Does anyone else find this quote disturbing?

[adsy 137]

This is a quote from the Rev after yesterday's game.

"We've played 34 players, we've played them all, so we can't bring in another 30 and say we're going with a youth policy," he said.

"We've played all our young blokes. James Frawley hasn't played, but he played his first game back after a six weeks stress fracture. There's not many we haven't played. It's going to make it very difficult from here (finals), but there's still a lot of footy to be played."

No mention of Newton whatsoever. Those of us holding our breath to see Juice in the Red & Blue may be waiting a while. It's quite obvious Daniher doesn't think he's up to it. I would have thought that with the team struggling for goals another option up forward would be beneficial, but apparently not. He needs to be given a go to show what he is capable of before Robbo is back.

Does anyone else find this comment strange?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

1. Young blokes can be deemed to include all players with less than 3 years or 50 games. We have many.

2. There are 3 players still to get a run. Newton, Buckley and Neville. Both Newton and Buckley are close. Neville isn't

3. The only thing that's strange is this comment: "It's quite obvious Daniher doesn't think he's up to it. " Its self serving a purpose at best.

[grazman 7,394]

This is a quote from the Rev after yesterday's game.

"We've played 34 players, we've played them all, so we can't bring in another 30 and say we're going with a youth policy," he said.

"We've played all our young blokes. James Frawley hasn't played, but he played his first game back after a six weeks stress fracture. There's not many we haven't played. It's going to make it very difficult from here (finals), but there's still a lot of footy to be played."

No mention of Newton whatsoever. Those of us holding our breath to see Juice in the Red & Blue may be waiting a while. It's quite obvious Daniher doesn't think he's up to it. I would have thought that with the team struggling for goals another option up forward would be beneficial, but apparently not. He needs to be given a go to show what he is capable of before Robbo is back.

Does anyone else find this comment strange?

Yes. Neville, Weetra etc I'd happily conceed on, but I wonder how Newton and Buckley are feeling? Maybe someone had SMS's Rev the Quarter time scores at the Telstra dome

[DemonDoug 0]

Perhaps he was generalising, hopefully. Can't see the purpose in not giving those other 2 youngsters a go now, what have we got to lose ?

[Jaded No More 68,835]

Newton waited one week too long to start stringing bags of goal together. A week earlier and he would have debuted ahead of Garland IMO.

Buckley will play soon, especially if they decide to rest Moloney given his OP situation. He is the only midfielder we have left who hasn't debuted yet.

I think Daniher was just trying to emphasis the point that we have pretty much reached the end of our list. We have played everyone who has been up for selection the past 6 weeks apart from Newton and Buckley. That in itself is a pretty frightening thought.

It's a shame Hughes is a rookie, as we could definitely use another crumber/ small up forward.

[beelzebub 23,311]

I must admit I read that as well and thought...wtf..... No...you havent used all potential players....

then I calmed...and reread it, hoping for further enlightenment... but none came.

At first I was trying to see if I could read it as alluded above that we have nearly exhausted our supply. But if youve ever heard the ol' rev talk...he's actually very careful with his words.. and so I am at the point where I am preapred to see it as he thinking there isnt really anyone else to come.

I too immediately thought...HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !! Newton !!!!!!!!.

well..again time will tell.

but in answer to original post..

yes.. I thought it a tad strange

[Rogue 585]

This is a quote from the Rev after yesterday's game.

"We've played 34 players, we've played them all, so we can't bring in another 30 and say we're going with a youth policy," he said.

"We've played all our young blokes. James Frawley hasn't played, but he played his first game back after a six weeks stress fracture. There's not many we haven't played. It's going to make it very difficult from here (finals), but there's still a lot of footy to be played."

Strange indeed

[beelzebub 23,311]

Perhaps he was generalising, hopefully. Can't see the purpose in not giving those other 2 youngsters a go now, what have we got to lose ?

especially as one of them actualy KNOWS where the goals are !! would be handy dont you think !! :-)

[mauriesy 7,212]

Newton waited one week too long to start stringing bags of goal together. A week earlier and he would have debuted ahead of Garland IMO.

Buckley will play soon, especially if they decide to rest Moloney given his OP situation. He is the only midfielder we have left who hasn't debuted yet.

I think Daniher was just trying to emphasis the point that we have pretty much reached the end of our list. We have played everyone who has been up for selection the past 6 weeks apart from Newton and Buckley. That in itself is a pretty frightening thought.

It's a shame Hughes is a rookie, as we could definitely use another crumber/ small up forward.

Actually I think the way we've played kids recently has been pretty good. For the record, here's our young player selection in the last five drafts:

2002: Bell (14), Smith (15), Rivers (26), Hunter (54), Ferguson (66)

2003: Sylvia (3), McLean (5), CJ (36) plus Davey (rookie)

2004: Bate (13), Dunn (15), Newton (43) plus P Johnson for pick 29

2005: Jones (12), Buckley (53), Bartram (60), Neville (68) plus Warnock rookie elevation

2006: Frawley (12), Petterd (30), Garland (46), Weetra (62)

I would have thought the fact that the great majority are still on our list and contributing indicates a good success ratio. The only conspicuous early pick failure was Smith and the only other one who's gone is Hunter. Given that the later the pick, the more speculative the outcome, there have been some good picks beyond the first round. There's also been a good mix of talls and running players, unlike Richmond who have put a lot of their recent high picks into fast but soft runners.

There's still ample time for players like CJ, Newton, Buckley, Neville, Frawley, Garland and Weetra, especially with the likelihood of a bit of a clean-out of quite a few retiring and older players next year. That will also give opportunity, I think, for Hughes and Neaves to progress from rookie status. I can see 4-5 draft selections and 2 Rookie elevations next year to replace players like Holland, Bizzell, Ward, Brown (maybe retired) and Wheatley without affecting the general balance and talent pool much. We don't get much output from most of these players, and it's a good time to be a young player if you put in the work and build your skills.

The danger of a simplistic "play the kids" philosophy is exactly the fate Richmond suffered just this weekend.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Actually I think the way we've played kids recently has been pretty good. For the record, here's our young player selection in the last five drafts:

......

The danger of a simplistic "play the kids" philosophy is exactly the fate Richmond suffered just this weekend.

Great post Maurie. Much truth in that.

[CURTIS 0]

I'm pretty sure we have room on our list to promote a rookie. i believe its because we have 2 veterans in yze and neitz.

Having said that i think the only rookie that looks like getting a game would be hughes.

Neaves a ruckman, maybe if pj gets injured with jamar out with a hammy.

Hayes getting tha sacked.

Bode still a long way off.

[John Dee 445]

With Warnock playing yesterday we have now played 35 out of a possible 40. The ones yet to play are Newton, Buckley, Neville, Frawley and Weetra. Newton, Buckley and Frawley will, in all probabilty, play this year. That has got to be some sort of record.

[John Dee 445]

I'm pretty sure we have room on our list to promote a rookie. i believe its because we have 2 veterans in yze and neitz.

Having said that i think the only rookie that looks like getting a game would be hughes.

Neaves a ruckman, maybe if pj gets injured with jamar out with a hammy.

Hayes getting tha sacked.

Bode still a long way off.

We don't have the ability to promote a rookie this year owing to having two declared veterans. For each declared veteran, two maximum, you lose a rookie spot but get a spot on the main list. Last year we had only one declared veteran and so had a spot for Warnock.

[Deano74 156]

Daniher must believe that the other young players arnt ready, There is no use playing them for the sake of it.

It wouldnt be good for their development or mindset to throw them into senoir football and have no influence.

I think that Newton is progessing well, and will get his chance at some stage this year.

[mauriesy 7,212]

Last year we had only one declared veteran and so had a spot for Warnock.

Yes, that was as a "nominated" rookie ... one who could play games in the senior side. As you correctly point out, due to having two veterans, this year we have no nominated rookie.

Warnock was elevated to the senior list for 2007, and it's not beyond possibility that Neaves, Hughes or even Bode could be elevated in 2008.

[Gorgoroth 12,910]

he said that straight after losing a close game i think it was a more of the cuff remark

[Dee*ceiving 1,662]

he said that straight after losing a close game i think it was a more of the cuff remark

Correct. He is just trying to have people sympathise with our situation. I doubt he was running player names through his head while he was making the comment to make sure he wasn't forgetting anyone.

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,777]

"Does anyone else find this comment strange?"

Exactly what I thought, Adsy.

[Adzman 2,154]

If the dees keep losing, Frawley, Newton and Buckley will all play once the season is "mathematically" over.

The side is a revolving door at the minute, I would be frustrated coaching a team with so many changes.

[deanox 9,891]

there was nothing meant by this remark at all.

we have played just about everyone he is right. there is no one left to play is a figure of speach clearly. the reporter who asked the question had no idea of what was going on at melbourne but had read about gasper retiring because of a youth policy and wanted to get a story on melbournes youth policy. anyone who had done research (ie read the last weeks papers) would realise that there is no youth policy because there are no players left to bring in...

don't read too much into that comment at all.

[deefuture06 0]

I'm thinking that he is refering to The NAB and season 07. The kids have had a go there. Just not clarified tho.

[beelzebub 23,311]

If the dees keep losing, Frawley, Newton and Buckley will all play once the season is "mathematically" over.

well...

lets see

16games to go

these inc :

WCE @ Sub

Port @ AAMI

Fre @ Sub

Bris @ Gabba

but wait ...there's more !!

Dogs @ Telstra ( twice...got screwed there !! )

Dons @ Telstra

and Syd at the back of beyond ( Manuka )

Well.. by my reckoning you need 12-1/2 to 13 wins to secure a place in the final 8.

Of the 16 left.. 4 are hard...and 4 even harder.

Given that we havent actually won one yet .... I dont think its too much of a stretch to call it over ...do you ?

Might as well experiment and get some games under these blokes !! just my view...as its not going to make the slightest difference really.

[Gorgoroth 12,910]

i agree it will be hard but i want them to develop a winning attitude for the last 16, not roll over and die like the tigers did

[Jonesy is the next captain 0]

If Neale doesnt want to play the kids so we dont end up like Richmond fine by me, lets at least try and keep morale higher, Richmond might be doomed for the rest of the season after that crushing defeat

[occo 2]

This is a quote from the Rev after yesterday's game.

"We've played 34 players, we've played them all, so we can't bring in another 30 and say we're going with a youth policy," he said.

"We've played all our young blokes. James Frawley hasn't played, but he played his first game back after a six weeks stress fracture. There's not many we haven't played. It's going to make it very difficult from here (finals), but there's still a lot of footy to be played."

No mention of Newton whatsoever. Those of us holding our breath to see Juice in the Red & Blue may be waiting a while. It's quite obvious Daniher doesn't think he's up to it. I would have thought that with the team struggling for goals another option up forward would be beneficial, but apparently not. He needs to be given a go to show what he is capable of before Robbo is back.

Does anyone else find this comment strange?

Im on ND side here. he hasnt said "We have played everyone", hes said that there arnt many that havnt played yet. Neville isnt close and shouldnt be. Newton and Buckley are a chance but ND will want Neitz to get some form instead of throwing Newton there. Yes he could play forward pocket and should. As for bucks well he will have his time. Its his 2nd year so still a lot of potentual in him. In fairness to ND bucks hasnt shown quite enough...although he probebly showed more than Garland. I am happy he has believed in Petterd and i think we just need to trust what hes doing. Im sure Bucks will get a go this year along with Newton at some point...and i would prefer they played rather than chris johnson atm but time will tell