I am with Saty. Repetitive boilerplate comments on players perceived strengths and weaknesses do nothing to advance this discussion. The old bromides such as too much or too little strength, speed, courage, stamina, skill, fat, muscle definition, footy smarts, charm, looks etc etc etc are just boring.

considered and thoughtful contributions are preferred. I previously suggested a second mirror thread where commentary can be separated from inanities. Why not Demonland?

With all due respect Saty I do not have you on ignore because some of your training reports are valuable, but I skim past most of your other posts because the continual defence of every player and shouting down posters who differ in opinion about players is also boring. It derails and deadends threads more often than not.

Yes, I also see the irony in this post being off topic and expect it'll be deleted.

Keep up the training reports. They are good reading.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

With all due respect Saty I do not have you on ignore because some of your training reports are valuable, but I skim past most of your other posts because the continual defence of every player and shouting down posters who differ in opinion about players is also boring. It derails and deadends threads more often than not.

Yes, I also see the irony in this post being off topic and expect it'll be deleted.

Keep up the training reports. They are good reading.

 

 

Moonie, no that's cool, I am sure all of us don't read everything, I just find the same endless lines being trotted out at the mention of a player in a thread tiresome

 It is not defending them, I am bored with it, discussion is a fine thing, but those who are willing to do that and actually advance a topic are very few and far between on here, DD's one word contribution in the last hour or two being the perfect example

All players have something they can improve, I can list what the players have told me, it's a long list, Jack Trengove's is his burst speed, he knows, he is trying to improve it

I sometimes feel, like on other public forums, that some posters need to find fault with something, to help salve a little of their own inadequacy

Edited January 17, 20178 yr by Satyriconhome

31 minutes ago, tiers said:

What a lot of hooey and hogwash. Jack Trengove has shown the ability to get to the contest, win the ball and deliver it to advantage. That's all we want from him.

Speed is but one attribute that contributes to the ability to get to the contest. Others include reading the flight of the ball, making good decisions on when to go the the contest, being in the right place when the ball arrives and being able to evade your opponent. On the other hand, foot speed is valuable to escape being tackled but thought speed and hand speed  are just as important in delivering the ball to advantage.

Williams and Mitchell have been cited as examples of slow players who nevertheless displayed footy brilliance. Their special skills were showcased by the players around them who instinctively knew where to be to receive the ball. That takes patient coaching and many games played together as a team. Jack has never had that luxury and he has been expected to carry too much of the load at a time when the club was unable to develop its list.

The ongoing criticisms of Jack for being too slow are unwarranted and unfair. He is a genuine footballer and deserves the chance to play in a good, competitive team to show his wares. He might surprise.

That remains to be seen.  Before his injury I would agree 100%.  Now?  He hasn't shown that he has the ability to replicate the form that made him such an exciting player as a youngster.  

I agree that Williams and Mitchell are fine, if not the best, examples of what slower players can do without 'speed'.  Having said that, Jack Trengove is not Diesel Williams or Sam Mitchell.  He isn't even in our best 22... yet.  He has a long way to go to becoming the player he was, if he can reach those heights again.  I'd love him to do it, but I'm not certain that he can.

Again, you would have to be a heartless Melbourne supporter to not hope that Jack succeeds in his continual comeback from a horrible injury, but the discussion on his speed is valid.  He isn't Sam Mitchel, nor is he Greg Williams.  

Is it fair to say that those lamenting the lack of speed they perceive with Trengove are doing so within the framework of him busting into our "best 22"?

Maybe some are getting sucked into the "spud or star" mentality that footy player discussion almost always comes down to?

Trengove is on a 1 year contract on (what you'd imagine would be) the minimum player wage. He's a 25 year old former pick 2 and noted for his leadership ability and footy nous. Why can't we look at his spot on the list from the position of reality? Chances are he is not going to become the star he was once destined to be, but are we doing a disservice to our list analysis by only focusing on that? If he can get his body right and continue the fine VFL form he showed last year, then why wouldn't we keep him on his list at the rate of pay relative to his output rather than his draft order? If one (or more) of Jones, Viney, Tyson or Lewis go down, Trengove is a solid replacement, and that could be his spot on our list.

You never have 40+ stars, you have a few guns and then role players. That's Trengove's spot going forward IMO. So let's look at his value from that perspective, rather than obsessing over his speed because we're trying to fit him into a list of 22-25 players where contributing speed becomes a defining factor.

 

52 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Moonie, no that's cool, I am sure all of us don't read everything, I just find the same endless lines being trotted out at the mention of a player in a thread tiresome

 It is not defending them, I am bored with it, discussion is a fine thing, but those who are willing to do that and actually advance a topic are very few and far between on here, DD's one word contribution in the last hour or two being the perfect example

All players have something they can improve, I can list what the players have told me, it's a long list, Jack Trengove's is his burst speed, he knows, he is trying to improve it

I sometimes feel, like on other public forums, that some posters need to find fault with something, to help salve a little of their own inadequacy

FMD have a cry Saty. Tissues?

Its a discussion forum and il contribute with one word replies if i want to. And if you get 'tiresome' of the same old topic being discuss then maybe you shouldn't be writing on a footy forum where this happens everywhere. You cannot seem to grasp the reality that in a footy forum all issues regarding footy is discussed positive and negative.

Edited January 17, 20178 yr by dazzledavey36

Is there training tomorrow? Where and when? Club web site says it's closed to media. Sorry if mentioned previously

Just now, Moonshadow said:

Is there training tomorrow? Where and when? Club web site says it's closed to media. Sorry if mentioned previously

They may have one on Moonie, a closed session, not sure if it is at Goschs as the net throwers have started, if it is should be 9.15 start

54 minutes ago, stuie said:

Is it fair to say that those lamenting the lack of speed they perceive with Trengove are doing so within the framework of him busting into our "best 22"?

Maybe some are getting sucked into the "spud or star" mentality that footy player discussion almost always comes down to?

Trengove is on a 1 year contract on (what you'd imagine would be) the minimum player wage. He's a 25 year old former pick 2 and noted for his leadership ability and footy nous. Why can't we look at his spot on the list from the position of reality? Chances are he is not going to become the star he was once destined to be, but are we doing a disservice to our list analysis by only focusing on that? If he can get his body right and continue the fine VFL form he showed last year, then why wouldn't we keep him on his list at the rate of pay relative to his output rather than his draft order? If one (or more) of Jones, Viney, Tyson or Lewis go down, Trengove is a solid replacement, and that could be his spot on our list.

You never have 40+ stars, you have a few guns and then role players. That's Trengove's spot going forward IMO. So let's look at his value from that perspective, rather than obsessing over his speed because we're trying to fit him into a list of 22-25 players where contributing speed becomes a defining factor.

 

Spot on. And this is where i hope Trenners grabs his opportunity while Tyson is out. Play as that inside midfielder who can use the footy also on the outside with his precise foot skills. We already know hes a better mark then Dommy so he can also rest forward too.

 

 

Edited January 17, 20178 yr by dazzledavey36

14 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

FMD have a cry Saty. Tissues?

Its a discussion forum and il reply with one word replies if i want to. And if you get 'tiresome' of the same old topic being discuss then maybe you shouldn't be writing on a footy forum where this happens everywhere. You cannot seem to grasp the reality that in a footy forum all issues regarding footy is discussed positive and negative.

It's not a cry, so a one word 'bang' adds something to the discussion about Trengove does it, or does it salve

I can grasp that discussion is one of the functions of this board, and I can have discussions about footy, with those that don't resort to childish point scoring or name calling, or can actually handle someone disagreeing with them, unlike some

Some don't seem to find much positive, so therefore more balanced optimistic views help keep the topic chugging along

 

18 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

It's not a cry, so a one word 'bang' adds something to the discussion about Trengove does it, or does it salve

I can grasp that discussion is one of the functions of this board, and I can have discussions about footy, with those that don't resort to childish point scoring or name calling, or can actually handle someone disagreeing with them, unlike some

Some don't seem to find much positive, so therefore more balanced optimistic views help keep the topic chugging along

 

 

You are not the moral compass of this forum.

Nor do you decide what is a 'discussion' or not.

I find your shooting down of other posters insufferable.

 

 

1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

With all due respect Saty I do not have you on ignore because some of your training reports are valuable, but I skim past most of your other posts because the continual defence of every player and shouting down posters who differ in opinion about players is also boring. It derails and deadends threads more often than not.

Yes, I also see the irony in this post being off topic and expect it'll be deleted.

Keep up the training reports. They are good reading.

 

 

I'd rather have someone defending players than the nerds who never got a kick in their lives, other than from bagging blokes who try their best.

I'm not keen on censorship.  I'm a Trengove fan, but I don't bleat about every opinion I disagree with.  Clint said Trengove has been slow since 2011.  I don't agree, but he's entitled to his view.  I don't take it personally. 

I'm a free speech advocate, but it appears some of you only want to read opinions you like.  I'd understand if some views were malicious, but they haven't been.  Even then, it's not a crime to offend (or shouldn't be).

Don't ever try to regulate discussion, which is what some are trying to do.  If you don't like some comments, or disagree, just accept that some hold a different view.  Either jog on, or challenge their opinion.  But never try to regulate thought. 

Edited January 17, 20178 yr by ProDee

3 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Moonie, it is not discussion, not all of us like reading the same thing from the same posters every time a certain player gets mentioned, Old Dee v Ben Ken, it is boring, WE ALL KNOW some think Trengove is slow, it has been said on here since he was drafted.

It's not I can't accept critical discussion about players, it is reading the same [censored] thing over and over again, it reminds me of a herd of sheep bleating, I have enough posters on ignore, I will have nothing to read if I start to self censor what I read as well

Looks like I am good company Saty. Glad to see you think that I don't mind Trengove. 

Part of a football discussion forum should be actual football discussion.  Actual football discussion will involve negative and positive observation relating to individuals

When done reasonably it adds to the site.

Sycophantic back slapping does little to illuminate and is frankly boring.

 

4 hours ago, Vogon Poetry said:

No thanks, I'll discuss what I want and do it when I want. I'll continue to ask and be interested in others view of Trengove's speed.  It's a subject I'm interested in.

Unless of course Demonland decides it's a topic not worth discussion.

 

Of the three times I have seen training this offseason it is clear that his acceleration and general movement have improved. I have  also observed he is continuing to work on his take off which may be a physical or mental thing. Even taking these items into account he still shows having the least speed of any mid during drills but again who knows what this mean until you see the whole package put together during games. 

1 hour ago, dieter said:

I'd rather have someone defending players than the nerds who never got a kick in their lives, other than from bagging blokes who try their best.

Just wanted to give a huge shout out to @waynewussell @deeznutz @big_red_fire_engine and @picket fence for their excellent, informative training reports. Thanks guys!

Predictably, a civil discussion about player strengths and weaknesses is once again derailed by the usual suspect. Endless grandstanding about "valid" and "invalid" opinions is insufferable, especially on a footy forum.

39 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Trouble is most of it is from the comfort of the armchair.

I believe we ought to be able to put ourselves in the shoes of the players we are criticizing.

I think Saty does that very well.

In other words, we are all mere mortals barracking for a team we wish were total supermen. Some of them are, some of them aren't. I still love em.

Though, yes, I did feel sad whenever the same old players who couldn't perform kept getting called up again to not perform.

That's not the fault of those players though. They were doing their best.

I can accept that totally.

4 hours ago, tiers said:

What a lot of hooey and hogwash. Jack Trengove has shown the ability to get to the contest, win the ball and deliver it to advantage. That's all we want from him.

Speed is but one attribute that contributes to the ability to get to the contest. Others include reading the flight of the ball, making good decisions on when to go the the contest, being in the right place when the ball arrives and being able to evade your opponent. On the other hand, foot speed is valuable to escape being tackled but thought speed and hand speed  are just as important in delivering the ball to advantage.

Williams and Mitchell have been cited as examples of slow players who nevertheless displayed footy brilliance. Their special skills were showcased by the players around them who instinctively knew where to be to receive the ball. That takes patient coaching and many games played together as a team. Jack has never had that luxury and he has been expected to carry too much of the load at a time when the club was unable to develop its list.

The ongoing criticisms of Jack for being too slow are unwarranted and unfair. He is a genuine footballer and deserves the chance to play in a good, competitive team to show his wares. He might surprise.

Exactly.

I think quality AFL teams need at least 10 B+ midfielders (and a few better than that) to succeed.

According to some here though, we already have too many slowish, experienced, inside midfielders who have great vision and who can read the ball well, select the right option every time, and who can dispose the ball effectively with boring consistency, such that Trenners is superfluous to needs.

I however trust in the football department, not the luminaries on this site. In fact, I suspect (/hope) Trengove still has some relevance to the modern game. At this footy club.

Time will tell.

 

17 minutes ago, SaberFang said:

Just wanted to give a huge shout out to @waynewussell @deeznutz @big_red_fire_engine and @picket fence for their excellent, informative training reports. Thanks guys!

Predictably, a civil discussion about player strengths and weaknesses is once again derailed by the usual suspect. Endless grandstanding about "valid" and "invalid" opinions is insufferable, especially on a footy forum.

Agree with this first paragraph. Not the second.

It's a 'valid' discussion on a footy forum and I, for one, am interested in other observations.

 

Edited January 17, 20178 yr by Ron Burgundy

Just now, Ron Burgundy said:

Agree with this first paragraph. Not the second.

 

Well, I think this picture sums it up nicely:

We're all entitled to our different opinions.

1 minute ago, dieter said:

Trouble is most of it is from the comfort of the armchair.

I believe we ought to be able to put ourselves in the shoes of the players we are criticizing.

I think Saty does that very well.

In other words, we are all mere mortals barracking for a team we wish were total supermen. Some of them are, some of them aren't. I still love em.

Though, yes, I did feel sad whenever the same old players who couldn't perform kept getting called up again to not perform.

That's not the fault of those players though. They were doing their best.

I can accept that totally.

So what your saying is we can't reasonably discuss players strengths and weaknesses because we are mere mortals? Righto then.

2 minutes ago, Ron Burgundy said:

It's a 'valid' discussion on a footy forum and I, for one, am interested in other observations.

I'm also interested in different observations. I'm not interested in reading post after post detailing why someone's opinion is invalid. That's why it's called an opinion.

1 minute ago, SaberFang said:

Well, I think this picture sums it up nicely:

We're all entitled to our different opinions.

In this case, a lot from column A. Not much from column B. ?