My 3 word player analysis v The Bulldogs

[Samael 560]

I'd give him a pass, but he certainly wasn't dominant. He took a few good grabs, held his own in the ruck and didn't have any of the shocking kicks we saw from him against Freo. Also came very close to a supergoal from the boundary but it was touched on the line. He had a very clear free kick denied to him while playing forward, the usual defenders trick of grabbing one of his arms and forcing him to go up one-handed. Apparently the umpires can't see that when it's done to a Melbourne player.

Speaking of umpires, they were disgraceful. The number of poor HTB calls made against us was insane, while we couldn't buy one against the doggies. Then there was the "holding" free against Dunn to set up a shot on goal for Grant, the above non-call for Gawn, a clear in the back that was instead called HTB (what a surprise), Jones being pinged for HTB when he was slammed from behind the moment he took possession, Viney being pinged when he never had possession and another who was tackled before he hit the ground and was pinged (can't remember who it was). Basically, Melbourne didn't get prior opportunity at all.

Your comments re the umpire are interesting. I was with some doggy supporters and they were annoyed at the umpiring as well and thought that there team was hard done. I did not think the umpiring was a factor at all. They missed and paid frees for both teams that the other side would have been howling about.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

He had an excellent season two years ago. Apparently one poor season is enough to dismiss the bloke for good.

Nasher, these are the kinds of comments that don't do this place any good. How as supporter's must we demand improvement if we're willing to let a 'good' season two years ago excuse average to poor form over the next few. It's nab cup and as one of our senior players we must demand more! It's as simple as that. The team simply won't get better if we're happy to see such fluctuations of form from senior individuals.

I'm not writing Colin off at this stage, but the signs from his first game were shocking and last weekend's game was average from my point of view for a player who should now be playing consistently good footy whether injured during pre-season or not. I'm talking about the basics here. Desire to compete, concentration, decision making. He is 27 or 28. Not 18.

Do we want this [censored] team to lift and rise the ladder? Or will we continually be making excuses for players who should be performing every week?

There's a reason we have been so bad for so long.

The fact that Nathan Jones is the only player I can name as someone who has consistently improved his game every year since the beginning of our dark days is extremely significant.

The inconsistency in form of others over the same period who are still on our list is simply not good enough. There can be no argument for that.

Frawley, Dunn, Garland, Jamar and now to a lesser extent Grimes, McKenzie, Bail.

All of them should be, (and in the case of Frawley was) on notice. If they cannot consistently improve from now on in, they'll be gone.

Edited March 17, 2015 by stevethemanjordan

[Mondê 525]

Nasher, these are the kinds of comments that don't do this place any good. How as supporter's must we demand improvement if we're willing to let a 'good' season two years ago excuse average to poor form over the next few. It's nab cup and as one of our senior players we must demand more! It's as simple as that. The team simply won't get better if we're happy to see such fluctuations of form from senior individuals.

I'm not writing Colin off at this stage, but the signs from his first game were shocking and last weekend's game was average from my point of view for a player who should now be playing consistently good footy whether injured during pre-season or not. I'm talking about the basics here. Desire to compete, concentration, decision making. He is 27 or 28. Not 18.

Do we want this [censored] team to lift and rise the ladder? Or will we continually be making excuses for players who should be performing every week?

There's a reason we have been so bad for so long.

The fact that Nathan Jones is the only player I can name as someone who has consistently improved his game every year since the beginning of our dark days is extremely significant.

The inconsistency in form of others over the same period who are still on our list is simply not good enough. There can be no argument for that.

Frawley, Dunn, Garland, Jamar and now to a lesser extent Grimes, McKenzie, Bail.

All of them should be, (and in the case of Frawley was) on notice. If they cannot consistently improve from now on in, they'll be gone.

I believe Dunn has taken significant strides over the past 3 seasons, he's now in my opinion on of the better one-on-one defenders in the competition. Agree with Garland and Jamar, and feel you are being too kind to Grimes and Jordie. Their careers have completely stalled and are well and truly at the crossroads now.

[Bombay Airconditioning 5,889]

He had an excellent season two years ago. Apparently one poor season is enough to dismiss the bloke for good.

And what one good season a few years ago warrants automatic selection? As already mentioned we now have other options, he needs to be dropped to go back and regain some form, even then depending on how others are going he may struggle to get back into the side.

[Bombay Airconditioning 5,889]

Sylvia is the perfect example, (ok he had a handful of good games as opposed to s great year) but the point being we held onto him and continued to play him in the hope that eventually one day he would deliver, upon being traded to a good side he found out what was actually required. Garland isn't a champion of the game or our team so he should be awarded no favours, at 26 he still could recapture the form we know he is capable of but until then......

[nutbean 8,837]

The fact that Nathan Jones is the only player I can name as someone who has consistently improved his game every year since the beginning of our dark days is extremely significant.

The inconsistency in form of others over the same period who are still on our list is simply not good enough. There can be no argument for that.

spot on - unless our footballers deliver improvement season on season - we will be cellar dwellers.

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

I would like to throw another thought out there.

Tom McDonald's kicking. I know people on here like to have a go at him, but his kicking in this match was top shelf. He was nailing difficult kicks, putting the ball to advantage so that only our players had a chance of taking it and had a 90+ efficiency rating. I really hope this is something he can do consistently, because he's turning himself into a real weapon. The run he made from the HBF across CHB and out the other side with repeat 1-2 handballs was as good as anyone in the league.

[Elusive Tunbridge 795]

Your comments re the umpire are interesting. I was with some doggy supporters and they were annoyed at the umpiring as well and thought that there team was hard done. I did not think the umpiring was a factor at all. They missed and paid frees for both teams that the other side would have been howling about.

I wasn't troubled by the umpiring in general, and I don't think they favoured either side. The HTB interpretation struck me as offering little chance to the player in possession, and I wonder how teams will adapt to it - reluctance to take possession? hurried disposal? something else?

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

I wasn't troubled by the umpiring in general, and I don't think they favoured either side. The HTB interpretation struck me as offering little chance to the player in possession, and I wonder how teams will adapt to it - reluctance to take possession? hurried disposal? something else?

Viney was pinged when he hadn't picked up the ball. He fumbled, was tackled without the ball which then wound up between his legs and under the body of the tackler, and somehow that was HTB against him. I'm pretty sure that was a Melbourne special.

[mo64 5,209]

I wasn't troubled by the umpiring in general, and I don't think they favoured either side. The HTB interpretation struck me as offering little chance to the player in possession, and I wonder how teams will adapt to it - reluctance to take possession? hurried disposal? something else?

I agree. Over our 2 NAB Cup games, I've actually found the umpiring interpretations easy to predict.

If you go to ground and don't dispose of it, HTB. If you handball to a teammate and he gets tackled without prior opportunity, HTB. So in other words, if you keep your feet and and if you don't handball to a teammate under pressure, you'll be fine.

[nutbean 8,837]

I would like to throw another thought out there.

Tom McDonald's kicking. I know people on here like to have a go at him, but his kicking in this match was top shelf. He was nailing difficult kicks, putting the ball to advantage so that only our players had a chance of taking it and had a 90+ efficiency rating. I really hope this is something he can do consistently, because he's turning himself into a real weapon. The run he made from the HBF across CHB and out the other side with repeat 1-2 handballs was as good as anyone in the league.

I think that Tom McDonalds kicking has been problematic but for the very reason stated the he does take the game on and kick forward which is always a more difficult proposition than chipping back and across to a man by himself. I don't want to see him stop running forward and taking the game on purely because he fluffs the odd disposal.

Edited March 17, 2015 by nutbean

[Nasher 33,047]

And what one good season a few years ago warrants automatic selection? As already mentioned we now have other options, he needs to be dropped to go back and regain some form, even then depending on how others are going he may struggle to get back into the side.

It wasn't "one good season", either, it was at least three solid seasons in a row before one poor one, but of course that doesn't suit your argument. At least you were closer to the mark than "one good season four years ago" which was just an outright lie.

I'm not suggesting that past form equals automatic selection, I'm saying it's an indicator of where he could get back to. I'm clearly in the minority, but I back him to get there and I think he will. He wasn't far off on the weekend - there was certainly a step change in his performance from the previous week.

I had a conversation with a colleague at work recently about how footy fans are always ridiculously biased towards the most recent season and forget everything else. There's no better an example of that than this discussion I reckon.

Edited March 17, 2015 by Nasher

[Webber 10,061]

It wasn't "one good season", either, it was at least three solid seasons in a row before one poor one, but of course that doesn't suit your argument. At least you were closer to the mark than "one good season four years ago" which was just an outright lie. I'm not suggesting that past form equals automatic selection, I'm saying it's an indicator of where he could get back to. I'm clearly in the minority, but I back him to get there and I think he will. He wasn't far off on the weekend - there was certainly a step change in his performance from the previous week. I had a conversation with a colleague at work recently about how footy fans are always ridiculously biased towards the most recent season and forget everything else. There's no better an example of that than this discussion I reckon.

Agree.

[mo64 5,209]

It wasn't "one good season", either, it was at least three solid seasons in a row before one poor one, but of course that doesn't suit your argument. At least you were closer to the mark than "one good season four years ago" which was just an outright lie.

I'm not suggesting that past form equals automatic selection, I'm saying it's an indicator of where he could get back to. I'm clearly in the minority, but I back him to get there and I think he will. He wasn't far off on the weekend - there was certainly a step change in his performance from the previous week.

I had a conversation with a colleague at work recently about how footy fans are always ridiculously biased towards the most recent season and forget everything else. There's no better an example of that than this discussion I reckon.

But his selection is still dependent on others on the list, and what they have to offer. Even if he gets back to his best, others may be playing at a level that is superior to his best.

I'll ask you this. What is Garland's role in the backline?

[Mondê 525]

It wasn't "one good season", either, it was at least three solid seasons in a row before one poor one, but of course that doesn't suit your argument. At least you were closer to the mark than "one good season four years ago" which was just an outright lie.

I'm not suggesting that past form equals automatic selection, I'm saying it's an indicator of where he could get back to. I'm clearly in the minority, but I back him to get there and I think he will. He wasn't far off on the weekend - there was certainly a step change in his performance from the previous week.

I had a conversation with a colleague at work recently about how footy fans are always ridiculously biased towards the most recent season and forget everything else. There's no better an example of that than this discussion I reckon.

Personally I think he's a pretty ordinary user of the footy and a so-so one out defender. His biggest strength in the past has been his reading of the play (intercept marks, defensive 3rd man up)...this is a role which Jeremy Howe now occupies. And he's better at it.

Edited March 17, 2015 by Mondê

[Bombay Airconditioning 5,889]

It wasn't "one good season", either, it was at least three solid seasons in a row before one poor one, but of course that doesn't suit your argument. At least you were closer to the mark than "one good season four years ago" which was just an outright lie. I'm not suggesting that past form equals automatic selection, I'm saying it's an indicator of where he could get back to. I'm clearly in the minority, but I back him to get there and I think he will. He wasn't far off on the weekend - there was certainly a step change in his performance from the previous week. I had a conversation with a colleague at work recently about how footy fans are always ridiculously biased towards the most recent season and forget everything else. There's no better an example of that than this discussion I reckon.

What suits my argument.....My argument is that there needs to be a time line on how long out of form players are given, if his stellar season was last year fair enough but it wasn't.

The "one good season in four" a blatant lie? The line was used jokingly but as other posters have pointed out his form is debatable.

As for your conversation with your work colleage....."bias towards the most recent season".....well that is his most recent form, how far back do we look? You could mount a case that he's been solid without being great just as you could mount a case that he can join his mate Jack Grimes in the VFL until they can display the kind of form on a consistent basis that warrants selection in an AFL team. Part of the reason we've been crap for so long is we hang on for too long, no ones made the tough calls. Garland is 26 and a professional sportsman so drop him, explain to him why he's been dropped and what areas he needs to work on. If the talent is there he will fight his way back, but as previously mentioned his best may not be good enough. Time will tell.

[Slartibartfast 15,774]

Like all our backmen in the 1st half, Garland was able to rack up easy possessions because there was little to no forward pressure by the opposition. As Stevetheman pointed out, he doesn't look to do anything creative once he gets the ball. Even at training, I haven't seen him take the game on, despite having acres of space and no pressure.

Watched the 2nd half again this morning, and Garland was bl##dy ordinary, as he was against Freo.

Garland isn't a great lockdown backman, and offers little on offence. IMO, it's time that we looked at other options.

You've made this point repetitively along with Steve and others for weeks. You don't have to respond every time someone disagrees with you.

[mo64 5,209]

You've made this point repetitively along with Steve and others for weeks. You don't have to respond every time someone disagrees with you.

It's only due to yourself and 1 or 2 others who believe that Garland and Grimes have a god given right to be in the team regardless of performance.

[dee-tox 4,827]

I thouht Garland was,particularly in the first half, one of our best. At least we know he is capable of playing to the standard. Not sure I can say the same about M Jones, Gawn, the Toump, Jordie and a few others.

[binman 38,125]

Agree.

So do i

[binman 38,125]

It's only due to yourself and 1 or 2 others who believe that Garland and Grimes have a god given right to be in the team regardless of performance.

What a ridiculous post

[LegsLeoncelli 162]

It's only due to yourself and 1 or 2 others who believe that Garland and Grimes have a god given right to be in the team regardless of performance.

Nah, it's just the way this joint works. You should know that from the training threads...

[Goodvibes 3,596]

I've been on this forum a long time now and it still amazes me how upset people get when someone disagrees with them. It's a bit of an occupational hazard for a dedicated footy forum member. How many days until round 1?

It also worries me that just as I'm warming to big Maxy everyone seems to be jumping off. I think we need to bring back our share market game. I'd definitely claim some Grimes, Garland and Gawn shares as well as the in demand Hogan, Salem and vandenberg shares. Viney might be good value at the moment too. Don't understand the doubters there either. I'm still a little cautious on the Watts and Toumpas front and more than happy to see others make their money on them.

[binman 38,125]

I've been on this forum a long time now and it still amazes me how upset people get when someone disagrees with them. It's a bit of an occupational hazard for a dedicated footy forum member. How many days until round 1?

It also worries me that just as I'm warming to big Maxy everyone seems to be jumping off. I think we need to bring back our share market game. I'd definitely claim some Grimes, Garland and Gawn shares as well as the in demand Hogan, Salem and vandenberg shares. Viney might be good value at the moment too. Don't understand the doubters there either. I'm still a little cautious on the Watts and Toumpas front and more than happy to see others make their money on them.

Good post good vibes. I'm a sucker for the watts and toump shares and happy to speculate. I'll leave the hogan shares. Too expensive and it will take me a couple of injury free years to stop being nervous about that investment. Happy to buy some Grimes, Basil and m Jones shares and invest heavily in the blue chip dunn and Jones shares

[rjay 23,922]

Viney was pinged when he hadn't picked up the ball. He fumbled, was tackled without the ball which then wound up between his legs and under the body of the tackler, and somehow that was HTB against him. I'm pretty sure that was a Melbourne special.

It was a tough call but he was on his knees and the ball could be seen as being in his possession...between his legs.

If you attempt to take possession of the ball and you are not on your feet you will more often than not get it given against you. I don't mind the interpretation if it's consistent.