Simon Buckley

[harry 1]

Nope Wells had 20 possessions and eight marks and was one of North's best, Buckley had 16 possessions and wasn't anywhere near Wells when he got his possessions. The defensive aspect of Buckley's game is a concern, he might be a gun one day, but he isn't yet.

Well, I'll take you're word for it. I could've sworn on the scoreboard it had Wells as having 13 possies about half way through the last quarter. Anyway, the main point of my statement (as you acknowledged) was to say that talking about whether or not we should be 'persisting' with Buckley is absolutely ridiculous. It's pretty reactionary stuff and is the kind of thing you expect from filth and tigers supporters, not Melbourne supporters who I've always considered to be more educated in the game than most.

[pantaloons 2,019]

I don't see how his game today was any worse than what he offered last year. Without wanting to rubbish the guy, his disposal is ordinary at best and he runs around like the quintessential headless chook when he has the ball. He seems to have played senior games because his pace and desire to take the game on are rare commodities in this team.

[Nasher 33,607]

If he doesn't learn to run the other way, He's out in my book.

Exactly. "He only knows how to attack" doesn't mean he should only be used to 'attack', it means he should either learn to 'defend' or face the chop.

His pace is his absolutely his weapon, but at this stage of his career he does just as much damage to our own cause with his lack of defensive nous and turnovers as he does to the opposition. Unless this improves, he'll never be anything more than a player on the periphery. At the moment, he doesn't belong in our best 22, whether he he's being played out of position or not.

I also think that if any of Whelan, Wheatley, Bell or Grimes had been available, he'd have played for Casey this week anyway.

[Rogue 585]

He seems to have played senior games because his pace and desire to take the game on are rare commodities in this team.

No doubt about it - it's why Ward played as many games as he did.

Unfortunately his game was a little too Ward-like for my liking. It's great to have someone with 'some dash' but - regardless of what the efficiency stats suggest - I felt his disposal let him down too often.

With regards accountability (or lackthereof), it was something that was apparent since I saw him in pre-season last year. I wasn't too fussed about his disposal at that stage but his accountability was an issue and it was good to hear he was dropped for that reason. As grazman said, it seemed to improve on his return.

Playing him out of defence is a joke.

Should be utilized as an attacking wing man, where the opposition are forced to match up on him.

You still need to be accountable.

[Chook 15,012]

Playing him out of defence is a joke.

Should be utilized as an attacking wing man, where the opposition are forced to match up on him.

I agree YM

100% correct.

Agree with that.

The last thing he needs is to have is the burden of tagging Wells.

x5

Holy Moly, did the sky just fall?

EDIT: Rectified my inability to count.

[Demon Tragic 0]

Geez. One rainy day doesn't mean it's winter. Let the guy establish some form! He was below average today, but no need to hang draw & quarter him.

[deanox 9,897]

during last season, buckley was given a licence to run, attack and play his own game, regardless of the consequences. He did this sucessfully, backing himself, breaklines etc he did get caught a few times, but he had a crack at i and was a shining light at times.

DB is now telling buckley you have to learn to be accountable and thus is playing him in more defensive roles. it doesnt matter if we lose, we're not going to win the flag anyway. but if he gets 3-4 games where he has to be accountable, he might slowly get it. he might learn to read the play when it is coming towards him (which he struggled with this week), he might learn how to use his pace to keep close checks on opposition players.

if he puts this together with his attacking footy he could be a weapon.

[rpfc 28,253]

It's the first round in a year that is going to be a hard slog.

And Buckley should be thrown by the wayside?

It's going to be another long year, but some of you blokes are just going to make it harder on yourselves with this nonsense.

So take your whinging elsewhere.

BTW, Buckley had to go back with Wheatley and Whelan out, and Batram on Harvey.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Even playing him as an attacking wingman he still needs to be accountable, he has no defensive side to his game.

Correct.

I love the guys pace but if his disposal/decision making is flawed and accountability is poor then he'll have a short AFL career.

I agree had others been fit he would not have been playing.

[titan_uranus 24,970]

I suspect it had a lot more to do with Grimes and Bell both being injured.

It will be interesting to see who makes way from the current squad when the injured players start returning.

[Devoted Demon 0]

Geez. One rainy day doesn't mean it's winter. Let the guy establish some form! He was below average today, but no need to hang draw & quarter him.

wow i could quote some words that you quoted at the game about him HAHAHAHA.....

Im with everyone else who believes we have had 1 outting and everyone is trying to hang this player and that player lets wait and see what they can do for a few more games before hanging our players out to dry

[grazman 7,406]

I don't think anyone's hanging Simon Buckley out to dry, rather we're saying there is a fundamental aspect to his game that is still not there.

Accountability has nothing to do with pace or being "attacking" it's purely about what you do when your side doesn't have the ball. I'd take a stab in the dark and say he was played on Wells because he has the pace to go with him, but if you're consistently standing 10-20 metres off your direct opponent hoping for a turn over, then you're dudding your team mates. Buckley has pace and we need that, but pace alone won't see him continue to be selected if he refuses to play accountable footy.

[rpfc 28,253]

I don't think anyone's hanging Simon Buckley out to dry, rather we're saying there is a fundamental aspect to his game that is still not there.

Accountability has nothing to do with pace or being "attacking" it's purely about what you do when your side doesn't have the ball. I'd take a stab in the dark and say he was played on Wells because he has the pace to go with him, but if you're consistently standing 10-20 metres off your direct opponent hoping for a turn over, then you're dudding your team mates. Buckley has pace and we need that, but pace alone won't see him continue to be selected if he refuses to play accountable footy.

No need for a stab.

Bruce played on Wells. Buckley was rotated through the backline, but Laidley kept bringing him deep to expose him.

[H_T 3,043]

Buckley was disappointing I thought, but he must keep playing, he can be damaging and the more he plays the better, esp. his defensive side to his game. He wasn't the only one who should be a little disappointed, McLean I thought was another, he didn't look 100%. Was he ill during the week? I don't think he would of taken an injury into the opening game.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Bruce played on Wells. Buckley was rotated through the backline, but Laidley kept bringing him deep to expose him.

In the last quarter Buckley was following Wells (at a distance). Its no wonder Laidley wanted to expose him deep in their forward line.

[Al`s DEMONS 0]

during last season, buckley was given a licence to run, attack and play his own game, regardless of the consequences. He did this sucessfully, backing himself, breaklines etc he did get caught a few times, but he had a crack at i and was a shining light at times.

DB is now telling buckley you have to learn to be accountable and thus is playing him in more defensive roles. it doesnt matter if we lose, we're not going to win the flag anyway. but if he gets 3-4 games where he has to be accountable, he might slowly get it. he might learn to read the play when it is coming towards him (which he struggled with this week), he might learn how to use his pace to keep close checks on opposition players.

if he puts this together with his attacking footy he could be a weapon.

makes sense

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

if it were only true.......

[Rampaging Demons 1]

played on wells in the last quarter and was torched but it is part of the learning curve......

he is one demon that does have genuine pace...

keep persisting and backing him!!

[Deano74 156]

All good sides have dashing defenders, where the attack can start, (pies- shaw), (crows -Mcleod) etc.

Maybe they have identified that we need a running halfback who can break the lines.

He has the dash and like all in the team need to improve his kicking, but for me this seems a good posi for him,

Whelan wont be around forever.

[pringle 42]

1. The guy who pulled his pants down on the day took a very long time to realize his potential, but has developed into a very good player for the Roos. Many were frustrated by his slow progress knowing his great alent, but the Roos persisted, showed faith and he has become a damaging player.

2. If I recall correctly, Buckley had a late start to pre-season in terms of actual game time, and probably showed his match fitness was not yet up to scratch. Should be better for the run.

3. The mass hysteria sometimes seen here is pretty entertaining to say the least. Whilst I don't usually like the negative sentiments in these types of anti young player threads, I do like the points of discussion they bring up and the focus on aspects of players' games that arise.