What's our best 22 now?

[Judge Roughneck]

Geeees ... Jennifer must be a keen archeologist during the off-season, I think she found that side on a Pyramid wall!   

Or she is aware ofdimma favoritism ppolicy's

[one-eyed]

Your AFL club’s best 22: Who makes the cut?

Herald-Sun
January 23, 2015 4:02PM


RICHMOND

B: Troy Chaplin, David Astbury, Steven Morris

HB: Dylan Grimes, Alex Rance, Bachar Houli

C: Brandon Ellis, Dustin Martin, Shane Edwards

HF: Brett Deledio, Ben Griffiths, Nick Vlastuin

F: Ty Vickery, Jack Riewoldt, Ben Lennon

FOLL: Ivan Maric, Anthony Miles, Trent Cotchin

I/C: Chris Newman, Shaun Grigg, Taylor Hunt, Reece Conca

Not picked: Jake Batchelor, Nathan Foley, Nathan Gordon, Sam Lloyd, Chris Knights

Astbury returns from a knee injury and takes Batchelor’s spot. Ben Lennon will get more chances in his second season but Gordon, Lloyd and Knights are all contenders for that small forward spot. The Tigers say they want to play Riewoldt, Griffiths and Vickery in the same side.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/breaking-news/your-afl-clubs-best-22-who-makes-the-cut/story-fnect155-1227194808450

[wayne]

Best 22 with grigg, newman, chaplin and vickery

[big tone]

Best 22 with grigg, newman, chaplin and vickery

All are best 22 bar Grigg as of last game last year IMO.
Hoping other players will overtake these guys is a different argument.
On record, those 3 mention are better preformed than any others.
Putting Lennon in front of others is shear hope, on form he has been below AFL standard.
We all hope these kids are going to improve and push older players out but until they preform  it's only hope.
Interested who you think replaces Chaplin and Vickery?

[wayne]

Astbury and Chaplin in makes us pretty slow. I'd go Batch for Chaplin. Vickery out and Knights in. Also you would probably go Gordon over Lennon at this stage.

[🏅Dooks]

Alot of talls in the back line. 

Does Grimes get a gig with Astbury in?

I'd have a fit knights on a hff in place of Vlastuin, and shift vlas back to take Newmans place on the bench. Newman Po.

Vickery, I'm giving him one year to prove himself. It's counter intuitive for me but apparently he's the size of a house now...

Grigg yeah well....what do you do

[Yeahright]

Alot of talls in the back line. 

Does Grimes get a gig with Astbury in?

I'd have a fit knights on a hff in place of Vlastuin, and shift vlas back to take Newmans place on the bench. Newman Po.

Vickery, I'm giving him one year to prove himself. It's counter intuitive for me but apparently he's the size of a house now...

Grigg yeah well....what do you do

I'd like to say no because I'd rather another small/medium defender in there but Grimes can play small pretty well so depending on match ups he probably will get a game with Astbury.

I'd personally like Gordon in before Knights purely because he's had a year with us to get used to everything and he performed now and then last year and Knights can get a few gigs in the VFL just to see whether Gordon is worth persisting with, but Knights probably is the better player

[No More]

could Taylor Hunt play off half back. He is quick and would give good run of half back.

[Yeahright]

 

We finally brought in a proven run with player WHY STUFF WITH IT?! Oh I know we have Grigg

[the claw]

Best 22 with grigg, newman, chaplin and vickery

All are best 22 bar Grigg as of last game last year IMO.
Hoping other players will overtake these guys is a different argument.
On record, those 3 mention are better preformed than any others.
Putting Lennon in front of others is shear hope, on form he has been below AFL standard.
We all hope these kids are going to improve and push older players out but until they preform  it's only hope.
Interested who you think replaces Chaplin and Vickery?

tone based on record grigg is easily best 22, so is petterd.
based on record the best 22 would go.

fb/ morris - chaplin - grimes
hb/ houli - rance - newman.

c/  ellis - martin - grigg

hf/ edwards - vickery - deledio
ff/ knights - riewoldt - griffiths

r/  maric - cotchin - miles.

int from/ foley - hunt - petterd - vlastuin  thomas  conca.

we all know our best 22 will get us nowhere near a flag thus we need to play others to improve. we should have been doing this the last 2 yrs but went with mainly so so mature types from both within and without.
my concern has been and remains  when you look at where we really need to improve there is little competition coming thru.
 the other concern remains the fact that we do need to improve on about  half of our best 22 players. and im not saying they are all duds they just have no more upside and cant take us further.
the hope is blokes like c ellis lennon menadue mcintosh mcbean and some others can out perform the current lot when they earn a game.

i think just about every poster on this site is guilty of wanting to see more of the kids get games. what very few of us are prepared to admit at times is the kids are not as good  ATM AS THOS WHO GET GAMES.
Its a catch 22  play lesser performing kids and maybe drop a few games we cant afford to drop if finals is the aim, or play those older players who give a fair bit more and give ourself the best chance to play finals.
me i think the bigger picture has to be looked at.  we must make hard calls on those who HAVE SHOWN THEY HAVE NO MORE TO GIVE.  Play lesser performing kids  who have upside  IN THEIR STEAD.
It may mean we miss finals  but long term it may unearth enough players that can take us further down the track.Clearly so far or the last 2 seasons playing more kids would mean no finals it seems no one is really prepared to maybe miss finals but complain about not enough  kids getting a game. Imo atm we cant have it both ways. play   the senior players who  are easily out performing most of the juniors and development players, but have reached their ceiling  thus they give us the best chance at finals. or we cut the senior players play lesser performing juniors fast tracking them  and likely miss finals.
it could be we miss finals either way so play the kids imo and be prepared to cop a little pain now so we get some joy later.

geez i can imagine the reaction of most supporters if we dont make finals this yr. because of this  i think the older blokes who give a bit more will very much be getting games over the kids.
we all talk about the kids earning a game the stark reality is few so far have out performed incumbent players.

[YellowandBlackBlood]

I want us to play kids, give them game time to develop them.  They also create enthusiasm which spreads to the senior players.  Of course, the older types can still get games if they play well.  When guys like Chaplin last year were stinking it up in the first half of the season, I was screaming to drop them and give the kids a go.  We couldn't have gone any worse, as we were losing games continually with our seniors.  If the seniors are winning games against good opposition they should be played.

Bottom line is if you are earning your spot in the team by playing your role well each week then you hold your spot.  If you don't, you make way for a junior to allow them to be fast tracked in the seniors. You can quickly tell if they can become comfortable with the pace of the game. You play the juniors in 4 week blocks to give them a good taste and continue to play them if they play well.  Too many times a junior is elevated then dropped after showing something or not having had the chance to show anything.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[🏅Dooks]

Alot of talls in the back line. 

Does Grimes get a gig with Astbury in?

I'd have a fit knights on a hff in place of Vlastuin, and shift vlas back to take Newmans place on the bench. Newman Po.

Vickery, I'm giving him one year to prove himself. It's counter intuitive for me but apparently he's the size of a house now...

Grigg yeah well....what do you do

I'd like to say no because I'd rather another small/medium defender in there but Grimes can play small pretty well so depending on match ups he probably will get a game with Astbury.

I'd personally like Gordon in before Knights purely because he's had a year with us to get used to everything and he performed now and then last year and Knights can get a few gigs in the VFL just to see whether Gordon is worth persisting with, but Knights probably is the better player

Makes sense 

[WilliamPowell]

I want us to play kids, give them game time to develop them.  They also create enthusiasm which spreads to the senior players.  Of course, the older types can still get games if they play well.  When guys like Chaplin last year were stinking it up in the first half of the season, I was screaming to drop them and give the kids a go.  We couldn't have gone any worse, as we were losing games continually with our seniors.  If the seniors are winning games against good opposition they should be played.

Bottom line is if you are earning your spot in the team by playing your role well each week then you hold your spot.  If you don't, you make way for a junior to allow them to be fast tracked in the seniors. You can quickly tell if they can become comfortable with the pace of the game. You play the juniors in 4 week blocks to give them a good taste and continue to play them if they play well.  Too many times a junior is elevated then dropped after showing something or not having had the chance to show anything.

Just my 2 cents worth.

  

Agree

Great post

[big tone]

Best 22 with grigg, newman, chaplin and vickery

All are best 22 bar Grigg as of last game last year IMO.
Hoping other players will overtake these guys is a different argument.
On record, those 3 mention are better preformed than any others.
Putting Lennon in front of others is shear hope, on form he has been below AFL standard.
We all hope these kids are going to improve and push older players out but until they preform  it's only hope.
Interested who you think replaces Chaplin and Vickery?

tone based on record grigg is easily best 22, so is petterd.
based on record the best 22 would go.

fb/ morris - chaplin - grimes
hb/ houli - rance - newman.

c/  ellis - martin - grigg

hf/ edwards - vickery - deledio
ff/ knights - riewoldt - griffiths

r/  maric - cotchin - miles.

int from/ foley - hunt - petterd - vlastuin  thomas  conca.

we all know our best 22 will get us nowhere near a flag thus we need to play others to improve. we should have been doing this the last 2 yrs but went with mainly so so mature types from both within and without.
my concern has been and remains  when you look at where we really need to improve there is little competition coming thru.
 the other concern remains the fact that we do need to improve on about  half of our best 22 players. and im not saying they are all duds they just have no more upside and cant take us further.
the hope is blokes like c ellis lennon menadue mcintosh mcbean and some others can out perform the current lot when they earn a game.

i think just about every poster on this site is guilty of wanting to see more of the kids get games. what very few of us are prepared to admit at times is the kids are not as good  ATM AS THOS WHO GET GAMES.
Its a catch 22  play lesser performing kids and maybe drop a few games we cant afford to drop if finals is the aim, or play those older players who give a fair bit more and give ourself the best chance to play finals.
me i think the bigger picture has to be looked at.  we must make hard calls on those who HAVE SHOWN THEY HAVE NO MORE TO GIVE.  Play lesser performing kids  who have upside  IN THEIR STEAD.
It may mean we miss finals  but long term it may unearth enough players that can take us further down the track.Clearly so far or the last 2 seasons playing more kids would mean no finals it seems no one is really prepared to maybe miss finals but complain about not enough  kids getting a game. Imo atm we cant have it both ways. play   the senior players who  are easily out performing most of the juniors and development players, but have reached their ceiling  thus they give us the best chance at finals. or we cut the senior players play lesser performing juniors fast tracking them  and likely miss finals.
it could be we miss finals either way so play the kids imo and be prepared to cop a little pain now so we get some joy later.

geez i can imagine the reaction of most supporters if we dont make finals this yr. because of this  i think the older blokes who give a bit more will very much be getting games over the kids.
we all talk about the kids earning a game the stark reality is few so far have out performed incumbent players.

Totally understand what you said about Grigg and Petterd, I should have been a bit clear on what I meant. Those two have better "records" than say Vlastuin and even Grimes but on what they have shown to date indicates that both are going to be very good AFL players. In Lennons case, and I really like the look of the kid, but what he has shown to date isn't all that much, that's why I said it was more hope than anything else.
I'd play all 3 in place of Petterd, Grigg and Houli. These guys have taken us as far as they are going to.
I also think if it's done right we can play a couple of kids at a time and not loose any ground. Dimma just needs to be smart with how he does it. He needs to give the kids confidence that even though they are young they can still play a roll in our team. I think a lot of the time a kid comes in and thinks he needs to get 20 touches to prove himself. All he should be thinking is about doing his particular role. I tend to think we still think like individuals and not a collective group.
Every time I hear a Hawthorn player speak it's always about playing his role for the team, and when it's said I actually believe that the player means it and it's not just a throw away line.

[the claw]

I want us to play kids, give them game time to develop them.  They also create enthusiasm which spreads to the senior players.  Of course, the older types can still get games if they play well.  When guys like Chaplin last year were stinking it up in the first half of the season, I was screaming to drop them and give the kids a go.  We couldn't have gone any worse, as we were losing games continually with our seniors.  If the seniors are winning games against good opposition they should be played.

Bottom line is if you are earning your spot in the team by playing your role well each week then you hold your spot.  If you don't, you make way for a junior to allow them to be fast tracked in the seniors. You can quickly tell if they can become comfortable with the pace of the game. You play the juniors in 4 week blocks to give them a good taste and continue to play them if they play well.  Too many times a junior is elevated then dropped after showing something or not having had the chance to show anything.

Just my 2 cents worth.

i agree and in pretty well much the same camp.

oh and tone i also agree with your post.