position/running defender can't get any bigger or better according to claw 8). We all know that is complete CRAP :D
-
stats scmackts who gives a poo.
The coaches and football department - the ones who are charged with delivering our next premiership. Thought a football sage such as yourself would know that.
firstly i dont proclaim to be a sage. i have enough common sense to treat stats with the cynisism they deserve. i really do hope those in charge think the same and trust more in what they actually see.
Aaaahhh, you cut Moore slack after delivering for 1 season out of his 6 so far because he is very injury prone yet McGuane who has shown significant improvement in each of his 4 so far gets none. Interesting. What was that comment about defending dogged under performers?
geez what a comment. there is only really one legit excuse for players underperforming. and thats injury.pretty hard to play anywhere near your best when constantly injured.
being constantly injured raises another debate. do you persevere with someone who is constantly injured or do you at some stage say hey we arent getting enough out of you and the injuries look like they will continue to happen.
imo moore has legit reasons for non performance mcguane does not. anyone who says injuries are not a pretty convincing reason for not performing is a fool.
He's 2cm taller than Moore so he is no more 'equipped' to be a KPP than Moore is. Horses for courses and in all facets McGuane is a better proposition off half back than Moore with more time and upside to his game and career. Simple really.
what are you on about i havent advocated moore play kp not because of height but size.
its exactly one of the reasons why i dont think mcguane should play kp along with a few other reasons why he should not play at all. nothing is ever simple.
look if you think mcguane a better propisition of hb than moore good for you but he does not have the tools to play as a running back. moore has it all over him in this area.
at the start of this footy season moore will be 26. mcguane 23, moore will be in his 7th season on the list proper and mcguane in his 6th. they have both played a similar amount of games moore has not played so many because of injury, and both are a very similar size. the difference is when fully fit moore has shown he can play at a high level and has most of the tools an afl footballer needs. mcguane well hes a battler whos done well with the tools he has to work with but for sure and certain he is not the answer moving forward it may well pan out that moore is not either.but if moore can stay fit i like his chances much better.
all i have said is mcguane is or was currently our chb hardwick in his infinite wisdom is now playing a better equipped player there .a player who hant done anything yet but one who hopefully will develop into the cornerstone of our defence. this is rebuilding, i hope he sticks with post.
where does this leave mcguane. imo struggling to get a game.
if hardwick is silly enough to play mcguane at fb or as a running defender it will prove he has no idea. mcguane just does not have the tools to play either role. he chronically lacks size and pace to play fb and does not have the skills and smarts to run of.
he may play as a third dour negating tall, but you want blokes who can run of in this role be genuinely quick have genuine footy smarts and use the ball really well. they need to be attacking weapons. besides if your 2 kpds are good enough the need for a third defensive tall is negated to a degree.
mcguane is what 191cm and somewhere between 86 and 90kg. how the hell is he going to play fb. he regularly gets out bodied in one on ones now, and thats up the ground where it doesnt matter so much. makes really dumb decisions and has brain fades that are unforgivable. his decision making and uncertainty with ball in hand is just plain ordinary and his footskills are to be kind average. so you want to see him delivering the ball of hb. im sorry its users like mcguane coming of hb that has killed us in the past and you want to give him this role. the idea is to actually improve our systems and structures not remain wallowed in mediocrity.
the sooner the big bodied dea shows he can play and get a game the better.after all we are looking to upgrade in most positions we are coming of a spoon and attempting to upgrade is what rebuilding is about.
if we are not looking to upgrade on such average players like mcguane we will never go anywhere.sticking with the same old same old will leave us mired at the bottom of the ladder.
anyway we are poles apart on this bloke and it seems we will remain so.
-
To totally discount stats is as foolish as it is to totally rely on them. Stats play an important role in making judgments, as long as they are used in context.
To say that you should make an assessment based solely on what you see is truly flawed, because as you have said yourself claw, sometime we only see what we want to see. There has been much research done into the unreliability of eyewitness accounts, showing just how much memory, pre conceptions and suggestibility can affect peoples' accounts of events.
You only have to have a look around at the various forums and see the differing opinions on the same players to get an inkling on just how unreliable it is to pass judgment on a player based solely on ones perceived observations. Then there is there is the unwillingness of people to even consider their judgment may be clouded,regardless of the evidence presented before them.
-
He's 2cm taller than Moore so he is no more 'equipped' to be a KPP than Moore is. Horses for courses and in all facets McGuane is a better proposition off half back than Moore with more time and upside to his game and career. Simple really.
what are you on about i havent advocated moore play kp not because of height but size.
You misunderstood my point. You can't judge McGuane on his capacity or past performance as a KPP without applying the same judgment to Moore because they are almost the same height and weight.
look if you think mcguane a better propisition of hb than moore good for you but he does not have the tools to play as a running back. moore has it all over him in this area.
Please list the areas that Moore is superior, then we can have a better debate. I've given my reasons why I think McGuane is a sound proposition to persevere with - all you have done so far is demonstrated a dislike for the guy with no reason behind it.
at the start of this footy season moore will be 26. mcguane 23, moore will be in his 7th season on the list proper and mcguane in his 6th.
Incorrect. McGuane is just starting his 5th year - Moore has 3 years of age and 2 years of experience, maturity and development on McGuane. Moore should be in the middle of his prime, McGuane still approaching his.
all i have said is mcguane is or was currently our chb hardwick in his infinite wisdom is now playing a better equipped player there .a player who hant done anything yet but one who hopefully will develop into the cornerstone of our defence. this is rebuilding, i hope he sticks with post.
I also hope he sticks with Post but please tell me when McGuane was ever our 1st choice or preferred CHB? He ended up there a few times in last year's debacle of a season due to other circumstances (injuries, Bowden dropped, no-one else good enough, etc) but he shouldn't be judged as our incumbent CHB, that's not a fair assessment.
besides if your 2 kpds are good enough the need for a third defensive tall is negated to a degree.
Good luck building a successful backline with only 2 players 190cm or taller. Every single forward line setup in today's era will have a minimum of 3 or even 4 players around the 190cm or taller mark and if you have a backline of mid 180cm 'runners' you will get slaughtered overhead. Which one or your running midgets would you drop into the path of the leading of the leading forward?
mcguane is what 191cm and somewhere between 86 and 90kg. how the hell is he going to play fb. he regularly gets out bodied in one on ones now, and thats up the ground where it doesnt matter so much. makes really dumb decisions and has brain fades that are unforgivable. his decision making and uncertainty with ball in hand is just plain ordinary and his footskills are to be kind average. so you want to see him delivering the ball of hb. im sorry its users like mcguane coming of hb that has killed us in the past and you want to give him this role. the idea is to actually improve our systems and structures not remain wallowed in mediocrity.
................
anyway we are poles apart on this bloke and it seems we will remain so.
Yep, that's as close as its going to get. Our opinions on McGuane's present capability and future potential are poles apart. I suppose 2010 will tell us a lot more about all 3 - McGuane, Moore and Thursfield.
-
Actually McGuane is about to START his 6th season, so he's had 5 years.
He was drafted in 2004 in the same draft as Deledio, so he's been at the club for the 05, 06, 07, 08 & 09 seasons
-
there is only really one legit excuse for players underperforming. and thats injury.pretty hard to play anywhere near your best when constantly injured.
being constantly injured raises another debate. do you persevere with someone who is constantly injured or do you at some stage say hey we arent getting enough out of you and the injuries look like they will continue to happen.
......anyone who says injuries are not a pretty convincing reason for not performing is a fool.
Wow, that's a big call - there are so many variables to make a generalisation like that. Did the injury restrict the player's output, did the player hide the injury in order to play, did the player 'sulk' because he was forced to play with the injury, what is the player's tolerance to pain, etc etc. Some players manage well in excess of 100 consecutive games in their career and you can't tell me that they weren't injured at some point but played on (and well). Nup, there is no legit excuse for under performing, none, nada, zit, zilch. There are a myriad of reasons, yes but zero excuses.
And applying your thinking, Moore must be under serious consideration for the flick if we are to consider constant injury as a criteria - 26 years of age, 65 games in 6 seasons in a poor side with 1 decent season to his credit. If I didn't know better this would be screaming list clogger to me. And before you howl me down - I'm ok with Moore, I believe he should have a spot on our list and that he provides options, depth and competition for a spot that is healthy and beneficial to the team, I'm just pointing out where I believe your thinking is flawed.
-
Actually McGuane is about to START his 6th season, so he's had 5 years.
He was drafted in 2004 in the same draft as Deledio, so he's been at the club for the 05, 06, 07, 08 & 09 seasons
Yep, correct Infamy, my mistake. I apologise to Claw.
My source had his debut year in '06 but looking further he was pick #36 in '04 and his first game wasn't until '06.
-
He's 2cm taller than Moore so he is no more 'equipped' to be a KPP than Moore is. Horses for courses and in all facets McGuane is a better proposition off half back than Moore with more time and upside to his game and career. Simple really.
what are you on about i havent advocated moore play kp not because of height but size.
You misunderstood my point. You can't judge McGuane on his capacity or past performance as a KPP without applying the same judgment to Moore because they are almost the same height and weight.
rubbish i dont want moore to play as a kp i want him played as a running third tall type a role he is infinitely more equipped to perform than mcguane.
moore as a kp pppffftt. too undersized just like mcguane. so i dont rate moore as a kp anyway. your right i dont understand what you are trying to prove here.
as stated i dont rate mcguane MAINLY based on his deficiencies as i see them. you may not agree thats your perogative,
i dont rate mcguane like moore as a kp option. but unlike moore i dont rate mcguane a possible running back third tall option either.
-
Rd 1 - Tiges
Edwards GOO Thursty
Connors Post Newman
Cotchin Deledio Martin
Tambling Astbury Nahas
Taylor Jack Roberts
Polak Foley Cousins
Int; Vickery Polo Morton Collins
Rd 1 - Burgers
Farmer Moore Grimes
Webberly Lukey Dea
Nason Contin Gilligan
King Rance O'Reilly
Westhoff Griffiths Hicks
Browne Jackson Thomspon
Int/Departure Lounge: Simmonds, Tuck, Mcmahon, Graham, Hislop, White
-
To totally discount stats is as foolish as it is to totally rely on them. Stats play an important role in making judgments, as long as they are used in context.
To say that you should make an assessment based solely on what you see is truly flawed, because as you have said yourself claw, sometime we only see what we want to see. There has been much research done into the unreliability of eyewitness accounts, showing just how much memory, pre conceptions and suggestibility can affect peoples' accounts of events.
You only have to have a look around at the various forums and see the differing opinions on the same players to get an inkling on just how unreliable it is to pass judgment on a player based solely on ones perceived observations. Then there is there is the unwillingness of people to even consider their judgment may be clouded,regardless of the evidence presented before them.
i didnt say i treat stats as foolish. i treat them with a fair degree of cynicism. big difference.
stats can tell you for instance a player is a very good kick but your eyes tell you different usually your eyes are right.eg a helicopter kick by a player with time and space to a player on the lead is credited as efficient because it went to the player but in reality the kick was poor because it gave a defender the chance to create a 50/50.
far to many almost entirely rely on stats which is folly. as you say only when used correctly in corroboration with all other factors are they of any use.
-
rubbish i dont want moore to play as a kp i want him played as a running third tall type a role he is infinitely more equipped to perform than mcguane.
moore as a kp pppffftt. too undersized just like mcguane. so i dont rate moore as a kp anyway. your right i dont understand what you are trying to prove here.
as stated i dont rate mcguane MAINLY based on his deficiencies as i see them. you may not agree thats your perogative,
i dont rate mcguane like moore as a kp option. but unlike moore i dont rate mcguane a possible running back third tall option either.
Aaarrgghhh. I didn't say you wanted Moore as a KPP. I said you shouldn't judge McGuane as one for the same reasons you put up for not judging Moore as one.
-
Please list the areas that Moore is superior, then we can have a better debate. I've given my reasons why I think McGuane is a sound proposition to persevere with - all you have done so far is demonstrated a dislike for the guy with no reason behind it.
where does one begin. pace, smarts, agility, kicking, run, decision making. exactly the reasons why i want him as the running tall.both can be servicable as stoppers but both lack size to regularly play kp.
-
Please list the areas that Moore is superior, then we can have a better debate. I've given my reasons why I think McGuane is a sound proposition to persevere with - all you have done so far is demonstrated a dislike for the guy with no reason behind it.
where does one begin. pace, smarts, agility, kicking, run, decision making. exactly the reasons why i want him as the running tall.both can be servicable as stoppers but both lack size to regularly play kp.
Just goes to show then that your visual perception is as prone to error as you claim my stats are. If you think Moore is quicker over the ground, more agile, a better kick and provides more run than McGuane then I'm not going to attempt to change your mind, just say that I disagree completely and leave it at that.
-
rubbish i dont want moore to play as a kp i want him played as a running third tall type a role he is infinitely more equipped to perform than mcguane.
moore as a kp pppffftt. too undersized just like mcguane. so i dont rate moore as a kp anyway. your right i dont understand what you are trying to prove here.
as stated i dont rate mcguane MAINLY based on his deficiencies as i see them. you may not agree thats your perogative,
i dont rate mcguane like moore as a kp option. but unlike moore i dont rate mcguane a possible running back third tall option either.
Aaarrgghhh. I didn't say you wanted Moore as a KPP. I said you shouldn't judge McGuane as one for the same reasons you put up for not judging Moore as one.
okay so we dont rate him a kp, well i dont anyway so what do we rate him as. ive given my reasons why i think he should not be played as a third tall.
-
Please list the areas that Moore is superior, then we can have a better debate. I've given my reasons why I think McGuane is a sound proposition to persevere with - all you have done so far is demonstrated a dislike for the guy with no reason behind it.
where does one begin. pace, smarts, agility, kicking, run, decision making. exactly the reasons why i want him as the running tall.both can be servicable as stoppers but both lack size to regularly play kp.
Just goes to show then that your visual perception is as prone to error as you claim my stats are. If you think Moore is quicker over the ground, more agile, a better kick and provides more run than McGuane then I'm not going to attempt to change your mind, just say that I disagree completely and leave it at that.
Agree :clapping :clapping
-
okay so we dont rate him a kp, well i dont anyway so what do we rate him as. ive given my reasons why i think he should not be played as a third tall.
I think they are both capable of playing the running half back role and I'm comfortable that of all the deficiencies on our list, this isn't actually one of them. I just think that McGuane is every bit as good as Moore and has more upside.
-
Please list the areas that Moore is superior, then we can have a better debate. I've given my reasons why I think McGuane is a sound proposition to persevere with - all you have done so far is demonstrated a dislike for the guy with no reason behind it.
where does one begin. pace, smarts, agility, kicking, run, decision making. exactly the reasons why i want him as the running tall.both can be servicable as stoppers but both lack size to regularly play kp.
Just goes to show then that your visual perception is as prone to error as you claim my stats are. If you think Moore is quicker over the ground, more agile, a better kick and provides more run than McGuane then I'm not going to attempt to change your mind, just say that I disagree completely and leave it at that.
we will see how prone my perception is to error. its served me pretty well up to now.
glass half full sums mcguane up perfectly.
as i said we are poles apart on mcguane. i see no reason to keep him if im wrong about moore all it will mean is both have to go.
rance is another with some real bad deficiencies. thursfield well the big criticism is he just doesnt get involved enough.
as i said moore has been awfully injured it is a yr where he has to show 08 was no fluke. he has to remain injury free or he will find himself without a club. and rightly so. the time at our club for hanging onto long term underachievers is past i hope.
as stated the sooner we can bring in the new the better.
b/ farmer ****** newman
hb/ dea/moore post webberley/tambling
as stated i dont believe we have an up to standard fb atm one of thursfield if he can bulk up or gourdis lets try someone new will suffice for now.
which player do you propose to play mcguane in front of.
finally because mcgune does not have the tools to play anywhere else butas a kp or even if i concede third tall go thru and do an exercise and rate him up against other players of this type at other clubs, mcguane for me is a long way down the pecking order. he is not the answer. and to stop the debate between him and moore. moore may not be either.
okay so we dont rate him a kp, well i dont anyway so what do we rate him as. ive given my reasons why i think he should not be played as a third tall.
I think they are both capable of playing the running half back role and I'm comfortable that of all the deficiencies on our list, this isn't actually one of them. I just think that McGuane is every bit as good as Moore and has more upside.
fair enough your entitled to your opinion.
it seems that moore and mcguane will be in competition for that third tall spot. weather its a running role imo likely moore or purely a defensive role likely mcguane is anyones guess. well thats how i see it anyway. you prefer mcguane i prefer moore.
with some luck it may be both are surpassed by a younger player. it could be gourdis thursfield and post will make up the 3 tall defenders who knows.
-
To totally discount stats is as foolish as it is to totally rely on them. Stats play an important role in making judgments, as long as they are used in context.
To say that you should make an assessment based solely on what you see is truly flawed, because as you have said yourself claw, sometime we only see what we want to see. There has been much research done into the unreliability of eyewitness accounts, showing just how much memory, pre conceptions and suggestibility can affect peoples' accounts of events.
You only have to have a look around at the various forums and see the differing opinions on the same players to get an inkling on just how unreliable it is to pass judgment on a player based solely on ones perceived observations. Then there is there is the unwillingness of people to even consider their judgment may be clouded,regardless of the evidence presented before them.
i didnt say i treat stats as foolish. i treat them with a fair degree of cynicism. big difference.
I don't think you're that cynical of them, you're happy to cherry pick those that suit your argument.
Ironically the one you tend to use the most is player weight which is the most likely to be wrong.
-
It will be interesting to watch the Blues play tonight and see their line up and game plan, it will also give us a chance to see how their forward line goes without Fev. At least we will have a sneak preview of what we may be up against come round one.
-
rance is another with some real bad deficiencies. thursfield well the big criticism is he just doesnt get involved enough.
Yep, agree. I've been hopeful of Rance all the way but I'm just starting to get some niggling doubts - I hope he proves me wrong. And my thoughts on Thursfield are well known on here - you put it well - unless he can get more involved then he will be gone.
as i said moore has been awfully injured it is a yr where he has to show 08 was no fluke. he has to remain injury free or he will find himself without a club. and rightly so. the time at our club for hanging onto long term underachievers is past i hope.
Totally agree.
as stated i dont believe we have an up to standard fb atm one of thursfield if he can bulk up or gourdis lets try someone new will suffice for now.
which player do you propose to play mcguane in front of.
I think Thursfield is our best 1st option at FB but not a good one in many cases. I thought Gourdis showed a little bit last Saturday but he needs more senior exposure/game time for me to have anything like a worthwhile opinion. The club has certainly given him every opportunity so there must be something there to work with. In a perfect world Gourdis steps up and Thursfield becomes depth but who knows what will happen.
My best back 6 for this year based on my opinion of each player goes:
Webberley Thursfield Newman
McGuane Post Tambling
but as we both know only too well - all the theories and ideas will go flying out the window after one game.
go thru and do an exercise and rate him up against other players of this type at other clubs, mcguane for me is a long way down the pecking order. he is not the answer. and to stop the debate between him and moore. moore may not be either.
If I get the time I might try and do that - not to try and prove my point but more to see what it reveals - the findings might surprise us both, either way!
-
My best back 6 for this year based on my opinion of each player goes:
Webberley Thursfield Newman
McGuane Post Tambling
Alot of people have Webberley in their back 6 before he's ever played a game. I think he'll be a while off yet especially with his build. But I'd definately have the other 5 in my backline Round 1 with Farmer taking Webberley's spot. I'd have Gourdis or Rance on the bench as the spare tall defender. Have you got Edwards on the wing?
-
Id like to see us focus on developing a forward line throughout 2010. Griffiths and Astbury in the keys. Taylor in a pocket, Morton on a Flank, Riewoldt on another Flank and Nahas or Gilligan in the Pocket.
-
My best back 6 for this year based on my opinion of each player goes:
Webberley Thursfield Newman
McGuane Post Tambling
Alot of people have Webberley in their back 6 before he's ever played a game. I think he'll be a while off yet especially with his build. But I'd definately have the other 5 in my backline Round 1 with Farmer taking Webberley's spot. I'd have Gourdis or Rance on the bench as the spare tall defender. Have you got Edwards on the wing?
Yep, as I said - only based on my opinion, nothing else. From what I have read and watched (video, not live) he has a lot of attributes that will add to the defensive capability of the team. The question is can he make the step up in class. If he can then I think his long accurate kicking and excellent run will make him a good BP or HBF.
And re: Edwards - no, I haven't got him in my side. I think he sits in the 25 - 35 region of how I rate our players and should only be depth this year with an upgrade to come at season's end. He might improve significantly this year and prove me wrong but I don't see a future with him.
-
To totally discount stats is as foolish as it is to totally rely on them. Stats play an important role in making judgments, as long as they are used in context.
To say that you should make an assessment based solely on what you see is truly flawed, because as you have said yourself claw, sometime we only see what we want to see. There has been much research done into the unreliability of eyewitness accounts, showing just how much memory, pre conceptions and suggestibility can affect peoples' accounts of events.
You only have to have a look around at the various forums and see the differing opinions on the same players to get an inkling on just how unreliable it is to pass judgment on a player based solely on ones perceived observations. Then there is there is the unwillingness of people to even consider their judgment may be clouded,regardless of the evidence presented before them.
i didnt say i treat stats as foolish. i treat them with a fair degree of cynicism. big difference.
I don't think you're that cynical of them, you're happy to cherry pick those that suit your argument.
Ironically the one you tend to use the most is player weight which is the most likely to be wrong.
lol you will learn that when i say i dont trust stats or use them much i speak the truth. i rarely use them.
just on the height weight thing though. given that all stats are accurate in their content the height of a player and weight are in fact the most reliable. there is minimal variation. and they are not affected by performance.
in fact by 18 19 i believe we have basically done our growing we may gain the odd cm up to age 21 22. when weights are given at the start of each season there is little fluctuation. but like in all things there can be exceptions to the rule.
just on obsevations they are not based on one viewing we have had 5 yrs to look at mcguane for example. over 50 games and constants are constants.
-
My best back 6 for this year based on my opinion of each player goes:
Webberley Thursfield Newman
McGuane Post Tambling
Alot of people have Webberley in their back 6 before he's ever played a game. I think he'll be a while off yet especially with his build. But I'd definately have the other 5 in my backline Round 1 with Farmer taking Webberley's spot. I'd have Gourdis or Rance on the bench as the spare tall defender. Have you got Edwards on the wing?
Yep, as I said - only based on my opinion, nothing else. From what I have read and watched (video, not live) he has a lot of attributes that will add to the defensive capability of the team. The question is can he make the step up in class. If he can then I think his long accurate kicking and excellent run will make him a good BP or HBF.
And re: Edwards - no, I haven't got him in my side. I think he sits in the 25 - 35 region of how I rate our players and should only be depth this year with an upgrade to come at season's end. He might improve significantly this year and prove me wrong but I don't see a future with him.
i agree with the back 6 you have chosen with exception of moore and farmer im really hopeful the big bodied hard at it Dea is given games as well.
out with the old and failed and in with the new we are in rebuild.
i think it fair to say tambling and post are a lock in for defense. if not hardwick has been doing a bit of spin.
like you i think atm our best option for fb is thursfield. heres hoping hes gained some size and strength and he can become more involved. if he fails next cab of the rank would be Gourdis. the only concern with him and its a big concern is his abysmal kicking.
okay we have been thru third tall. everyone by now knows i prefer moore so this leaves mcguane out.
imo farmer is exactly what we have been missing down back. hard at it accountable quick smart and decent skills. the one critique thus far is he does not get involved enough or find enough ball. im hoping this will improve with time confidence and experience. at 21 also i think they will give him every chance its not as if hes still in nappies.
the last spot imo is between Dea and Webberley. hopefully they both get plenty of games. i think because of age, 21yo webberley will get first go at it.
Dea is a lovely size has good foot skills has a big leap. we are not overly endowed with big bodies or medium sized players down back.
this leaves the captain out i get the impression that he will be used thru the midfield this yr but he is always an option to go back.
imo its folly to be looking at a back 6 we should be looking at a back 10 or 12.
talls in order of preference post, thursfield, moore, gourdis, rance, mcguane, polak,
smls mediums. tambling, farmer, dea, webberley, newman, white, king, mcmahon,
one thing that does stand out we do have the numbers but do we have the quality. are enough of the numbers up to standard. that is the 100 dollar question. we are about to find out the answer. i could put a line thru half a dozen without flinching and still leave plenty that has me unsure.
-
Before peopl start jumping down my throat, i know stats dont mean everything but they do show if players are making improvements or not to a large degree.
While i dont dislike Thursfield i think you will find that the following stats show that McGuane is comming along better than him in most areas, so for players of the same height and weight i would take McGuane. I also think he attacks the player harder than Thursfiled which with both lacking in size somewhat is a big up side.
Thursfield, Will
Year Team Played W L D Goals Averages K Hb Poss M HO Tack FF FA Gls Beh 5+ 10+
2005 Richmond 6 2 4 0 0 4.0 5.5 9.5 2.5 0.0 0.8 0.3 0.8 0.0 0.0 0 0
2006 Richmond 1 0 1 0 0 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0 0
2007 Richmond 15 3 11 1 0 3.9 5.3 9.2 3.3 0.1 1.3 0.6 0.9 0.0 0.0 0 0
2008 Richmond 18 8 9 1 0 3.6 6.0 9.6 3.3 0.0 1.2 0.4 1.3 0.0 0.0 0 0
2009 Richmond 13 4 8 1 0 2.8 4.6 7.4 2.3 0.0 1.2 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0 0
McGuane, Luke
Year Team Played W L D Goals Averages K Hb Poss M HO Tack FF FA Gls Beh 5+ 10+
2006 Richmond 2 0 2 0 0 2.5 2.0 4.5 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.0 0.5 0 0
2007 Richmond 14 2 12 0 0 6.4 4.9 11.2 3.8 0.1 2.1 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.0 0 0
2008 Richmond 16 9 6 1 0 6.6 5.0 11.6 5.1 0.1 2.4 0.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 0 0
2009 Richmond 22 5 16 1 2 6.5 6.9 13.4 5.8 0.1 1.7 0.5 1.2 0.1 0.1 0 0
-
Maybe if one of the moderators would like to tidy that up a bit if they can, i seem to have trouble getting tables to align on this site.
-
Got to have Relton in there.
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors
C: Dustin Martin Brett Deledio Richard Tambling
HF: Robin Nahas Jayden Post David Astbury
F: Mitch Morton Jack Riewoldt Relton Roberts
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery Daniel Jackson Andrew Collins Matt Dea
Emg: Shane Edwards, Graham Polak, Jeromey Webberley
-
Farmer - Thursfeild - Moore
Post - McGaune - Connors
Deledio - Martin - Tambling
Roberts - Taylor - Cousins
Nahas - Riewoldt - Morton
Vickery - Cotchin - Thomson
Newman
Simmonds (Browne)
Edwards (Dea)
Collins (Tuck, King)
* Foley (inj), Astbury (inj), Griffiths (inj),
* Coburg / kicking practice: Rance, Gourdis, White, Polo
-
* Foley (inj), Astbury (inj), Griffiths (inj),
Is Astbury injured? ???
-
* Foley (inj), Astbury (inj), Griffiths (inj),
Is Astbury injured? ???
Has injury problem with his heel, will have cortezone injections next week, could be serious problem.
They were know until heel is injected and allowed to settle down
http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum//index.php?topic=10352.msg175486#msg175486
-
how bad is Griffiths injury?
:)
-
how bad is Griffiths injury?
:)
I think Bents meant Griffiths is coming back from injury (suffered a shoulder injury in the U18s). Griffiths was running laps at training just under two weeks ago so he mustn't been too far away but given he'll be underdone and is a new draftee it's highly unlikely he'll play round 1.
-
* Foley (inj), Astbury (inj), Griffiths (inj),
Is Astbury injured? ???
Has injury problem with his heel, will have cortezone injections next week, could be serious problem.
They were know until heel is injected and allowed to settle down
Thanks OE.
That doesn't sound good. Hope he is alright. I was hoping to see him play early in the season. :(
http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum//index.php?topic=10352.msg175486#msg175486
-
Farmer thursfield mcgaune
deledio post collins
cousins Martin tambling
Taylor riewoldt relton
Morton vickery nahas
browne cotchin Jackson
Newman
Connors
tuck/thomson
Edwards/moore
Foley and a griffths/astbury to come in
-
Was at the game today. Foley said he'd be back by round 1, and Griffiths said he'd be playing footy by round 6 or so.
-
Was at the game today. Foley said he'd be back by round 1, and Griffiths said he'd be playing footy by round 6 or so.
Cheers Danog.
Presumably Foley means at Coburg at best as he's basically had no preseason?
A shame about Griffiths still being quite a while away from playing. It won't matter that much in the long run as 2010 is his first year and we'll struggle this year anyway with or without him. It just would've been great for us as supporters to see him in action sooner.
-
I'm happy to hear that about griffiths, it means the club is not rushing him. Hopefully he has a long career ahead of him, but for people to be putting their faith in him to be a solution to our forward line this year is off the mark. He needs to get his body right and then gain some match conditioning at a lower level before he is even considered to play at the top level.
I will not be disappointed if we dont see him in richmond colors until right at the end of the season, if at all. I will be spewing if he is thrown into the throng too early and damages his shoulders
-
from today's Herald-Sun....
Dustin Martin told the Herald Sun before the national draft that he was "born to play AFL". Four months on it would appear he was right.
Round 1 is like a red rag to Richmond's bull-at-a-gate midfielder, who, barring any mishap, will face Carlton on March 25.
Martin had 26 disposals, five marks and five tackles in the NAB Cup first-round loss to Hawthorn and was solid against Geelong in Yea the next week.
"He's certainly put himself in contention," Tigers football manager Ross Monaghan said.
"We're a couple of weeks away, but we couldn't be more pleased with how he has presented himself. He's certainly put himself in line for Round 1 and done everything right at this stage."
Ben Nason (No. 71), who survived a knee scare against the Hawks, and former basketballer Matt Dea (No. 44) shape as the Tigers' Round 1 smokies after promising pre-seasons.
"Nason couldn't be considered last week but he's another one who has done everything right . . . and he's given himself a chance to play early in the year," Monaghan said.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/smells-like-teen-spirit/story-e6frf9jf-1225837573380
-
Theres no need to rush Griffiths or Astbury, when they are ready to play they will play, theres no point risking them early.
-
Was at the game today. Foley said he'd be back by round 1, and Griffiths said he'd be playing footy by round 6 or so.
Cheers Danog.
Presumably Foley means at Coburg at best as he's basically had no preseason?
A shame about Griffiths still being quite a while away from playing. It won't matter that much in the long run as 2010 is his first year and we'll struggle this year anyway with or without him. It just would've been great for us as supporters to see him in action sooner.
More so when the forward line is
CHF - Rance
FF - Polak
:-\
-
If Astbury and Gourdis play this week against Essendon and in the following intraclub game and both play solid then we must stick with a team(spine) of:
Edwards Thursfield Newman
Farmer Post Mcguane
Tambling Cotchin Collins
Cousins Astbury Morton
Nahas Reiwoldt Polak
Graham Deledio Martin
Vickery Foley Jackson Gourdis
I think Gourdis will be more valuable than Moore against Carlton's tall forwards. I think Polak will play even though he hasn't been looking very dangerous up forward. I'd prefer to play Graham and Vickery than Simmonds. Both will improve once the real stuff starts. Farmer in defence will release Tambling(or Edwards) to the wing. I'd be surprised if more than one of Dea, Webberley, Taylor or Roberts got a game Round 1. I think Dea, Webberley and Taylor still look a few Coburg games away from being considered in a team looking to beat Carlton in Round 1. It's a pity Griffiths wasn't ready to play some preseason games but at least we should have 4 debutants for Richmond in Martin, Astbury, Gourdis and Farmer 8)
-
i am going to keep saying this ...
Post is a forward.
i would have the "Spine" from these possible players Round 1.
Moore/Thursfield
McGuane/Moore
Cotchin/Deledio/Jackson
Post/Astbury
Reiwoldt/Polak
:)
-
i am going to keep saying this ...
Post is a forward.
Agreed
They are much harder to find too so not sure why we are forcing him to play down back
Much easier to convert a failed key forward to a key defender than vice versa
-
Post will play as a defender though. I had the same problem thinking Post should play forward after last season but we now have Astbury who will be a forward and he'll team with with Reiwoldt and Polak for now but when Griffiths is ready he'll be the 3rd tall forward. With Mcguane and Thursfield being 191-192cm and about 90kg, we definately need at least taller defender and that is Post while Gourdis will be a spare tall. We definately need theses two 194-195cm talls
-
I'm surprised some people don't have Edwards in as a certainty.
-
My side FWIW:
Edwards Thursfield Moore
Tambling McGuane Newman(c)
Collins Martin Cousins
Riewoldt Post Cotchin
Morton Vickery Nahas
R: Browne Jackson Deledio
IC: Simmonds Connors Polo Roberts
New:
D Martin
R Roberts
-
I'm surprised some people don't have Edwards in as a certainty.
I think GB people are leaving Edwards out because we're not sure if he will make it in a top Richmond side and that he is being played as a small defender. Farmer and Newy seem certainties to play as small defenders for mine in round 1.
B: Farmer McGaune Thursty
HB: Newman Post Moore
C: Tambling Deledio Cousins
HF: Morton Riewoldt Hislop*
F: Nahas Polak Roberts
R: Simmonds Martin Cotchin
Int: Vickery, Jackson, Connors, Contin**
emg (from): Edwards Thomson Collins Dea Taylor Nason
* Don't rate Hislop but I think he'll get first shot on one of the HFFs because of his defensive pressure and during preseason he's shown he can get the footy. If only he could kick :P.
** There's something about Contin I like. My round 1 smokey. Thomson (another I don't rate) might get in though instead as another inside mid.
-
Another week another guessimate :-\. Only two rookies allowed so went with Polly (playing as a decoy to take the best defender) and Roberts. Hislop will probably play in the 22 on a HFF because of his defensive pressure but choose Polo as back-up just in case Betts gets away from Farmer or another small Blue cuts loose. The Blues best scoring options are their small forwards and mids now that Fev is gone. Restrict them and it'll give us our best chance of winning.
B: Thursty McGuane Farmer
F: Waite O'hAilpin Betts
HB: Moore Post Newman
HF: Robinson Henderson Houlihan
C: Tambling Deledio Martin
C: Simpson McLean Walker
HF: Polo Riewoldt Morton
HB: Scotland Thornton Bower
F: Roberts Polak Nahas
B: Russell Jamison Joseph
R: Simmonds Cotchin Jackson
R: Kruezer Murphy Gibbs
Int: Vickery, Connors, Nason, Cousins
Int: Warnock, Yarran, Carrazzo, Grigg
Emg: Tuck, Hislop, Browne
-
Tuck or Jackson MT, I reckon it's a toss up.. but maybe just Jackson so he can do a job on Gibbs or Murphy.
-
Another week another guessimate :-\. Only two rookies allowed so went with Polly (playing as a decoy to take the best defender) and Roberts. Hislop will probably play in the 22 on a HFF because of his defensive pressure but choose Polo as back-up just in case Betts gets away from Farmer or another small Blue cuts loose. The Blues best scoring options are their small forwards and mids now that Fev is gone. Restrict them and it'll give us our best chance of winning.
B: Thursty McGuane Farmer
F: Waite O'hAilpin Betts
HB: Edwards Post Newman
HF: Robinson Henderson Houlihan
C: Tambling Deledio Martin
C: Simpson McLean Walker
HF: Polo Riewoldt Morton
HB: Scotland Thornton Bower
F: Roberts Polak Nahas
B: Russell Jamison Joseph
R: Graham Cotchin Jackson
R: Kruezer Murphy Gibbs
Int: Vickery, Gourdis, Nason, Cousins
Int: Warnock, Yarran, Carrazzo, Grigg
Emg: Tuck, Hislop, Browne
Made some changes ;D
-
Forget Polak (Not going to make it)
B Farmer Thursfield Gourdis
HB Edwards McGuane Newman
C Connors Cousins Tambling
HF Cotchin Moore Nahas
F Roberts Riewoldt Morton
R Simmonds Deledio Martin
Int Jackson-Vickery-Nason-Post
The Goo must be elevated along with Roberts. Hard bodies to complement a very young group.
Moore up forward, can take a grab.
Riewoldt cannot be played at CHF as he's not big enough.
Get Cousins in the pivot, Cotchin up forward.
Forget Hislop, Taylor stiff too miss but he is not quite ready.
Get Tambling off half back and in the action
Smash the Blues into submission. It's payback time !!
-
Here is my team for round one against the Bluebaggers!
FB Farmer McGuane Moore
HB Newman Post Edwards
C Martin Thomson Tambling
HF Morton Reiwoldt Cotchin
FF Nahas Polak Roberts
Following Simmonds, Deledio, Jackson, Cousins
Int Vickery, Nason, Hislop, Connors
Would love to see Polak out of the team but until players such as Astbury, Griffiths and Taylor force their way into the team legitimately then he is a necessary evil we have to endure. Vickery or Browne could also have stints as forwards in the interim Polak is a good choice to hit the packs and keep the main defender honest. He is not power forward though.
Hislop may play in the forwardline for his defensive pressure but I would rather Cotchin as he is a better finisher and has a stronger attacking element to his game. We can't have a purely defensive forwardline and with Polak, Hislop and Nahas all playing predominately as defending forwards we really need players that can create goals.
Connors is an attacking player who breaks the lines well yet he is seen as a HB player. Perhaps he would exploit his skills better as a rotating wingman.
Thomson is a great hard ball winner and has better skills than many give him credit for. His has a lot of upside if given the opportunity to win the ball and feed it out to the likes of Lids and Bling.
I would love to see Dea and/or Gourdis in the backline also we in the place of Edwards. Thursty is also an unlucky omission but he doesn't seem to have come on since his injury. I hope Gourdis is elevated soon as he seems to have finally started to find form.
Stripes
-
I was annoyed when Astbury injured his foot. I was really looking forward to him having some strong nab games and holding down CHF for Round 1. We are pretty desperate for someone like him up forward.
-
Ok my turn:
B- Farmer - Thursfield - Newman
HB - Polo- Mc Guane - Tambling
C- Martin- Deledio - Collins
HF - Post- Polak - Edwards
F- Nahas - Reiwoldt - Morton
R- Simmonds - Cotchin - Jackson
INT - Vickery- Gourdis - Nason- Connors
EMG - Graham- Tuck - Hislop
I am assuming Cousins tummy and Foley will both be out...otherwise Cousins in and either Tuck or Connors out... I have also assumed that Polak and Gourdis get elevated.
-
Here is my team for round one against the Bluebaggers!
FB Farmer McGuane Moore
HB Newman Post Edwards
C Martin Thomson Tambling
HF Morton Reiwoldt Cotchin
FF Nahas Polak Roberts
Following Simmonds, Deledio, Jackson, Cousins
Int Vickery, Nason, Hislop, Connors
Would love to see Polak out of the team but until players such as Astbury, Griffiths and Taylor force their way into the team legitimately then he is a necessary evil we have to endure. Vickery or Browne could also have stints as forwards in the interim Polak is a good choice to hit the packs and keep the main defender honest. He is not power forward though.
Hislop may play in the forwardline for his defensive pressure but I would rather Cotchin as he is a better finisher and has a stronger attacking element to his game. We can't have a purely defensive forwardline and with Polak, Hislop and Nahas all playing predominately as defending forwards we really need players that can create goals.
Connors is an attacking player who breaks the lines well yet he is seen as a HB player. Perhaps he would exploit his skills better as a rotating wingman.
Thomson is a great hard ball winner and has better skills than many give him credit for. His has a lot of upside if given the opportunity to win the ball and feed it out to the likes of Lids and Bling.
I would love to see Dea and/or Gourdis in the backline also we in the place of Edwards. Thursty is also an unlucky omission but he doesn't seem to have come on since his injury. I hope Gourdis is elevated soon as he seems to have finally started to find form.
Stripes
Don't think starting with an extra man on the ground is a good idea.
:thumbsup
-
Here goes nuffink ;D
B- Farmer - Thursfield - Newman
HB - Polo- Mc Guane - Edwards
C- Martin- Deledio - Tambling
HF - Roberts- Reiwoldt - Nason
F- Nahas - Polak - Morton
R- Simmonds - Cotchin - Cousins***
INT - Vickery- Hislop - Post- Jackson
EMG - Moore - Tuck - Thomson
***Subject to fitness
If Cousins doesn't play - I'd go Jackson starting 18 and Thomson to the bench.
Post I've put in ahead of Moore, although I am not sure he deserves it because his pre-season form hasn't been great ;D but sticking with the kids
-
okkkkk i don't know how many times i have done a Round 1 team, but this is my final one and it is based on what I think Mr Damien Hardwick will select, not what i hope Mr Damien Hardwick selects;
Mr Damien Hardwick will select:
B: 15 Farmer 16 McGuane 2 Thursfield
HB: 40 Moore 37 Post 17 Newman
C: 30 Tambling 9 Cotchin 36 Martin
HF: 50 Roberts 8 Riewoldt 27 Hislop
F: 26 Nahas 6 Polak 20 Morton
Foll: 5 Simmonds 3 Deledio 23 Jackson
Int: 32 Cousins 47 Nason 29 Vickery 31 Thomson
:)
-
i usually enjoy trying to do a a team but sheesh not tonight all it does is make one realise just how many nuffas we have and are forced to play.
i know most dont want to hear it so wont go into it but sheesh we have got plenty wrong so far this off season.
-
I reckon they wont play Nahas Roberts and Nason in the same side, one will miss
-
I reckon they wont play Nahas Roberts and Nason in the same side, one will miss
your team jackstar?
:)
-
your team jackstar?
:)
B: Tuck Tuck Tuck
HB: Tuck Tuck Tuck
C: Tuck Tuck Tuck
HF: Tuck Tuck Tuck
F: Tuck Tuck Tuck
R: Tuck Tuck Tuck
IC: Tuck Tuck Tuck
Em: Tuck Tuck Tuck
That's a Tuckin good side Jackie. ;D
-
your team jackstar?
:)
B: Tuck Tuck Tuck
HB: Tuck Tuck Tuck
C: Tuck Tuck Tuck
HF: Tuck Tuck Tuck
F: Tuck Tuck Tuck
R: Tuck Tuck Tuck
IC: Tuck Tuck Tuck
Em: Tuck Tuck Tuck
That's a Tuckin good side Jackie. ;D
Your an idiot :whistle
-
Your an idiot :whistle
Lighten up mate. ;)
BTW it's 'You're'.
-
Well Roberts and Polak will definitely play IMO, thats why they were elevated. Forward line may be:
Morton, Polak, Nahas
Roberts, Riewoldt, Taylor
-
I reckon they wont play Nahas Roberts and Nason in the same side, one will miss
your team jackstar?
:)
Polo McGaune Newman
Edwards Thursfield Connors
Deledio Cotchin Martin
Cousins Riewoldt Hislop
Vickery Morton Tambling
Simmonds
Tuck
Jackson.
Interchange. Nason, Browne ,Moore ,Farmer.
Emerg. Nahas,Collins, Post,
I reckon they might go with the extra tall.
Nahas to miss out as a big surprise, although if Cous does front up he is in.
Would think they would play Tambling forward 50 and rotate high through corrdior, as the run and carry playr through the middle.
they seem intent to wanna play Edwards and Connors down back, that suggests they he might want to release Tambling with his speed through the corridor or high inside F 50.
Also they can use Farmer in D50 on someone like Eddie Betts ???
Have a suspicion although not seen in practice games that Simmonds will push forward, thus have allowed for Browne and Vickery to have some time in the middle .
Would think that Nason might be a better option than Nahas at the present time.
Now with Tuck, pointless having him go flat out for 10 minutes and then watch him jog to the interchange.
Would have 3 way rotation with him , Cous and Lids with Tuck spending 5 mins on ball and 5 minutes inside F50 and then on bench.
Would slide Lids from outside centre square to on ball-centre bounce and then inside F 50, similair to Tuck.
Lids good option inside F50 for 5 min spells.
Farmer on bench would mean when he takes the field, you can push Polo onto a wing or even on ball through a rotation.
Jackson is a bit of a worry as you cannot use him very smart and is a bit one dimensional
-
Jack Im assuming this is the team you want, not the team you think will play.
Why Edwards in front of Nason?
-
Jack do you really think Polo and Edwards will be selected??
-
Jack Im assuming this is the team you want, not the team you think will play.
Why Edwards in front of Nason?
I have both playing. Edwards off half back, Nason on the bench.
Its the team that I think they will go with.
I dont beleive Roberts will play,maybe wrong, but i think they will go with 2 first gamers from Under 18 level , and with Farmer.
There vision would be to introduce new players as the season goes on.
Big ask to have 4-5 new players playing round 1, it wont happen
-
Jack do you really think Polo and Edwards will be selected??
Yes,unfortunately.
Saying that, both are struggling for form
-
Surely though Jack, Roberts deserves more of a go based on his pre-season against players like Edwards and Polo, regardless of positions??
-
Jack Im assuming this is the team you want, not the team you think will play.
Why Edwards in front of Nason?
I have both playing. Edwards off half back, Nason on the bench.
Its the team that I think they will go with.
I dont beleive Roberts will play,maybe wrong, but i think they will go with 2 first gamers from Under 18 level , and with Farmer.
There vision would be to introduce new players as the season goes on.
Big ask to have 4-5 new players playing round 1, it wont happen
:banghead I think i better go to bed :P
You dont think they will play polak?
-
Polak has to play otherwise we may have just left him on the Rookie list.
-
Surely though Jack, Roberts deserves more of a go based on his pre-season against players like Edwards and Polo, regardless of positions??
Read my earlier post.
They aint going to play 4 first gamers.
Roberts will play the following week or two..
Unless they dont play Nason, which they will.
You cannot use Roberts down back, so you must play Polo and Edwards.
Also if they play Connors, he can be pushed forward if need be as well.
-
Jack Im assuming this is the team you want, not the team you think will play.
Why Edwards in front of Nason?
I have both playing. Edwards off half back, Nason on the bench.
Its the team that I think they will go with.
I dont beleive Roberts will play,maybe wrong, but i think they will go with 2 first gamers from Under 18 level , and with Farmer.
There vision would be to introduce new players as the season goes on.
Big ask to have 4-5 new players playing round 1, it wont happen
:banghead I think i better go to bed :P
You dont think they will play polak?
NO !
-
Surely though Jack, Roberts deserves more of a go based on his pre-season against players like Edwards and Polo, regardless of positions??
Read my earlier post.
They aint going to play 4 first gamers.
Roberts will play the following week or two..
Unless they dont play Nason, which they will.
You cannot use Roberts down back, so you must play Polo and Edwards.
Also if they play Connors, he can be pushed forward if need be as well.
Fair enough but really with the amount of new players to the club, playing 4 would not be unexpected IMO. I know Roberts can't play back but gee we need him forward don't we? With Thursty, Moore, McGuane, Newman, Connors and Farmer in the backline, Polo and Edwards may not be needed.
I am sure we will all be way of the mark anyway, we usually are.... :thumbsup
-
Polak has to play otherwise we may have just left him on the Rookie list.
I'd be very surprised if he didn't play.
-
I am sure we will all be way of the mark anyway, we usually are.... :thumbsup
Not really, think that most will be nearly right , apart from 1 or 2 spots.
-
Polak has to play otherwise we may have just left him on the Rookie list.
I'd be very surprised if he didn't play.
I wouldnt, he has had a touch in the practice matches.
They might go with Browne as an option in the ruck which would mean that Vickery and Simmonds would be marking option inside F 50, thus Polak wouldnt be needed, reality is he cant get a kick anyway for what I seen
-
Look I am normally crap and this but I will give it a go... ;D
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Troy Taylor
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Andrew Browne, Tom Hislop/Shane Tuck
Emerg: Adam Thompson, Dean Polo, Shane Edwards
-
Polak has to play otherwise we may have just left him on the Rookie list.
I'd be very surprised if he didn't play.
I wouldnt, he has had a touch in the practice matches.
They might go with Browne as an option in the ruck which would mean that Vickery and Simmonds would be marking option inside F 50, thus Polak wouldnt be needed, reality is he cant get a kick anyway for what I seen
That makes sense Jack, but i cant see the club not playing him if they are going to elevate him. I get the impression that at this point of time, polak is the best person to provide a stay at home FF, from a structural point of view. Just the best witches hat to sit in that position as the whole team has the game plan drilled into them over and over
-
Look I am normally crap and this but I will give it a go... ;D
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Troy Taylor
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Andrew Browne, Tom Hislop/Shane Tuck
Emerg: Adam Thompson, Dean Polo, Shane Edwards
I think you are very close there WA Tiger
Here is mine, its not the team I would like but its the team I think will go out there in R1
B: Mitchell Farmer Will Thursfield Kelvin Moore
HB: Chris Newman Jayden Post Luke McGuane
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Connors
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Ben Cousins
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Trent Cotchin Daniel Jackson
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Shane Edwards, Shane Tuck
Emerg: Andrew Browne, Dean Polo, Troy Taylor
-
Ben cousins may not be available round 1.
They still don't know what is wrong with him, so no one knows when he will right to play.
-
Thats ok. I have missed Tambling anyway, so slot him in in Cousins spot. If they are bith available then connors heads to the bench and take edwards out.
-
Ben cousins may not be available round 1.
They still don't know what is wrong with him, so no one knows when he will right to play.
I think he will if can pull up ok over the next few days but if not maybe Thompson will come in.
-
Look I am normally crap and this but I will give it a go... ;D
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Troy Taylor
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Andrew Browne, Tom Hislop/Shane Tuck
Emerg: Adam Thompson, Dean Polo, Shane Edwards
I think you are very close there WA Tiger
Here is mine, its not the team I would like but its the team I think will go out there in R1
B: Mitchell Farmer Will Thursfield Kelvin Moore
HB: Chris Newman Jayden Post Luke McGuane
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Connors
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Ben Cousins
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Trent Cotchin Daniel Jackson
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Shane Edwards, Shane Tuck
Emerg: Andrew Browne, Dean Polo, Troy Taylor
Yeah I think we may both be on the money to some degree but there will be a couple of surprises IMO, there usually is, there will be a player selected neither of us thought about... :thumbsup
-
........but there will be a couple of surprises IMO, there usually is, there will be a player selected neither of us thought about... :thumbsup
Jordy?
:scream
-
........but there will be a couple of surprises IMO, there usually is, there will be a player selected neither of us thought about... :thumbsup
Jordy?
:scream
lol, surley we wouldn't be that surprised... ;D
-
Look I am normally crap and this but I will give it a go... ;D
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Troy Taylor
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Andrew Browne, Tom Hislop/Shane Tuck
Emerg: Adam Thompson, Dean Polo, Shane Edwards
troy taylor wont play, Polo or edwards would be in front of him likely edwards Id say , they wont leave him out
-
Look I am normally crap and this but I will give it a go... ;D
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Troy Taylor
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Andrew Browne, Tom Hislop/Shane Tuck
Emerg: Adam Thompson, Dean Polo, Shane Edwards
troy taylor wont play, Polo or edwards would be in front of him likely edwards Id say , they wont leave him out
Well if Edwards does play instead of Taylor I hope the hell that they play him on a HF flank because I don't think he is capable of playing in the backline as he is too small and he turns the ball over when trying to bring it out of defence. His skills and size don't suit him plaing in the centre either and his constant turning the ball over will result in many gaols to the opposition as it has done in the past. At least if he is in the forward line he can either kick a goal or a point, he has that much space to aim at in between both point posts. ;D
-
Yeah I think we may both be on the money to some degree but there will be a couple of surprises IMO, there usually is, there will be a player selected neither of us thought about... :thumbsup
Nason
-
Yeah I think we may both be on the money to some degree but there will be a couple of surprises IMO, there usually is, there will be a player selected neither of us thought about... :thumbsup
Nason
He is already in my side.
-
He is already in my side.
Oops so he is sorry WA. Lost him among the 5 names on the bench.
-
He is already in my side.
Oops so he is sorry WA. Lost him among the 5 names on the bench.
4 On the bench MM, it will be between Tuck and Hislop IMO, last time I looked they were not congenial twins.. ;D
-
Ok so with Hardwicks statement last night or the medias statement last night saying 3 kids will make their debut here is my side. Tuck is in and I have included Hislop on the HFF.
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Tom Hislop
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Andrew Browne, Shane Tuck
Emerg: Adam Thompson, Dean Polo, Shane Edwards
-
Hislop and Polak shouldnt play but they will ::)
-
Ok so with Hardwicks statement last night or the medias statement last night saying 3 kids will make their debut here is my side. Tuck is in and I have included Hislop on the HFF.
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Tom Hislop
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Andrew Browne, Shane Tuck
Emerg: Adam Thompson, Dean Polo, Shane Edwards
Farmer, Martin, Roberts and Nason makes four WAT. Also note you don't have Bling in side.
-
Ok so with Hardwicks statement last night or the medias statement last night saying 3 kids will make their debut here is my side. Tuck is in and I have included Hislop on the HFF.
B: Mitchell Farmer Luke McGuane Will Thursfield
HB: Chris Newman Kelvin Moore Daniel Connors
C: Brett Deledio Dustin Martin Daniel Jackson
HF: Relton Roberts Jack Riewoldt Tom Hislop
F: Mitch Morton Graham Polak Robin Nahas
R: Troy Simmonds Ben Cousins Trent Cotchin
Int: Tyrone Vickery, Ben Nason, Andrew Browne, Shane Tuck
Emerg: Adam Thompson, Dean Polo, Shane Edwards
Farmer, Martin, Roberts and Nason makes four WAT. Also note you don't have Bling in side.
Gee forgot bling, I didn't really consider Farmer a Debutant, I will change Hislop for Bling, getting hard.
-
okkkkk i don't know how many times i have done a Round 1 team, but this is my final one and it is based on what I think Mr Damien Hardwick will select, not what i hope Mr Damien Hardwick selects;
Mr Damien Hardwick will select:
B: 15 Farmer 16 McGuane 2 Thursfield
HB: 40 Moore 37 Post 17 Newman
C: 30 Tambling 9 Cotchin 36 Martin
HF: 50 Roberts 8 Riewoldt 27 Hislop
F: 26 Nahas 6 Polak 20 Morton
Foll: 5 Simmonds 3 Deledio 23 Jackson
Int: 32 Cousins 47 Nason 29 Vickery 31 Thomson
:)
-
Mr Damien Hardwick will select:
B: 15 Farmer 16 McGuane 2 Thursfield
HB: 40 Moore 37 Post 17 Newman
C: 30 Tambling 9 Cotchin 36 Martin
HF: 50 Roberts 8 Riewoldt 27 Hislop
F: 26 Nahas 6 Polak 20 Morton
Foll: 5 Simmonds 3 Deledio 23 Jackson
Int: 32 Cousins 47 Nason 29 Vickery 31 Thomson
My only change to your team Torch is Thomson for Edwards.
-
okkkkk i don't know how many times i have done a Round 1 team, but this is my final one and it is based on what I think Mr Damien Hardwick will select, not what i hope Mr Damien Hardwick selects;
Mr Damien Hardwick will select:
B: 15 Farmer 16 McGuane 2 Thursfield
HB: 40 Moore 37 Post 17 Newman
C: 30 Tambling 9 Cotchin 36 Martin
HF: 50 Roberts 8 Riewoldt 27 Hislop
F: 26 Nahas 6 Polak 20 Morton
Foll: 5 Simmonds 3 Deledio 23 Jackson
Int: 32 Cousins 47 Nason 29 Vickery 31 Thomson
:)
I think you'll be pretty close to the actual team there torch. I'd have Connors ahead of Thomson though on the bench.
-
I want to go with a 7/7/4 formation to start.
Backs:
Sweeper: Grimes
Mops: Morris, Houli
Height: Chaplin, Rance
Running height: Martin, Deledio
Mids:
Ruck: Maric
Inside/outside: Cotchin, Foley, Conca
Inside/outside defensive: Ellis
Outside defensive: Jackson
Outside: Grigg
Forwards:
Tall: Riewoldt, A. Edwards, Vickery
Small: S. Edwards
Bench: King, Tuck, Knights
Sub: Nahas
This is a glamour backline. If our young mids can get heat on the opposition clearances our backline will destroy them on the counter. If the bad guys hard tag Deledio Martin will get 40 touches. If they hard tag them both Morris and Houli will run riot.
For the first time since 2001 we can have a backline full of hurt. Morris, Houli - 60m players. Deledio - 70m. Martin - 80m player. This is hurt.
When we get the clearance (Chimpa might get a few of them) we have to hit the target. If we do we will score. If we don't we can still kill them on the counter if our mids apply heat. Our lack of pace here can hurt us but our glamour and pace in defence will offset that.
If Vickery can't handle the #3 forward job with change ruck duties we have to develop Elton or recruit a replacement. But I think TV will bloom in 2013. He is crucial.
When I look at this side there are a few obvious weaknesses.
First the #2 forward A. Edwards is demonstrably not a premiership player in the role. And his history shows that his form fades as the season wears on. Good. I expect him to play twelve to fifteen rounds in the role then be replaced. Probably by an improving Vickery, or less likely by Elton or Griffiths coming through. If Vickery can take more ruck duties Ivan can play #1 forward freeing the #3 role to Knights, maybe PetTurd or even the resting Chimpa.
Secondly Grimes. He's a budding champion with the dodgiest strings in legend. When Dimma says that he wants Flosstone to play round one he's saying we can't win the premiership in 2013. IMO he's aiming too low if Grimes is right. But Grimes may not come up. Ouch.
Thirdly Foley may not return to his best. Maybe we should let Foley play as the other mop and put Houli out to pasture. Half fit, Foley would be an awesome mop. (Less turning for the ankles, eh.)
Last, a lot of responsibility falls to third and second year players Conca and Ellis in the midfield. Maybe they go on in 2013, maybe they go on in 2014. Maybe they never do. But Chimp will go on. And when we find others who can support him we will.
http://www.puntroadend.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=47417.210
-
Wow what a poo team we had in 2010
-
Wow what a poo team we had in 2010
Yep,
10 weeks..... :pray and hopefully blood will spill on the navy blue....
-
Wow what a poo team we had in 2010
Yep,
10 weeks..... :pray and hopefully blood will spill on the navy blue....
Only 8 possibles left from that side in our r1 2013 teAm :o
-
Wow what a poo team we had in 2010
How did we ever think we were a chance to beat them!! :o
-
I want to go with a 7/7/4 formation to start.
Backs:
Sweeper: Grimes
Mops: Morris, Houli
Height: Chaplin, Rance
Running height: Martin, Deledio
Mids:
Ruck: Maric
Inside/outside: Cotchin, Foley, Conca
Inside/outside defensive: Ellis
Outside defensive: Jackson
Outside: Grigg
Forwards:
Tall: Riewoldt, A. Edwards, Vickery
Small: S. Edwards
Bench: King, Tuck, Knights
Sub: Nahas
This is a glamour backline. If our young mids can get heat on the opposition clearances our backline will destroy them on the counter. If the bad guys hard tag Deledio Martin will get 40 touches. If they hard tag them both Morris and Houli will run riot.
For the first time since 2001 we can have a backline full of hurt. Morris, Houli - 60m players. Deledio - 70m. Martin - 80m player. This is hurt.
When we get the clearance (Chimpa might get a few of them) we have to hit the target. If we do we will score. If we don't we can still kill them on the counter if our mids apply heat. Our lack of pace here can hurt us but our glamour and pace in defence will offset that.
If Vickery can't handle the #3 forward job with change ruck duties we have to develop Elton or recruit a replacement. But I think TV will bloom in 2013. He is crucial.
When I look at this side there are a few obvious weaknesses.
First the #2 forward A. Edwards is demonstrably not a premiership player in the role. And his history shows that his form fades as the season wears on. Good. I expect him to play twelve to fifteen rounds in the role then be replaced. Probably by an improving Vickery, or less likely by Elton or Griffiths coming through. If Vickery can take more ruck duties Ivan can play #1 forward freeing the #3 role to Knights, maybe PetTurd or even the resting Chimpa.
Secondly Grimes. He's a budding champion with the dodgiest strings in legend. When Dimma says that he wants Flosstone to play round one he's saying we can't win the premiership in 2013. IMO he's aiming too low if Grimes is right. But Grimes may not come up. Ouch.
Thirdly Foley may not return to his best. Maybe we should let Foley play as the other mop and put Houli out to pasture. Half fit, Foley would be an awesome mop. (Less turning for the ankles, eh.)
Last, a lot of responsibility falls to third and second year players Conca and Ellis in the midfield. Maybe they go on in 2013, maybe they go on in 2014. Maybe they never do. But Chimp will go on. And when we find others who can support him we will.
http://www.puntroadend.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=47417.210
I think this format is closer to the the actual line up in the modern game. More so than the traditional seven banks of three players.
I do concur the 2010 side was utter gash.
-
From that 2010 side the only good players are McG, Deledio, Dusty, Riewoldt, Rancer, Cotch, Cuz, Vickery and my mate Tucky.
-
FB morris chaplin batchelor
HB grimes rance houli
C edwards cotchin conca
HF king vickery newman
FF nahas reiwoldt griffiths
FOLL maric deledio martin
INT tuck grigg ellis knights
If Foley is fit he would replace Knights
-
FB morris chaplin batchelor
HB grimes rance houli
C edwards cotchin conca
HF king vickery newman
FF nahas reiwoldt griffiths
FOLL maric deledio martin
INT tuck grigg ellis knights
If Foley is fit he would replace Knights
Don't rate Azza Edwards?
-
A Edwards will not get a gig
If the below selected talks are fit and in form. Hope to see astbury go past him, too.
FB morris chaplin batchelor
HB grimes rance houli
C edwards cotchin conca
HF king vickery newman
FF nahas reiwoldt griffiths
FOLL maric deledio martin
INT tuck grigg ellis knights
If Foley is fit he would replace Knights
Got a feeling knights will be best 22.
Foley replace houli or king or Newman.
-
A Edwards will not get a gig
If the below selected talks are fit and in form. Hope to see astbury go past him, too.
FB morris chaplin batchelor
HB grimes rance houli
C edwards cotchin conca
HF king vickery newman
FF nahas reiwoldt griffiths
FOLL maric deledio martin
INT tuck grigg ellis knights
If Foley is fit he would replace Knights
Got a feeling knights will be best 22.
Foley replace houli or king or Newman.
A. Edwards will play in Round 1
-
FB morris chaplin batchelor
HB grimes rance houli
C edwards cotchin conca
HF king vickery newman
FF nahas reiwoldt griffiths
FOLL maric deledio martin
INT tuck grigg ellis knights
If Foley is fit he would replace Knights
Don't rate Azza Edwards?
Not overly. Should have kept Post instead. I wouldn't have had Edwards, Petterd or Mcguane at the club this year
-
Edit: or nahas.
That group is shaping up as the weakest non kpp
A Edwards may well okay round 1. But its the best interest of the club to find a superior player. I hope one already on the list.
-
FB morris chaplin batchelor
HB grimes rance houli
C edwards cotchin conca
HF king vickery newman
FF nahas reiwoldt griffiths
FOLL maric deledio martin
INT tuck grigg ellis knights
If Foley is fit he would replace Knights
Don't rate Azza Edwards?
Not overly. Should have kept Post instead. I wouldn't have had Edwards, Petterd or Mcguane at the club this year
Post is rubbish (that's why he's at Altona)
Petterd was worth a rookie spot has large amounts of talent
McG is McG :shh
-
A Edwards will not get a gig
If the below selected talks are fit and in form. Hope to see astbury go past him, too.
FB morris chaplin batchelor
HB grimes rance houli
C edwards cotchin conca
HF king vickery newman
FF nahas reiwoldt griffiths
FOLL maric deledio martin
INT tuck grigg ellis knights
If Foley is fit he would replace Knights
Got a feeling knights will be best 22.
Foley replace houli or king or Newman.
Foley won't play. Griffiths has been training down back.
-
A Edwards will not get a gig
If the below selected talks are fit and in form. Hope to see astbury go past him, too.
FB morris chaplin batchelor
HB grimes rance houli
C edwards cotchin conca
HF king vickery newman
FF nahas reiwoldt griffiths
FOLL maric deledio martin
INT tuck grigg ellis knights
If Foley is fit he would replace Knights
Got a feeling knights will be best 22.
Foley replace houli or king or Newman.
Foley won't play.
You got inside word?