Do we really want to win this game? Smith was named on the bench for the Northern Blues, not in the best players. My God!
Ditto, Captain Crash.
I was astonished to see Smith replacing Simmo.... and straight into the selected side, no less. FO. I pray this is not an MM fave getting a gig ahead of hard working others... would have expected Dick, or Holman, or Johnson etc into the green vest instead of Smith straight into the side.
I think what Sellers says rings true in relative terms. As i said before, i think the key is this. Team rules can be made, followed and enforced no matter what era you come from. The rules may change, but the meaning behind them remains the same. Thats all sellers wants. Players demanding success from their teammates and ensuring it comes.
I'm talking about blokes like Ellard, Army and Rowe playing ahead of Graham and Watto. I've been pretty clear about that. Tutt and Jones are certainly not kids.
Now you're being naughty. Watson ahead of Rowe... You're taking the p1ss, right? Armfield has deserved his selection ahead of others owing to consistent good form and our desperate need for quick blokes! Agree that Ellard should not get a game ahead of Graham.
The only thing I can deduce from those team changes is that Malthouse is purely coaching for a contract renewal, he doesn't have the club's best interests at heart.
Watson had a reasonable crack in the seconds and we know he can kick long & straight yet the Big Galoot gets a gig ahead of him. What chance does the guy have to show if he is worth keeping ??
If Gibbs can't be dropped for that lame-ass effort last week, then to what level does he have to stoop down to for it to ever happen ?? ******* protected species and a goddam disgraceful decision !!
We'll have some of the promising newbies wanting to leave soon enough, if they are putting in and not being rewarded for their effort then they will take their business elsewhere.
Fork tongue stuff again. MM says out of form blokes won't get a gig in this side... yet good old jelly spine Gibbs gets to play despite appalling softness and being a terrible liability.
We need a very simple and basic indoctrination (written everywhere and shouted together), all for one and one for all. It's not complicated and it is a proven winner over many, many years. It was our motto on one of the war ships I served on in the 70s and once ingrained you found yourself looking out for your mates and knowing that they were 'covering your back'. A few blokes let the crew down and let's just say that after being dealt with, they never did it again (OH&S HR would have not been happy with us!!!).
There was a bloke or two in the VFL who showed genuine hardness at the contest who should get a gig in front of Gibbs... and this is a tragic reality, Gibbs is a sublime talent... but no point having a Bugatti Veyron if the driver is a balloon foot.
For what it's worth I am loath to criticise SW. This bloke brings an attitude to the field which is sadly lacking in many of his team mates. He's in our best 25.
3 That there might be some issue with Gibbs that is personal that we don't know about and the club is supporting him through it (to on-field detriment).
Drop Jones, Watson in as he's shown he better forward than back Casboult back as 2nd ruck and move Jaksch moved forward if Jammo rerturns. Menzel back in the team and Walker forward. Then the key is to get numbers more forward so we can run the ball quickly in the forward line so these blokes have space to run into. That'll give these blokes some confidence. Play last week's rotten game plan, with a million blokes behind the ball, and those poor younger blokes forward will be totally lost, as Hendo was last week, as they'll be no run hence no speed of ball movement going forward.
Sorry, but arguing about Jones v Watson v Casboult (as forwards) is like arguing over whether we want 3.93 out of 10, or 3.99 out of ten or 3.88 out of ten. It's like having very little x 3. Jaksch looks more like a tall forward prospect than the 3 of them!
During the Rottingwood game last Friday night, leadership blokes Rowe, Hendo and Murph were busting a gut. Now before I am howled down re Hendo, it is my hunch that the bloke came into the game under an injury cloud and twanged the hammy early on hence being useless - that he played told me he desperately wanted to help out in MMs milestone game, but it turned out disastrous for him. MM impresses upon us that we do not take very suspect blokes into games (though most blokes take niggles into games)... Hendo was very suspect, you only need to look at how he pulled up the week prior and grabbed at his hammy and calf the week prior.
180 degrees from these blokes (including Armfield and the kids), attitude wise, was the lame effort from Gibbs. Folks, I saw it first hand here in NZ the week prior, the Gibbs disinterest. And as I mentioned in a previous post, folks next to me at the game, knowing little about the game and obviously invited along as a part of the occasion (ANZAC day), unsolicited, mentioned loudly to each other how 'weak' no. 4 was. His apathy stood out that much. It was embarrassing to watch his lack of effort. He only contributed more after EVERYONE ELSE HAD LIFTED... easy stuff.
Why has this bloke become a liability on match day? Why is he a shadow of last year? Why does he just not give a toss at present? As a member/shareholder of the club we have a right to have this situation addressed and explained, honestly. At present the Gibbs presence on the field is 'anti leadership', especially by example.
Gibbs should not be playing this week based on form and ATTITUDE. This is a test for MM who has claimed that out of form blokes do not get a gig.
My bigger problem with the Gibbs lack of effort and attitude is the influence and effect this has on the rest of the team. This issue demands explanation and action. Blokes with this kind of attitude and form, getting a gig, only sends one message to the young blokes - reputation gets you games at the CFC, not bona fide form, attitude and contribution.
They did, the selection needed the blessing of those higher up though.
...and let's face it, if the coaches have signalled a preference for Murph the players would just fall into line. Plus I bet there was some politics involved.... you know, afraid of losing Murph as the contract talks are near so dangle the Skipperdom as a carrot
Just listened to Rowey talk and he handled himself well, as does Hendo... but Murph seldom comes across well in the media when he opens his cakehole, not a blight on him as a player but doesn't help in the leadership stakes.
Been thinking about our terrible efforts and many suggest it's a Coach has lost the players issue...
Maybe the 'rift' is between players? And it spreads as people takes sides....?
...was a thought that occurred to me also the other day, maybe many blokes don't agree with Murph as Captain? Maybe they're not behind the Skipper. Reckon there might just be something in this; that there is disharmony in the ranks!
Yes, Wood jagged a couple of goals but the rest of his game was rubbish. Ch 7 actually put together a montage of his worst efforts and some of his marking efforts were comical. Casboult hasn't made much of an impact on the scoreboard but his marking around the ground and his physicality is his strength and we missed both very badly on Friday.
That Grundy towelled up both Warnock and Wood is not surprising, both struggle against mobile opponents.
A confident Meat and a fit Kreuz suggests a far better rucking combo me thinks... with Wood as the backup playing in the Magoos... and then recruiting another couple to groom over the next few years. Trade 206, we'll get a 2nd rounder for him.
Re Edelston in the Coach's box... what an appalling decision. Two people needs their dots kicked over this ...the person who suggested it and the person who agreed with them.
You're taking the p1ss, right? Armfield has deserved his selection ahead of others owing to consistent good form and our desperate need for quick blokes! Agree that Ellard should not get a game ahead of Graham.
