Play the kids who will be hungry, result doesnt matter, lets find some players for 2026 and beyond. Voss might enjoy the last 8 weeks if we give him some players who want to learn and give effort for 4 quarters, he owes Binns a game too after singling him out.
I know i'm not the only one, but i've been calling for Lemmey for weeks now for the above reason and to spare the injured players we currently have. Not many who haven't been given a crack yet, but he is one.
We have played 39 players this year.
Only players not to play.... Newman - out for year Smith - out for year Monaghan - irish rookie Duffy - irish rookie Ben Camporeale - should play this week Lemmey - should play this week Charleson - showed something in the VFL this week
For the record, only the bombers have used more players than us, 1 more, with 40. 1 other team has used 37 a few other teams have used 36.
The rest of the 8, 12th, 14th and last have used 34 players.....everyone else is more.
Shows a very distinct correlation of injuries/players used and ladder position. Hard for us to make it near the pointy end when year on year, we have to use more players than just about everyone else.
Fair comments, Id be playing Harry O with Jack out this week and also picking Lemmey to help Charlie down forward. Pies have taken the foot of the gas given they have some breathing space at the top of the ladder and are playing rookie player Roan Steele and appear likely to rest nemesis players Sidebottom(illness) and Bobby Hill(personal reasons) which should really help us.
SoS and Saad out, probably Billy as well. Likely ins Cowan and OFarrell. After that, Fog is probably looking at the twos as well.
Could well be.
Must admit that poster did nail it the last time he said it. Doesn't mean he will this time thought. might have be a coincidence last time.
Anyway, the lack of any hunger at training is more an issue.
Play the kids who will be hungry, result doesnt matter, lets find some players for 2026 and beyond. Voss might enjoy the last 8 weeks if we give him some players who want to learn and give effort for 4 quarters, he owes Binns a game too after singling him out.
The VFL kids want to run and take the game on, the seniors by design or lack of effort don't, and we end up with the ball going backwards, sideways etc while all our forwards get manned up . Everyone can see it except the coaches box, senior players need to be dropped and the kids promoted, results don't matter for this season .
Glad Luke Power seems to value the modern more expansive style than the 1960s game the seniors play.
I think our VFL game tactics Saturday night were closer to the AFL teams tactics than they have been all season, which against Hird's group make the game a shoot out.
The difference Saturday night was basically that we had Cowan and Carroll who both played 4-qtrs and mopped up in defence to kick things off on the attack with plenty of rebound.
There will be a lot of fans boosting Evans, Durdin and Moir, but they all really only played 1/2 a game, they can't do that at the next level and get away with it like they did Saturday night.
Hirds comments suggested otherwise about game style and that the VFL teams approach differed and that's what caught his eye and he described it as expansive in comparison.
James Hird wants our kids in and the senior team playing the same game style as our VFL team, was impressed with kids like Moir , Charleson, Carroll etc. Tend to agree, need to drop senior players who are not taking us anywhere and go with the kids for the next 8 weeks... Glad Luke Power seems to value the modern more expansive style than the 1960s game the seniors play.
We clearly have some talent at the young end of the list, why isn't this transferring to senior level? It can't just be the old chestnut of the VFL being so much lower level than the big stage?
Port Melbourne were very average, far cry from Fred Cook, the Goss boys and Buster Harland in the glory days. Bit unnerving seeing James Hird patrolling the boundary too..
Your forgetting Toby Pink is a high quality opponent..er cough, clear throat...I think to be fair the delivery to Gunston would be of a higher quality that what Charlie gets each week. I think Chol is one of the leading F50 marks in the comp and Id put that down to high quality delivery rather than Mabior being a sensational FF.
Our F50 delivery has generally been substandard and inconsistent for many years. This has been discussed many times on here. We can win the ball but all too often cannot capitalise. We definitely need to fix this asap by upgrading our midfield with pace and accuracy.
Think we are 18th in the comp for F50 Conversions for the reasons you have given, need to be in the top 6 to be a good team. Its balance, if you replace your mids and running half backs etc with elite kickers you will probably lose some contested and defensive ability as its hard to get players who are good at everything and I guess thats the art of building a good team.
Collingwood are ripe for a loss, they are resting players, playing a few duds and over using the ball playing cute football. They were lucky Pendlebury held them together and id be tagging him this week and taking that luxury away from the Pies. Nick Daicos wants the ball every foray forward and Pies have gone handball happy getting it to him, Mcrae got them back in the game in second half by wanting sensible direct football and less hollywood stuff but I think we can punish them abit more than WC did if we can get Charlie firing and keep the turnovers low which is what Collingwood thrive on.
Busted ass Gunston managed 7 goals agains Norf, our gun FF at the peak of his powers couldnt manage 1.
Your forgetting Toby Pink is a high quality opponent..er cough, clear throat...I think to be fair the delivery to Gunston would be of a higher quality that what Charlie gets each week. I think Chol is one of the leading F50 marks in the comp and Id put that down to high quality delivery rather than Mabior being a sensational FF.
McRae got the Collingwood job because Wright had a fixed idea on how they wanted to play and that was the Richmond gameplan. They wanted a Hardwick pupil who could execute and had tactical nous because thats what that gamestyle requires. Kingsley was the second choice because again he was a Hardwick pupil, McRae wasnt a popular choice with many Pies fans being an unknown rookie coach and there was a bit of pushback on his appointment but clearly Wright knew what he wanted.
According to Mitch Cleary from CH7 , Voss was appointed on the basis he was a standard setter, an authoritarian figure with a high level of respect in the football community because of his playing history and a coach who players would listen to unlike the previous incumbent Teague who lost the senior players. Luke Sayers said publicly that we had the list and Voss was the man to unlock its potential, so he wasnt there to build the list but to win premierships. Sayers said“Michael demonstrated a strong understanding of the key fundamental requirements for Carlton right now: inspirational and accountable leadership, driver of a united and ambitious culture, builder of trusting and collaborative relationships and a deep and genuine desire to deliver strong on-field performance". Those comments imo related to the weak areas of Teagues short reign as coach where he was strong with innovation and tactically but couldnt manage the playing group and bond with certain players and had pushback in the gamestyle he was trying to implement. Cleary also said that Voss wasnt expected to deliver any technical/tactical nous not being his forte and that the club would employ assistants to provide in that area ie Hansen, Hamill, Clarke etc. Voss said his focus would be fixing our contest/stoppage and defensive areas which to be fair he has achieved but probably at the expense of our offensive game. 4 days ago Voss has defended Carlton's contested-based style, saying it still stacked up against the competition's pacesetters. "It's a pretty impressive brand to watch," he said. "It's hard to talk down being the No.1 contested team in competition ... I think thats being a bit delusional, kicking the ball backwards, sideways and bombing it in long is not pretty to watch and not what the better teams are playing imho.
My view is I dont see any comparison between Voss and McRae valid as they operate at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of gamestyle and Mcrae in particular had an opportunity to have input into his list where he has used the topup method unlike Voss who got given a rebuilt list with high expectations attached, so different coaches with different lists. Im highly critical of Voss and his lack of tactical ability but after hearing what Cleary said I think a lot of the blame has to fall on Hansen and the other Assistants. I see Voss as a Chris Fagan style coach who is more of a Man Manager but needs the right crew around him unlike say McRae who is prepared to shuffle the magnets at any point in the game and take the blame if it all goes astray rather than blame the players if they dont play their role etc. McRae also has the advantage of a great leadership group and is spoilt for choice with so many mature players unlike Voss who when we all tried to pick a new captain in the "next captain thread" struggled to find many names who qualified as leaders.
If we retain Voss then imo all the Football manager, Coaching Assistants and Recruiters have to go and start afresh especially with Assistants who can help modify the gamestyle and move the magnets better on matchday. If he is sacked I dont have a problem either and dont subscribe to the theory all our problems are based on our history of sacking coaches....if you look at Brittan, Ratten, Bolton and Teague what have they done senior coaching wise since they were sacked....answer..Nothing. What have we missed out on....Nada. Fagan has had 8 years at Brisbane making finals in the last six so its a bit of the Geelong operating theory where if you play the odds you have to win a GF eventually if you keep making the eight. Its a Difficult position for Wright and the board to evaluate Voss given he has achieved some objectives but failed to progress from the last couple of years unlike say Fagan who kept Brisbane in the premiership frame on a continuous basis and as we all know these decisions usually get made sooner than later depending on the availability of coaching options so I dont see the remaining games having much influence.
Not a huge fan but has looked good and contested well. I think he is a bit more vigorous at VFL level than he has shown in the AFL and needs to play like with that spice to his game if he gets promoted.
The senior players sacked the last coach led by the Captain....the club had no choice but to move Teague on.
Senior players as in who?
Cripps and his mates complained about the game plan being confusing that was the excuse anyway, Teague was meant to have a good rapport with the youngers players but couldnt get the senior players to buy in when he went into a ultra attacking game plan. I think its an ongoing problem and Jordan Lewis identified it as being a hierarchal issue within the playing list.
