Lol Lever hey...

Its half time and Lever has racked up 2 disposals 0 marks 0 tackles.

Yeah nah sorry, the guy is ridiculously overrated and a joke that he's currently clogging up our salary.

Lever out, Omac in, Smith to 3rd tall/interceptor 

Bloke cost us 2 first rounders and had spent all of his time at adelaide guarding grass. Is useless. Omac is better

Of [censored] course this thread shows up.

The anti-Lever bias is insane on this board.

If you think Lever was the problem today, or even a top 10 problem, you don't get it.

2 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Lol Lever hey...

Its half time and Lever has racked up 2 disposals 0 marks 0 tackles.

Yeah nah sorry, the guy is ridiculously overrated and a joke that he's currently clogging up our salary.

Why the [censored] should we care about Lever only having two disposals. He's not in the side to get disposals.

1 minute ago, titan_uranus said:

Of [censored] course this thread shows up.

The anti-Lever bias is insane on this board.

If you think Lever was the problem today, or even a top 10 problem, you don't get it.

Why the [censored] should we care about Lever only having two disposals. He's not in the side to get disposals.

You simply don't get it.

I am not surprised really.

Agree Lever is hopeless but who was the architect of this disasterous recruiting

3 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Of [censored] course this thread shows up.

The anti-Lever bias is insane on this board.

If you think Lever was the problem today, or even a top 10 problem, you don't get it.

Why the [censored] should we care about Lever only having two disposals. He's not in the side to get disposals.

What is he in the side for? To play a negating role on Castanga? You really don't seem to get it. He either plays on the best forwards as a negater or he needs to generate offense.

What is his role?

1 minute ago, Watts the matter said:

What is he in the side for? To play a negating role on Castanga? You really don't seem to get it. He either plays on the best forwards as a negater or he needs to generate offense.

What is his role?

Its all about the intercepts remember?

The guy looks like he struggles to run at times. Genuine question, is he still suffering some kind  of knee problem? He was being managed a few weeks ago. 

5 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

You simply don't get it.

I am not surprised really.

You have a habit, dazzle, of taking your anger out on previous drafting/trading decisions. 

If you watched today's game and thought "we lost because Lever was poor", you don't understand the fundamental problems we're having through the middle and forward of centre.

2 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

What is he in the side for? To play a negating role on Castanga? You really don't seem to get it. He either plays on the best forwards as a negater or he needs to generate offense.

What is his role?

His role, like every other defender's role, is to defend.

Our defensive set up wasn't our problem. Like most weeks, we put our defenders under insane pressure with our repeat turnovers across half-forward.

I'm not suggesting Lever stood out in a positive way, but there are obvious, glaring problems in the other two thirds of the ground that are vastly more problematic than whatever you don't like about Lever.

Doesn’t like backing into a pack.. loves to point fingers.. 

The worst recruit we have ever had had enough of him drop him doesn't deserve his spot.

2 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

You have a habit, dazzle, of taking your anger out on previous drafting/trading decisions. 

If you watched today's game and thought "we lost because Lever was poor", you don't understand the fundamental problems we're having through the middle and forward of centre.

His role, like every other defender's role, is to defend.

Our defensive set up wasn't our problem. Like most weeks, we put our defenders under insane pressure with our repeat turnovers across half-forward.

I'm not suggesting Lever stood out in a positive way, but there are obvious, glaring problems in the other two thirds of the ground that are vastly more problematic than whatever you don't like about Lever.

If you are focusing on just the game yes.

If you are focusing on the trade, a disaster, for the salary we are paying and the draft picks we gave up. As you rightly point out we have many issues. We can't address some of these because we wasted our assets on a medium defender with average pace and skills.

4 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

You have a habit, dazzle, of taking your anger out on previous drafting/trading decisions. 

If you watched today's game and thought "we lost because Lever was poor", you don't understand the fundamental problems we're having through the middle and forward of centre.

His role, like every other defender's role, is to defend.

Our defensive set up wasn't our problem. Like most weeks, we put our defenders under insane pressure with our repeat turnovers across half-forward.

I'm not suggesting Lever stood out in a positive way, but there are obvious, glaring problems in the other two thirds of the ground that are vastly more problematic than whatever you don't like about Lever.

Yes, but Lever has cost us the opportunity to fix forward problems due to his cost in dollars and draft picks. Defensive half backs are a dime a dozen.

13 minutes ago, Dee Zephyr said:

The guy looks like he struggles to run at times. Genuine question, is he still suffering some kind  of knee problem? He was being managed a few weeks ago. 

Probably. He has done his ACL twice. He had already did his ACL once prior to our diligent football department paying overs for him (and somehow not factoring that in). We kind of get what we deserve in that sense. Lever was only ever a third man up at Adelaide, an unaccountable defender, who whilst great to have, should never be acquired at the cost of your future. 

Edited July 5, 20205 yr by KingDingAling

7 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

You have a habit, dazzle, of taking your anger out on previous drafting/trading decisions. 

If you watched today's game and thought "we lost because Lever was poor", you don't understand the fundamental problems we're having through the middle and forward of centre.

His role, like every other defender's role, is to defend.

Our defensive set up wasn't our problem. Like most weeks, we put our defenders under insane pressure with our repeat turnovers across half-forward.

I'm not suggesting Lever stood out in a positive way, but there are obvious, glaring problems in the other two thirds of the ground that are vastly more problematic than whatever you don't like about Lever.

Did I say we lost because of Lever??

Looks like he doesn't know when to go up and when to stay down, when to man up and when to guard the space. Always choosing the wrong option. Really poorly coached IMO and the defensive structure not working and not suiting his game

Our coaching team needs to coach to players strengths, they seem obsessed with everyone being able to fill multiple roles to the detriment of their natural game

It's not all Lever's fault.

What idiot would pick a similar role player to go up with him when what we need is a one on one defender.

Oh that's right, the idiot who coaches us.

OMac in for Smith, get back to the mix that works then start to judge Lever once he's playing the role he's meant to.

 

Yep Smith and Lever cannot be in the same team. May, OMac and Lever are needed to get the right dynamic with each playing their role

10 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Did I say we lost because of Lever??

Why are you having a go at him in a thread all about him immediately after the game?

Why is the focus on him at all, given what we saw today?

When you start to think OMac would be a better option than Lever then there definitely is a problem with the way Lever is playing.

Not our worst but he was poor today; rarely read the flight of the ball correctly and made no second efforts. 

He is terrible below his knees and that is not knew.  He cannot bend down which may be his past knee issue but today it looked like poor motivation.

16 minutes ago, Hellish Inferno said:

Looks like he doesn't know when to go up and when to stay down, when to man up and when to guard the space. Always choosing the wrong option. Really poorly coached IMO and the defensive structure not working and not suiting his game

Our coaching team needs to coach to players strengths, they seem obsessed with everyone being able to fill multiple roles to the detriment of their natural game

Agree. need to move him somewhere where he attacks the ball to take a mark. One time today forward of the wing the ball waas kicked to him by a Tiges player. he punched it rather than tyake the mark forward of centre for us.

1 hour ago, Dee Zephyr said:

The guy looks like he struggles to run at times. Genuine question, is he still suffering some kind  of knee problem? He was being managed a few weeks ago. 

Apparently he was winning all the time trials over the pre season... shows you how bad the clubs running ability is

3 minutes ago, Elegt said:

Apparently he was winning all the time trials over the pre season... shows you how bad the clubs running ability is

He wasn’t winning from what I recall however he was running in the strongest running groups.

Its interesting that they got so many miles into his legs. Obviously we need guys fitter but I thought his training would involve more strength and power for contest work and defending one on one.

Ill go on the record and say I was all for recruiting him. He was in the best U/21 team (or whatever that is) a couple times and playing good footy for the Crows. The fact that this “key position” defender wanted to come to our club was amazing in my mind. Couldn’t give a stuff about the price.

Right now he’s a long way off the “key position” player I thought he’d be and is struggling to be in our starting squad.

Id be interested to know what his relationship is like with the playing group. Obviously he came across on big coin and I wonder if that would bother other players - especially when he’s battling at present