Sam Blease a chance this week?

[Whispering_Jack 30,059]

Pardon me for starting a football thread but ...

Here's some great news for fans of Sam Blease of which I am one.

Neil Craig is suggesting on The Craig Report that Sam Blease is a chance to play against Collingwood on Queens Birthday after a good display for the Scorpions when he not only was good offensively but also strong in his defensive work.

It's an area that Blease has been known to be deficient in the past and it seems that he's finally starting to get on top of it. We really need his pace and smarts around goal in the second half of the season.

[DemonOX 8,791]

Does it really matter???

[Gorgoroth 12,950]

Do you reward him after one defensive display or make him do repetitive defensive weeks?

Or do you reward him after one week in hope that it will make him take that up ith him straight away.

[Little Richard 6,262]

Do you reward him after one defensive display or make him do repetitive defensive weeks?

Or do you reward him after one week in hope that it will make him take that up ith him straight away.

Tapscott was rewarded immediately after that 6 goal game, which I thought was a poor move - one good game probably shouldn't be rewarded with a promotion. Tappy isn't doing a lot at the moment so I think it would have been better to leave him to dominate for a few weeks.

Blease... not too sure, I guess he has been at Casey for a few games now but if only starting to show the required work rate now, he should probably be left for a couple more games imo. Just until he can really take games apart.

[bing181 9,225]

Tapscott was rewarded immediately after that 6 goal game, which I thought was a poor move - one good game probably shouldn't be rewarded with a promotion.

Yes and no. Given that confidence and self-belief is behind so many of our current woes, I didn't think it was a bad move to bring in a player who would obviously be "up".

Be good to see Blease given a run, though it seems it'll happen sooner rather than later in any case. Sylvia to come in (I presume ... unless there's a club penalty as well?), and there was also mention of Byrnes, so not sure how many of that type we can squeeze in.

[McQueen 17,864]

Tapscott was rewarded immediately after that 6 goal game, which I thought was a poor move - one good game probably shouldn't be rewarded with a promotion. Tappy isn't doing a lot at the moment so I think it would have been better to leave him to dominate for a few weeks.

Blease... not too sure, I guess he has been at Casey for a few games now but if only starting to show the required work rate now, he should probably be left for a couple more games imo. Just until he can really take games apart.

Blease needs games now he's fit and found a little touch in the VFL.

The season's written off so let's give these guys the opportunity to gain some confidence through subsequent AFL appearances.

[titan_uranus 25,016]

Of the three games he's been down there for, he's played one good one. I don't think that's enough.

I'd want to see him play three or four consecutive games showing that he can match that defensive intensity and pressure for consistent periods of time before I bring him back. Every time he's played for Melbourne his games have been characterised by selfishness, showboating and laziness in defence. If he comes back and shows any of that again, I'd be livid.

[The Red Fox 216]

Blease was sensational on the weekend against Sandringham. Far too good for VFL level.

On form, he and Gawn deserve a senior recall. Hope he gets his chance.

[jumbo returns 6,741]

Of the three games he's been down there for, he's played one good one. I don't think that's enough.

I'd want to see him play three or four consecutive games showing that he can match that defensive intensity and pressure for consistent periods of time before I bring him back. Every time he's played for Melbourne his games have been characterised by selfishness, showboating and laziness in defence. If he comes back and shows any of that again, I'd be livid.

I concur with your thoughts, but I want to see this bloke back.

He's a speed machine....he just has to learn to speed back to help.

[ThreeOneSix 954]

Does it really matter???

Yes, it does matter, because Blease has been on our list long enough, he is a player in the bracket that Neeld harps on about - games wise, yet Neeld won't play him.

Blease killed it towards the end of last year, showed some loyalty and stuck with us, had a big pre-season and yet doesn't get a crank.

Neeld needs to pull his head in and start playing talented blokes like Blease, instead of sticking with spuds like McKenzie and Bail - who are barely even VFL standard.

[titan_uranus 25,016]

Yes, it does matter, because Blease has been on our list long enough, he is a player in the bracket that Neeld harps on about - games wise, yet Neeld won't play him.

Blease killed it towards the end of last year, showed some loyalty and stuck with us, had a big pre-season and yet doesn't get a crank.

Neeld needs to pull his head in and start playing talented blokes like Blease, instead of sticking with spuds like McKenzie and Bail - who are barely even VFL standard.

This is wrong on a lot of levels.

For one, Blease did not 'kill it' towards the end of last year. You're implying we fought off potential suitors to keep him, which is also completely untrue.

He doesn't get a crack because he hasn't displayed defensive qualities which are required at AFL level.

We continually berate our players for a lack of effort - Blease has been the typical lack of effort player. He was sent to Casey to get this side of his game right, which he appears to be beginning to do. He needs to continually work on that and make sure it's a regular aspect of his game because the Blease that has played AFL in the past is not going to make it if he won't tackle and chase.

[stuie 7,374]

Going by the VFL report he's a certainty, as is Sellar who will come in to replace Chip and take on Cloke.

[The Song Formerly Known As 6,479]

Yeah he'll play.

[DeeSpencer 25,687]

This is wrong on a lot of levels.

For one, Blease did not 'kill it' towards the end of last year. You're implying we fought off potential suitors to keep him, which is also completely untrue.

He doesn't get a crack because he hasn't displayed defensive qualities which are required at AFL level.

We continually berate our players for a lack of effort - Blease has been the typical lack of effort player. He was sent to Casey to get this side of his game right, which he appears to be beginning to do. He needs to continually work on that and make sure it's a regular aspect of his game because the Blease that has played AFL in the past is not going to make it if he won't tackle and chase.

I think in this weeks Craig report (or somewhere else) Craig says he ran as hard back as he did forward. That was/is Blease's problem. He'll sprint off at 100 miles an hour when he gets the ball (often only to burn team mates) but sometimes with productive play but as soon as the ball is going to the other team he'll look completely flat.

Of course other problems he faces is his disposal is mediocre and his decision making often poor.

But it will be interesting to see if he's got any better since we last saw him. I certainly think his play last year was promising but I 100% agree it wasn't enough to indicate long term success.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,049]

I wouldn't mind seeing him in, provided he understands that he needs to run hard both ways to keep his spot.

[deanox 9,915]

Yes, it does matter, because Blease has been on our list long enough, he is a player in the bracket that Neeld harps on about - games wise, yet Neeld won't play him.

Blease killed it towards the end of last year, showed some loyalty and stuck with us, had a big pre-season and yet doesn't get a crank.

Neeld needs to pull his head in and start playing talented blokes like Blease, instead of sticking with spuds like McKenzie and Bail - who are barely even VFL standard.

This post is wrong on so many levels it's unbelievable.

You want to play a kid every week, who hasn't earned a spot because he sites not do the team things, just so he can get games experience?

I think we saw with the last lot ie Morton, that no matter how many games you pay, if you aren't getting them for the right reason you don't improve.

[ThreeOneSix 954]

This post is wrong on so many levels it's unbelievable.

You want to play a kid every week, who hasn't earned a spot because he sites not do the team things, just so he can get games experience?

I think we saw with the last lot ie Morton, that no matter how many games you pay, if you aren't getting them for the right reason you don't improve.

This post is wrong on so many levels it's unbelievable.

You want to play a kid every week, who hasn't earned a spot because he sites not do the team things, just so he can get games experience?

I think we saw with the last lot ie Morton, that no matter how many games you pay, if you aren't getting them for the right reason you don't improve.

We play blokes week in week out who don't do enough to earn their spot.

A lot of people were harping on the Kent shouldn't of played last week because he didn't earn his spot - and he shown more signs than 3 quarters of the list.

Blease has been in the system a lot longer than Kent.... Blease is proven at AFL level, if Sam Blease isn't performing at VFL to required standards, he's probably lost interest.

Can hardly blame him, watching blokes spud up our main list week in - week out - and continue to get a game.

Watts has done nothing all year, gets injured/rested and doesn't even have to come back through the VFL.

[bing181 9,225]

.... Blease is proven at AFL level

You're wrong there for starters. He's had a couple of flash games - alongside a few stinkers. Last game he played in the firsts, he was subbed out after hardly getting a touch.

Hope he does well, really, but he's been a) too inconsistent and b) too unaccountable. Kent earned his game last week on the back of (apparently) a strong showing in the VFL - and strong in all facets, not just at generating a few highlights. If the penny is finally starting to drop for Sam, great for him, but until then ...

[What 18,810]

Hoping this is the week he cements his spot as a permanent in the starting 18.

Go get em Sammy.

[ThreeOneSix 954]

Hoping this is the week he cements his spot as a permanent in the starting 18.

Go get em Sammy.

Shouldn't be too hard for Sam Blease to cement his spot in that side, kid can play and should be no where near the VFL.

[deanox 9,915]

threeonesix you're exposing your lack of understanding of football here mate, I suggest you leave it alone...

I want to see Blease cement a spot in the team, and I think he is capable of it, and won't be surprised if he does in the second half of this year, but you need to think about the following:

• When Neeld came to the club, Blease was one of the players in the Morton, Gysberts, camp of not willing to work hard enough, not willing to run hard enough at training. He was terribly unfit, fast but unfit, this is very well documented.
• Subsequently Blease 'bought in' to requirements of the FD. He started working hard at training. Although he was still behind others in terms of fitness etc, he was given games last year on the back of his committment to training. He played some promising football last year.
• To claim he is a proven AFL player is misguided at best. I would suggest he has played a handful of games showing real potential and one game where he performed at the accepted standard. He has 24 career games at an average of 12 disposals per game.
• Over the pre-season he put in at training, and he was given games in rounds 1 and 2. The team got belted both matches, and he collected a total of 15 possessions and 2 tackles in those games and didn't kick a goal. (he had a lot of friends)
• Subsequently he was dropped. Playing at Casey he has not demonstrated the ability to run both ways (i.e. spread and chase in defence), which is an obvious requirement if the team wants to avoid getting belted every week.
• He came back in for round 5, and managed another 7 disposals and no tackles. At least you can say his form is consistant.
• He went back to Casey for the last 3 weeks where he has worked on defensive efforts, in fact last week they were particularly pleased with his defenseive efforts.
• They were possibly happy enough with his effort that he will get promoted to the 1st's this week.

He has all the skills, and the pace to be a successful AFL player, but he needs to show the commitment to being a 2 way player, or he will not have a successful AFL career.

[Little Richard 6,262]

Blease needs games now he's fit and found a little touch in the VFL.

The season's written off so let's give these guys the opportunity to gain some confidence through subsequent AFL appearances.

That attitude under Bailey probably just damaged a few players confidence. He might be fit enough for VFL but AFL? I guess we'll find out this week as it seems he'll be playing.

[Deespicable 2,726]

What Blease offers is pace (which we currently lack) and the fact that he is one of the few genuine potential linebreakers in our squad of players.

The worry I have on him is not his tackling, but that he may not have the peripheral vision to ever really make it in this role, but unless he plays on a wing or half-back regularly we won't know.

[zeldacat 53]

Will be good to have Blease back, but give me a break - Sellar just fluffs around and is soooo slow - he's the one that needs to go back to the VFL (and stay there).

[pm24 451]

Ummmm Sellar played in the VFL last week. Pederson came in for him last week, though there is a chance Sellar comes in to take Cloke.