My 3 word player analysis v The Bulldogs

[RalphiusMaximus 6,048]

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.

He was on his feet until he was tackled to the ground.

[Gator 17,332]

Garland had an excellent 2013, which was the culmination of some solid years developing within the system. In January 2014 he had ankle surgery, which understandably effected his output and he didn't play AFL until round 8. He never recaptured his 2013 form. In the second last game of 2014 he injured his knee and missed the final game, but I'm not sure of the diagnosis.

He's been off the pace in the fitness stakes during this preseason, which may have been due to missing most of last year's preseason and injuring his knee in August. He doesn't have a gold pass to our best 22, but I think it's premature to dismiss him and it doesn't acknowledge his recent injury concerns. I think it will take him a while to hit his straps, but injury free with an increased fitness base there's no reason he won't return to the type of form that earned second place in 2013's B&F. He strikes me as in introspective sort of fellow who'll play his best when free of mind. Hopefully he continues to gain confidence over the ensuing weeks. His best is very good and his worst a liability.

[hemingway 7,627]

Garland had an excellent 2013, which was the culmination of some solid years developing within the system. In January 2014 he had ankle surgery, which understandably effected his output and he didn't play AFL until round 8. He never recaptured his 2013 form. In the second last game of 2014 he injured his knee and missed the final game, but I'm not sure of the diagnosis.

He's been off the pace in the fitness stakes during this preseason, which may have been due to missing most of last year's preseason and injuring his knee in August. He doesn't have a gold pass to our best 22, but I think it's premature to dismiss him and it doesn't acknowledge his recent injury concerns. I think it will take him a while to hit his straps, but injury free with an increased fitness base there's no reason he won't return to the type of form that earned second place in 2013's B&F. He strikes me as in introspective sort of fellow who'll play his best when free of mind. Hopefully he continues to gain confidence over the ensuing weeks. His best is very good and his worst a liability.

prodee your last sentence is the most telling and summarizes the Garland dilemma.

[Henrietta Lumbago 331]

Garland had an excellent 2013, which was the culmination of some solid years developing within the system. In January 2014 he had ankle surgery, which understandably effected his output and he didn't play AFL until round 8. He never recaptured his 2013 form. In the second last game of 2014 he injured his knee and missed the final game, but I'm not sure of the diagnosis.

He's been off the pace in the fitness stakes during this preseason, which may have been due to missing most of last year's preseason and injuring his knee in August. He doesn't have a gold pass to our best 22, but I think it's premature to dismiss him and it doesn't acknowledge his recent injury concerns. I think it will take him a while to hit his straps, but injury free with an increased fitness base there's no reason he won't return to the type of form that earned second place in 2013's B&F. He strikes me as in introspective sort of fellow who'll play his best when free of mind. Hopefully he continues to gain confidence over the ensuing weeks. His best is very good and his worst a liability.

His best is nothing more than an average defender, he doesn't play tall and his decision making is slow, when he has the ball in our back line he gives the opposition so much time to man up or cover the gaps, the sooner he is replaced with a Grant Birchall type, Nick Malcelski type, the better!

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,388]

It could be any player, everyone has a bad game or even a run of bad games. But if that run of games turns into a season or longer or it's the same mistakes made over and over its time for them to be dropped. The exception at the moment is probably Dawes for lack of other options. In Garlands case we have Frost who is up and about, Grimes can make way for Salem. If Nathan Jones form was to drop away all year and he became a liability he can go too and rediscover his touch. I don't care who it is. We need to set high standards. I remember when the Hawks sat out Sewell and the Swans Okeefe, many on thought, hey we could do with a player like that. That what successful clubs do, they make the tough calls.

[Akum 2,660]

His best is nothing more than an average defender, he doesn't play tall and his decision making is slow, when he has the ball in our back line he gives the opposition so much time to man up or cover the gaps, the sooner he is replaced with a Grant Birchall type, Nick Malcelski type, the better!

Yet Roos keeps picking him! Must be awful for you!

[binman 42,903]

His best is nothing more than an average defender, he doesn't play tall and his decision making is slow, when he has the ball in our back line he gives the opposition so much time to man up or cover the gaps, the sooner he is replaced with a Grant Birchall type, Nick Malcelski type, the better!

Honesty what a load of ill informed tosh. Average defenders don't get runner up in b and fs

Edited March 17, 2015 by binman

[old dee 23,787]

Honesty what a load of ill informed tosh. Average defenders don't get runner up in b and fs

Being runner up in a MFC B and F over the last few years would not be a major achievement on a AFL level players CV.

[hemingway 7,627]

Being runner up in a MFC B and F over the last few years would not be a major achievement on a AFL level players CV.

a little harsh old dee ?

[old dee 23,787]

a little harsh old dee ?

Yes probably is Ernie but we have been so bad I find it difficulty to see any players other than a handful that have been AFL standard.

A large number of MFC players got games during 2011 - 2013 because they were the best of a very bad lot.

[HEMLOCK 39]

I didn't see the match but this is very much to the contrary of what I've heard so far. For Hogan to be 'disappointing' in his third game of AFL level footy is a bit stiff.

he was though, sure he jumped around a bit but didn't instil too much confidence in me, still a young man

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Yep. Grimes and Matt Jones were both very good yesterday, and certainly in our best. Both suffer from the perceived past indiscretions not allowing them to be as good as their last performance. Which was Saturday, and they played well, got a lot of it, and used it well. They will both be part of Roos squad of 'first selected' each week, whether some can see it or not. As for the oft repeated refrain that Van Demon, Newton, Michie, Brayshaw etc etc 'going past them', most of those usually mentioned have played nil or just a handful of games, so they are UNKNOWNS. Bail didn't see as much ball, but was good when he got it, and McKenzie same.

Would just like to bump this thread for this post which seems to represent many posters' views on these particular players.

I'd also like to represent other posters' views on these players by stating the following:

These players are not whipping boys.

They are criticised fairly for their worth as footballers to our side just as any player is who is in questionable form or who doesn't offer enough at AFL level.

Clearly, the coaches agree.

Please shut-up.

The end.