7 minutes ago, Macca said:

Some of our former senior players are going to have to shine to get more opportunities ... that's footy.

and a sign of an imporoving team. One less walk-up means one more competitive spot.

I thought he did pretty well, and will keep his place. The tackle he made was a cracker.

I can understand the distrust in the FD after the Essendon loss and there's no doubt they are sending mixed messages at the moment... however, Wagner didn't look out of his depth for a first game. I'd be giving him another run this week. He didn't make any critical errors that I can recall and that was a high pressure match on Sunday, so I'll be interested to see how he goes against the Filth.

Great pick up.....recruiting team have done sensational job this time.

Watched the replay again. He was far from our worst on the day and has done enough for re-selection.

I am still unsure of where he fits in with a fully fit squad, but he is an interesting player and appears to able to handle the game at the top level. I'm really keen to see how he fares against Collingwood. Perhaps he goes to Howe?

Was as good if not better than Garland has been lately. It's a yes from me. 

13 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

I can understand the distrust in the FD after the Essendon loss and there's no doubt they are sending mixed messages at the moment... however, Wagner didn't look out of his depth for a first game. I'd be giving him another run this week. He didn't make any critical errors that I can recall and that was a high pressure match on Sunday, so I'll be interested to see how he goes against the Filth.

Was extremely lucky not to give away a 50m out near the boundary line which would have put Waite straight in front, but was actually good other than that!

6 hours ago, Deestroy All said:

Was as good if not better than Garland has been lately. It's a yes from me. 

Is that the benchmark though?

37 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

Was extremely lucky not to give away a 50m out near the boundary line which would have put Waite straight in front, but was actually good other than that!

Luckily Waite made such a meal of his dive that the umpires decided against paying it, but yes, it was a silly move.

1 hour ago, Nasher said:

Is that the benchmark though?

Sadly its ours...

2 hours ago, Nasher said:

Is that the benchmark though?

No it's not.

But Garland clearly didn't set it high enough. (Leader).

So Wagner gets his chance and should be persisted with for a few weeks to see what he can offer the back-line and team. (Unless he of course begins to play at the level Garland was).

 

6 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

No it's not.

But Garland clearly didn't set it high enough. (Leader).

So Wagner gets his chance and should be persisted with for a few weeks to see what he can offer the back-line and team. (Unless he of course begins to play at the level Garland was).

 

I reckon even if he does play at Garland's level, he has 5 years development on Garland that we will never get from Garland, so may as well persist with Wagner.

Garland would have to be a significant upgrade to keep him in, and I'm not sure he is.

Wagner seems to have the right stuff and should become a good player.

But I think posters are seeing stuff that wasn't there on Sunday.

One great pass, one great tackle ... and that's it. What he did was good, but he simply didn't do very much at all.

I admit I didn't pick up on how he did defensively. It was a fast open game, Norf had some forwards that over performed (Harvey, Waite) and some that under performed (Thomas, Petrie), and the defence was zoning and playing as a unit, so it's hard to assess how well he did defensively.

While I think it's harsh to say that the selection of Wagner lost us the Norf game, I just don't think he's ready yet. My concern is that if the Pies game is close and he does a few clangers, it could really set him back. He'd benefit more from a few games at Casey to see how he stacks up against other rivals for his spot such as Hunt and White and, yes, Grimes and Garland.

Most players can hardly remember their first game it goes so quickly and they rarely get many touches.  

Compared to most debutantes he did well and should only get better.  I like his attributes.  But remember, he'll need 50 games before he becomes a reliable and accomplished AFL player.

He's one I'd keep getting games into (form permitting).

 

21 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Most players can hardly remember their first game it goes so quickly and they rarely get many touches.  

Compared to most debutantes he did well and should only get better.  I like his attributes.  But remember, he'll need 50 games before he becomes a reliable and accomplished AFL player.

He's one I'd keep getting games into (form permitting).

Thought he did "OK" rather than "well". There weren't the steady stream of clangers that were a problem in NAB, so perhaps one could say that playing him in preseason games may have been a good move. 

We've got three promising young HBFs - Wagner, Hunt & White. Wagner seems to have been fast-tracked, though the others had interrupted pre-seasons and are playing back to full fitness. As things stand now, I can't see why Wagner deserves a game (let alone a number of games) ahead of Hunt & White on their late-2015 form.

Your "form permitting" qualifier is the crux. His performance needs to be 5/10 at the very least, and so far he's not got there. Another 3/10 game this weekend, especially if there's a couple of clangers and it's close, won't do him as much good as a stand-out performance for Casey would. I'm 50/50 about him being in the team this weekend, but if he's picked in such a hugely important game for both sides, he'll really be under the pump to perform. 

1 hour ago, Akum said:

 

Thought he did "OK" rather than "well". 

Well, I disagree. 

There's a different category for me when it comes to first games. 

If it was his 8th game I'd agree with you, but I've seen a lot of first games over the years and I think he did well - for a first game. 

2 hours ago, Akum said:

Wagner seems to have the right stuff and should become a good player.

But I think posters are seeing stuff that wasn't there on Sunday.

One great pass, one great tackle ... and that's it. What he did was good, but he simply didn't do very much at all.

I admit I didn't pick up on how he did defensively. It was a fast open game, Norf had some forwards that over performed (Harvey, Waite) and some that under performed (Thomas, Petrie), and the defence was zoning and playing as a unit, so it's hard to assess how well he did defensively.

While I think it's harsh to say that the selection of Wagner lost us the Norf game, I just don't think he's ready yet. My concern is that if the Pies game is close and he does a few clangers, it could really set him back. He'd benefit more from a few games at Casey to see how he stacks up against other rivals for his spot such as Hunt and White and, yes, Grimes and Garland.

I think that is why he deserves another run. Being a defender in that game was pretty difficult. If we play in a slower tempo game and he is a noticable liability then maybe he gets dropped but he had a pretty tough start and handled it pretty well. I saw a few good spoils but i also didnt see a huge amount of his defensive positioning and such. Might take a bit more notice this week, assuming he plays.

35 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Well, I disagree. 

There's a different category for me when it comes to first games. 

If it was his 8th game I'd agree with you, but I've seen a lot of first games over the years and I think he did well - for a first game. 

Fair enough. He certainly didn't look all at sea, like Strauss looked in his first few games, for example.

My guess is that he's been brought to the club because they think he can play zone defence well. And (speaking for myself) it's harder to assess a "zone defence" performance because I'm used to defenders being more about match-ups and one-on-one. So if his positioning and use of space and covering of space and decoy running was good, that's what the coaches will be looking for. But as yet they're not the things I'm attuned to notice about a defender's performance. It may well be that Garland & Grimes struggle more with a zone defence too.

And for a zone defence, it's more important to get the "mix" of 7 or 8 players who might play through there right, rather than to just pick the top 7 or 8 defenders at the club.

Still think 3 kicks & 5 handballs is just "OK", even in a first game, but not opposed to giving him another go, especially as we already have 2 enforced changes, which is probably enough.

31 minutes ago, Akum said:

Still think 3 kicks & 5 handballs is just "OK", even in a first game

I think we've established that we disagree.

8 hours ago, Nasher said:

Is that the benchmark though?

What StevieJordan said.

24 disposals and 6 marks. Great game and won't miss any time soon based on today's performance.

As much as I like Colin Garland, he'll be hard pressed to find his way back into our 22 with Wagner playing so well.

He was fantastic today. Seriously good

Wagner looked like he had the composure if a 100 game player today. He is growing with confidence and is staking a claim to be in the back 6.

He has been pleasantly surprising.

On 8 April 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dr. Gonzo said:

Yeah you're right, they certainly got it right last week.

This type of thinking is ridiculous - 1) taking this approach we may as well shut down the forum as we'd have nothing left to discuss and 2) this kind of thinking (that those in positions of power know better than us) is what has got us in trouble in the past.

Looks like they knew what they where doing. He was sensational today.