On 21/10/2010 at 05:44, Jarka said:

Really? I thought his current contract ends 2010.

It's perplexing because I'd imagine that Newton wouldn't be offered an extension so having him on the trip would be a waste on time & money. Unless of course he's just there to make up the numbers, as I previously suggested.

If you were in charge of the trip would you take a player who you knew that you were going to delist shortly?

Yes - all contracts expire in November some time I believe.

For the purposes of an exhibition match in China, I think any player is as good as any other. Nobody cares about the result, it's only going to be played at half pace, and the locals wouldn't know the difference anyway. Heck, Brisbane used a member of staff to make up numbers. I'd have been just as happy to see Jack Grimes chuck on a Brisbane jumper just to balance up the teams like we do in the ultra-social level of sports I play.

So in the end, this match is just for show, it doesn't even rank as high as a pre-season praqctice match in terms of importance. To that end, who cares which players play?

  On 21/10/2010 at 05:58, E25 said:

Pissweak snipes as usual Thomo.

Good to see it still stings.

It Stings E24? Try penicillin, that should fix it.

Stings you ya twit.

Pull your head in.

  On 21/10/2010 at 06:49, E25 said:

Stings you ya twit.

Pull your head in.

Nothing stings with me E24, but thanks for your concern.

  On 21/10/2010 at 04:20, MrReims said:

It was just an idea for the occasional change up, for say 5-10 minutes when it fits for a plan X. Damn... How close minded are some of you?! I'm sure glad DB doesn't think like you guys

Look its a bit much for Bailey isnt it?? He apparently does not have a plan B!!

Considering it for plan X...is that when where 10 goals up with 10 minutes to go and the coach says "Hang it lets move Frawley into the centre!"? B)

Happy to see him run into the centre, connect with Judd so he hits the deck hard, grab the ball shoot it off to Scully who then hits Watts lace out 40 from goal. other than that I think the backline is best for him. It'll be Watts who will be able to have a run through the middle if Bailey wants to mix it up, he's got better agility.

  On 21/10/2010 at 04:20, MrReims said:

Ok, so you still don't get it.

One last time, for old times sake. NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT ANY CHANGE TO FRAWLEY'S MAIN ROLE IN THE TEAM!

It was just an idea for the occasional change up, for say 5-10 minutes when it fits for a plan X. Damn... How close minded are some of you?! I'm sure glad DB doesn't think like you guys

Where was that caveat?

Post it or we will take it as it's written.

And the modern game sees Frawley doing his stuff in the middle of the ground from time to time anyway.

And close minded? How did you get there from here?

  On 21/10/2010 at 08:02, rpfc said:

And the modern game sees Frawley doing his stuff in the middle of the ground from time to time anyway.

The chase on Lewis Jetta is a great example of this. For that to have been possible, he must have been lurking around half-forward to begin with.

  On 21/10/2010 at 08:02, rpfc said:

Where was that caveat?

Post it or we will take it as it's written.

And the modern game sees Frawley doing his stuff in the middle of the ground from time to time anyway.

And close minded? How did you get there from here?

That caveat was first raised by me, when I said he would do well in the midfield, if only to change the game's flow. MrReims then agreed with me and the rest of you went and bit his head off for it. James Frawley is a defender, and will always be one, but a guy that size who can run down Lewis Jetta and break tackles the way he can could wreak havoc in the middle for a ten minute burst. If you don't agree with that, then you underrate Frawley as a footballer.

  On 20/10/2010 at 14:20, oldman emubitter said:

i'll put my balls on the line, if he gets the opportunity to play in the backline he will do well. chip to the midfield

They are precious aren't they- I'd never put mine on the line.

  On 21/10/2010 at 06:03, Nasher said:

Yes - all contracts expire in November some time I believe.

For the purposes of an exhibition match in China, I think any player is as good as any other. Nobody cares about the result, it's only going to be played at half pace, and the locals wouldn't know the difference anyway. Heck, Brisbane used a member of staff to make up numbers. I'd have been just as happy to see Jack Grimes chuck on a Brisbane jumper just to balance up the teams like we do in the ultra-social level of sports I play.

So in the end, this match is just for show, it doesn't even rank as high as a pre-season praqctice match in terms of importance. To that end, who cares which players play?

I'm also referring to the China trip as a whole. Why take a player who'll be delisted anyway?

As for the contracts ending in November, why delist the likes of Brad Miller and co so early then and keep Newton till November? I would have thought that Miller would have been much more deserving of a junket trip to China rather than Newton. Hell, put our ex-captain in that category as well.

  On 21/10/2010 at 09:04, jayceebee31 said:

They are precious aren't they- I'd never put mine on the line.

nah, had the snip bout 3 days after my daughter was born; she turned 19 this year.

back to chip, the club saw a role for dunny in the middle and i reckon chip could do it better. but i do agree with everyone, he has shone down back and would only be an option in the middle if another 1 or more talls really started to stake a claim in the back half. martin, newton and/or warnock are in the back ground. personally i hope stef kicks on, thought he showed real promise in defence.

  On 21/10/2010 at 08:30, Nasher said:

The chase on Lewis Jetta is a great example of this. For that to have been possible, he must have been lurking around half-forward to begin with.

Kicked a goal too.

  On 21/10/2010 at 09:10, Jarka said:

I'm also referring to the China trip as a whole. Why take a player who'll be delisted anyway?

As for the contracts ending in November, why delist the likes of Brad Miller and co so early then and keep Newton till November? I would have thought that Miller would have been much more deserving of a junket trip to China rather than Newton. Hell, put our ex-captain in that category as well.

I am not sure they may not re rookie Newton anyway. Its not a matter if deserving a junket. The FD had made a call on Millers career and to Millers benefit it allowed him to explore opportunities with other Clubs.

  On 21/10/2010 at 08:02, rpfc said:

And the modern game sees Frawley doing his stuff in the middle of the ground from time to time anyway.

Exactly. The game is so fluid that he floats through there enough.

And its a good point on the Jetta chase.

So he "shone" in a game without any real meaning!?

Who would he displace from the tight knit strong hearted defence?

Sure some have suggested that a stint in defence may help a struggler gain confidence, but pity help us if he goes into defence for this reason in a "real" match 2011 or beyond, and that includes Wizzard, Ansett or whatever Cup Vlad choses to call it in 2011.

He has had plenty of opportunities to establish himself in a developing young side over what, 4 years - he has not grasped those opportunities for whatever reason - skill and natural ability, talent, heart, commitment, G&D, injury - which of those doesn't really matter.

I sure as hell hope he does not ever again keep a young progressing player out of our team, nor off our list.

I could classify him as "depth" when feeling incredibly charitable and good hearted only.

  On 21/10/2010 at 10:26, Rhino Richards said:

And its a good point on the Jetta chase.

I'm not sure that specific example is such a good point. The Frawley chase ended (not started) at half-forward and Frawley chased for a long time. If Frawley was lurking at half-forward he wouldn't have been chasing Jetta along the wing towards the half-forward flank.

If Frawley did a match day cameo I'd prefer to see him fwd a la Brian Lake than in the midfield.

  On 21/10/2010 at 14:32, Rogue said:

I'm not sure that specific example is such a good point. The Frawley chase ended (not started) at half-forward and Frawley chased for a long time. If Frawley was lurking at half-forward he wouldn't have been chasing Jetta along the wing towards the half-forward flank.

It started on our HFF.

The basic premise was he was up the ground causing trouble.

  On 21/10/2010 at 14:32, Rogue said:

I'm not sure that specific example is such a good point. The Frawley chase ended (not started) at half-forward and Frawley chased for a long time. If Frawley was lurking at half-forward he wouldn't have been chasing Jetta along the wing towards the half-forward flank.

I think you've mixed up your teams there Rogue.

  On 21/10/2010 at 01:05, MrReims said:

I resoect the question but i guess it's kind of irrelevant as I can't see him needing to play there for more than say a quarter. But as a left of field play to break up a game? His tank would be more than enough to rattle some cages (if not teeth... )

I dont think it works. It takes him away from his defensive role on their best forward which provides an opportunity for his opponent to recover against a lesser defender and disrupts the structure. Whereas the other midfielders are interchanging for a breather he will "have a rest" (after a quarter in the midfield)back in defence under your plan. It assumes he knows what to do as a midfielder. Finally we have some strong running midfielders I dont see that we need any help there. Better that he keep providing the run from defence that he currently does but stays in defence.

  On 21/10/2010 at 08:35, Chook said:

That caveat was first raised by me, when I said he would do well in the midfield, if only to change the game's flow. MrReims then agreed with me and the rest of you went and bit his head off for it. James Frawley is a defender, and will always be one, but a guy that size who can run down Lewis Jetta and break tackles the way he can could wreak havoc in the middle for a ten minute burst. If you don't agree with that, then you underrate Frawley as a footballer.

You're stealing credit here, Chook.

You mentioned the caveat of shurt bursts, Olman Emubitter mentioned Frawley as a mid.

He should mention the caveat if that is what he means.

Isn't it amazing that we live in a world where your words are taken literally?

Annoying...

I don't mind the idea at all.. An old coach of mine once advised "never change a winning game, but always change a losing game". The true merit of this philosophy is up for debate, but it generally rings true.

I have seen plenty of forwards thrown into the midfield for 5 minutes, or a couple of clearances, to try to spark a revival. I think the best at it at the moment is Pav. The problem here is that when Pav gets the clearance, he has no-one to kick it to that he can trust to win the ball and kick the goal. In this situation, Pav will nearly always run, carry, and kick the goal himself.

I like the idea of taking a defender and throwing him in to help win a clearance, and get the ball forward. This could be beneficial if te forwards are starved of opportunity.

If the game is nearly lost, and the mids are being beaten at the clearances, a change can be worthwhile. Why not use a backman rather than a forward?

Frawley would be the guy who would give us the best chance of changing the dynamic of the clearance to our advantage.

Cheers

I'd sooner put Jurrah or Watts in the middle.

They have the tank & it wouldn't compromise our defence.

Back to Newton, I agree he hasn't taken his chances at AFL level to date and been a massive cause for frustration, but having said that I have never seen hime play in defence. I may be wrong but I hazard a guess most on here haven't either. That's not to say he'll be any good in the role, or even retain his spot on the list, but if the FD decided to try him in a different spot, I wouldn't be too disappointed. On the available evidence he will not make it as a forward. Period. But we don't lose anything by trying him as a backman.

The question keeps cropping up as to who in the team he would replace if we went down this path. The consensus is that our defence is the strongest are of our list and he will be hard pressed to make an impression there. I don't disagree. But building for a flag means constantly evaluating and trying to improve every area of your list ALL THE TIME. It would be foolish to exempt the backline from this kind of analysis. If Newton can force his way into the mix, displacing one of the incumbents, we will be a better team for it.

In any event, I see Frawley and Warnock as the only true KPD on our list. Garland is a jet but IMO is better suited to third tall role that Rivers / MacDonald currently play. Warnock is a good workhorse in his role but there is clearly an opportunity for someone to make one of the KPD roles their own, Newton or otherwise.

As a defender I am taking offence at the ease of which some of you think it is to play there.

Yes, it is easier to be taken to the ball rather than seeking it yourself but remember - defenders have to worry about the pill and the man, and defenders in the modern game are asked to do more and more.

I don't think the 'Newton switch' is easy and I don't think it is a necessary gamble.

Our backline doesn't need it.

It's only a rookie spot I know, but Newton has run his race.