Pedo and Chip are pretty much the same age, weight, and height.

Both played 88% game time.

1 player had 25 touches at 92% efficiency. The other had 8 touches at 50% efficiency.

Can you guess which one is which?

wow,now were bored.

early season practise matches,

different players.

different roles.

different game plan

poster hasnt put up any prize for guessing the right answer.

Does that really tell us one was fitter than the other? Or does that tell us one is far better than the other?

That, plus watching Pedo fail to make contests for the second half combines to tell us both things are true.

Paul Roos reported as being Impressed with Cam, early day's with the new coach and he can work wonders. Lets hope Cam can as well..

That, plus watching Pedo fail to make contests for the second half combines to tell us both things are true.

You were watching the game?

Or is this just another of your arguments for arguments sake, get over it, Cam played his role on Friday night, so did the other 25, we took a small step on the journey

That, plus watching Pedo fail to make contests for the second half combines to tell us both things are true.

Make contests?

He was the CHF - we are a walking contest - if someone doesn't hit us, it's their fault.

Stand by that until the day I die, or spend time up the ground...

You were watching the game?

Or is this just another of your arguments for arguments sake, get over it, Cam played his role on Friday night, so did the other 25, we took a small step on the journey

Played a role. Could have played a better role if we was fit. Maybe could have been the decoy forward AND done more than give us 8 touches including 3 clangers. 1 mark at CHF? Wow.

Pedo and Chip are pretty much the same age, weight, and height.

Both played 88% game time.

1 player had 25 touches at 92% efficiency. The other had 8 touches at 50% efficiency.

Can you guess which one is which?

The ol stats don't lie debate -

My 2cents on the whole Pedo debate - average player but will be needed to fill gaps as the season goes - so hoping he can stand up.

I didn't go to the game on Friday but watched it on Foxtel - Commentators said Pedo ran his guts out trying to make options for defenders down the ground all night. Can't complain about that

Those stats you bring up Stuie, you failed to mention Frawley gave up a stinker goal - wonder how many Pedo set up? Stats are a [censored] way to argue IMO - they can always be manipulated to the argument and not give the whole picture.

Pedo is no and will never be a superstar but bagging him after one game is f'n stupid... he could be important if our Bigs don't get on the ground

The ol stats don't lie debate -

My 2cents on the whole Pedo debate - average player but will be needed to fill gaps as the season goes - so hoping he can stand up.

I didn't go to the game on Friday but watched it on Foxtel - Commentators said Pedo ran his guts out trying to make options for defenders down the ground all night. Can't complain about that

Those stats you bring up Stuie, you failed to mention Frawley gave up a stinker goal - wonder how many Pedo set up? Stats are a [censored] way to argue IMO - they can always be manipulated to the argument and not give the whole picture.

Pedo is no and will never be a superstar but bagging him after one game is f'n stupid... he could be important if our Bigs don't get on the ground

Totally agree with the bold part. I'm not saying he's terrible, I'm just saying if he was fitter he could actually be more useful than just being a fat decoy.

Also, he's played more than one game for us...

Pedo and Chip are pretty much the same age, weight, and height.

Both played 88% game time.

1 player had 25 touches at 92% efficiency. The other had 8 touches at 50% efficiency.

Can you guess which one is which?

Not really relevant to fitness though is it? How much game time and possession did McDonald or Nicholson have?

Reverse the roles and let Pedersen play key back on the likes of McBean, Hampson and Griffiths and he's bound to rack up 20 touches. Make Chip Frawley play CHF and his speed probably allows him to get maybe 12 to 15 touches but his efficiency probably drops.

I'm not arguing that Pedersen is a good player. He's VFL quality at best as a forward and maybe just good enough as depth as a defender (where he might be a better intercept mark and kick than Frawley but his lack of pace makes him exploitable for goals). But stats and the fact he was blowing don't tell me he's unfit.

Frawley played 88% game time and probably spent a fair bit of that playing a bit of kick to kick making small movements to get to position or guarding Richmond forwards who didn't move much at all deep in defense. Pedersen played 88% of game time and his main opponent in Astbury cramped at kicked the ground leading to JKH's exciting and sealing goal. It's a stretch but you can say Pedersen ran his opponent to cramp. That's not a bad sign.

I'm much more concerned about Pedersen's lack of pace and talent than his lack of fitness.

Totally agree with the bold part. I'm not saying he's terrible, I'm just saying if he was fitter he could actually be more useful than just being a fat decoy.

Also, he's played more than one game for us...

You could be right about the fitness - I have no idea - Commentator did say he tried hard - Only Roosy & Mission would know if he's fit or not I can't really comment (as I haven't seen enough of him)

I see your point but, what I am trying to say is everyone copped a hard run in 2013 - let's move on to 2014 and he wasn't terrible in the first game against the Tigs - Crashed a pack or 2 which I think got a scoring opportunity...

You're probably right if your judging on elite standards though - but maybe a little harsh too early?

Played a role. Could have played a better role if we was fit. Maybe could have been the decoy forward AND done more than give us 8 touches including 3 clangers. 1 mark at CHF? Wow.

It seems pretty clear that his role was not to take marks and get touches. It was to take the opposition defenders out of the 50 meter arc to make way for the small forwards to work. My guess is that this was a clear instruction and one that the midfield and half-backs understood. They simply weren't looking for Pederson as a target. Seemed to work pretty well from what I saw.

Why do you not understand the idea of playing a specific role as asked for by the coach? We need to judge players according to whether they have done the job required of them.

You could be right about the fitness - I have no idea - Commentator did say he tried hard - Only Roosy & Mission would know if he's fit or not I can't really comment (as I haven't seen enough of him)

I see your point but, what I am trying to say is everyone copped a hard run in 2013 - let's move on to 2014 and he wasn't terrible in the first game against the Tigs - Crashed a pack or 2 which I think got a scoring opportunity...

You're probably right if your judging on elite standards though - but maybe a little harsh too early?

Maybe too harsh seeing he probably wouldn't have played had we had more big men to choose from. He's a spare parts/depth/utility player, and it's probably my worry about Clark, Dawes, Hogan, Fitzy all being out that's making me take it out on poor old Pedo bear...

Totally agree with the bold part. I'm not saying he's terrible, I'm just saying if he was fitter he could actually be more useful than just being a fat decoy.

Also, he's played more than one game for us...

I think you are marking his fitness and body comp too harshly based on him not being in shape last year which I always thought might have been North's fault a little as they do have a few bigger and lumpier types than what Misson was designing for us. At all the trainings he ran pretty well for a key position player in the straight running drills and in training drills he was tackling, chasing and running as hard as the midfielders. I would like to know where he finished in the time trial because I would imagine whilst he wasn't up the front that he would've done pretty well.

He shouldn't get an excuse that just because he wasn't fully fit when he turned up to training last year that he's fine now because he's better than that but I think he is probably around the AFL standard for endurance for mature but moderately talented key position players.

Blease and Pedersen cop it for their fitness because for once on our list we don't have any roly poly Wonaeamirri's or Byron Pickett's or half training and battling to get fit Aaron Davey's. Or any other white players if it looks like I'm targeting Indigenous players I don't want it to seem that way they were just the 3 that first came to mind.

It seems pretty clear that his role was not to take marks and get touches. It was to take the opposition defenders out of the 50 meter arc to make way for the small forwards to work. My guess is that this was a clear instruction and one that the midfield and half-backs understood. They simply weren't looking for Pederson as a target. Seemed to work pretty well from what I saw.

Why do you not understand the idea of playing a specific role as asked for by the coach? We need to judge players according to whether they have done the job required of them.

I understand his role. My point is, if he was fitter he could have taken defenders outside 50 and then actually done something. Are we really that good a team that we can afford to have 1 guy on the ground who's purely a decoy and contributes nothing?

I understand his role. My point is, if he was fitter he could have taken defenders outside 50 and then actually done something. Are we really that good a team that we can afford to have 1 guy on the ground who's purely a decoy and contributes nothing?

I give up. You win. Feel better?

It seems pretty clear that his role was not to take marks and get touches. It was to take the opposition defenders out of the 50 meter arc to make way for the small forwards to work. My guess is that this was a clear instruction and one that the midfield and half-backs understood. They simply weren't looking for Pederson as a target. Seemed to work pretty well from what I saw.

Why do you not understand the idea of playing a specific role as asked for by the coach? We need to judge players according to whether they have done the job required of them.

That is a tough one Reverend, how do we know what their job is every week?

Also the idea only works if the opposition continues to fall for it.

Before long the good sides twig to the idea and then leave the person free as they know he is a decoy.

The Decoy then needs to be used.

In Pedersen's case is he up to it?

This was

That is a tough one Reverend, how do we know what their job is every week?

Also the idea only works if the opposition continues to fall for it.

Before long the good sides twig to the idea and then leave the person free as they know he is a decoy.

The Decoy then needs to be used.

In Pedersen's case is he up to it?

The roles will change, the role he had on Friday worked because it was coached well, let's give everybody a second chance shall we, what if Fitzy, who used to be one of the least liked and then managed to get a consistent run and became a favourite, has a shocker during the NAB Challenge how will he be viewed then

Paul Roos reported as being Impressed with Cam, early day's with the new coach and he can work wonders. Lets hope Cam can as well..

Yep, if Roos was impressed with Cam Pedo's performance, that's good enough for me. His teammates have indicated on DeeTV that he's been one of the hardest trainers this preseason.

This was

The roles will change, the role he had on Friday worked because it was coached well, let's give everybody a second chance shall we, what if Fitzy, who used to be one of the least liked and then managed to get a consistent run and became a favourite, has a shocker during the NAB Challenge how will he be viewed then

As I see it Saty Fitzy has played some good games so we know he can produce.

Pedersen has never played good games.

If Fitzy has a poor one ( which he will ) we can be confident he will turn it around.

With Pedersen we have nothing to fall back to.

As I see it Saty Fitzy has played some good games so we know he can produce.

Pedersen has never played good games.

If Fitzy has a poor one ( which he will ) we can be confident he will turn it around.

With Pedersen we have nothing to fall back to.

You don't have to keep looking backwards OD, I don't, looking fwd to the Intra Club Thursday, see who gets a run

Can't we leave past history, most of the players on Friday night gave it their best, including Cam Pedersen, I posted what his role was, he seemed to do it ok, Roos says 'If you don't play your role, you won't play'

Of course he may be given a different role against another team, but he carried out what it was on Friday night, that's the whole idea isn't it?

He dropped marks and failed to get effective touches. Even little things like knocking the ball out to a teammate or dishing off little handballs would have been handy, but I really didn't notice any effective play other than clearing up space.......he knocked the ball free for Barry to pick up and handball lto Howe for a goal

As for blowing hard, it was the first game of the season and he is carrying 98kg around, dear me

Who's looking at past history? I am just commenting on Friday night.

As I said he did lead away from the goal square to free up space, so he did that well, and it was great coaching to create that space.

But really, how hard is it to lead away from an area? It's not sufficient for an AFL forward - they need to be able to positively influence contests when the ball comes their way. Very rarely did I see Pederson do that on Friday night.

With Pedersen we have nothing to fall back to.

I knew we got rid of Juice to soon

OD, listen to what Bernie Vince says after his post game presser, it's all about the team, we supposedly had a second string unit there on Friday and I know it was the NAB Challenge but it was a pleasant change to watch a team playing as a team and seemingly all on the same page, made me a bit more optimistic that the dark times may be coming to an end.

Players who normally get derided on here playing their role and (yes apart from the howlers), playing weill, Niclholson, Bail, Pedersen....Roos doesn't care who it is, if he thinks they can play the role he wants he will pick them, if they play the role, the place in the team is theirs to lose........so the guys who got the first chance, as Roos says got the merits

I understand his role. My point is, if he was fitter he could have taken defenders outside 50 and then actually done something. Are we really that good a team that we can afford to have 1 guy on the ground who's purely a decoy and contributes nothing?

My point is that it wasn't lack of fitness that contributed to his lack of contribution. He had multiple defenders (Chaplin, Rance, Astbury, Bachelor, McIntosh) play on him so I'm not sure just by having more and more fitness whether he would be more efficient. I think the reason he got so little ball was that he's not a natural CHF in getting to the right spots, he's not fast enough to get separation and be in clear open space, he's not a strong mark as a forward and his team mates were both instructed to share the ball across half back and through the middle and (in part to the work Pedo did) had space and options to kick the ball to Bail, JKH and Toumpas who were the other leading half forward options.

The lead up CHF will be Dawes' role come season proper and I hope he can average at least a goal a game and probably 15 touches and maybe at least 6 or 8 marks per game. But I don't expect to see 5 goal hauls and 25 touches from Dawes in that lead up role. We will probably see Hogan in that role as well and Howe and if he holds his Friday night form then Bail.

Sydney in 2012 won the flag with Sam Reid not kicking many goals or taking many marks. He was mainly about work rate and sure he took some great marks as he is a hugely talented in the air but he wasn't exactly impacting games like Trav Cloke. If the key forward injuries continue and all of a sudden Pedersen is back in the decoy CHF role I think we can win games if he makes a little more impact than he did Friday night. A few more marks and getting involved in the possession chains and he would've both worked hard and played well.

You don't have to keep looking backwards OD, I don't, looking fwd to the Intra Club Thursday, see who gets a run

I was reply to your comment about what happens if Fitzy has a poor game?

History tells you things Saty.

If you ignore it then it tends to repeat itself.