watched reply and they just ran, ran and ran we where stuffed wont happen this week

 

5 hours ago, Grapeviney said:

Appreciate the info LT, although I wish that people who worked at the club would be more discrete about what they know.

We all complain about the spin which comes from coaches and players in post-match press conferences and the like, but there's a reason why they don't reveal the inner thoughts of the FD to supporters and the general public. 

Thanks for the info. I was particularly unhappy with Harmes especially his 2nd efforts, in the 2nd quarter Garlett kicked wide for Harmes to make space and mark. He fell over in the contest and stayed there and didn't even get up and chase or contest. It looked bad and I expect him to have a rest this week.

Kent and Harmes are interesting ones.

Both were utterly appalling against Essendon but picked themselves up for North, Collingwood and Richmond (Kent especially).

I've never seen Kent run so hard and work so hard as he did against Collingwood.

But both then fell into bad habits against St Kilda.

I'm not sure what the problem is. Do they pick and choose when to put in 100%? Are they not fit enough to do it weekly? Did they think the game was won early? Not sure what it is but we can't continue to play players like them who fluctuate from fantastic to abysmal like that.

59 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I'm not sure what the problem is. Do they pick and choose when to put in 100%? Are they not fit enough to do it weekly? Did they think the game was won early? Not sure what it is but we can't continue to play players like them who fluctuate from fantastic to abysmal like that.

Or is it just because they are they 22 and 20 respectively?  I reckon you only have to be 5% off the boil mentally to appear slow and lazy at AFL level, which renders you completely useless.  I reckon it's just a function of inexperience, and the problem we have is that half our team is filled with players at this age and level of experience - if too many off them fall off the effort cliff at once, the results reflect accordingly.  

The question is, how do you address it?  I doubt their lack of "putting in" is intentional (I definitely don't like the term "pick and choose"), just more a lack of recognising when the focus is off and lacking experience in breaking out of it.  You could drop them, but in the case of Kent in particular, he's clearly best 22 - you risk hurting the team by doing this. I don't think dropping them is particularly productive, in the same sense that you wouldn't punish your kids for knocking over a glass of water - save the punishment type responses for the players who actively, consciously defy team rules.  It needs to be responded to with education, and this is something that can happen while in the team still I think - until the player starts to become a real repeat offender then you're left with no choice.

This is where Roos, Goodwin et al (should) earn their money IMO.

10 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

This loss was purely down to players work rate. I have a friend who works at the club and can pass on that the coaching staff singled out a few players in the review. Guys like Kent and Harmes didn't put in, mids didn't push back hard enough. They were also livid at Tmac not following instructions. He was told to stick closer to Reiwoldt after qtr time but kept trying to guard space and cut off attacks (unsuccessfully). He seems to have developed an ego and taking things on himself. Unsure if he will be dropped because we don't have any other decent tall defenders as coverage, but they're very unhappy with his attitude.

Paging some of the comments in the Michael Hurley thread. Interesting. Thanks for the info, LT.

9 hours ago, Nasher said:

Or is it just because they are they 22 and 20 respectively?  I reckon you only have to be 5% off the boil mentally to appear slow and lazy at AFL level, which renders you completely useless.  I reckon it's just a function of inexperience, and the problem we have is that half our team is filled with players at this age and level of experience - if too many off them fall off the effort cliff at once, the results reflect accordingly.  

The question is, how do you address it?  I doubt their lack of "putting in" is intentional (I definitely don't like the term "pick and choose"), just more a lack of recognising when the focus is off and lacking experience in breaking out of it.  You could drop them, but in the case of Kent in particular, he's clearly best 22 - you risk hurting the team by doing this. I don't think dropping them is particularly productive, in the same sense that you wouldn't punish your kids for knocking over a glass of water - save the punishment type responses for the players who actively, consciously defy team rules.  It needs to be responded to with education, and this is something that can happen while in the team still I think - until the player starts to become a real repeat offender then you're left with no choice.

This is where Roos, Goodwin et al (should) earn their money IMO.

Whilst I agree in essence to the above sometimes the 'education' IS the dropping.

It's a clear lesson 100% or hit the road ( to Casey )

There are dog collars that deliver a shock if the animal strays from its territory. I wonder if one could be fitted to T Mac?

1 minute ago, chook fowler said:

There are dog collars that deliver a shock if the animal strays from its territory. I wonder if one could be fitted to T Mac?

Good luck fitting it 

40 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

There are dog collars that deliver a shock if the animal strays from its territory. I wonder if one could be fitted to T Mac?

Or else leash him to a hound tuned in to the smell of his opponents socks?

Edited May 3, 20169 yr by america de cali