15 hours ago, Dappa Dan said:

Harsh on Tyson and Oliver.

Otherwise sound.

For some reason I struggled to pick up Oliver some of the time and was surprised when I saw the stats. He is a freak. Love him.

Tyson's disposal in the first half was terrible. It improved when he was allowed to get a few steps from the pack, in the second half, probably due to a drop in pressure from the Suns. 

 

 

2 hours ago, binman said:

 

I see his flaws but get really frustrated at those who bag him whilst ignoring the fact that he gets selected. If he wasnt up to it is is ridiculous to suggest they would pick him just as a future prospect. And again the argument there is no one else does not hold water. A team pushing for finals does not carry a player who the coaching staff do not believe is up to it. If as bad as some say they would reorganise things just as they did when thwy dropped him. I would mention the option of bringing in keilty but some would argue he is not up to it yet. Which might be right. Bur tbat proves my point. They dont select players they dont think are up to it.

 

How many examples do you need before you come to the realisation that every club's list and line profiles differ in depth and quality? Why do you continue to overlook that clear piece of evidence in this argument? 

There are a multitude of examples across the AFL both past and present where players who may be underperforming are continually picked due to a lack of positional options available. 

It is obvious to most that we have a lack of quality and depth in our key position back stocks, which clearly allows Oscar a much greater margin for error compared to that of one of our midfielders for example. Let's say an ANB, Harmes or Stretch.

Tom Barrass is the perfect example of what I'm talking about. A young key defender drafted a year before Oscar McDonald yet has played less games due to West Coast's key back depth. He's been allowed time to develop as he should at WAFL level. After a strong start to the year (much stronger start than Oscar and if anyone watches non-mfc games you will agree), he has been omitted for the first time this weekend on the back of one poor game. One!

So yeh, the point is, players can be selected in a starting 22 even if their form doesn't warrant it.

Oscar is that guy at the moment. 

Edited May 28, 20178 yr by stevethemanjordan

Not much talk about Tom Bugg's wastefulness and lack of composure in front of goal. Proved to be very costly against North and almost yesterday. Can take a decen tmark but where does he stand? Again, lack of depth in key position is gifting guys like he and O mac games.

15 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Tyson's disposal in the first half was terrible. It improved when he was allowed to get a few steps from the pack, in the second half, probably due to a drop in pressure from the Suns. 

 

 

I didn't get to watch live yesterday due to playing but have just watched the first half replay. Haven't watched the second half yet but it's interesting watching when you know the result and minimal emotion is involved.

After reading some comments on Dom, I thought he must have butchered every possession but he hit a few great long passes that setup scores and was involved in multiple scoring chains. I think he over kicked one into the breeze which didn't look pretty. He laid a couple strong tackles. He definitively would have been closer to our best than our worst.

On the others commonly talked about, Hibberd is a great recruit and I love him with the pill. The only thing worrying me was that a lot of time he was the closest to Matera who had 2.4 at half time and could have buried us nearly. It may not have been his man but it's just something I noticed.

Poor Oscar as well is such a limited player (at the present) There is absolutely no one to replace him so he has to keep playing but his pace and physicality is so minimal it's sad. He will be a player no doubt in time but right now it would be great if we had enough fit players to have him learning his craft in the twos. 

2 hours ago, ProDee said:

Garland isn't available and we're improvising in the ruck, so Oscar gets to hold down a key post.

it's pretty obvious he's getting games due to attrition.

The implication being that the only reason he is selected is because of attrition.

Sorry PD but that logic just doesn't hold up. It doesn't explain why he was selected all last season when we had both Dunn and garland fit and ready or why he was selected at the beginning of this year when we were not 'improvising in the ruck'. 

By your logic when Gawn is back we are no longer 'improvising in the ruck' he will get dropped. Which i doubt will be the case. 

I'm not the one selecting omac. The coaches are. They clearly have their reasons for doing so and i very much doubt it is simple an explanation as 'attrition'. Goodwin has nae it crystal clear that players not playing their role will not be selected. Full stop. So the evidence is also clear that OMac MUST be playing his role. 

For what its worth i agree we really need a quality back. May would do nicely. Though he won't replace Omac. 

Anyway don't quote me and i will brook no further comment about Omac or enter into any further debate about him. 

6 minutes ago, deeko said:

Poor Oscar as well is such a limited player (at the present) There is absolutely no one to replace him so he has to keep playing but his pace and physicality is so minimal it's sad. He will be a player no doubt in time but right now it would be great if we had enough fit players to have him learning his craft in the twos. 

Apart from Hullet, Maynard or Keilty. ha Oh sorry they're not up to it. Can't pick a player who is not up to it. So ipso facto OMac is. Go Oscar. I've got your back.or

By the by Pederson has played at CHB, is very strong and now mobile enough. Do you think they might play him back and drop o,mac for him when Gawn returns? No? Why not? 

4 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

 

So yeh, the point is, players can be selected in a starting 22 even if their form doesn't warrant it.

 

Agree. But not if they are not up to it. If not good enough to play they are not selected. Ever. Think Cook. We desperately needed a CHF. But we didn't ever pick him. Because he was not up to it. There is big difference between under performing and your contention that OMac has not a single strong attribute and is not up to AFL standard. 

Edited May 28, 20178 yr by binman

40 minutes ago, binman said:

Apart from Hullet, Maynard or Keilty. ha Oh sorry they're not up to it. Can't pick a player who is not up to it. So ipso facto OMac is. Go Oscar. I've got your back.or

By the by Pederson has played at CHB, is very strong and now mobile enough. Do you think they might play him back and drop o,mac for him when Gawn returns? No? Why not? 

Not sure if you're serious with this post or not?? But if so....

The three VFL games this year and Hullett and Keilty wouldn't have had a dozen possessions between them in total. Not sure if either have played well at all this year as I can't recall them once being named in the best. So imo, no they are clearly not up to it.

Maynard was knocked into next month by that little pleb Thomas a month back and has been unavailable with concussion. So as I said, there is no one to take his place. Literally no one.

As for putting words into my mouth for Pedo to go back, I would have back there everyday over Omac. Better hands by far plus can kick the pill. But I think it's pretty clear that when Gawn returns Pedo would go forward allowing our best backman in T Mac to return to his no. 1 spot at CHB.

I have Oscars back also (believe it or not) and in time he will be ok I hope, but watching the replay he really was awful. 

4 hours ago, Redleg said:

For some reason I struggled to pick up Oliver some of the time and was surprised when I saw the stats. He is a freak. Love him.

Tyson's disposal in the first half was terrible. It improved when he was allowed to get a few steps from the pack, in the second half, probably due to a drop in pressure from the Suns. 

 

 

And a lift in pressure from our mids. Jones for example was very quiet until he took the game over. Viney was subdued. I loved watching Tyson come off the back of the square. 

A balanced analysis Joeboy, although I do agree with others re: Dom Tyson - he was pretty good.

Bugg

missed the goals

23 hours ago, stranga said:

Not much talk about Tom Bugg's wastefulness and lack of composure in front of goal. Proved to be very costly against North and almost yesterday. Can take a decen tmark but where does he stand? Again, lack of depth in key position is gifting guys like he and O mac games.

Hold his spot because he actually links up at Half forward. Carey was saying about Daniher. The harder thing to do as a Fwd is win the ball (which Bugg is foing) as soon as he starts kicking straighter he'll more than hold his spot.

(Side Note seems to me as Ben Kennedys papers have been stamped)

19 hours ago, Dappa Dan said:

And a lift in pressure from our mids. Jones for example was very quiet until he took the game over. Viney was subdued. I loved watching Tyson come off the back of the square. 

Viney started the game at a bull out of a gate & actually played a very good defensive game.

7 hours ago, Mud Dogs Gonna Win said:

Viney started the game at a bull out of a gate & actually played a very good defensive game.

Yeah, he didn't play badly. But his game vs Crows is what we need from him. Actually, we need the midfield games of Oliver, Petracca and Viney from that week to roll through to finals.The mix of offensive and defensive stuff. Viney kicks a surprising amount of goals. We'll need all of them.

On 28/05/2017 at 0:01 PM, binman said:

Apart from Hullet, Maynard or Keilty. ha Oh sorry they're not up to it. Can't pick a player who is not up to it. So ipso facto OMac is. Go Oscar. I've got your back.or

By the by Pederson has played at CHB, is very strong and now mobile enough. Do you think they might play him back and drop o,mac for him when Gawn returns? No? Why not? 

I have much regard for Pedo.

but on the occasions he played back for MFC he was awful. Couldn't spoil . Truly, as a defender, Oscar is better than Pedo.