As you can appreciate, I think we know that we are still in development mode, and one of the things we are looking for is to develop a winning attitude, as well as a winning feeling.
Irrespective, the conversation surrounding who plays when is occurring and largely it will vary depending on what our aims are.
Team balance is one.
Learning opportunities with guidance is another.
Realistically I look at it, and I can see a few "constants" that are likely to be the case for our team selection, irrespective of what value we perceive they bring to the table.
What I can see happening is that the following players will be picked most weeks unless injured, or struggling for form/fitness majorly.
Mature agers, team leaders, onfield coaches, call them whatever you want:
Marc Murphy
Kade Simpson
Matthew Kreuzer
Ed Curnow
Dale Thomas
Levi Casboult
Matthew Wright
These guys are going to play pretty much when they are available and even if we think they are struggling. They are there not to perform well themselves, but play their role to the best of their ability and ensure that the team is playing the right way, and that other blokes are playing their allotted roles or learning to play them properly. These guys are only going to exclude themselves from selection if they are struggling big time.
The next tier:
Jack Silvagni
SPS
Matthew Kennedy
Patrick Cripps
Harry McKay
Darcy Lang
Lachie Plowman
Jarrod Garlett
Caleb Marchbank
Jacob Weitering
Zac Fisher
David Cunningham
Charlie Curnow
Tom Williamson
Jarrod Pickett
Ciaran Byrne
These guys are no longer "learning" to play football. Some are learning to compete, or learning roles, and some weeks they will benefit from dropping down to VFL level to polish up something or work on their leadership ability, but you will find that these guys are going to be 15-23 gamers for the year (some more likely to play more than others).
The next Tier:
Sam Kerridge
Jed Lamb
Liam Jones
Sam Rowe
Aaron Mullett
Cam O'Shea
Matthew Lobbe
Nick Graham
Andrew Phillips
Matt Shaw
Alex Silvagni
This group are role/depth players who could surprise and play every week but are more likely to be filling in the gaps for team balance that we cant quite get right from the aforementioned. I expect some to play frequently but most of them will be doing well to get 10+ AFL games for the year and will be the VFL equivalent of what the first tier I wrote down do for our VFL team.
The Next Tier:
Paddy Dow
Lochie O'Brien
Tom De Koning
Angus Schumacher
Harrison Macreadie
Cameron Poulson
Pat Kerr
Youngsters that are still firmly on their L plates and looking to find their feet at this level, or learn roles. Some might emerge instantly and play like seasoned pros (looking at Paddy Dow mainly or Cam Poulson hopefully) but realistically if they get anywhere near 10 games for the year, they will be deemed a roaring success. (Projected anywhere from 0-10 games with anything else being an outlier).
This is where I see our list for 2018. This is likely to be how our MC select our team for round 1, and will contain a few but not many surprises, mainly regarding team balance and opposition match ups, but anticipate that some are going to be ahead of others in the pecking order simply because we need them to be. I expect we will see the 3-4 year draftees playing pretty much every week unless their form is putrid (and even then we might persist because there is little they can benefit from at VFL level).
Interesting groupings and on the whole I agree although a couple I do question.
Surely Cripps has to go into the 1st group - i know his age and games played may say otherwise but with true leadership already being shown he must go in the 1st group.
I would also put Liam Jones up a level - only just showing us what he can do but has shown more than enough already in my opinion.
Some would question Daisy Thomas in the 1st group but i agree with this. I believe he shows enough on the field and more than enough off it (the training track etc) to warrant him being in the leadership/coaching group.
As you can appreciate, I think we know that we are still in development mode, and one of the things we are looking for is to develop a winning attitude, as well as a winning feeling.
Irrespective, the conversation surrounding who plays when is occurring and largely it will vary depending on what our aims are.
Team balance is one.
Learning opportunities with guidance is another.
Realistically I look at it, and I can see a few "constants" that are likely to be the case for our team selection, irrespective of what value we perceive they bring to the table.
What I can see happening is that the following players will be picked most weeks unless injured, or struggling for form/fitness majorly.
Mature agers, team leaders, onfield coaches, call them whatever you want:
Marc Murphy
Kade Simpson
Matthew Kreuzer
Ed Curnow
Dale Thomas
Levi Casboult
Matthew Wright
These guys are going to play pretty much when they are available and even if we think they are struggling. They are there not to perform well themselves, but play their role to the best of their ability and ensure that the team is playing the right way, and that other blokes are playing their allotted roles or learning to play them properly. These guys are only going to exclude themselves from selection if they are struggling big time.
The next tier:
Jack Silvagni
SPS
Matthew Kennedy
Patrick Cripps
Harry McKay
Darcy Lang
Lachie Plowman
Jarrod Garlett
Caleb Marchbank
Jacob Weitering
Zac Fisher
David Cunningham
Charlie Curnow
Tom Williamson
Jarrod Pickett
Ciaran Byrne
These guys are no longer "learning" to play football. Some are learning to compete, or learning roles, and some weeks they will benefit from dropping down to VFL level to polish up something or work on their leadership ability, but you will find that these guys are going to be 15-23 gamers for the year (some more likely to play more than others).
The next Tier:
Sam Kerridge
Jed Lamb
Liam Jones
Sam Rowe
Aaron Mullett
Cam O'Shea
Matthew Lobbe
Nick Graham
Andrew Phillips
Matt Shaw
Alex Silvagni
This group are role/depth players who could surprise and play every week but are more likely to be filling in the gaps for team balance that we cant quite get right from the aforementioned. I expect some to play frequently but most of them will be doing well to get 10+ AFL games for the year and will be the VFL equivalent of what the first tier I wrote down do for our VFL team.
The Next Tier:
Paddy Dow
Lochie O'Brien
Tom De Koning
Angus Schumacher
Harrison Macreadie
Cameron Poulson
Pat Kerr
Youngsters that are still firmly on their L plates and looking to find their feet at this level, or learn roles. Some might emerge instantly and play like seasoned pros (looking at Paddy Dow mainly or Cam Poulson hopefully) but realistically if they get anywhere near 10 games for the year, they will be deemed a roaring success. (Projected anywhere from 0-10 games with anything else being an outlier).
This is where I see our list for 2018. This is likely to be how our MC select our team for round 1, and will contain a few but not many surprises, mainly regarding team balance and opposition match ups, but anticipate that some are going to be ahead of others in the pecking order simply because we need them to be. I expect we will see the 3-4 year draftees playing pretty much every week unless their form is putrid (and even then we might persist because there is little they can benefit from at VFL level).
Thomas won't be a mainstay if the others come on. I wouldn't have considered Silvangni anything more than a young kid either so how he is considered a next tier player I have no idea. Casboult too isn't a direct selection- I'd have him in tier two or three.
Without wishing to be disrespectful, I don't really understand the point of this thread. Our best 22 will be a mix of oldies and youngsters, A graders, B graders, talls, smalls etc. We already know pretty much who they are.
Barring injury and any directive to specifically play kids, the first 14 or 15 spots are pretty much a lock, certainly as far as the club is concerned. We all have our own set of heroes and villains, but they won't figure in the club's plans. The other 7 or 8 spots will generate a bit of discussion I guess.
And dissection is missing an s.
Agree with most of the ratings, but Cripps and Jones will be two of the first picked players every week. Cripps will not be sighted in the VFL probably for the rest of his career unless coming back from injury. Jones would have to do a complete 180 not to play every game this year also. His role on the last line of defence will be integral this season.
Without wishing to be disrespectful, I don't really understand the point of this thread. Our best 22 will be a mix of oldies and youngsters, A graders, B graders, talls, smalls etc. We already know pretty much who they are.
Barring injury and any directive to specifically play kids, the first 14 or 15 spots are pretty much a lock, certainly as far as the club is concerned. We all have our own set of heroes and villains, but they won't figure in the club's plans. The other 7 or 8 spots will generate a bit of discussion I guess.
And dissection is missing an s.
No disrespect felt at all its to encourage the conversation surrounding team balance over this way rather than a pre match thread because I can see it happening weekly.
Agree with most of the ratings, but Cripps and Jones will be two of the first picked players every week. Cripps will not be sighted in the VFL probably for the rest of his career unless coming back from injury. Jones would have to do a complete 180 not to play every game this year also. His role on the last line of defence will be integral this season.
This is not about who gets first picked, but the recent conversation surrounding selection for team balance and certain players potentially not playing.
My lists suggest that blokes like Weitering and Mckay will get the nod ahead of anyone they are vying with for selection IMHO.
No disrespect felt at all its to encourage the conversation surrounding team balance over this way rather than a pre match thread because I can see it happening weekly.
This is not about who gets first picked, but the recent conversation surrounding selection for team balance and certain players potentially not playing.
My lists suggest that blokes like Weitering and Mckay will get the nod ahead of anyone they are vying with for selection IMHO.
Thanks Thry. Well, you and I both know it will happen weekly because there will be a few different versions of the best 22 week in week out, and folks will vie for their preferred line up.
Weitering is a cert every week. The club won't risk having a No1 pick cooling his heels in the 2's, not even under the "player management" moniker. I think McKay is a cert to get a block of games at the start, but maybe not for the entire season, unless there is merit.
I'll be interested to see the team balance if we play a lot of kids for development and get off to a bad start to the year and cop a few beltings...will Bolton and crew hold their nerve and keep playing the kids or will BB go back to some of the experienced players and old ways of playing men behind the ball looking to limit the damage.
He has been exempt from scrutiny but thats going to change at seasons end and he needs wins not green shoot cliches....
They learnt a harsh lesson against Port Adelaide last year with a totally imbalanced side. They won’t do that again. We will be a blend of old, medium and new.
Indeed, that was a screw up and some...
Thomas won't be a mainstay if the others come on. I wouldn't have considered Silvangni anything more than a young kid either so how he is considered a next tier player I have no idea. Casboult too isn't a direct selection- I'd have him in tier two or three.
What I was hoping to highlight, is how important the older blokes are to our side, and irrespective of how well players come on, the 1st tier will absolute be the first names written on the team sheet most weeks. The fact that there are others relatively cemented on there too, is quite irrelevant to whether or not they get selected and you will find the youngsters will only keep the mature players out if they REALLY kick on and become not just decent performers, but 4 quarter players each and every week.
We are very thin for mature, experienced top liners, and they will be in the mix for selection most weeks.
Look at this back bone, and pick your starting 22:
--BP-------------------FB-------------------BP
HBF-------------------CHB-------------------Simpson
Wing------------------Murphy------------Thomas
HFF-------------------Casboult---------------Wright
FP----------------------FF---------------------FP
Followers: Kreuzer-----E. Curnow--------------Mid
Int: 1-----------2----------3----------4
There is plenty of space for the kids and there, and whilst I can appreciate that many have pencilled in Cripps Im not writing him in here, because he is ahead of schedule and we need to be thinking a little bit more about that, when we look at our team, because the second you start dropping the likes of the above names, for kids, all of a sudden Cripps effectiveness will be reduced because he is no longer worried about his own game, but having to lead the line (Murphy, Kreuzer and Daisy are underated in this facet) and whilst Cripps might relish it, its not something we should take for granted.
I'll be interested to see the team balance if we play a lot of kids for development and get off to a bad start to the year and cop a few beltings...will Bolton and crew hold their nerve and keep playing the kids or will BB go back to some of the experienced players and old ways of playing men behind the ball looking to limit the damage.
He has been exempt from scrutiny but thats going to change at seasons end and he needs wins not green shoot cliches....
I would say the teams that we have seen so far is what you will see next Thursday.
I don't see O'Brien being an inclusion, has looked timid and scared both games and needs to get used to playing against men. I fully expect Dow to be there to experience a 90K crowd against the reigning premiers.
Backs; Jones, Weitering, Marchbank, Plowman, Simpson, Byrne
Mids; Kruezer, Cripps, Kennedy, E.Curnow, Murphy, SPS
Forwards; Casboult; C. Curnow, McKay, Pickett, Fisher, J.Silvagni
I; Dow, Thomas, Wright, A.Silvagni/O'Shea (depending on injury recovery)
Sure our backs are significantly bigger than their smalls but if we keep it in the air, block Riewoldt from marking this gives us a clear advantage in the air. I would like to see A.Silvagni in to cover Martin when he goes forward but don't know if he's ready. McKay needs to play a block of games say 3-5 and re assess. Jack is holding on by the bare minimum as Pickett would be very handy this game. If Rance plays off his man we need to go through our player as often as possible.
I would say the teams that we have seen so far is what you will see next Thursday.
I don't see O'Brien being an inclusion, has looked timid and scared both games and needs to get used to playing against men. I fully expect Dow to be there to experience a 90K crowd against the reigning premiers.
Backs; Jones, Weitering, Marchbank, Plowman, Simpson, Byrne
Mids; Kruezer, Cripps, Kennedy, E.Curnow, Murphy, SPS
Forwards; Casboult; C. Curnow, McKay, Pickett, Fisher, J.Silvagni
I; Dow, Thomas, Wright, A.Silvagni/O'Shea (depending on injury recovery)
Sure our backs are significantly bigger than their smalls but if we keep it in the air, block Riewoldt from marking this gives us a clear advantage in the air. I would like to see A.Silvagni in to cover Martin when he goes forward but don't know if he's ready. McKay needs to play a block of games say 3-5 and re assess. Jack is holding on by the bare minimum as Pickett would be very handy this game. If Rance plays off his man we need to go through our player as often as possible.
Generally agree with this Raydan. Except Wright is our best forward, and he has to start on the ground IMO. And I would also start Silvagni in the 18, but I take your point regarding his readiness.
My hobby horse for a while has been that I want Krooz to play as a mid and bring in Lobbe as a ruck. Lobbe is the best ruck we've had on our list for years, so why not use him ? We've been bullied around the stoppages for too long by the big bodied mids like the Swans, Crows etc. I have no idea who's in or out for the Tiges, but having Cripps, Kennedy and Krooz as genuine mids is real muscle around the contest. People say that Krooz can still do that as well as ruck, but IMO it's not quite the same.
The club won't do it, nobody on here likes the idea (I've mentioned it previously), so I doubt it will ever see the light of day. But I'd like to see it trialled for a block of games. The JLT series would have been perfect for such an experiment.
I note that Cripps was drifting forward a lot more in the JLT series, and Krooz could be Crippa MKII in this respect.
I think the round 1 team will be something like:
B: Byrne, Jones, Marchbank
Hb: Plowman, Weitering, Simpson
C: E.Curnow, Cripps, Petrevski-Seton
Hf: Pickett, C.Curnow, Fisher
F: Wright, Casboult, J.Silvagni
Foll: Kreuzer, Kennedy
Rov: Murphy
I/c: Dow, Cuningham, Thomas, Lamb
Emg: Garlett, McKay, Mullett
I think the round 1 team will be something like:
B: Byrne, Jones, Marchbank
Hb: Plowman, Weitering, Simpson
C: E.Curnow, Cripps, Petrevski-Seton
Hf: Pickett, C.Curnow, Fisher
F: Wright, Casboult, J.Silvagni
Foll: Kreuzer, Kennedy
Rov: Murphy
I/c: Dow, Cuningham, Thomas, Lamb
Emg: Garlett, McKay, Mullett
It's a strong team Pratty. Will be too good for the Tigers.... if dry, I'm thinking McKay for Jack. Reckon Lamb and Thomas haven't rarnt their spots...or maybe Cuners will miss for Jack, but I'd prefer the extra runner...
My hobby horse for a while has been that I want Krooz to play as a mid and bring in Lobbe as a ruck. Lobbe is the best ruck we've had on our list for years, so why not use him ? We've been bullied around the stoppages for too long by the big bodied mids like the Swans, Crows etc. I have no idea who's in or out for the Tiges, but having Cripps, Kennedy and Krooz as genuine mids is real muscle around the contest. People say that Krooz can still do that as well as ruck, but IMO it's not quite the same.
The club won't do it, nobody on here likes the idea (I've mentioned it previously), so I doubt it will ever see the light of day. But I'd like to see it trialled for a block of games. The JLT series would have been perfect for such an experiment.
I note that Cripps was drifting forward a lot more in the JLT series, and Krooz could be Crippa MKII in this respect.
I think if they had wanted it they would have trialled it in JLT, but I think as a quartet Lobbe, SpecialK, Cripps and Kennedy are too slow.
If Meat hadn't played so well in JLT I might be persuaded to swap him out, bring in Lobbe to ruck and Kreuzer as a mid/wing as you suggest. But again it would have to be trialled in the pre-season, in the main season if that setup goes wrong you end up in a world of pain with no way out! Even when it seems right, it would only be fit for use in a horses for courses scenario.
During JLT when we broke from the midfield SpecialK is just another runner. Some of those segments of play with SpecialK, Cripps and Kennedy linking with the smaller mids were spectacular.
What teams would SpecialK as a mid work best against, teams with strong and heavier mid-field like an Adelaide or Freo? Could SpecialK go head to head with someone like Nat Fyfe, but even so wouldn't we prefer Cripps or Kennedy to go head to head with Fyfe? What about Charlie Curnow? Kennedy looks like a ready made to take on a Fyfe type!
Plus, I think SpecialK's best work comes in his 2nd and 3rd efforts, he recovers from the ruck contest and rejoins the chain of play faster than anybody else(Except maybe Natanui who is probably SpecialK's equal in this regard) which is why when SpecialK rucks he is so influential without winning lots of taps.
FWIW, Casboult's 2nd efforts were much better in the JLT, I hope he takes that into the main season as well, but he still let play move away rather than rejoin the chain of disposals like SpecialK does. Casboult's emphasis seemed to be ruck then sit back behind play, SpecialKs emphasis was to ruck then push towards the next contest.
I think if they had wanted it they would have trialled it in JLT, but I think as a quartet Lobbe, SpecialK, Cripps and Kennedy are too slow.
If Meat hadn't played so well in JLT I might be persuaded to swap him out, bring in Lobbe to ruck and Kreuzer as a mid/wing as you suggest. But again it would have to be trialled in the pre-season, in the main season if that setup goes wrong you end up in a world of pain with no way out! Even when it seems right, it would only be fit for use in a horses for courses scenario.
During JLT when we broke from the midfield SpecialK is just another runner. Some of those segments of play with SpecialK, Cripps and Kennedy linking with the smaller mids were spectacular.
What teams would SpecialK as a mid work best against, teams with strong and heavier mid-field like an Adelaide or Freo? Could SpecialK go head to head with someone like Nat Fyfe, but even so wouldn't we prefer Cripps or Kennedy to go head to head with Fyfe? What about Charlie Curnow? Kennedy looks like a ready made to take on a Fyfe type!
Plus, I think SpecialK's best work comes in his 2nd and 3rd efforts, he recovers from the ruck contest and rejoins the chain of play faster than anybody else(Except maybe Natanui who is probably SpecialK's equal in this regard) which is why when SpecialK rucks he is so influential without winning lots of taps.
FWIW, Casboult's 2nd efforts were much better in the JLT, I hope he takes that into the main season as well, but he still let play move away rather than rejoin the chain of disposals like SpecialK does. Casboult's emphasis seemed to be ruck then sit back behind play, SpecialKs emphasis was to ruck then push towards the next contest.
Yes, no doubt Krooz has been on the list long enough - if they haven't tried it by now, they clearly think it's no good.
IMO, the issue with speed is not so critical with the inside extractors / ball winners, but this needs to be offset with genuine pace on the outside. What is the optimal size/speed ratio to get us a win in any given game ? We don't have players like Buddy, who are "both/and" type players, i.e, both big and great pace, agility etc. If we give something extra in one department, we lose something in another department. The critical issue is do we gain more than we lose in any such move ?
I'm still gobsmacked that my idea hasn't been tried even once. We've been in the bottom rungs of the ladder for ages. It's not as if we're putting a flag tilt in jeopardy.
As a ruckman, Kreuzer is an excellent at stoppages.
As a midfielder, Kreuzer is average.
No point playing Kreuzer as a pure midfield type as you'd probably get more from a pure midfielder in that role.
The advantage is playing him as a ruckman, then you get the midfield advantage he brings compared to the other ruck, but not at the expense of a pure midfielder.
As a ruckman, Kreuzer is an excellent at stoppages.
As a midfielder, Kreuzer is average.
No point playing Kreuzer as a pure midfield type as you'd probably get more from a pure midfielder in that role.
The advantage is playing him as a ruckman, then you get the midfield advantage he brings compared to the other ruck, but not at the expense of a pure midfielder.
Not wishing to start a 10 page derailment, much less a train wreck, but I think it's hard to judge Krooz as a pure mid unless he actually plays that role. The inside mids around him set themselves up for this role, pre game and in game, whereas Krooz has to spend a few seconds entangling then extricating himself from the opposing ruckman - in that few seconds, a lot can happen, and as a mid, he's behind the 8 ball to begin with.
At any rate, it's clear that it ain't gonna happen, so it's best to just fuggitabouit.
Not wishing to start a 10 page derailment, much less a train wreck, but I think it's hard to judge Krooz as a pure mid unless he actually plays that role. The inside mids around him set themselves up for this role, pre game and in game, whereas Krooz has to spend a few seconds entangling then extricating himself from the opposing ruckman - in that few seconds, a lot can happen, and as a mid, he's behind the 8 ball to begin with.
At any rate, it's clear that it ain't gonna happen, so it's best to just fuggitabouit.
How long does it take Kreuzer, and any ruckman, to get the ball to their boot? Its a long way down there.
What about if the ball is on the ground? Thats an even longer way down there.
He's a big body, a slow moving body by comparison.
Those few seconds extracting himself from a ruckman is no difference from extracting yourself from a tagger. In fact, its easier given he is given a clear path to the ball, no blocking of ruckmen allowed, and he'd have the first idea on where the ball would be going from the hitout too.
I'm still gobsmacked that my idea hasn't been tried even once. We've been in the bottom rungs of the ladder for ages. It's not as if we're putting a flag tilt in jeopardy.
Actually they sort of tried it years ago, they did at one stage have Hampson rucking and Kreuzer in the center at the same time. They also went through a period were those two would rove to each other inside F50, I saw it as an attempt by Ratten to clear some space for the likes of Betts, Garlett and Murphy.
How long does it take Kreuzer, and any ruckman, to get the ball to their boot? Its a long way down there.
What about if the ball is on the ground? Thats an even longer way down there.
He's a big body, a slow moving body by comparison.
Those few seconds extracting himself from a ruckman is no difference from extracting yourself from a tagger. In fact, its easier given he is given a clear path to the ball, no blocking of ruckmen allowed, and he'd have the first idea on where the ball would be going from the hitout too.
That's fair enough, but don't forget, he's only a few cms taller and a few kgs heavier than Cripps, so he wouldn't be holding proceedings up too much in comparison.
Actually they sort of tried it years ago, they did at one stage have Hampson rucking and Kreuzer in the center at the same time. They also went through a period were those two would rove to each other inside F50, I saw it as an attempt by Ratten to clear some space for the likes of Betts, Garlett and Murphy.
I only have a vague recollection of those setups.
Pickett out for three months. Broken scaphoid. Get well soon.
Kreuzer was as good a clearance player as we had last year, and often more effective after the tap then at the actual ruck contest. Yep, I'd play him as a ruck follower (and have suggested this for a while) for sure but have concerns with burning him out during games, although, to be said he is an elite endurance athlete.
I'd rather play him this role then slot him forwards as a defacto marking forward - he's a trier in that regard but lacks the speed and nous to be a consistent multiple goal kicker. That's a specialist job and too much a role to ask for any one player.
That's fair enough, but don't forget, he's only a few cms taller and a few kgs heavier than Cripps, so he wouldn't be holding proceedings up too much in comparison.
Now you mention it, Cripps always looks a bit slow to me and it's amazing that despite that he does seem to have the time to execute. Maybe I've internalised a concern about his seeming "lumbering" but I always get a bit of heart in mouth when he has the ball, especially if he decides to run with it.
Now you mention it, Cripps always looks a bit slow to me and it's amazing that despite that he does seem to have the time to execute. Maybe I've internalised a concern about his seeming "lumbering" but I always get a bit of heart in mouth when he has the ball, especially if he decides to run with it.
Yes, Cripps either disposes of the footy asap, or he uses his strength and size to bullock his way through players. Trying to outrun the opposition won't end well. Ditto the Cruiser.
Ive watched Cripps.
Its like time moves slowly around him.
I don't think he moves slowly. It just looks like he has plenty of time most of the time.
Ive only witnessed a few players who just seemed to be "motionless" and all of them have been able to manufacture both time and space somehow around themselves and most of them are absolute guns at the sports they play.
Its a universal quality. Ive noticed it on the greats. Diesel Williams had that ability. Maradonna had that ability. Cripps has that ability.
He's a gem. I didn't put him in the first group of my tiers, not because he isn't worthy (there were a few that should be walk up starts) but more to do with the fact that the bloke has ten years of footy ahead of him, and is part of a younger group that isnt expected to perform week in and week out for 4 quarters even though he probably will.
Ive watched Cripps.
Its like time moves slowly around him.
I don't think he moves slowly. It just looks like he has plenty of time most of the time.
Ive only witnessed a few players who just seemed to be "motionless" and all of them have been able to manufacture both time and space somehow around themselves and most of them are absolute guns at the sports they play.
Its a universal quality. Ive noticed it on the greats. Diesel Williams had that ability. Maradonna had that ability. Cripps has that ability.
He's a gem. I didn't put him in the first group of my tiers, not because he isn't worthy (there were a few that should be walk up starts) but more to do with the fact that the bloke has ten years of footy ahead of him, and is part of a younger group that isnt expected to perform week in and week out for 4 quarters even though he probably will.
They make time because opponents are wary of going too early, Cripps is too good at getting a handball away while under pressure which leaves his opponent holding him as the ball leaves the are, the opponents are left looking like a goose.
All the good players have that knack, Judd was the same, Kreuzer can also do it. That ability to squeeze the footy out of the traffic to a team-mate without telegraphing that intent to an opponent. SPS and Curnow also have it, Kennedy shows signs as well.
Yes, Cripps either disposes of the footy asap, or he uses his strength and size to bullock his way through players. Trying to outrun the opposition won't end well. Ditto the Cruiser.
Got a nice long stride has Cripps and a good look away move, bit like Pendlebury who is slow but has the long stride and basketball hesitation/ head fake moves and being a leftie has most players going the wrong way..
Got a nice long stride has Cripps and a good look away move, bit like Pendlebury who is slow but has the long stride and basketball hesitation/ head fake moves and being a leftie has most players going the wrong way..
Yes, I agree with all that, but it highlights the fact that he relies on tricks rather than pace to get free. IMO, this will hold him in good stead for the future, because what he relies on doesn't diminish with age or injury, unlike the fast players, where usually their speed is the first thing that goes.
i reckon he's quite slippery for a guy hiz size.
After all taller than any of Fev, Dunstall, Riewoldt (x2), Rance etc etc.
Got a nice long stride has Cripps and a good look away move, bit like Pendlebury who is slow but has the long stride and basketball hesitation/ head fake moves and being a leftie has most players going the wrong way..
I remember Rhys-Jones had that loping kind of running style and was called the "Slo-Mo Man" because it looked like he was running in slow motion. He was very slippery though and manged to break away plenty!
That's fair enough, but don't forget, he's only a few cms taller and a few kgs heavier than Cripps, so he wouldn't be holding proceedings up too much in comparison.
Cripps is an outlier. Nobody his size has ever been able to do what he has done. Even then, Cripps is rather average by foot and rarely attempts a kick from a stoppage. His vision is what sets him apart. His size facilitates that.
Cripps is an outlier. Nobody his size has ever been able to do what he has done. Even then, Cripps is rather average by foot and rarely attempts a kick from a stoppage. His vision is what sets him apart. His size facilitates that.
he is not average by foot, that is BS.
Compare to Gibbs' kicks from stoppages - awesome kicks over 5m to 25m around corners, onto the chest of the opposition...
It's about playing the percentages.... ::) ::)
Who would have thought? Not you, clearly.....
Cripps is an outlier. Nobody his size has ever been able to do what he has done. Even then, Cripps is rather average by foot and rarely attempts a kick from a stoppage. His vision is what sets him apart. His size facilitates that.
Adam Goodes gave it a fair go
Adam Goodes gave it a fair go
You mean the 2-time brownlow medalist and 372 game premiership Yeah, he'd be another outlier. How many of them have their been in the history of the game you reckon?
FYI, he's only 191cm.
Adam Goodes gave it a fair go
Kouta as well ?
https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/kouta-a-huge-cripps-fan-ng-ya-112709
Kouta as well ?
https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/kouta-a-huge-cripps-fan-ng-ya-112709
Kouta was the first of his kind and is almost the sole reason the AFL recruit so many athletes nowadays.
Played 278 games, despite doing his knee.
Yes, he's an outlier as well.
...and still only 191.
he is not average by foot, that is BS.
Compare to Gibbs' kicks from stoppages - awesome kicks over 5m to 25m around corners, onto the chest of the opposition...
It's about playing the percentages.... ::) ::)
Who would have thought? Not you, clearly.....
Why is it when someone says the word 'average' people lose their crap.
The simple definition of the word means that on any given list, half of the blokes are below average in terms of kicking ability.
Yes, GIbbs kicking from stoppages was pretty bad....as is most people. Gibbs kicking around the ground is elite.
So by extension, If Gibbs is an elite kick, but struggles around stoppages, what do you think an average kick like Cripps would be like from stoppages?
There is a reason he doesn't kick much, especially from stoppages....he's playing the %'s.
If you've got some time, compare the kick to handball ratio of the 2 players and see why one prefers to kick and the other prefers to handball.
i'll take that as a concession. 8)
i'll take that as a concession. 8)
So he handballs because he is an average kick is a concession?
But its BS that he's an average kick?
Your 'logic' is interesting to say the least.
Why is it when someone says the word 'average' people lose their crap.
The simple definition of the word means that on any given list, half of the blokes are below average in terms of kicking ability.
Yes, GIbbs kicking from stoppages was pretty bad....as is most people. Gibbs kicking around the ground is elite.
So by extension, If Gibbs is an elite kick, but struggles around stoppages, what do you think an average kick like Cripps would be like from stoppages?
There is a reason he doesn't kick much, especially from stoppages....he's playing the %'s.
If you've got some time, compare the kick to handball ratio of the 2 players and see why one prefers to kick and the other prefers to handball.
Sorry Kruddler, but that’s not what average means. Half of the list will be below the mean but the average could be above or below the mean.
Cripps and Gibbs both execute many of their disposals under more pressure than many other players and that results in a disposal efficiency of 68.7% and 69.8% respectively. The difference is not statistically significant but I’d argue that, as Gibbs gets more uncontested possessions, his disposal efficiency should be better.
I like Gibbs as a player and was sorry to see him go. However, one thing that irked me was his tendency to fluff kicks when under minimal pressure; the missed goal against Hawthorn for example.
So he handballs because he is an average kick is a concession?
But its BS that he's an average kick?
Your 'logic' is interesting to say the least.
One gentle piece of advice Kruddler, stick to what you're good at, ok?
Sorry Kruddler, but that’s not what average means. Half of the list will be below the mean but the average could be above or below the mean.
Cripps and Gibbs both execute many of their disposals under more pressure than many other players and that results in a disposal efficiency of 68.7% and 69.8% respectively. The difference is not statistically significant but I’d argue that, as Gibbs gets more uncontested possessions, his disposal efficiency should be better.
I like Gibbs as a player and was sorry to see him go. However, one thing that irked me was his tendency to fluff kicks when under minimal pressure; the missed goal against Hawthorn for example.
I'm making the point that roughly half of the AFL is 'average or below' in terms of kicking. You are correct in what you say, but it serves little purpose and the point i make is still valid. Nobody considers anybody 'average'. To suggest someone could be is always taken as an insult. Its clear that not everyone can be above average.....unless they play for the club you support and you have your navy coloured glasses on. ;)
re DE%'s....
I was wondering if someone was going to compare them.
I'd argue this, a kick is a harder skill to execute and thus players who kick more have a lower % compared to those who simply handball.
The longest kick people attempt? Lets just suggest 50m, but you could argue more.
The shortest kick? Basically 15m to be considered a mark is about right, but you could argue less. The number of kicks people attempt above 50 is probably equal to those below 15, so 15-50m is the range.
Handballs? anything from 0.5m up to maybe 10m....you rarely see bigger, and if you do its usually just to space.
Difficulty level is clearly harder with kicking.
That being said, you also can't analyze simply kicks vs handballs either. As generally the more skilled players attempt higher degree of difficulty kicks. A couple of perfect examples to that are Eddie Betts and Stevie J. They do things a ruckman would never even think is an option. It doesn't always come off, but attempting them drops their %'s compared to if they took the easy option all the time.....which most ruckman do. So much so, some rucks dont even attempt a kick at all!
So that being said, use %'s to compare, sure, but watch the game to get the whole picture.
FWIW, Cripps goal kicking efforts over his career - 23.32 (42%)...or 33% if you go by AFL.com.au stats which include complete misses.
So yes, i stand by my comments that Cripps is average by foot....which is probably doing him a favour.
Note: This does not mean Cripps is not an elite player, nor does it mean i love him any less. Even superman had his kryptonite.
One gentle piece of advice Kruddler, stick to what you're good at, ok?
Pointing out the grand canyon sized holes in your logic? Deal. ;D
I'm making the point that roughly half of the AFL is 'average or below' in terms of kicking. You are correct in what you say, but it serves little purpose and the point i make is still valid. Nobody considers anybody 'average'. To suggest someone could be is always taken as an insult. Its clear that not everyone can be above average.....unless they play for the club you support and you have your navy coloured glasses on. ;)
re DE%'s....
I was wondering if someone was going to compare them.
I'd argue this, a kick is a harder skill to execute and thus players who kick more have a lower % compared to those who simply handball.
The longest kick people attempt? Lets just suggest 50m, but you could argue more.
The shortest kick? Basically 15m to be considered a mark is about right, but you could argue less. The number of kicks people attempt above 50 is probably equal to those below 15, so 15-50m is the range.
Handballs? anything from 0.5m up to maybe 10m....you rarely see bigger, and if you do its usually just to space.
Difficulty level is clearly harder with kicking.
That being said, you also can't analyze simply kicks vs handballs either. As generally the more skilled players attempt higher degree of difficulty kicks. A couple of perfect examples to that are Eddie Betts and Stevie J. They do things a ruckman would never even think is an option. It doesn't always come off, but attempting them drops their %'s compared to if they took the easy option all the time.....which most ruckman do. So much so, some rucks dont even attempt a kick at all!
So that being said, use %'s to compare, sure, but watch the game to get the whole picture.
FWIW, Cripps goal kicking efforts over his career - 23.32 (42%)...or 33% if you go by AFL.com.au stats which include complete misses.
So yes, i stand by my comments that Cripps is average by foot....which is probably doing him a favour.
Note: This does not mean Cripps is not an elite player, nor does it mean i love him any less. Even superman had his kryptonite.
Remember that disposal efficiency has some extraordinary qualifications: An effective long kick is one that is at least 40 metres to a 50/50 or better for the team. An effective short kick is one that results in a teammate's possession provided that teammate was the intended target of the kicker (so, if Levi intercepts a short kick intended for Charlie, it's an ineffective disposal). A handball to a teammate that hits the intended target to the team's advantage is recorded as an effective handball.
Hoiking the ball across the body to a 50/50 contest counts as an effective disposal and I reckon Gibbs does a hell of a lot more of those than Cripps. In contrast, a handball that is too fast or not anticipated by the intended recipient is not an effective disposal.
A kick under no pressure is an easier skill to execute than a handball (or kick) taken while being tackled or under threat of being tackled. I would argue that, when Cripps evades the tackler and has time to steady, his kicking is as good as anyone's.
Again, all reasons i didn't bring up disposal efficiency....you did. :P
No comment about Cripps goal kicking efficiency? ;)
Lets not forget that its bloody hard to be accurate by hand let alone by foot when in a congested situation. Just ask Judd.
His deposal efficiency must have dropped a fair way when he had to become a contested player rather then an outside runner in his WC days.
I remember Juddy blindly handballing 15-20 metres forward out of a pack time and time again sometimes it hit a teammate other times it didn't and would land in the opposition hands. Its used to frustrate me a bit but as he did it time and time again it dawned on my (from the comfort of my couch) it must be a lot harder then it seems to use the ball cleanly when blokes have arms on you and in Judds case were hanging off him.
Put in this way I would rate Cripps general field kicking as clean as anyone in our team. His goal kicking has been below par but that's it IMO.
Lets not forget that its bloody hard to be accurate by hand let alone by foot when in a congested situation. Just ask Judd.
His deposal efficiency must have dropped a fair way when he had to become a contested player rather then an outside runner in his WC days.
I remember Juddy blindly handballing 15-20 metres forward out of a pack time and time again sometimes it hit a teammate other times it didn't and would land in the opposition hands. Its used to frustrate me a bit but as he did it time and time again it dawned on my (from the comfort of my couch) it must be a lot harder then it seems to use the ball cleanly when blokes have arms on you and in Judds case were hanging off him.
Put in this way I would rate Cripps general field kicking as clean as anyone in our team. His goal kicking has been below par but that's it IMO.
It's hard to hit a team-mate with the pill when they are tailing their opponents to the contest. ;)
Cripps is OK over short distances, but he needs to find some better penetration with his foot skills to be able to break up opposition defensive structures. If he can't they can just zone at 30m and he's not going to have an influence. I don't think his goal kicking will be a problem if he has people capable of sharing the midfield load, and he's already showing signs of a preparedness to push forward.
How good was it seeing Dow, Pickett and Garlett hit blokes on the chest with 45m passes? Hawthorn lived off that sort of ball use for a decade, you just cannot defend against it if the right decision is made!
From the Casboult Conundrum thread :
We've picked up quite a lot of depth across all segments except our forward line, so I think you are being a little pessimistic.
If you look across our list these are the players who do, can or have played midfield rotations at various times;
Dow
Murphy
Cripps
O'Brien
SPS
Kennedy
Kerridge
Lamb
Docherty
Lang
Schumaker
Plowman
Garlett
Fisher
Cunningham
Polson
Curnow
Curnow
Graham
Pickett
Byrne
Thomas
Wright
Based on VFL results, Jones could ruck and Kreuzer could play midfield, O'Shea could also get a rotation and has done so at VFL level, as well as Marchbank. But I thought Fraser had done a marvellous job at VFL level of getting Jones into the midfield with the right attitude and intent, and that is half the battle, feeling like you belong and being comfortable in the hustle and bustle.
I wouldn't be surprised to find Mullett acting as a backup for Ed Curnow as well, although if Lamb was available I'd let Lamb cover the loss of Ed and set Mullett free to attack the goals.
I haven't included the rookies Shaw or McDaid, but both are aerobically capable of being onballers and over 185cm x 85kg.
Silvagni, Williamson and Macreadie are strong enough and have sufficient aerobic capacity to do a mid-rotation as well.
Whether some of these players are successful at a rotation is more about coaching, structures and attitude than physical characteristics.
Some might argue having the correct attitude is a domain of coaching and leadership, which reminds me of those video clips showing Hodge berating Mitchell for not following his man!
Anyway this is a Casboult thread, these posts would be better of in the selection dilemma thread.
I think their success is about both physical characteristics and coaching.
Leaving aside my three protagonists (Curnow E, Kennedy and Cripps), these are my thoughts below. I might not have covered everyone you mention. If one of the above three goes down with injury, who replaces them ? Is load sharing an acceptable alternative ? Do 3 Caleb Daniels equal 1 Cripps ?
-Dow - too young - he should not be burdened so early in his career like Murph and Gibbs
-Murphy - gives his all but too small
-O'Brien - too young and not shown much to date
-SPS - maybe, but more an outside type at this moment (and a good one at that) - the bull rider stories make good copy, but we need to see more
-Kerridge - earnest and a big body, shame about the disposal, so a begrudging yes
-Lamb - not sure -seems to be a bit of a hole plugger at the moment
-Docherty - injured, but has had good spurts in the midfield, so yes
-Lang - don't know enough about him - is he more inside or outside ?
-Schumaker -??
-Plowman - no for mine - defender only for now, and very good.
-Garlett - see SPS
-Fisher - terrier and great attack, so 50/50 from me. A good example of the fight in the dog v the dog in the fight - wish he was bigger
-Cunningham - yes, if he gets it together
-Polson ??
-Curnow C - yes, but he's a one man AFL team, so he can play anywhere.
-Graham - much discussed, no need to repeat the arguments again
-Pickett - injury prone, big worry for mine playing in the guts
-Byrne - see Pickett
-Thomas - not sure about this one
-Wright - no, robbing Peter to pay Paul
-O'Shea - maybe, not great in the heat of the battle from what I can tell
-Jack S - yes, I have him ear marked as a tough inside mid if his life as a forward doesn't pan out. In fact, I would prefer it.
-Mullet - no, too timid and easily shifted. Definitely a wing /HBF IMO.
And yes, you're probably right. The situation doesn't seem as bad as I had initially thought.
What I was hoping to highlight, is how important the older blokes are to our side, and irrespective of how well players come on, the 1st tier will absolute be the first names written on the team sheet most weeks. The fact that there are others relatively cemented on there too, is quite irrelevant to whether or not they get selected and you will find the youngsters will only keep the mature players out if they REALLY kick on and become not just decent performers, but 4 quarter players each and every week.
We are very thin for mature, experienced top liners, and they will be in the mix for selection most weeks.
Look at this back bone, and pick your starting 22:
--BP-------------------FB-------------------BP
HBF-------------------CHB-------------------Simpson
Wing------------------Murphy------------Thomas
HFF-------------------Casboult---------------Wright
FP----------------------FF---------------------FP
Followers: Kreuzer-----E. Curnow--------------Mid
Int: 1-----------2----------3----------4
There is plenty of space for the kids and there, and whilst I can appreciate that many have pencilled in Cripps Im not writing him in here, because he is ahead of schedule and we need to be thinking a little bit more about that, when we look at our team, because the second you start dropping the likes of the above names, for kids, all of a sudden Cripps effectiveness will be reduced because he is no longer worried about his own game, but having to lead the line (Murphy, Kreuzer and Daisy are underated in this facet) and whilst Cripps might relish it, its not something we should take for granted.
Prophetic. In fact this thread has been very much all valid and proven correct. The biggest issue I have is that the folk in the stands, can see this stuff coming, yet the club has failed to entertain it.
I should keep a level head and listen to my inner self a bit more and perhaps not let my emotions get in the way of clarity of thinking.
In any case, with our injury list mounting, we need to get the following players as mainstays, and maybe give the kids a bit more VFL time:
Alex Silvagni
Sam Rowe
Andrew Phillips
Jed Lamb
Matt Shaw
Sam Kerridge
Matthew Lobbe
They don't have to all play together, but we are far too uncompetitive and might need to get a few more battle hardened bodies in the team to prevent demoralising situations that have been playing out at senior level thus far.
What I similarly worry about is that the same issues will likely play out at VFL level (demoralising performances) due to a lack of senior battle hardened bodies at this level too, so its a real balancing act that we are in unfortunately as a washout of the heavy turnover of the list.
Phillips and Rowe look right to go to me, although Phillips shared a lot of the load with De Koning.
Lamb is one of those blokes like Ed Curnow, great in the 3rd or 4th banana role, but not effective at being the front man.
Phillips and Rowe look right to go to me, although Phillips shared a lot of the load with De Koning.
Lamb is one of those blokes like Ed Curnow, great in the 3rd or 4th banana role, but not effective at being the front man.
I agree but the weekend showed that we are very much got the balance wrong between experience and inexperience to be competitive. Lamb is 25, and has played 50 games now. We need him to provide us with leadership or prove that he can't because time is running out for these peripheral players. If he can give us the chop out we need, he will get another year next year, and if he can't then we pull the plug on him and look elsewhere.
We are going to have one of those years where we need to make decisions, and we need to know if players are able to show the right stuff to be worth persisting with.
Phillips and Rowe look right to go to me, although Phillips shared a lot of the load with De Koning.
Lamb is one of those blokes like Ed Curnow, great in the 3rd or 4th banana role, but not effective at being the front man.
Agree..I think they will play Philips and Rowe....Nic Nat and Lycett are a decent double act and Kreuzer looks a bit jaded plus I thought Philips was one of our best
in the NB's. Probably says something we have to go back to Rowe in such a hurry but we look leaderless down back and he may give Jones and Weitering a bit more confidence
and help contain Kennedy.
Lamb will do well at VFL level because he is smart enough to find space playing on banana's but at AFL senior level he is a very ordinary player who needs to take every chance , problem is he doesnt and often misses goals or opportunities to help others score....
I like the idea of Phillips playing especially with Kreuz's fitness under a cloud. Don't think he'll play if Kreuz is fully fit but I didn't mind him at senior level tbh, until his fitness let him down. I'm sure Sam R will play as we need some more maturity and presence badly to help steady the ship. Him and Jones as the primary KDs and Weitering more in the Marchbank role.
Prophetic. In fact this thread has been very much all valid and proven correct. The biggest issue I have is that the folk in the stands, can see this stuff coming, yet the club has failed to entertain it.
I should keep a level head and listen to my inner self a bit more and perhaps not let my emotions get in the way of clarity of thinking.
In any case, with our injury list mounting, we need to get the following players as mainstays, and maybe give the kids a bit more VFL time:
Alex Silvagni
Sam Rowe
Andrew Phillips
Jed Lamb
Matt Shaw
Sam Kerridge
Matthew Lobbe
They don't have to all play together, but we are far too uncompetitive and might need to get a few more battle hardened bodies in the team to prevent demoralising situations that have been playing out at senior level thus far.
What I similarly worry about is that the same issues will likely play out at VFL level (demoralising performances) due to a lack of senior battle hardened bodies at this level too, so its a real balancing act that we are in unfortunately as a washout of the heavy turnover of the list.
Good stuff, 3 Leos, common sense really.
Note: This does not mean Cripps is not an elite player
It does in my opinion.
Elite players have all of the skills of the game, which is why there are so few of them.
It does in my opinion.
Elite players have all of the skills of the game, which is why there are so few of them.
I don't think there is any player who has all the skills, it's just not the case!
I think most elite players excel at a few skills, and are passable at the rest.
Older more experienced teams are better at structuring the game plan around strengths and weaknesses, they are experienced at making things happen that favour them and avoiding situations that don't!
If you think that is not true, I suggest getting hold of the heat maps for players like Martin, Ablett Jnr, Selwood, Dangerfiled, Franklin. They all avoid specific areas of the ground and certain circumstances, they play to their strengths.
To me this requirement to all-skill every player is a bit of a furphy, and it's a contributing factor for the slow progress of young players like Weitering. Maybe long term they will be better off for it, but we can never really know!
Maybe I should have said that in my opinion a player can't be classed as elite without superior foot skills, which definitely applies to Martin, Dangerfield, Selwood and Franklin.
Greg Williams was slow but also an elite player, due in no small part to his skill by hand and foot, Sam Mitchell likewise.
Cripps is a very good and very valuable player, but not in the top bracket.
Cripps is a very good and very valuable player, but not in the top bracket.
Give him time B4L.
Even though Diesel was a prolific ball winner, and had extraordinary handball skills, it was probably 4 or 5 years into his career before Diesel became know for that elite kicking either side of his body.
Sam Mitchell was similar, a prolific ball winner, great with handball, not much good at kicking (probably below average) until perhaps even 5 or 6 years into his career! I know Dawks fans that had labeled him a turnover merchant and did not want him as captain when he was first named!
Cripps shows all the signs of being on the right trajectory.
AFL Coaches have a funny way of looking at this, they all share a universal outlook which you can basically summarise as follows;
"I can teach a Super Athlete to be a AFL Footballer, but I cannot teach a natural Footballer to be a Super Athlete!"
I call it the AFL coaches megalomania, it's like a disease, and they truly believe it.
I supposed that they have to believe it or they wouldn't be in the job! That perspective also explains much of the drafting and trade recruitment that occurs, they all think they can fix some players broken skills, but they cannot fix someone who doesn't have the natural physical attributes. It is a sort of common coaching arrogance they all share!
Cripps will get better, then the shortcomings will start to evaporate, the things that he lacks are all coach-able except for speed! But we know from Williams and Mitchell that speed is not a requirement. When his kicking improves they won't be able to leave him alone, they won't be able to run off him!
Maybe I should have said that in my opinion a player can't be classed as elite without superior foot skills, which definitely applies to Martin, Dangerfield, Selwood and Franklin.
Greg Williams was slow but also an elite player, due in no small part to his skill by hand and foot, Sam Mitchell likewise.
Cripps is a very good and very valuable player, but not in the top bracket.
gee, he's only 22, playing in a very soft midfield!
AFL Coaches have a funny way of looking at this, they all share a universal outlook which you can basically summarise it as follows;
"I can teach a Super Athlete to be a AFL Footballer, but I cannot teach a natural Footballer to be a Super Athlete!"
In the case of Shaun Hampson, absolute bunkum.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm a big fan of Patrick Cripps.
Cripps is ahead of schedule with or without his limitations. Hes a 60 game player in his 5th season of AFL (the first of which was a VFL gap year) most of it played at a good or better level.
Given that information, we are a few years off being truly competitive, because the rest of the crop that we have drafted (Charlie Curnow, and Zac Fisher aside) are still finding their feet at this level.
Yes we have gotten a leg up with some more advanced trades in (Pickett, Kennedy, Marchbank, Plowman), but these guys are going to hold us in good stead, whilst we are still searching for some additional talent at the end of this season and next season.
AFL Coaches have a funny way of looking at this, they all share a universal outlook which you can basically summarise as follows;
"I can teach a Super Athlete to be a AFL Footballer, but I cannot teach a natural Footballer to be a Super Athlete!"
The truth is "There are some things you cant teach"...and I don't think you can teach either of those.
Once in a lifetime a super athlete who is also a good footballer, with all the skills comes along...Then he buggers up his bloody knee! :(
In the case of Shaun Hampson, absolute bunkum.
That's a good example, as is Casboult, Watson and Deluca.
But I have to query this, why is Blicavs a success at the Handbaggers, but those above dismal failures at Carlton?
Blicavs had barely played a game of football before being drafted, he was guy who played a little basketball and mostly competed at distance running! I understand he had one season at Taylor's Lakes before being rookied!
Blicavs' parents were both born overseas – his father was born in New Zealand to Latvian parents, and his mother was born on the isle of Jersey[1] Both of his parents represented Australia at basketball. His father Andris Blicavs played at the 1976 Montreal Olympics and his mother Karen Ogden was a member of the team that competed at the 1983 World Championships. His brother Kris has played basketball in the South East Australian Basketball League (SEABL) and his sister Sara Blicavs played in the Women's National Basketball League (WNBL).[2]
Prior to being recruited by Geelong, Blicavs was a middle-distance runner and steeplechaser, who attempted to qualify for the 2012 Summer Olympics.
He trained as an Olympian until he missed the cut!
Blicavs is the modern archetype of the coaches megalomania, probably in the fashion of his predecessor Kouta! People forget Kouta's chosen sport was athletics until 16 or 17, high jump, hurdles and discus!
The whole situation gets even murkier for Carlton, when you consider Hampson left for Nthmond and ended up ranked top 5 for ruck in his only injury free season there. That same year our best ruck was clearly Kreuzer in 12th. That re-opens the players who leave and improve debate.
Can you see where coaches get this megalomaniac belief from?
Blicavs is the modern archetype of the coaches megalomania, probably in the fashion of his predecessor Kouta! People forget Kouta's chosen sport was athletics until 16 or 17, high jump, hurdles and discus!
Can you see where coaches get this belief from?
Kouta was Victorian junior hurdles champion from memory but he also played all of his junior football, he wasn't an athlete turned footballer as some people claim.
Goldstein was on an AIS basketball scholarship at 17 unless I'm mistaken, and Jezza didn't play Aussie rules until he was 14, some people are just naturally good at sport and can turn their hands to more than one discipline.
That's the definition of a "natural footballer" isn't it.
They just have the natural instincts and ability for the game.
The fact they may not have played a lot doesn't matter.
They've either got it or they haven't.
That's a good example, as is Casboult, Watson and Deluca.
But I have to query this, why is Blicavs a success at the Handbaggers, but those above dismal failures at Carlton?
Blicavs had barely played a game of football before being drafted, he was guy who played a little basketball and mostly competed at distance running! I understand he had one season at Taylor's Lakes before being rookied!
He trained as an Olympian until he missed the cut!
Blicavs is the modern archetype of the coaches megalomania, probably in the fashion of his predecessor Kouta! People forget Kouta's chosen sport was athletics until 16 or 17, high jump, hurdles and discus!
The whole situation gets even murkier for Carlton, when you consider Hampson left for Nthmond and ended up ranked top 5 for ruck in his only injury free season there. That same year our best ruck was clearly Kreuzer in 12th. That re-opens the players who leave and improve debate.
Can you see where coaches get this megalomaniac belief from?
Hampson was ok at best at Carlton but very ordinary at Richmond, let's not use spin to change history. He didn't improve at Richmond. He was better at Carlton.
Casboult certainly hasn't been a dismal failure. Not a rip-roaring success, he was a pick 44 from the Rookie Draft, but far from a dismal failure. Certainly a far bit better than Hampson, which we know hurts.
Cripps has to show he can handle a tag to be seen as top shelf....Sam Mitchell and Greg Williams would get 30 plus possies with taggers all over them but Cripps needs to show he can shake the tags and be effective.
You look at the two players Ed Curnow played on in the last two weeks, now Ed gives a heavy tag but Sidebottom and Higgins cleaned him up and were both BOG in previous weeks...Cripps was kept to 19 by a banana in Ben Jacobs, an elite player would have had 30 plus on Jacobs and had him benched.
Granted Cripps is still a kid and he has zero support so we need to be patient but talk of Cripps being elite need to be tempered until we have a better team and he can be judged.
Charlie Curnow is a better more complete player at the minute and has performed well regardless of the support given to him and regardless of who he is playing on...
Maybe I should have said that in my opinion a player can't be classed as elite without superior foot skills, which definitely applies to Martin, Dangerfield, Selwood and Franklin.
Greg Williams was slow but also an elite player, due in no small part to his skill by hand and foot, Sam Mitchell likewise.
Cripps is a very good and very valuable player, but not in the top bracket.
So I guess Judd was definitely not elite?
So I guess Judd was definitely not elite?
That's a tough one.
His foot skills were very good early in his career but dropped off when he had hip issues later on.
At his peak he was elite, later on he was passed by players like Ablett and Dangerfield.
At his peak he was elite, later on he was passed by players like Ablett and Dangerfield.
Sorry, you do not lose elite, it's something you've earned for life!
Sorry, you do not lose elite, it's something you've earned for life!
Time catches up with everyone sooner or later.
Would love to have non elite Judd on the list anytime
Sorry, you do not lose elite, it's something you've earned for life!
Daisy Thomas ????
Daisy Thomas ????
So far this season, hes been one of our best.
Hes not what he was, but he shows glimpses and still has the workrate of an elite player.
For me the measure of a player is their ability to perform in the face of adversity, not necessarily how well they go when the teams travelling well, and saturday night might have been one of Daisy's best matches in Navy Blue (I don't want to jinx him, but he's having a pretty good 2018 at this stage).
So far this season, hes been one of our best.
Hes not what he was, but he shows glimpses and still has the workrate of an elite player.
For me the measure of a player is their ability to perform in the face of adversity, not necessarily how well they go when the teams travelling well, and saturday night might have been one of Daisy's best matches in Navy Blue (I don't want to jinx him, but he's having a pretty good 2018 at this stage).
Spot on. And that's what Daisy did bring last week. Hopefully we bring in a few more senior blokes this week to give strong support and direction to the newbies... ie Rowe, Phillips, Shaw, Kerridge.
For me the measure of a player is their ability to perform in the face of adversity, not necessarily how well they go when the teams travelling well, and saturday night might have been one of Daisy's best matches in Navy Blue (I don't want to jinx him, but he's having a pretty good 2018 at this stage).
This is what i've been banging on about for years with Daisy.
He sets the example of busting his butt each and every week. Its a non-negotiable. Sure, his body isn't what he used to be. He can't control that, age and injuries creep up on everyone, including Judd. What he CAN control is effort....and he gives that in spades.
Yes, we'd hoped to get more output from him, more elite daisy. Previous problems may be the reason for it, but perhaps the injuries he got while wearing navy blue are equally (or more) to blame for his declining output. Either way, we are still getting a 100% committed player each and every week. I used the term leader in regards to him previously and people scoffed, but doing the 1%ers like he does is the example our young blokes need to be seeing.
If only we had more blokes who put in like him, we wouldn't see all these 10 goal defeats we've been seeing.
Spot on. And that's what Daisy did bring last week. Hopefully we bring in a few more senior blokes this week to give strong support and direction to the newbies... ie Rowe, Phillips, Shaw, Kerridge.
Too True!
Spot on. And that's what Daisy did bring last week. Hopefully we bring in a few more senior blokes this week to give strong support and direction to the newbies... ie Rowe, Phillips, Shaw, Kerridge.
Kerridge? Wouldnt have thought so watching the twos v Norp on the weekend.
Kerridge? Wouldnt have thought so watching the twos v Norp on the weekend.
I didn't watch that game GTC, but based on previous experiences the prospect of him coming in does not excite me. He would only provide a bit more hardness around the contests at best but maybe that's all he'd be expected to do?
I didn't watch that game GTC, but based on previous experiences the prospect of him coming in does not excite me. He would only provide a bit more hardness around the contests at best but maybe that's all he'd be expected to do?
My concern is turnovers. Turnovers are king these days and they are forced by oppo to create scoring opportunity. If you hand it over to them, you make it easy and Sam is abit of a butcher with the footy. Yes he adds some hardness and experience, its the disposal aspect of his game that concerns me.
My concern is turnovers. Turnovers are king these days and they are forced by oppo to create scoring opportunity. If you hand it over to them, you make it easy and Sam is abit of a butcher with the footy. Yes he adds some hardness and experience, its the disposal aspect of his game that concerns me.
Agree. He's a very untidy and fumbling type of player. Tries hard but is not AFL standard. I find him excruciately frustrating to watch.
I agree re Kerridge and ability.
I guess though, if part of where we are at is building culture, reward for effort must be looked at as well. If he is performing in the 2s and giving his all, is that enough to get him a gig when we are complaining about the lack of effort shown by our 1s?
Agree. He's a very untidy and fumbling type of player. Tries hard but is not AFL standard. I find him excruciately frustrating to watch.
I think you'll find that he's cleaned up considerably in that area and hit most targets recently, in fact he's improved that much that his disposal is now very close to average. :o ;) :)
I agree re Kerridge and ability.
I guess though, if part of where we are at is building culture, reward for effort must be looked at as well. If he is performing in the 2s and giving his all, is that enough to get him a gig when we are complaining about the lack of effort shown by our 1s?
Yep, absolutely.
Effort must be unconditional, you can persist (for a while) with players that make poor choices (learning their craft) but the effort must be there.
If you promote guys who don’t put in the effort, it smacks of favoritism and that will destroy the place.
I agree re Kerridge and ability.
I guess though, if part of where we are at is building culture, reward for effort must be looked at as well. If he is performing in the 2s and giving his all, is that enough to get him a gig when we are complaining about the lack of effort shown by our 1s?
From that perspective, yes I agree Deags. In the light of last Sat, I'm willing to give him a try if he can offer something that may help the younger guys to settle in and build some confidence. If, as Baggers says, he has got his disposal up to average then he could take some of the heat of the younger guys without undoing his good work by giving away too many turnovers.
My concern is turnovers. Turnovers are king these days and they are forced by oppo to create scoring opportunity. If you hand it over to them, you make it easy and Sam is abit of a butcher with the footy. Yes he adds some hardness and experience, its the disposal aspect of his game that concerns me.
If the structure is correct Kerridge will be OK, don't have him trying to hit targets, make sure he works inside and dishes off to kids like Fisher and SPS.
Word the kids up, it's time they played big boy football and self-organised on field, no more you stand next to him and go everywhere he goes!
It's time we started seeing some genuine footy smarts from some of these "talented kids"!
In other words, cut the robot crap!
I think you'll find that he's cleaned up considerably in that area and hit most targets recently, in fact he's improved that much that his disposal is now very close to average. :o ;) :)
Came OShea hits targets in the VFL, hardly makes a mistake and I thought he had improved, attacks and defends not too bad at senior level but his disposal has been poor, the same skill level fault that got him the boot from Port resurfaced with senior pressure vs North. Kerridge is the same IMO, looks ok at VFL level with less pressure but will be exposed at senior level.
You are either a good kick/good decision maker or you are poor IMO and if its not fixed in your first couple of seasons then its going to be the same through the career.
Kerridge is a more hardened AFL body and will stop the bleeding a bit but you have to ask is it worth playing him or better getting games into kids like Dow and putting up with some big losses....or does that do more harm to Dow ?...I dont know and it probably depends on the kids themselves as some have the maturity and some dont when you throw them in the deep end.
Kerridge is a more hardened AFL body and will stop the bleeding a bit but you have to ask is it worth playing him or better getting games into kids like Dow and putting up with some big losses....or does that do more harm to Dow ?...I dont know and it probably depends on the kids themselves as some have the maturity and some dont when you throw them in the deep end.
Are you prepared to risk the kids by throwing them in the deep end, not knowing if they will handle the situation or not?
The answer to this question has nothing to do with potential or ability, it's a learning curve. The problem we have at the moment is that we have almost not role models on the field, nobody sharing the load with the kids.
The world stands on the shoulders of those who came before us, AFL is no different! ;)
Throw the kids in the deep end and ask them to sort themselves out, without some senior structure or previous knowledge in support, and you can end up with a team of flat earthers! :o imho, the deep end survivor plan is just another "Lord of the Flies" scenario, and that won't take us anywhere fast, it won't deliver any consistency, and it won't be repeatable.
We need a structure that churns out 20 to 30 AFL ready 2nd or 3rd year players in a sensible time frame. Surely standing on the shoulders of someone who has come before them makes sense regardless of the individuals capacity to deal with situations! Isn't that what you do with your kids?
Are you prepared to risk the kids by throwing them in the deep end, not knowing if they will handle the situation or not?
The answer to this question has nothing to do with potential or ability, it's a learning curve. The problem we have at the moment is that we have almost not role models on the field, nobody sharing the load with the kids.
The world stands on the shoulders of those who came before us, AFL is no different! ;)
Throw the kids in the deep end and ask them to sort themselves out, without some senior structure or previous knowledge in support, and you can end up with a team of flat earthers! :o imho, the deep end survivor plan is just another "Lord of the Flies" scenario, and that won't take us anywhere fast, it won't deliver any consistency, and it won't be repeatable.
We need a structure that churns out 20 to 30 AFL ready 2nd or 3rd year players in a sensible time frame. Surely standing on the shoulders of someone who has come before them makes sense regardless of the individuals capacity to deal with situations! Isn't that what you do with your kids?
Hodge, Lewis etc you can throw in the deep end and they handle it and become massive players for their club and quickly, Jonathan Brown was another, just a hard unit at 16 playing vs men down at Warrnambool, , Voss was another, the Scott boys, Joel Selwood, I wont count Gary Ablett jr as he was an exceptional talent.....Sticks was another who thrived as a young man being captain, Ricciuto another.....there is a common theme though, these players were mentally tough for what ever reason and were young men not young boys....we get too many boys...
Kennedy will be very good for us....
but too many pipsqueaks, agreed.
Hodge, Lewis etc you can throw in the deep end and they handle it and become massive players for their club and quickly, Jonathan Brown was another, just a hard unit at 16 playing vs men down at Warrnambool, , Voss was another, the Scott boys, Joel Selwood, I wont count Gary Ablett jr as he was an exceptional talent.....Sticks was another who thrived as a young man being captain, Ricciuto another.....there is a common theme though, these players were mentally tough for what ever reason and were young men not young boys....we get too many boys...
Sticks was 25 when he entered AFL.
Hodge and Lewis survived and became stars, but they were far from being superheroes on debut, they took some time and I contest they weren't thrown in the deep end like our kids. They had Crawford, Chick, Lonie, Harford, Bateman, Dixon and a host of bits players surrounding them including some serious KPP options.
Jonathon Brown had as KPP role models Lynch, Bradshaw, Charman, White, Leppitsch and as general role models Scott, Scott, Johnston, Power, Pyke, Voss, Black, Akermanis, Lappin and Headland who were all established before he arrived! Hardly the deep end!
Ablett Jnr had in support Chapman, Ling, Wojinski and started with Enright, Corey, Johnston, Kelly, Bartel, etc, etc,. Most of them were still there and established when Selwood started five years later. Hardly deep end stuff is it?
I thought Ricciutto might be a good example of a surviver, but that doesn't stack up either. He had McGuinness, Bickley, Jarman and a host of others established when he arrived. Role models a plenty!
There isn't a single average player in that list though EB1, they are all extraordinary players and they all had far more support around them than our current kids!
It makes a huge difference, the situations are barely comparable!
They all played alongside significant mentors, we have a bunch of kids playing alongside peers!
Hodge, Lewis etc you can throw in the deep end and they handle it and become massive players for their club and quickly, Jonathan Brown was another, just a hard unit at 16 playing vs men down at Warrnambool, , Voss was another, the Scott boys, Joel Selwood, I wont count Gary Ablett jr as he was an exceptional talent.....Sticks was another who thrived as a young man being captain, Ricciuto another.....there is a common theme though, these players were mentally tough for what ever reason and were young men not young boys....we get too many boys...
Hmmm.
I think you are ignoring the environments that these guys all started playing football in granted they are tough as nails, but sometimes the difference between looking tough and being tough is simply being taught how to handle yourself on field.
Even our own Patrick Cripps had the benefit of having Chris Judd even if it was a short time.
Anyway going back to the question of Kerridge its a simple equation.
Is the team playing like it lacks belief in its ability to compete? For me, certain players are (they are learners). That means that they need someone who can help them walk a bit taller, and IMHO, Kerridge is one of those players.
Even our own Patrick Cripps had the benefit of having Chris Judd even if it was a short time.
Just a bit of trivia....How many games did Judd play with Cripps?...the answer surprised me.
Just a bit of trivia....How many games did Judd play with Cripps?...the answer surprised me.
7.
No doubt having Judd around in his development years helped Cripps to some extent....but they didn't play together a great deal... which surprised me, because we even had a thread about Judd holding Cripps back.
http://www.carltonsc.com/index.php?topic=2167.0
Playing is just a generalisation of being a team-mate, it's not just the game day is it?
It was Judd's influence that got Cripps motivated to hire a coach to help with his speed one off season.
It was Judd's influence that got Cripps motivated to hire a coach to help with his speed one off season.
Obviously a fairly average coach.
Hmmm.
I think you are ignoring the environments that these guys all started playing football in granted they are tough as nails, but sometimes the difference between looking tough and being tough is simply being taught how to handle yourself on field.
Even our own Patrick Cripps had the benefit of having Chris Judd even if it was a short time.
Anyway going back to the question of Kerridge its a simple equation.
Is the team playing like it lacks belief in its ability to compete? For me, certain players are (they are learners). That means that they need someone who can help them walk a bit taller, and IMHO, Kerridge is one of those players.
If we are relying on Kerridge to add leadership and hardness then we are in trouble.....when he has the footy it wont be long before the other team get it back, thats the bottom line and why he plays VFL....
We lack depth in the middle tier age bracket, those mid age senior players are not good enough and thats one of our major problems, no seven man defense anymore and a high banana factor means big floggings when the kids tire..
Look at the reality, people want the likes of Kerridge, Matt Shaw in the team...not to win the game but to prevent massive losses.....we might as well go back to stacking the backline and playing negative footy again...
Obviously a fairly average coach.
Cripps acceleration has certainly improved significantly from his first season, top speed won't really be affected.
But isn't it the first 3m to 5m that really count for an inside mid, after that he should be dishing off to an outside runner!
If we are relying on Kerridge to add leadership and hardness then we are in trouble.....when he has the footy it wont be long before the other team get it back, thats the bottom line and why he plays VFL....
We lack depth in the middle tier age bracket, those mid age senior players are not good enough and thats one of our major problems, no seven man defense anymore and a high banana factor means big floggings when the kids tire..
Look at the reality, people want the likes of Kerridge, Matt Shaw in the team...not to win the game but to prevent massive losses.....we might as well go back to stacking the backline and playing negative footy again...
Do we have an alternative at the moment :(
What you point out is exactly right....that mid age/experience group is basically not up to it.
They provide little to the youngsters in terms of support because they're not secure in their own positions
...an ongoing problem ::)
Just a bit of trivia....How many games did Judd play with Cripps?...the answer surprised me.
8 by my count.
Wasn't too surprising to me. It wasn't until Judd went down that Cripps was fit and got a big go at it.
He kept breaking down before that.
If the structure is correct Kerridge will be OK, don't have him trying to hit targets, make sure he works inside and dishes off to kids like Fisher and SPS.
Word the kids up, it's time they played big boy football and self-organised on field, no more you stand next to him and go everywhere he goes!
It's time we started seeing some genuine footy smarts from some of these "talented kids"!
In other words, cut the robot crap!
Just let em be natural, have some fun, show some flair.
Just let em be natural, have some fun, show some flair.
One thing about that GTC.
As long as we aren't predictable then allowing some freedoms can be very hard to coach against! ;)
As you can appreciate, I think we know that we are still in development mode, and one of the things we are looking for is to develop a winning attitude, as well as a winning feeling.
Irrespective, the conversation surrounding who plays when is occurring and largely it will vary depending on what our aims are.
Team balance is one.
Learning opportunities with guidance is another.
Realistically I look at it, and I can see a few "constants" that are likely to be the case for our team selection, irrespective of what value we perceive they bring to the table.
What I can see happening is that the following players will be picked most weeks unless injured, or struggling for form/fitness majorly.
Mature agers, team leaders, onfield coaches, call them whatever you want:
Marc Murphy
Kade Simpson
Matthew Kreuzer
Ed Curnow
Dale Thomas
Levi Casboult
Matthew Wright
These guys are going to play pretty much when they are available and even if we think they are struggling. They are there not to perform well themselves, but play their role to the best of their ability and ensure that the team is playing the right way, and that other blokes are playing their allotted roles or learning to play them properly. These guys are only going to exclude themselves from selection if they are struggling big time.
The next tier:
Jack Silvagni
SPS
Matthew Kennedy
Patrick Cripps
Harry McKay
Darcy Lang
Lachie Plowman
Jarrod Garlett
Caleb Marchbank
Jacob Weitering
Zac Fisher
David Cunningham
Charlie Curnow
Tom Williamson
Jarrod Pickett
Ciaran Byrne
These guys are no longer "learning" to play football. Some are learning to compete, or learning roles, and some weeks they will benefit from dropping down to VFL level to polish up something or work on their leadership ability, but you will find that these guys are going to be 15-23 gamers for the year (some more likely to play more than others).
The next Tier:
Sam Kerridge
Jed Lamb
Liam Jones
Sam Rowe
Aaron Mullett
Cam O'Shea
Matthew Lobbe
Nick Graham
Andrew Phillips
Matt Shaw
Alex Silvagni
This group are role/depth players who could surprise and play every week but are more likely to be filling in the gaps for team balance that we cant quite get right from the aforementioned. I expect some to play frequently but most of them will be doing well to get 10+ AFL games for the year and will be the VFL equivalent of what the first tier I wrote down do for our VFL team.
The Next Tier:
Paddy Dow
Lochie O'Brien
Tom De Koning
Angus Schumacher
Harrison Macreadie
Cameron Poulson
Pat Kerr
Youngsters that are still firmly on their L plates and looking to find their feet at this level, or learn roles. Some might emerge instantly and play like seasoned pros (looking at Paddy Dow mainly or Cam Poulson hopefully) but realistically if they get anywhere near 10 games for the year, they will be deemed a roaring success. (Projected anywhere from 0-10 games with anything else being an outlier).
This is where I see our list for 2018. This is likely to be how our MC select our team for round 1, and will contain a few but not many surprises, mainly regarding team balance and opposition match ups, but anticipate that some are going to be ahead of others in the pecking order simply because we need them to be. I expect we will see the 3-4 year draftees playing pretty much every week unless their form is putrid (and even then we might persist because there is little they can benefit from at VFL level).
So I figured post round 9 is a good time to revisit this particular thread.
We all have our questions as to why things are the way they are, and the answers are wide and varied but ultimately, the way I broke up these groups, and forecasted how many games they SHOULD play, based on where our list is at, paints the picture better than any other explanation of why we have been so poor in season 2018.
Effectively, if you look above I have listed a fairly best case scenario regarding our list, in terms of what players bring what effort and class every week and it really does tell the story of where we are at, and why we are performing so poorly.
Of the first tier: Simpson, Thomas and Wright have been the only players to play every game and the absence of the rest has been sorely missed, irrespective of how well we have covered them at times.
Of our second tier: Unfortunately, Cripps, Fisher, SPS and Plowman are the only ever present players from this tier and most of this tier have shown patchy form, or ability to be on the park. Cripps, Fisher and Charlie are the only 3 from this tier that have really had what can be called good form. The rest have come in and out, played the odd stinker, or generally haven't been cited.
Of our third tier: Liam Jones and Aaron Mullet are the only ever present options and we would have been doing well if the rest of these guys had shown good form when they were playing (Rowe is probably the only other player from this tier to have been a good contributer most of the time). The rest have been similarly patchy.
Our fourth tier: Paddy Dow is playing more footy than I was expecting/hoping he needed to, and Lachie O Brien is ahead of schedule and done ok.
What the above shows, is why we are miles off the pace of a competitive footy side, and the fact that we have managed a win, is almost a miracle. We have had the perfect storm of the players we needed to rely on not performing this year. We needed to have our best 22 made up of our first 2 tiers of players, with sprinklings of the others for team balance, and the one week we got that against Essendon, we had a win.
Unfortunately, circumstances have conspired to prevent us from picking the top tier altogether, which was going to be the key to us doing any damage on the scoreboard this season.
Again, I expect us to be better after the bye, and frankly Gold Coast and Western bulldogs aside, it might actually work out better for us to fare better with blokes getting on the park in the second half of the year as we have played a fairly tough schedule until now. Given whom we have faced, we could and should do much better in the second half of the season.
Jack Darling is just hitting his straps. Been in the system for 7 years, is 25 years old 191 cm 95 kg and played 160 games. Had many lean years but WCE have stuck with him.
Patrick Kerr is 19, 194 cm 94 kg. 1 game. Has strong hands and kicks straight.
These guys take time........IF you have the patience.
Jack Darling is just hitting his straps. Been in the system for 7 years, is 25 years old 191 cm 95 kg and played 160 games. Had many lean years but WCE have stuck with him.
Patrick Kerr is 19, 194 cm 94 kg. 1 game. Has strong hands and kicks straight.
These guys take time........IF you have the patience.
In a crap game Kerr looked much more like a forward than McKay.
Did any one else feel that there were times on the weekend where Kerr made leads or got into good positions only to be ignored.
I couldn't be a hundred percent sure but I thought on at least two occasions that he was a good option but players went elsewhere.
Of course that's watching on TV so you only get a limited overview.
Did any one else feel that there were times on the weekend where Kerr made leads or got into good positions only to be ignored.
I couldn't be a hundred percent sure but I thought on at least two occasions that he was a good option but players went elsewhere.
Of course that's watching on TV so you only get a limited overview.
Yep, sure did!!
Did any one else feel that there were times on the weekend where Kerr made leads or got into good positions only to be ignored.
I couldn't be a hundred percent sure but I thought on at least two occasions that he was a good option but players went elsewhere.
Of course that's watching on TV so you only get a limited overview.
Yeeeerrp, we burnt him more than once.
Some talk about him making leads to nowhere at the wrong time, but he'll do that anyway because he is a natural KPF that makes space for team-mates and draws defenders, his work rate stands out. The Dees had already pegged him as the main lead up target halfway through the 1st Qtr.
Often Kerr comes good late, he seems to take time to work into the game, I think his best footy comes in the 2nd half, but of course you have to actually get the footy into F50 for him to have any chance! :o
On a side note, I got the feeling at the VFL that he might not be the most well liked player on the list, not sure why, but his connections to team-mates came across as a bit cold. I suppose if that is true we will Robbo him! ::)
So I thought I would revisit this on the back end of the season, because there are quite a few dissapointed with how things wound up, and I thought it would be beneficial to highlight, why 2018 became the car crash that it ended up:
Tier 1 Mature agers, team leaders, onfield coaches, call them whatever you want. For our best possible outcome, we needed these guys not only to play each and every week, but to be at their very best in the process. We got very different results:
Marc Murphy - 13 games for the season and never really got going either. Might have had one or two standout games. Struggled for Fitness AND form.
Kade Simpson - 21 games at a fairly high standard. Showing signs that the game is starting to go by him.
Matthew Kreuzer - 12 games, of which almost half were played under duress, if he ran out the game at all but still contributed well (which says a bit about our overall team).
Ed Curnow - 21 Games for the season. After the buy Ed struggled, and without knowing any different, Id suggest he played either under duress or carrying too heavy a load which really effected his ability to contribute in the backend of the season.
Dale Thomas - 20 games. So so disposal, but played very high standard footy for the most part with only a few errors in the process.
Levi Casboult - 10 games. We really needed Levi at full capacity this season particularly with all our other ruckmen going down throughout the season.
Matthew Wright - 21 games. Another one who appears to have carried too big a load and had a poor end to the year.
Sam Docherty - Never fired a shot.
We need new blood in this group. If we are relying heavily on this group (as a whole) next season, we are likely to be back in the bottom 4 again.
Tier 2
The Future and hopefully the present (we got far too little output from this group with the exception of Cripps, Fisher and Charlie:
Jack Silvagni - 15 Games. Firmly still on his L plates with no major tricks added to his bow. Silvagni is a competitor, but thats where it ends for me as he simply doesnt get involved enough.
SPS - 22 Games. Improved towards the back end of the year, and is still learning. Not the first to suffer from second year blues, and wont be the last.
Matthew Kennedy - 12 games. Another one that never really got going until late, and then broke down completely.
Patrick Cripps - 22. There are not enough superlatives for Cripps. Build a statue to him from now for services rendered.
Harry McKay - 13 games. Probably about what we expected from young Harry. Ironically, he gave us less goals for much better overall contribution in the back end of the season than he did where he was a pure finisher early. Hopefully he picks up where he left off next season.
Darcy Lang - 11 games. An interupted start, and then a yo yo ing performance really means its hard to take anything from his season.
Lachie Plowman - 13 games. Got stitched up a lot early on and was another one that struggled with form and fitness from the outside looking in.
Jarrod Garlett - 11 games. An interupted start, and a really poor end to the season rumoured to be hampered by injury, but the question marks over his desire are still there which is a worry.
Caleb Marchbank - 12 games. I had him as probably our best defender against the Tigers in round 1. He was marking everything coming in and justifed his trade. Unfortunately he was another that broke down and then struggled to get going again until late in the year.
Jacob Weitering - 14 games. Struggled early, got dropped, came back in, and played pretty well until he hurt himself again and then went back to the sort of up and down performances.
Zac Fisher - 17 - Fisher was arguably the 3rd biggest positive this year. The unfortunate broken leg injury against Hawthorn ended what was a really strong season for Fisher.
David Cunningham. 5 games. Was really hoping for Cunners to help fill in the holes in our midfield. Unfortunately he never got going and then was ruled out for the year.
Charlie Curnow - 20 games. Faded a little later in the year, but he is a jet. If not for him Cripps, and Fisher, this season would have yielded almost 0 positives.
Tom Williamson - Never fired a shot.
Jarrod Pickett - 7 games. Cruelled by injury but given it was effectively a hand injury, I cannot comprehend how he appeared to be in such poor physical shape and never showed us the speed we know he has in spades. That worries me although hes had a really rotten run with injury so it might be a belief issue rather than poor application (hopefully).
Ciaran Byrne - 7 games. Another one that failed to get going, got hurt, missed most of the season, and then came in and started to show what we know and love about him.
We needed far more consistency from this group as a whole, which speaks for why we won 2 games for the year and finished dead last, and really paints the picture of why we struggled so badly. We had may 3 of these players up and running for most of the season at the same time and the rest were variable in fitness, form or both.
The 3rd Tier (hopefully depth, or spare parts players):
Sam Kerridge - 10 games. Considering the injury list above, its an indictment on him that he only got 10 games.
Jed Lamb - 18 games. Was a real spare parts player for us this season and should be rewarded if possible as he has been a square peg in a round hole and doing quite well.
Liam Jones - 17 games. Im calling him the enigma. He was a mix of mostly good, some bad, and some really ugly play. Needs to play the percentages better I think and he will improve a lot as he is an all or nothing defender at the moment.
Sam Rowe - 17 games. Thankfully returned from his knee injury in good nick, and contributed for most of the year.
Aaron Mullett - 13 games. Delisted. Nothing to say here. Failed to take his opportunity.
Cam O'Shea - 11 games. Delisted. At least he tried, he's just not quite up to it, and given his approach to his footy, I hope he gets another go elsewhere.
Matthew Lobbe - 6 games. We really could have used more from him, as he battled admirably after returning from significant injury, and was one of the few on this list, who actually could improve next season.
Nick Graham - 10 games. Graham is a fairly limited footballer and has been very much a yo yo player for us, and appears to keep trying hes just limited.
Andrew Phillips - 5 games. Cruelled by injury again. His good was really good but hes been on the list for 3 years, and played 22 games for us, and only 6 in the last two years. Hes currently a list clogger until he can get his body right.
Matt Shaw - 2 games, injured most of the year. Delisted.
Alex Silvagni - Retired after playing 0 games.
Not a lot of positives here. Most of them have shown us their best footy with real limited scope for improvement out of any of them (ruckmen aside).
The 4th tier (L Platers, getting a feel for being a pro footballer):
Paddy Dow - 20 games. A real positive in an otherwise poor year. Might go straight from L plates to walk up starter at this stage, as he is showing us some really good signs.
Lochie O'Brien - 18 games. Probably played more due to the above list of hampered players, but showed some positives. Still question marks, but he's done well for a 1st year player of his size and shape.
Tom De Koning - 2 games. Played ahead of schedule. Was really excited watching him in the VFL, and happy for him to get an opportunity, but it was way ahead of time and speaks for why we struggled so badly.
Angus Schumacher - 0 games. Some good VFL form. Should have got a run against the Bulldogs, but I think we got caught trying to win the game, and paid for it.
Harrison Macreadie - 0 games. Never fired a shot.
Cameron Polson - 12 games. Probably got given games when he didnt warrant selection, but really started to show his worth later in the year. Has a bit of Jack Silvagni's issue of only really having being a competitior and the right attitude as his major positives, as he is small, not quick, doesnt get a lot of it. Really needs to kick on next year as he got an extension and we are investing heavily.
Pat Kerr - 4 games. Looked comfortable at the level, but he's a half a game player at this stage. Needs to kick on next year, as he is a big target who likes to throw his weight around.
Kim Lebois - gone without firing a shot. Has been unlucky with injury from what I have seen.
Reading this list, you really get a picture for why we struggled so badly. Consistency, fitness, form all non existant. We were relying too heavily on the sort of players we were hoping not to (L Platers, our mature agers gave us too little, our depth players gave us too little, and even our future tier 1 players, didnt play enough consistent footy this season!!).
I have a similar list but I have Jones in my Tier 1, I have Dow & O'Brien in my Tier 2 and I have Casboult in my Tier 3.