Northern Blues vs. Essendon
Saturday, May 23
Preston City Oval at 2pm
Northern Blues
B: Gowers M. Watson McGuinness
HB: Smith Jaksch Dick
C: Viojo Graham Boekhorst
HF: Bransgrove Fields Johnson
F: Ellard Foster Walsh
R: Warnock Holman Whiley
Int: Wilson Russell Bolger Dirago Murray Strachan Wilkinson Aurrichio* Johnston
Essendon
B: Freezer J. Langford Steinberg
HB: Ashby Pears Dalgleish
C: Polkinghorne Coghlan Tipungwuti
HF: Heavyside McKernan Fantasia
F: Hardingham Giles Ferry*
R: Tagliabue Schroder Hams
Int: Howlett Kavanagh Gwilt Edwards Browne McNiece Aylett O'Brien Dempsey Hickey K. Langford McKenna Laverde
Northern Blues vs. Casey Scorpions
Saturday, May 23
Preston City Oval at 11am
Northern Blues
B: Coulson J. Roberts Walton
HB: Wilkinson M. Gleeson Johnston
C: Russell Cattapan Strachan
HF: Aujla Murray Kinsella
F: Wilson Dirago Stevens
R: Bolger Soncin Perry
Int: McDonagh Haynes Armitage Ballard K. Roberts Yelland Langwell Gilbert Asani McDonald Conlon Wild
Casey Scorpions
B Corrigan Keilty Hillard
HB Pattison Thwaites J. McDonald
C Hunt Walmsley Scott
HF Page Rennie T. Wilson
F K. Wilson King Petropoulos
R Gains Paredes Hannon
Int D. Johnson Wyatt C. Johnson
Welsh Mason Thomas
Droessler Anderson Lang
Rosier Waters Gawley
Fisscher
I am disappointed that neither of the Irish boys came up again. Nor did Hendo or Walker. And I am very disappointed that Kreuzer didn't come up.
Here's hoping that Foster can start to emerge as a genuine FF
Imagine Foster ends up a gun the Doggies will be spewing! A bit like the Pies and Stewart for GWS.
Here's hoping that Foster can start to emerge as a genuine FF
I wouldn't give up on Jaksch ending up as a very good tall forward for us...
With Warnock having played last night and Kreuzer missing (again!), our ruck stocks are looking pretty thin. Not sure what we can do about that at this time, but it does not bode well.
Northern Blues 9 - 14 - 68
Essendon 11 - 10 - 76
We couldn't hold on after having a 4 goal lead near half time. Very disappointing.
Goals: Gowers 2, Johnson 2, Watson, Wilson, Walsh, Wilkinson, Ellard.
DISPOSALS: Graham 21, McGuinness 20, Whiley 16, Walsh 16, Boekhorst 13
This was at 3/4 time. Final stats haven't come through as yet.
One thing it does prove is that Nick Graham can get the pill.
Just reading through the comments for the last half, it looks like their 3 ruckman had a significant role. But we can only play what we have available. Still heartbreaking.
Northern Blues 9 - 14 - 68
Essendon 11 - 10 - 76
We couldn't hold on after having a 4 goal lead near half time. Very disappointing.
Goals: Gowers 2, Johnson 2, Watson, Wilson, Walsh, Wilkinson, Ellard.
DISPOSALS: Graham 21, McGuinness 20, Whiley 16, Walsh 16, Boekhorst 13
This was at 3/4 time. Final stats haven't come through as yet.
One thing it does prove is that Nick Graham can get the pill.
Just reading through the comments for the last half, it looks like their 3 ruckman had a significant role. But we can only play what we have available. Still heartbreaking.
DISPOSALS: Graham 23, McGuinness 23, Walsh 19, Ellard 17, Boekhorst 17, Whiley 17
It looks like our better ball getters had a pretty quiet last term between them. Doesn't help that they didn't have a big man to help them out. (I know I harp on about this, but if I state it often enough, someone at Carlton might even pay attention!)
Pity McGuiness isn't a rookie, otherwise he'd seriously be looked at for a game at the higher level.
Pity McGuiness isn't a rookie, otherwise he'd seriously be looked at for a game at the higher level.
This is actually he 'retirement gig'. He came over to be an assistant coach as much as anything. That he is a wise head among a young group is a bonus.
Pity McGuiness isn't a rookie, otherwise he'd seriously be looked at for a game at the higher level.
ex Footscray player who went to the SANFL and became a good player for Norwood......bit undersized for KP and relies on being a wiley old fox on the field.
Plenty of courage but lacks pace and would struggle at senior level, as Crash said has come here to retire and pursue a assistant type role coaching career....
There a couple of backman in the SANFL who could be looked at but I reckon the Boekhorst experiment might have subdued interest in the state leagues for senior spots and these type
of players would be rookied....
Did Laverde play today? If so, did he rip Boekhurst a new one on the wing?
2015 AFL Victoria Development League
Northern Blues 1.2 2.5 3.5 5.7 (37)
Casey Scorpions 6.2 10.6 16.9 18.11 (119)
GOALS:
Northern Blues: Walton 3 Murray Stevens
Casey Scorpions: Wyatt 4 Fisscher 4 Rennie 2 King 2 Waters 2 Anderson Hillard Hannon Lang
BEST:
Northern Blues: Soncin Johnston Cattapan Stevens Gleeson Armitage
Casey Scorpions: Keilty Pattison Wilson Wyatt McDonald Walmsley
Not good.
2015 Peter Jackson VFL
Northern Blues 3.3 7.9 7.10 9.14 (68)
Essendon 3.2 4.2 7.6 11.10 (76)
GOALS:
Northern Blues: Gowers 2 Johnson 2 Wilkinson Watson Ellard Wilson Walsh
Essendon: Langford 2 McKERNAN 2 Giles 2 Hardingham Heavyside Polkinghorne Coghlan Laverde
BEST:
Northern Blues: Graham Walsh Fields Johnson Ellard McGuinness
Essendon: McKERNAN Gwilt O'Brien Tipungwuti Steinberg Giles
Did Laverde play today? If so, did he rip Boekhurst a new one on the wing?
Laverde did play, but he doesn't appear to have been that good. Boekhorst got 17 possessions, but that is just so so.
Graham BOG. Sure to make the emergency list for next week. At least he's signed up until 2016 so we get so him get another chance under a fair coach.
At least the best includes three blokes that have consistently been in the better players this year, that's a positive.
I'll take 17 possies for Boekhurst, he has to start to find his feet somewhere.
Graham BOG. Sure to make the emergency list for next week. At least he's signed up until 2016 so we get so him get another chance under a fair coach.
The saviour.
Doesn't need to be a saviour. Just needs to play 100+ games of good football.
Doesn't need to be a saviour. Just needs to play 100+ games of good football.
VFL yeah?
Doesn't need to be a saviour. Just needs to play 100+ games of good football.
Unfortunately Karroto, the mail I have is that he won't be getting a game anytime soon. Not regarded AFL level and has been told as much by one of the assistants. An assistant who has been bandied about as a potential replacement for Mick. Only what I've heard.
Unfortunately Karroto, the mail I have is that he won't be getting a game anytime soon. Not regarded AFL level and has been told as much by one of the assistants. An assistant who has been bandied about as a potential replacement for Mick. Only what I've heard.
Wow if that's the case what does it say for the rest of them, he is one of the leading lights ins NBs
Why is our VFL team playing on a Sunday befor an interstate Friday game? Players selected from the VFL to cover injuries or dropped players will not have had an adequate preparation.
Wow if that's the case what does it say for the rest of them.
It says it all.
Not regarded AFL level and has been told as much by one of the assistants.
I'm shocked.
I'm shocked.
You shouldn't be, several of us on the forum have been posting for sometime about the poor development of our players.
They go back to the NBs and go backwards at a rapid rate, we never have players coming into the AFL in red hot form, it just never happens. Our development coaches are oxygen and confidence thieves, stealing a living from our club and retaining their jobs by finger-pointing at the very players that they are supposed to be encouraging, developing and teaching!
Unfortunately Karroto, the mail I have is that he won't be getting a game anytime soon. Not regarded AFL level and has been told as much by one of the assistants. An assistant who has been bandied about as a potential replacement for Mick. Only what I've heard.
Surely not. Graham is not getting a game simply because big bad mick plays favourites. Once we slay the big meanie weanie coach everything will magically turn around and we'll become a juggernaut again.
At least that's what i'm lead to believe by many on here. :-\
Perhaps Mick doesn't play the kid because he isn't good enough. Radical thinking i know.
Perhaps Mick doesn't play the kid because he isn't good enough. Radical thinking i know.
It's just not feasible that given the amount testing done on players at pre-draft camps that we could have such a poor success rate.
Many of these kids have already past a number of significant tests just to get to the testing stage, and are then rated highly enough to be draft picks not just rookies, yet the vast majority of them fail at Carlton. It's untenable that so many are purely spuds, coaching must be contributing to the problem!
Surely not. Graham is not getting a game simply because big bad mick plays favourites. Once we slay the big meanie weanie coach everything will magically turn around and we'll become a juggernaut again.
At least that's what i'm lead to believe by many on here. :-\
Perhaps Mick doesn't play the kid because he isn't good enough. Radical thinking i know.
Mick does know a fair bit about playing blokes who are not good enough.....played Warnock in place of Carrazzo vs Geelong..both radical, illogical and unsuccessful, recalled Liam Jones after he slayed them in the NB's??..not....another master stroke of success...not
Graham's form has warranted a decent run at senior level by any normal person's rationale...
It's just not feasible that given the amount testing done on players at pre-draft camps that we could have such a poor success rate.
Many of these kids have already past a number of significant tests just to get to the testing stage, and are then rated highly enough to be draft picks not just rookies, yet the vast majority of them fail at Carlton. It's untenable that so many are purely spuds, coaching must be contributing to the problem!
Not doubting any of that. I've said for a long time that development is a big problem at our club.....this extends well before Mick arrived.
Surely not. Graham is not getting a game simply because big bad mick plays favourites. Once we slay the big meanie weanie coach everything will magically turn around and we'll become a juggernaut again.
At least that's what i'm lead to believe by many on here. :-\
Perhaps Mick doesn't play the kid because he isn't good enough. Radical thinking i know.
One gets to show there wares by playing VFL. If they do well then they get to play AFL. Then you judge them on their AFL performance. Graham is doing very well with the NBs but then is judged on an AFL game where he was sub, come on at 3/4 time got 5 touches, more then Murphy and Gibbs combined in that qtr, then was dropped.
How would Mick know if he was going to do well at senior level based on that?
Kruddler defending his mate Mick again. Once again Kruddler backs the wrong horse. Knows it but doesn't want to look "wrong".
Mick needs to play Wiley and Boekhurst. Carlton get flogged and those two are worst on ground. Why did we pick up those duds? Mick needs to be sacked.
One gets to show there wares by playing VFL. If they do well then they get to play AFL. Then you judge them on their AFL performance. Graham is doing very well with the NBs but then is judged on an AFL game where he was sub, come on at 3/4 time got 5 touches, more then Murphy and Gibbs combined in that qtr, then was dropped.
How would Mick know if he was going to do well at senior level based on that?
Kruddler defending his mate Mick again. Once again Kruddler backs the wrong horse. Knows it but doesn't want to look "wrong".
No not entirely correct. Young players would be given KPI's and other criteria to meet and areas to improve on before they become regulars in the Seniors. Graham has clearly not met these criteria and its not necessarily only Mick who sets them, it will be Wiley, Webster and other line coaches also. The notion that a coach won't play a player because he "doesn't like him" is totally rediculous.
How would Mick know if he was going to do well at senior level based on that?
Kruddler defending his mate Mick again. Once again Kruddler backs the wrong horse. Knows it but doesn't want to look "wrong".
Do you even read what is written or do you just see my name and trawl out the same old crap that is in no way relevent to the topic at hand?
GI2C has answered your question. Wonder if you'll say he is just looking after Mick as well?
You do realise that this whole argument came about because someone OTHER than Mick said that Graham wasn't good enough for AFL.
Graham's form has warranted a decent run at senior level by any normal person's rationale...
This is simply impossible to argue against (without even mention the diabolical form of those in the senior 22 most weeks).
No not entirely correct. Young players would be given KPI's and other criteria to meet and areas to improve on before they become regulars in the Seniors. Graham has clearly not met these criteria and its not necessarily only Mick who sets them, it will be Wiley, Webster and other line coaches also. The notion that a coach won't play a player because he "doesn't like him" is totally rediculous.
Seriously? Then their KPI's are wrong. I suppose Daisy and Gibbs are meeting their KPI's every week???
If a kid is BOG nearly every week in the two's and the 1st's are playing crap footy, you play him.
Anyone who doesn't think Mick plays his favorites is kidding themselves.
Not doubting any of that. I've said for a long time that development is a big problem at our club.....this extends well before Mick arrived.
MM certainly hasn't fixed it, it could even be going backwards!
Seriously? Then their KPI's are wrong. I suppose Daisy and Gibbs are meeting their KPI's every week???
If a kid is BOG nearly every week in the two's and the 1st's are playing crap footy, you play him.
Anyone who doesn't think Mick plays his favorites is kidding themselves.
Read my post, I said "young players" as in those trying to break into the seniors.
Unfortunately Karroto, the mail I have is that he won't be getting a game anytime soon. Not regarded AFL level and has been told as much by one of the assistants. An assistant who has been bandied about as a potential replacement for Mick. Only what I've heard.
Any idea what part of his game they don't rate? They must think he is a terrible footballer if players like Watson and Bootsma get more than 11 games to prove themselves.
Obviously I don't know the whole story but I don't like the sound of it, especially if he's contracted for another year.
No not entirely correct. Young players would be given KPI's and other criteria to meet and areas to improve on before they become regulars in the Seniors. Graham has clearly not met these criteria and its not necessarily only Mick who sets them, it will be Wiley, Webster and other line coaches also. The notion that a coach won't play a player because he "doesn't like him" is totally rediculous.
Absolute BS, what about every other player are they meeting their KPIs?? We are losing by 13 goals every week but only Graham isn't meeting KPIs I've heard it all now.
It is absolutely obvious Mick don't like Graham, plays him as sub and drops him the next week around 7-8 times last year, does the same this year. Mick doesn't rate him or whatever pissy reason, just like he underrated Betts , Garlett and Robbo. Mick has a history of pointing the finger at players and blaming them, this is just another case of that. The side is on the bottom and he's about to be sacked for a reason you do realise don't you?
Absolute BS, what about every other player are they meeting their KPIs?? We are losing by 13 goals every week but only Graham isn't meeting KPIs I've heard it all now.
It is absolutely obvious Mick don't like Graham, plays him as sub and drops him the next week around 7-8 times last year, does the same this year. Mick doesn't rate him or whatever pissy reason, just like he underrated Betts , Garlett and Robbo. Mick has a history of pointing the finger at players and blaming them, this is just another case of that. The side is on the bottom and he's about to be sacked for a reason you do realise don't you?
If you believe that I feel sorry for you.
Sorry mate, I forgot Mick is without blame in any of this to you. The man is perfection, not a flaw in his methods. I feel sorry for you too.
If you believe that I feel sorry for you.
Why do you feel sorry for him?
Why do you feel sorry for him?
It's meant to be some sort of insult ie I am clueless or ignorant or naive or something along those lines. Basically a cop out response.
It's meant to be some sort of insult ie I am clueless or ignorant or naive or something along those lines. Basically a cop out response.
Firstly if you take it as an insult, I apologise if I was out of line. I never said you were clueless or naive, you are far from it. It just seems that you some of your arguments re the coach to me, dont, "add up". I refuse believe/accept the notion a coach wont play a guy because he "doesnt like him". Its too professional (even at our club) and if it occurred, the coach would be out on his arse straight away. Perhaps it is me thats naive but thats just what I reckon.
Any idea what part of his game they don't rate? They must think he is a terrible footballer if players like Watson and Bootsma get more than 11 games to prove themselves.
Obviously I don't know the whole story but I don't like the sound of it, especially if he's contracted for another year.
Look, as I say it's just second-hand and I always take these stories with a grain of salt but his speed and foot skills were the two reasons given. Also as far as I'm aware it was only one individual in particular who leveled the criticism.
Pretty depressing I would imagine for the kid.
Sorry mate, I forgot Mick is without blame in any of this to you. The man is perfection, not a flaw in his methods. I feel sorry for you too.
No thats not what I said, he is far from perfection like all of us mere mortals. The blame doesnt lie with one man, it lies with many in the organisation. RE NG non selection, there is a match committee that picks a side, not just the coach.
No thats not what I said, he is far from perfection like all of us mere mortals. The blame doesnt lie with one man, it lies with many in the organisation. RE NG non selection, there is a match committee that picks a side, not just the coach.
Just like the board receives feedback from a CEO and makes it's own choice, same with assistant coaches and the head coach. If you think Mick is being fair with NG well then I give up.
Firstly if you take it as an insult, I apologise if I was out of line. I never said you were clueless or naive, you are far from it. It just seems that you some of your arguments re the coach to me, dont, "add up". I refuse believe/accept the notion a coach wont play a guy because he "doesnt like him". Its too professional (even at our club) and if it occurred, the coach would be out on his arse straight away. Perhaps it is me thats naive but thats just what I reckon.
Okay let me put this to you. Has Mick being acting professionally or rationally in his time at the club? I say no.
Just like the board receives feedback from a CEO and makes it's own choice, same with assistant coaches and the head coach. If you think Mick is being fair with NG well then I give up.
So your saying to me that the process at Carlton is:
1 MC meets and decides who plays and who doesn't that week
2 Mick screws up the agreed team sheet and writes his own one
3 Submits own version of teamsheet
Is this what your telling me Carrots? That Mick rejects what the MC says and picks his own side?
So your saying to me that the process at Carlton is:
1 MC meets and decides who plays and who doesn't that week
2 Mick screws up the agreed team sheet and writes his own one
3 Submits own version of teamsheet
Is this what your telling me Carrots? That Mick rejects what the MC says and picks his own side?
I'm saying that Mick has the final say yes. Input is welcome (I hope) but in the end Mick has the final say. I have no doubt he has surrounded himself with his yes men for this very reason, what he has at our club is in effect an autocracy.
Okay let me put this to you. Has Mick being acting professionally or rationally in his time at the club? I say no.
99% of the time I would say yes. Every coach has their little tanty from time to time, or brain fade even (ie Clarkson, Scott recently) do they get pounded the way MM does on here?
I'm saying that Mick has the final say yes. Input is welcome (I hope) but in the end Mick has the final say. I have no doubt he has surrounded himself with his yes men for this very reason, what he has at our club is in effect an autocracy.
Mate if thats what you believe, so be it.
99% of the time I would say yes. Every coach has their little tanty from time to time, or brain fade even (ie Clarkson, Scott recently) do they get pounded the way MM does on here?
Okay, well I say a coach that constantly points the finger elsewhere, absolutely loses the plot in the coach's box every week, threatens TV presenters, has childish fights with reporters and deliberately and publicly contradicts what the club is saying is acting far from rationally or professionally. If you think otherwise, I would hate to think what your version of irrational and unprofessional would be. Maybe he needs to throw a monitor through the coach's box screen, threaten Cameron Ling or even jump out of his seat and stab Mark Stevens.
Okay, well I say a coach that constantly points the finger elsewhere, absolutely loses the plot in the coach's box every week, threatens TV presenters, has childish fights with reporters and deliberately and publicly contradicts what the club is saying is acting far from rationally or professionally. If you think otherwise, I would hate to think what your version of irrational and unprofessional would be.
FMD you have described 17 of the other coaches there as well.
FMD you have described 17 of the other coaches there as well.
No I haven't. I have made a very good point and your answer shows you don't really have an answer. IMO.
No I haven't. I have made a very good point and your answer shows you don't really have an answer. IMO.
No probs
Okay let me put this to you. Has Mick being acting professionally or rationally in his time at the club? I say no.
Let me ask you this...
Same question, but plug in any other Carlton bloke in there. Start from the top of the tree and work your way down.
You'll end up with CEO, Pres, assistants, players....
THE ENTIRE CLUB has not acted professionally or rationally over the same period.
Surely not. Graham is not getting a game simply because big bad mick plays favourites. Once we slay the big meanie weanie coach everything will magically turn around and we'll become a juggernaut again.
At least that's what i'm lead to believe by many on here. :-\
Perhaps Mick doesn't play the kid because he isn't good enough. Radical thinking i know.
So it's good culture or development to not reward consistent VFl performances week in and week out?
Picking and choosing your battles here?
Firstly if you take it as an insult, I apologise if I was out of line. I never said you were clueless or naive, you are far from it. It just seems that you some of your arguments re the coach to me, dont, "add up". I refuse believe/accept the notion a coach wont play a guy because he "doesnt like him". Its too professional (even at our club) and if it occurred, the coach would be out on his arse straight away. Perhaps it is me thats naive but thats just what I reckon.
Ask Jeremy Laidler
What Shadesy said.....on both counts!
So it's good culture or development to not reward consistent VFl performances week in and week out?
Picking and choosing your battles here?
You're suggesting that not only is Graham following coaches instructions, but is doing so better than some other kids who are getting a call up. Following that further, you are assuming there is a spot for him in the side, given the role he plays.
Doesn't matter how well all our ruckman play, you'll never pick Warnock, Wood, Kreuzer and Casboult in the same side. Cripps plays a similar role and IMO clearly plays it better than Graham. Throw in Carrazzo, Whiley and maybe a few others who play a similar role and you'll see its not as simple as rewarding high numbers in the 2's.
Said this before, but Bomber dropped both Chappy and Bartel back to the 2's until they played the way he wanted (ie more defensive). Chappy got 35 touches the first week and despite pressure from assistants, Bomber held firm. FOUR weeks later, Chappy played the way he wanted, and brought him back.
What are Grahams KPIs? Is he achieving them?
Given that our senior coach has now changed, his KPI's might change as well. As a result, he may get a game now when he wouldn't have otherwise.
We lost the last 4 games by plus 70 points.
Any idea what part of his game they don't rate? They must think he is a terrible footballer if players like Watson and Bootsma get more than 11 games to prove themselves.
Obviously I don't know the whole story but I don't like the sound of it, especially if he's contracted for another year.
Look, as I say it's just second-hand and I always take these stories with a grain of salt but his speed and foot skills were the two reasons given. Also as far as I'm aware it was only one individual in particular who leveled the criticism.
Pretty depressing I would imagine for the kid.
We might find out if the story is true with said person in charge now.
We lost the last 4 games by plus 70 points.
Is that an overly simplistic view of it though?
We saw what happened when we chose that way of thinking about whether or not Watson should play vs Liam Jones, and sure, Watson gets the opportunity because he had averaged 3 goals a week in the VFL, but the results were not great.
We can all believe he deserves an opportunity, but if he wasnt playing to instruction, its only right the senior coach gets to use a benchmark for senior footy.
Depending on how you sit, this can be an argument all day every day, but at worst the senior coach must have the right to dictate these terms. Given Laidler's tweet we know that he likely fought opposition from the playing group from day 1. That was never going to end well.
Given our culture of the tail wagging the dog, this is a massive issue for us.
Is that an overly simplistic view of it though?
We saw what happened when we chose that way of thinking about whether or not Watson should play vs Liam Jones, and sure, Watson gets the opportunity because he had averaged 3 goals a week in the VFL, but the results were not great.
We can all believe he deserves an opportunity, but if he wasnt playing to instruction, its only right the senior coach gets to use a benchmark for senior footy.
Depending on how you sit, this can be an argument all day every day, but at worst the senior coach must have the right to dictate these terms. Given Laidler's tweet we know that he likely fought opposition from the playing group from day 1. That was never going to end well.
Given our culture of the tail wagging the dog, this is a massive issue for us.
Yes it is..... very Simple... its the only KPI that matters. Do we need to complicate it more than that?
Graham isn't meeting KPi's... please. Who in out team on Friday night, or the previous week, or the week before that is meeting their KPI's. We are losing by 70 points, there is a whole lot of players not performing. To say Nick Graham isn't meeting his performance criteria in being BOG every week in the VFL whilst our seniors are getting thoroughly rogered for fun every Friday night is entirely laughable.
Nick Graham isn't our saviour. He may be a little slow and not found his feet at AFL level yet, but he hasn't had a decent crack at it. We talk about player development and recruiting being poor. Well here is a guy we picked in the late second round, who seems to be a pretty good midfielder and growing each week in the VFL.
Give him a crack. If he doesnt make it, move him one. We are cactus this year anyway.
Agree that we simply must play guys such as Graham and Holman for a number of weeks on end.
Add to that I'd like to see us use the run and carry of blokes like Boekhorst, Buckley, Smith and Tutt. Give Whiley a decent crack too. Byrne too when back from injury.
We have to see what these guys have to offer over the next 14 weeks. That's a large chunk of the season that must not be wasted!
Play Jaksch back and forward.
Play Walker and Yarran forward - onball/wing at times also. I'd consider getting Docherty and Tuohy into the midfield too.
Rookies Brad Walsh and Tom Fields should play asap IMO if we can in fact get them onto the senior list.
Yes it is..... very Simple... its the only KPI that matters. Do we need to complicate it more than that?
Graham isn't meeting KPi's... please. Who in out team on Friday night, or the previous week, or the week before that is meeting their KPI's. We are losing by 70 points, there is a whole lot of players not performing. To say Nick Graham isn't meeting his performance criteria in being BOG every week in the VFL whilst our seniors are getting thoroughly rogered for fun every Friday night is entirely laughable.
Nick Graham isn't our saviour. He may be a little slow and not found his feet at AFL level yet, but he hasn't had a decent crack at it. We talk about player development and recruiting being poor. Well here is a guy we picked in the late second round, who seems to be a pretty good midfielder and growing each week in the VFL.
Give him a crack. If he doesnt make it, move him one. We are cactus this year anyway.
Ive stated for weeks that we should play Graham, and that I couldnt figure out why he isnt getting a game.
That doesnt mean there isnt a reason why he isnt getting a game.
On the part in bold, he might be meeting them less than others. We dont know what they are. Needless to say, they may change, and he might fit straight in.
We are getting belted by X points, is not the reason to take out a bloke who is doing what is expected of him.
We are getting belted by X points, is not the reason to take out a bloke who is doing what is expected of him.
I can't Imagine there are too many of these guys around.
If i was to hazard a guess, our clearances and Contested possessions are pretty good and strong, in which is Graham's role. We are getting chopped on the outside, which I don't think Graham would fix. But with Gibbs, Judd and Mick out, he'll get his turn.
I can't Imagine there are too many of these guys around.
If i was to hazard a guess, our clearances and Contested possessions are pretty good and strong, in which is Graham's role. We are getting chopped on the outside, which I don't think Graham would fix. But with Gibbs, Judd and Mick out, he'll get his turn.
Agreed.
We are a spare parts team at the moment.
We will probably pick 22 "fit" players, and go into this game hoping for the best, and expecting the worst.
We have always had shades of a spare parts patchwork best 22 with a few players that were probably not up to AFL standard playing more often than not, short some key position players, and a decent midfield. It fired some weeks and not others.
From here, all we need to see is what some of these blokes are capable of and go from there.