Changes against the cats next week

[Ned 156]

Clark and Chip back and I'd like to see Blease and Bennell based on Casey game reports. Not sure who should go out though. Good effort last night and I'm loathe to change much in a tram that had a real go.

[baysidedave 246]

Yeah I saw it, granted only on TV and I agree with he was particularly ordinary.....

My point however was that he has been one of our best up until tonight and yet after one, granted, dreadfully poor performance he gets the bullet.

And he apparently gets it ahead of others that have been worse for longer in other games and have been kept in the side regardless.

But hey if you want him gone I'm sure your not alone.

why is it everybody jumps on Watts, keep him in until he plays 3 bad in a row

[jimcor 212]

I'm with those that don't think Neeld should do anything other than find a spot for Clarke & Frawley. After having just re-watched the game, I even think that some of my reactions last night might have been flawed i.e. I don't think Sellars and Watts were that poor - not great but not that poor!

What a great place to be in compared with the last few seasons. We now have players expected to perform to certain minimum levels before they are promoted. A miracle (almost).

Apart from Dunn, I don't know who should be dropped. Maybe Tapscott who seemed to struggle a bit but was also very brave. On reflection, I can't even understand why so many call for Joel M to be dropped. IMO his strengths still far outweigh his weaknesses and you can't fault him for effort and hardness. Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing who runs out on Saturday because, if nothing else, it might give us an idea of who they think can be trusted to execute the plan and who can't.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

why is it everybody jumps on Watts, keep him in until he plays 3 bad in a row

Is that the benchmark? So you can get away with playing 2 games without the appropriate effort as long as the third one is ok, then repeat cycle.

Get games into the young players but not at the expense of maintaining minimum standards.

Watts may still play next week, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was either rested, the sub or demoted.

And just because Watts has a bad week and gets demoted doesn't mean anyone has drawn a line through his name. It just means like many other young players, he has had a bad week and has been demoted, both to maintain standards and for his own education and development.

Some people are very precious when it comes to our young players.

Edited April 29, 2012 by dandeeman

[Mac7 309]

I think I heard that Frawley's calf injury will see him miss a further 1-2 weeks.

[Ned 156]

I'm with those that don't think Neeld should do anything other than find a spot for Clarke & Frawley. After having just re-watched the game, I even think that some of my reactions last night might have been flawed i.e. I don't think Sellars and Watts were that poor - not great but not that poor!

What a great place to be in compared with the last few seasons. We now have players expected to perform to certain minimum levels before they are promoted. A miracle (almost).

Apart from Dunn, I don't know who should be dropped. Maybe Tapscott who seemed to struggle a bit but was also very brave. On reflection, I can't even understand why so many call for Joel M to be dropped. IMO his strengths still far outweigh his weaknesses and you can't fault him for effort and hardness. Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing who runs out on Saturday because, if nothing else it might give us an idea of who they think can be trusted to execute the plan and who can't.

Great post. I agree, the more you watch it the better it looks. Tapscott has great effort and he also has a decent kick on him, something that's useful in our team.

[rjay 25,092]

Injuries will be the guide this week. Frawley may not be back and who knows with Clark, Tappy had a bad cork and Magnar may have pulled up a bit sore after he cooled down. I would like to see Blease and Petterd get a good run at it for a few weeks though, not up and down as has been the recent case.

[jimcor 212]

I've reviewed my post and changed my mind. We should definitely drop either Joel Mc or Tom Mac because it's too confusing trying to work out who's being rubbished and who's being praised. As a default position, I assume all negative comments are aimed at Joel because he's been around for the longer period and has inadvertently attracted a lot of harsh (too strong?)critics. For the sake of clarity, we should insist that no two players with similar, but not the same, names be selected.

[QueenC 74]

QueenC, on 29 April 2012 - 01:19 AM, said:

Yeah I saw it, granted only on TV and I agree with he was particularly ordinary.....

My point however was that he has been one of our best up until tonight and yet after one, granted, dreadfully poor performance he gets the bullet.

And he apparently gets it ahead of others that have been worse for longer in other games and have been kept in the side regardless.

But hey if you want him gone I'm sure your not alone.

why is it everybody jumps on Watts, keep him in until he plays 3 bad in a row

I wasn't having a go, I was defending him while acknowledging that he didn't have a good game......

And I agree with you, a few bad games in a row, then he can be re-aquainted with the Scorps, but certainly not yet.

All I was saying is that a hell of a lot of people want to see him gone.

Edited April 29, 2012 by QueenC

[Macca 17,034]

I'm with those that don't think Neeld should do anything other than find a spot for Clarke & Frawley. After having just re-watched the game, I even think that some of my reactions last night might have been flawed i.e. I don't think Sellars and Watts were that poor - not great but not that poor!

What a great place to be in compared with the last few seasons. We now have players expected to perform to certain minimum levels before they are promoted. A miracle (almost).

Apart from Dunn, I don't know who should be dropped. Maybe Tapscott who seemed to struggle a bit but was also very brave. On reflection, I can't even understand why so many call for Joel M to be dropped. IMO his strengths still far outweigh his weaknesses and you can't fault him for effort and hardness. Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing who runs out on Saturday because, if nothing else, it might give us an idea of who they think can be trusted to execute the plan and who can't.

Yeah , I agree . Good post 'jimcor' . Geelong are a tallish side so we need a few big blokes . Probably at least 1 in reserve if somebody is being towelled up .

Clark and Frawley (if fit) to come in . Possibly Sellar or Dunn out but there may be another player from Saturday night who "doesn't come up" . That's been the pattern this year . More and more teams are seemingly "resting" the odd player so we'd be no different .

Cheers

Edited April 29, 2012 by Macca

[jabberwocky 2,301]

All I was saying is that a hell of a lot of people want to see him gone.

Who are the people and where do they want him gone, do you mean off the list gone or Casey gone?

Edited April 29, 2012 by dandeeman

[Guest strawberry_gumdrops]

How is Strauss travelling?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,303]

Is that the benchmark? So you can get away with playing 2 games without the appropriate effort as long as the third one is ok, then repeat cycle.

Get games into the young players but not at the expense of maintaining minimum standards.

Watts may still play next week, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was either rested, the sub or demoted.

And just because Watts has a bad week and gets demoted doesn't mean anyone has drawn a line through his name. It just means like many other young players, he has had a bad week and has been demoted, both to maintain standards and for his own education and development.

Some people are very precious when it comes to our young players.

The thing is you can't judge kids on a game by game basis - you leave them in the side for 4-6 weeks and judge them over the whole period. You can't expect 20 year olds to be dominating week in, week out in a bottom 3-4 side. Same deal with guys like Morton if you put him in the senior side you can't drop him after only one or two games because he didn't set the world on fire. It gives them time to find their place in the side, get used to the structures etc on game day and won't have them hesitate with every possession because they're worried they'll be dropped if they make a mistake.

Edited April 29, 2012 by Dr. Gonzo

[jabberwocky 2,301]

The thing is you can't judge kids on a game by game basis - you leave them in the side for 4-6 weeks and judge them over the whole period. You can't expect 20 year olds to be dominating week in, week out in a bottom 3-4 side. Same deal with guys like Morton if you put him in the senior side you can't drop him after only one or two games because he didn't set the world on fire. It gives them time to find their place in the side, get used to the structures etc on game day and won't have them hesitate with every possession because their worried they'll be dropped if they make a mistake.

Look I don't disagree with any of that however there is a difference between making skill errors, judgement errors, lacking fitness and lacking endeavour.

The latter shouldnt be tolerated under any circumstances. With Watts it is one of, or more likely a combination of the the two latter reasons that he had a bad night.

Then as i have said earlier i thought he had a real bad night, others saw it differently.

I find it a bit ridiculous that people are getting thier noses out of joint because a couple of people have suggested that Watts should play a game or two at Casey for not performing. We need to stop being precious as a club and start treating these players as men. Men who can take a kick in the pants and respond appropriately.

The club is revising it's standards, Jack Watts isn't exempt. Neither is Brad Green, Ricky Petterd and the rest of the list.

I am happy to put my faith in this group of coaches to get the best out of him.

There is a lot of hyperbole on both sides of the Jack Watts argument, most just want to see the bloke succeed. I know I do.

Edited April 29, 2012 by dandeeman

[Dr. Gonzo 24,303]

Yep I agree with that and Watts definitely needs to lift his fitness, his attack on the ball has been very good at times this year and other times not so good - he has to realise he can't choose when he wants to go, he just has to do it every time. I am confident the penny will drop eventually and when it does he will be a genuine gun. He was poor last night but for skinny tall players it wasn't a great night (look how Riewoldt and to a lesser extent Goddard went not withstanding Jordie's great effort in quelling him).

It wouldn't surprise me if he is sent back to Casey for a bit and I wouldn't necessarily complain but you can't make someone "go harder" endurance wise if they don't have the fitness base. Remember he has only really done 1 full pre-season so whether he is dropped or not I don't see him improving that this year.

[MadAsHell 4,215]

How is Strauss travelling?

Spoke to him saturday night and said he was a week away. Would expect him to come back through Casey rather then staright into the seniors.

[Cheesecake 92]

I think I heard that Frawley's calf injury will see him miss a further 1-2 weeks.

On the TV coverage from the game, someone (maybe Greeny) said that Frawls had a hip-flexor strain.

Not sure that this isn't club spin, and perhaps you have better info Mac, but if the rumour mill can't even get the exact injury right, then who knows how long he'll be out. Can anyone provide any further info?

[Guest José Mourinho]

why is it everybody jumps on Watts, keep him in until he plays 3 bad in a row

Against st kilda the thing he needed to do to get involved in a wet game was throw his body in there.

And he didn't do it enough, and was largely anonymous.

I'm a fervent supporter of Watts, but I think he needs to be dropped to teach him that the current level of physical commitment is not enough to continue getting a game.

He's been given leniency in the past, but it's time to step it up another level.

Confidence in his body may be an issue, but a standard needs to be set.

This would help him build the required confidence.

[Guest José Mourinho]

Spoke to him saturday night and said he was a week away. Would expect him to come back through Casey rather then staright into the seniors.

Fantastic to hear.

Would love him back in the BP.

[Demon_JB 1,385]

For those who are opting for Davey to be dropped need to get their heads checked. Over the two weeks Davey has been regaining some form and showing glimpses of his former self, as well as very successfully on a number of occasions extracting the ball from the pack with sharp hands, opening the run of play.

If he continues this week by week he could have a break out game and inject the confidence he so desperately needs. Dropping him would just be starting from square one again. Instead of just refreshing the disposal count on footy live apps and making a judgement call based from that, try actually watching the game and thinking from a mental and fundamental perspective.

[Nasher 33,617]

I agree that dropping Davey would be counter-productive. Doubly so when the suggested replacement is Blease.

[jimcor 212]

One of the other factors that should perhaps be borne in mind is that it would be counter-productive to make multiple unforced changes while the team is learning to put the new gameplay into place. It's much more difficult having a lot of players trying to learn something new than it is having the odd new player coming in and learning how the rest of the team is playing. Unless players are not following instructions or not making the required effort, they should be given a decent run. If they're improving (and in my view, Davey definitely is) they should be supported. On the other hand, if they show themselves to be a dud, back to the twos.

Footy players will make mistakes and I'd much rather that they stretch themselves rather than just occupy a space.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Agree Nasher. Without a ready second option for the small FP role, we are stuck with Davey. And from reports Blease aint AFL ready.

[Choko 493]

Blease appears to have had a good game at Casey this week, so I would be inclined to give him a go. He is pacy, which we desperately need.

I think Watts was actually that bad against the Saints, that he must be dropped. He seems realyl low on confidence. I love JW, so I don't say this to kick him. Having said that, it wasn't an easy night to be a tall - just ask Nick R.

In: Frawley, Clark, Blease, Petterd

Out: Joel Mac, Watts, Dunn, Sellar

Edited April 30, 2012 by Choko

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,909]

Against st kilda the thing he needed to do to get involved in a wet game was throw his body in there.

And he didn't do it enough, and was largely anonymous.

I'm a fervent supporter of Watts, but I think he needs to be dropped to teach him that the current level of physical commitment is not enough to continue getting a game.

He's been given leniency in the past, but it's time to step it up another level.

Confidence in his body may be an issue, but a standard needs to be set.

This would help him build the required confidence.

I would have thought dropping a player wouldn't help their confidence. Saturday night was a night for big bodied players so in those conditions Watts wasn't ever going to be in the best players. But he wasn't bad enough to be dropped, either.

I'll assume Frawley won't be fit and Clark will. So, for mine, Clark comes in and Dunn goes out (see footnote below). Based on the Casey game, maybe Bennell should come in to add pace and skillful disposal, but, if so, it would have to be for Joel MacDonald, who had his best game for the year on Saturday night. On balance, I'd let Bennell play one more good game at Casey before promoting him. And Sellar should make way for Martin once Martin is fit. I think Sellar is the slowest player I've ever seen. His effort is commendable, but he runs like he's wearing concrete slippers.

And by far the worst player on Saturday night was Sylvia, but through no fault of his own. He should have come back via Casey. But now he's back, he should remain in the team.

Footnote: While I'd drop Dunn, I suspect the Match Committee won't and will once again see value in Dunn playing a shut down role, perhaps on Corey Enright. In which case, Clark will come in for Tapscott.