Also, I haven't said that Sellar is up to the job. I am saying that he has a good chance based on history and what I envisage the role to be. I have not idea if he's capable of doing it yet.

You must admit though, you are well down the hypothetical road.

I think we are thinking along similar lines, .................................................

Quality post

You must admit though, you are well down the hypothetical road.

I don't think either of you have said Sellar is up to it. I think the main difference is you would revert to Frawley on the gorilla's quicker than Bob because you think that would lead to a better outcome.

Both are valid views, neither assumes Sellar is a "given".

In essence, Thomo is right .

Happens quite a bit

Edited January 19, 201213 yr by Thomo

I agree with AoB and I think it's a really important point he's making. It's the "whole-is-greater-than-the-sum-of-the-parts" factor that was badly missing in 2011 and made it so easy for top teams to score against us, whether our individual defenders played well or not. Our main 3 defenders are all 192-193cm tall, and will be vulnerable against a side with 1 or 2 198-200cm forwards. Sellar has the potential to fill that gap. A lot of top forwards are in the 193cm range (e.g. Riewoldts) & Sellar won't be any use at all; he'll only get a game when we're facing the true gorillas over 198cm.

I don't think the gorilla-stopper role is all that difficult - even Warnock could do it reasonably well as long as he didn't get his hands on the ball too often & have to do something with it. You don't have t beat your opponent - all you need to do is to stop them getting clean ball more than a few times in a game.

I agree with AoB about the reason for Sellar being drafted, and I think there's a good chance that he'll be up to the limited role he needs to play. However, I agree with rpfc that Sellar won't be picked for every game, he'll only be picked when we need him for a specific match-up.

And the "whole-is-greater-than-the-sum-of-the-parts" factor is going to be even more important in the midfield. If there's going to be a Great Leap Forward in our midfield in 2012, it will be because of combining much better as a unit, rather than because of one of them mutating into a better midfielder than Pendles or Judd.

I doubt a back six including Sellar and Rivers has the run and skill required for us to go all the way in 2012 and beyond. Particularly if Bartram is also in the six.

Having Grimes as the second smallest defender also means he may be exposed for pace.

Rivers v Cloke was as much down to the midfield as anything.

Edited January 19, 201213 yr by Fat Tony

You must admit though, you are well down the hypothetical road.

Don't put words in my mouth. I have said no such thing. In fact, I specifically pointed out that I'm making no judgement on whether he is good enough or not. I have not seen him play that role, so I have no idea. I can feel optimistic based upon previous instances where players in similar situations have succeeded, but I am making no judgement on Sellar because I just don't know yet.

If anything, the only person who has made judgement on Sellar is you. You say that you don't think he's good enough. I have said that I don't know whether he's good enough. I assume that the football department think he's a good chance of being good enough, otherwise they wouldn't have drafted him, but I don't have the information available to allow me to make an informed judgement.

Looks like Belly to me.

Both strong, quick and athletic. Perfect sizes for the game and both actually have great skills but IMO they aren't there mentality.

Very hesitant, quick to lose confidence and always unsure of themselves.

Hope Strauss makes it cause we need his type but his name isn't in my mind going forward.

They both lacked composure at times, but...

Bell's issue was brain damage that made it difficult to concentrate and know what was going on around him.

Caused by overt courage.

Strauss' issues have been almost the opposite - tentativeness and a lack of confidence and aggression.

Which was evident early in his career, but was fading quickly once he strung some games together in 2011.

I actually think the common appraisal of Strauss is outdated and obsolete.

They both lacked composure at times, but...

Bell's issue was brain damage that made it difficult to concentrate and know what was going on around him.

Caused by overt courage.

.

I think you are being generous to Belly. This affected him later in his career but the issues were there to see well before then.

Don't put words in my mouth. I have said no such thing. In fact, I specifically pointed out that I'm making no judgement on whether he is good enough or not. I have not seen him play that role, so I have no idea. I can feel optimistic based upon previous instances where players in similar situations have succeeded, but I am making no judgement on Sellar because I just don't know yet.

If anything, the only person who has made judgement on Sellar is you. You say that you don't think he's good enough. I have said that I don't know whether he's good enough. I assume that the football department think he's a good chance of being good enough, otherwise they wouldn't have drafted him, but I don't have the information available to allow me to make an informed judgement.

With respect AoB, you have written many lines starting with "rpfc believes" so those first two lines are a little galling...

And the "hypothetical road" which you are trudging down is that Sellar will be a suitable pure defender on players that Frawley would usually play on, and with the amount of text you have put in this thread about it I would say that it is not unfair to say that you are a fair way down that road.

We both think he may help out with teams we usually struggle with and we not have an answer for months (or years if he takes time) so this is argument without a quick conclusion...

For what it's worth, my compliments to Axis of Bob and rpfc for this interesting and very well articulated debate. For the most part, both have avoided personal criticism and provided interesting arguments which more than anything show how a forum such as this can open the minds of all of us.

Have to agree LA DEE, well played AoB and RPFC

Edited January 20, 201213 yr by s-t-i-n-g-a

I think you are being generous to Belly. This affected him later in his career but the issues were there to see well before then.

I don't think any of us know when he suffered brain damage. He suffered serious concussion a number of times before he joined MFC.

This page, largely as a rest of Axis' well thought out arguments, is really one of the most intellectually stimulating pages I have seen on this site, or at 'ology.

Well considered, well presented, and thought provoking. Great work.

And I happen to agree that, unlike so long ago when we last tasted the ultimate success and every defender had a man to shut down in his own way, a good defence is a network of players who know each other's strengths and weaknesses, as well as their own and the opposition attackers, there really being no "fixed positions" anymore, and further complicated by the incessant rotations. It is no surprise that the defences he mentioned, Collingwood, Geelong, Hawthorn, StKilda play in this way and that they have bee up there for the past few years.

Whilst I am sure Neeld will innovate but what we need is a fairly stable, but also flexible (if that is not contradictory) team down back. It was one of (few) the things that I thought we were getting right under Bailey in 2010, but 2011 it didn't seem to progress.

I think you are being generous to Belly. This affected him later in his career but the issues were there to see well before then.

My understanding is that Belly suffered numerous concussions before he started with us, and that this may have contributed to his lack of awareness and further concussions when at MFC, and the subsequent deterioration later in his career.

I find it hard to compare Strauss with Bell in that context.

This page, largely as a rest of Axis' well thought out arguments, is really one of the most intellectually stimulating pages I have seen on this site, or at 'ology.

Well considered, well presented, and thought provoking. Great work.

And I happen to agree that, unlike so long ago when we last tasted the ultimate success and every defender had a man to shut down in his own way, a good defence is a network of players who know each other's strengths and weaknesses, as well as their own and the opposition attackers, there really being no "fixed positions" anymore, and further complicated by the incessant rotations. It is no surprise that the defences he mentioned, Collingwood, Geelong, Hawthorn, StKilda play in this way and that they have bee up there for the past few years.

Whilst I am sure Neeld will innovate but what we need is a fairly stable, but also flexible (if that is not contradictory) team down back. It was one of (few) the things that I thought we were getting right under Bailey in 2010, but 2011 it didn't seem to progress.

That may be, but better teams will isolate their forwards.

There was plenty of one-on-one contest in the finals.

With respect AoB, you have written many lines starting with "rpfc believes" so those first two lines are a little galling...

I was clarifying our positions to Thomo, who thought we were arguing the same thing. I said nothing controversial, just a summary of our respective arguments. If you thought I misrepresented you then you'd have told me.

Conversely, I told you not to put words in my mouth because you were stating that my position was that Sellar was good enough, despite me having directly said that this was not the case. You were misrepresenting my position and I was correcting this misrepresentation.

And the "hypothetical road" which you are trudging down is that Sellar will be a suitable pure defender on players that Frawley would usually play on, and with the amount of text you have put in this thread about it I would say that it is not unfair to say that you are a fair way down that road.

Since you are struggling to pinpoint my position, I will state it succinctly.

I believe that Sellar has been recruited with the intention to play him in a similar role to Dawson/Lonergan, where he plays as the primary defensive stopper on the opposition's gorilla forward. This frees Frawley up to play a more attacking role in defence.

This makes no judgements on how good Sellar is and whether or not he is capable of doing this. It is only a judgement on what role I think he has been recruited for.

Given the 'amount of text I have put in this thread about it', it shouldn't be hard for you to find where I have said that Sellar is good enough. So, given that, quote me to show where I have said that. In response, I will quote you all of the times where I have specifically and explicitly said that I am making no judgement on this.

The ball is in your court.

Edited January 20, 201213 yr by Axis of Bob

I got rid of the asides...

I believe that Sellar has been recruited with the intention to play him in a similar role to Dawson/Lonergan, where he plays as the primary defensive stopper on the opposition's gorilla forward. This frees Frawley up to play a more attacking role in defence.

And I believe that that ceiling is too high for him and that it is too much to ask of him to be as effective as Frawley as a pure defender to release Frawley. Let others read that - you don't have re-publish...

This makes no judgements on how good Sellar is and whether or not he is capable of doing this. It is only a judgement on what role I think he has been recruited for.

Given the 'amount of text I have put in this thread about it', it shouldn't be hard for you to find where I have said that Sellar is good enough. So, given that, quote me to show where I have said that. In response, I will quote you all of the times where I have specifically and explicitly said that I am making no judgement on this.

I believe you are tacitly saying, by the fact that you have written so extensively, that Sellar is a good chance to play this role. That is where I made that judgement. I apologise for jumping to that conclusion.

I'm happy to stop arguing the future role and merits of the 35th best player on our list.

And I believe that that ceiling is too high for him .......

Maybe that's why he is a Sellar?

Maybe that's why he is a Sellar?

Like it DC you are getting it back in time for the main game!

DC just won the thread with 1 post.

Maybe that's why he is a Sellar?

Ha ha

Given the 'amount of text I have put in this thread about it', it shouldn't be hard for you to find where I have said that Sellar is good enough. So, given that, quote me to show where I have said that. In response, I will quote you all of the times where I have specifically and explicitly said that I am making no judgement on this.

The ball is in your court.

rpfc sez 'we'll bump it in 6 months.'

Night.

A bump is irrelevant to the differences we have because we are arguing different things. You will claim victory for yourself if Sellar turns out to be a dud, but that will be irrelevant to my point. If you want to bump then you need an agreed position.

I am arguing what the footy department intended, while you are arguing Sellar's quality. Different arguments, but you can't see that yet.

This isn'this about winning/losing an argument. It is supposed to be a discussion. You have created so many enemies that now you can't see anything else.