Jump to content

Featured Replies

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

Jeffy lost his appetite for the contest. It doesn't sound like that's an issue for Kozzie.

I believe this is absolute rubbish. He had family issues in 2018, badly injured his shoulder twice in 2019, none of his injuries involved appetite or shirking. 

 
  • Author
10 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

Great training report. As a track watcher through most of last season I think the biggest challenge will be for the team to play how they train. Last year my opinion was that we consistently failed to play in a style that did not resemble how we trained. At training we moved the ball quickly but judiciously to a free target, switched across the ground to change the angle of attack, hand balled to advantage just like we all did at training in our suburban careers. However all I saw in most of our games was see ball, get ball and kick long to a contest and just keep bombing it long etc. we all saw it but as I said repeatedly last year that is not how we were training. Maybe that was all about lack of personnel, lack of faith in a constantly changing line up due to injury and form? May this season be totally different and we  play how we train and bring some subtle finesse added to a physical and brutal game plan.

Agree, and I think the lack of opposition at training had us all fooled a bit. That old analogy about dancing with your sister was compounded by the sister having two left feet. My observations of training on Monday looked like the sister knew how to dance.

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

Jeffy lost his appetite for the contest. It doesn't sound like that's an issue for Kozzie.

Lead our tackles inside 50 for 2015, 2017, 2018 & 2019. 2nd in 2016.

 
1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

Lead our tackles inside 50 for 2015, 2017, 2018 & 2019. 2nd in 2016.

Be that as it may he was not physically competive enough at the end. Which is why they delisted him. And why no other club picked him up.

9 hours ago, binman said:

Be that as it may he was not physically competive enough at the end. Which is why they delisted him. And why no other club picked him up.

Yeah I'm not trying to imply he was fantastic or his effort was consistent (was anyone's last year?), but I just think criticism of Jeff is sometimes over the top, and comments like 'lost his appetite' seem strange to me when it's about a player who lead our tackles inside 50 and our average goals; both things we were in desperate need of in 2019. Plus, as others have mentioned; injury and personal circumstances had a big impact on him in his last couple of years so I guess that's why I feel the need to comment sometimes.


48 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Yeah I'm not trying to imply he was fantastic or his effort was consistent (was anyone's last year?), but I just think criticism of Jeff is sometimes over the top, and comments like 'lost his appetite' seem strange to me when it's about a player who lead our tackles inside 50 and our average goals; both things we were in desperate need of in 2019. Plus, as others have mentioned; injury and personal circumstances had a big impact on him in his last couple of years so I guess that's why I feel the need to comment sometimes.

That's fair enough. I loved jeffy. He was terrific for us. And had a bad run with injury (his shoulder injury in rhe preseason game ladt year was terrible timing and really knocked him oof his axis) and as you say had to deal with some personal stuff. 

I definitely don't want to denigrate him or tarnish his legacy. 

28 minutes ago, binman said:

That's fair enough. I loved jeffy. He was terrific for us. And had a bad run with injury (his shoulder injury in rhe preseason game ladt year was terrible timing and really knocked him oof his axis) and as you say had to deal with some personal stuff. 

I definitely don't want to denigrate him or tarnish his legacy. 

Oh, wasn't directed at you at all mate, or anyone specifically really, just a general comment, your observation was fair enough.

21 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Oh, wasn't directed at you at all mate, or anyone specifically really, just a general comment, your observation was fair enough.

Also, I can't help it, but I detected a subliminal antipathy towards Garlett from some of his critics on this site. I may be wrong....

 
1 hour ago, dieter said:

Also, I can't help it, but I detected a subliminal antipathy towards Garlett from some of his critics on this site. I may be wrong....

So in a thread about our last training session, you have been able to detect an underlying, deep-seated aversion - which is what "subliminal antipathy" basically means - to Jeffy by some on here? Are you f' ing serious?

Why would you even raise such a thing about a player - a much loved player - no longer at the club? Are you trying to stir up trouble?, infer racial issues? what?

I normally read your comments with interest Dieter, but this last one absolutely astounds me.

19 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

So in a thread about our last training session, you have been able to detect an underlying, deep-seated aversion - which is what "subliminal antipathy" basically means - to Jeffy by some on here? Are you f' ing serious?

Why would you even raise such a thing about a player - a much loved player - no longer at the club? Are you trying to stir up trouble?, infer racial issues? what?

I normally read your comments with interest Dieter, but this last one absolutely astounds me.

Please don't get me wrong: it was in relation to some correspondence between Binann and Lord Nev. But, it has been my experience that there are posters on this site who kept calling him soft, etc etc, and I wasn't just referring to this 'Training Session' thread. He was never 'soft'. He played his way, the way Eddie and Rioli play and played their way. There are people on this site who didn't understand that. That's all I want to say.

Edited by dieter


1 hour ago, dieter said:

Also, I can't help it, but I detected a subliminal antipathy towards Garlett from some of his critics on this site. I may be wrong....

Just my opinion, but I think us fans (and our coaches) got a bit over-obsessed with hard at it, inside types for a few years. We love the bash and crash, the toughness, especially when you follow a team that has been beaten up and been 'bruise free' for so long, and so when we have a player that doesn't play that way we can be over-critical of that aspect of their game without realizing how much we need a mixture of players to be successful.

20 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Amazing we had an Indigenous forward in Jeff Garlett, who could bring magic but was accused of 'going missing', seems if you have a good junior highlight reel this is ok

I would be very surprised if Kossie plays round 1,  he runs out of steam very quickly at the moment

Garlett was allergic to physical contact.

Kossie seeks it out.

35 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Garlett was allergic to physical contact.

Kossie seeks it out.

An occasional short step would have been acceptable but Jeff ran past way too many contests (more so in the last year or so)

Such a good finisher though and he'd still be with us otherwise.  Garlett made the call on himself in a lot of ways ... Goodwin's decision to dispense with the bloke was made easier by Jeff himself.

But there are plenty who don't relish the contest when it doesn't look so obvious.  But ultimately they still get found out in the same way. 

Either traded away or delisted.

Those who are highly skilled or immensely skilled and therefore highly productive stay in the system.

42 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Garlett was allergic to physical contact.

Kossie seeks it out.

Plainly obvious if you watch carefully enough. 
that is the way Jeff played, still had a lot of class, but liked being out wide. He was a running player. Others get their hands dirty

Jeepers a training report thread turning in to a defence of Jeff Garlett's hardness. 

What's next?

- 21 reasons why Simon Godfrey was actually a good kick
- Brock McLean wasn't slow, just poorly used.
- Mark Neeld - underrated.
- 7 reasons why you should try the Bat soup in Wuhan


On 1/24/2020 at 11:49 PM, John Demonic said:

Replacing Hogan with Hourigan, should solve our forward line issues.

Hourigan, Hannigan, Flanagan..........

How does that song go again ????

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

Jeepers a training report thread turning in to a defence of Jeff Garlett's hardness.

That's not what was being said at all. Worth taking the time to understand the point if you're going to have a crack I reckon.

4 hours ago, Macca said:

An occasional short step would have been acceptable but Jeff ran past way too many contests (more so in the last year or so)

Such a good finisher though

Amazing you can't put the pieces together when they're all there in front of you.

2 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Amazing you can't put the pieces together when they're all there in front of you.

In your imagination

You're never going to get it ... it's one thing to have favourites but you've got to be able to recognise faults.  You were the same with CS although you dropped him like a hot potato once he was removed. 

Which is typical of you.

If you really want to know why Garlett could no longer get a regular game and was ultimately delisted,  look no further than the coach of the team.


6 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Just my opinion, but I think us fans (and our coaches) got a bit over-obsessed with hard at it, inside types for a few years. We love the bash and crash, the toughness, especially when you follow a team that has been beaten up and been 'bruise free' for so long, and so when we have a player that doesn't play that way we can be over-critical of that aspect of their game without realizing how much we need a mixture of players to be successful.

Be that as it may, Jeff is also 30 years of age and just finished his contract. If you're finishing strongly, you get another 2 or 3 years. If you see out a contract in the way Jeffy did, whether there are a few mitigating circumstances or not, you're going to be passed up for a younger player/s that the club can get some games and experience into for the future. The club doesnt want to risk having another year or two of his total output again (Forget stats) especially for someone who'll be finished at the end of those years anyway.

Edited by John Demonic

10 minutes ago, Macca said:

In your imagination

No, you literally just somehow wrote down all the pieces but then failed to put them together. Nothing to do with me.

11 minutes ago, Macca said:

You're never going to get it ... it's one thing to have favourites but you've got to be able to recognise faults.  You were the same with CS although you dropped him like a hot potato once he was removed.

CS?

And there you go again, talking about Jeff's finishing and outside skill; yet somehow not 'recognizing the faults' of the team and how those things are related.

13 minutes ago, Macca said:

Which is typical of you.

I've never met you, so I'm not sure why you're grasping for personal assessments.

14 minutes ago, Macca said:

If you really want to know why Garlett could no longer get a regular game and was ultimately delisted,  look no further than the coach of the team.

The coach? The coach who is the most under pressure senior coach in the league this year? The coach who has been widely recognized as being too obsessed with the contest and crowding the ball? The coach who oversaw us chasing any good quality outside player/finisher available in the trade/draft period because he's clearly recognized he's got the balance wrong?

Are we talking about the same coach?

 

9 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

Be that as it may, Jeff is also 30 years of age and just finished his contract. If you're finishing strongly, you get another 2 or 3 years. If you see out a contract in the way Jeffy did, whether there are a few mitigating circumstances or not, you're going to be passed up for a younger player/s that the club can get some games and experience into for the future. The club doesnt want to risk having another year or two of his total output again (Forget stats) especially for someone who'll be finished at the end of those years anyway.

Yep, agree with that. I've not made any argument trying to say we should have kept him and he was in great form, just that I think some take the criticism too far (typical of internet forums though I guess), and fail to take into account the context of the team, the need of balance on game day and the blokes circumstances.

 
3 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

You wrote down all the pieces (about Garlett)

Yeah I did ... it's called a balanced view, stuie

You might want to try it sometime (if you're capable)

4 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Plainly obvious if you watch carefully enough. 
that is the way Jeff played, still had a lot of class, but liked being out wide. He was a running player. Others get their hands dirty

But clubs need both types of players don't they?

I realise it's not as simple as that, even 'outside' players need to go when it's their turn. But are we criticising an outside type player, in a team all but void of them, for not taking on someone else's role, or cleaning up after someone that failed?


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

      • Haha
      • Like
    • 115 replies
  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Clap
      • Like
    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Like
    • 4 replies