38 minutes ago, praha said:

I think we're playing him because no matter how bad he is at AFL level, having him in the VFL will bring his trade level down even more.

Wouldn’t it be sensible to play him back into form right back where he belongs, where the Lever flies, over mountains high.

Or VFL and then back to seniors.

 

1 minute ago, FTB said:

Tholstrup will almost certainly be sub which is disappointing.

Why not Chandler?

Good changes

Good to see two kids and Tommo come in

Billings held accountable too. he is turning out to be a bust

https://www.facebook.com/100064706349400/posts/932701252230078/?mibextid=rS40aB7S9Ucbxw6v

Any chance Nathan Brown can ring a few others with the same advice ‘be a great teammate’

Does anyone know whether Petty prefers playing as a forward or in defence?

Lately he is performing like a man who would rather be on a beach in Honolulu than playing AFL football.

Maybe he and Goodwin are on different wavelengths.

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I am utterly amazed that Petty continues to get gifted games.

Baffled.

Goodwin's commitment or stubbornness to make it work is a really getting beyond the pale 

40 minutes ago, Billy said:

Why not Chandler?

Because he’s named on field. Our sub has come from the bench every match this season.

Rhino Richards instead of face palming everyone who seems to think Petty should be dropped, how about giving your opinion on why he’s still getting a game.

There’s nothing I’d rather see than Petty having a positive input, what riles me & a lot of supporters is Goodwins stubbornness playing him forward when it’s a massive failure 

The primary argument for keeping Petty is there is no one to bring in. despite his horrible form. 

he has the potential to play well unlike BB who’s body is done

not saying I agree but all the hand wringing is silly given our lack of options

Re Petty:  No-one's saying the situation is ideal, but he keeps getting a game because we have no other options. Why is that so hard to grasp?

He had a serious foot injury which meant that not only did he miss a lot of football/preseason, he's probably working through building confidence in his body again. Perhaps he'd be better off doing that at Casey, but then which big-bodied forward with a bit of aggression comes in? Crickets.

No point, moving him down back either, who does he replace? In spite of everything, Tom Mac has been doing (very) well down there, and you start robbing Peter to pay Paul.

But beyond all that and getting into the favourite Demonland pastime of speculating without any solid information to go on, I wonder if they don't keep playing him because they understand that if we are to have a realistic chance of going deep in finals we have to have an effective big-bodied forward alongside JVR. Petty isn't that guy at the moment, but he's the only person on the list who could be. 

 

1 hour ago, Earl Hood said:

The cupboard is bare, that’s why. 

Cop out excuse.

1 hour ago, Superunknown said:

Wouldn’t it be sensible to play him back into form right back where he belongs, where the Lever flies, over mountains high.

That Petty would currently be a B-grader down back is an assumption, perhaps.  Discuss.

 

 

1 hour ago, Ouch! said:

Remember last year, we refused to play Grundy in the seniors, and he was playing exclusively for a stretch in the VFL as a forward. Didn't work then, but perhaps Petty and Turner might 🤔

... there wasn't a tongue in cheek emoji sorry.

Grundy is an established AA ruck and arguably one of the best rucks in the league. He might even push AA selection this year. Crazy we got rid of him, crazy he ever even played at Casey, and crazy we never played him in finals, ESPECIALLY if our intent was to trade him. We might have gotten more for him. Instead we had Schache suit up 🤡 

Edited June 20, 2024Jun 20 by praha

1 hour ago, FTB said:

Tholstrup will almost certainly be sub which is disappointing.

I thought Disco would be sub 

2 hours ago, MrFreeze said:

What is the sunk cost fallacy? The Sunk Cost Fallacy is our tendency to follow through on something that we’ve already invested heavily in (be it time, money, effort, emotional energy, etc.), even when giving up is clearly a better idea

Maybe the investment will work out in the long term. I wouldve buckled and pushed him back a while ago.

You're trying to explain a sunk cost fallacy to a Melbourne member who sinks $1500 a year into his membership costs lol

2 hours ago, praha said:

Explains Hoskin-Elliot winning the Kent Kingsley Award for Spuds Who Play Well Against Melbourne.

And tomlinson probably could have stopped Krueger.  He would had offered more than Howes or turner

Damned if you do damned if you don't with Petty

Could a witches hat match his output? Probably

Do we have an adequate witches hat to select? Probably not

If we lose against Norf and he has another quiet game, he must play in defence again to try and retain whatever is left of his trade value in case he ships off

12 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Re Petty:  No-one's saying the situation is ideal, but he keeps getting a game because we have no other options. Why is that so hard to grasp?

He had a serious foot injury which meant that not only did he miss a lot of football/preseason, he's probably working through building confidence in his body again. Perhaps he'd be better off doing that at Casey, but then which big-bodied forward with a bit of aggression comes in? Crickets.

No point, moving him down back either, who does he replace? In spite of everything, Tom Mac has been doing (very) well down there, and you start robbing Peter to pay Paul.

But beyond all that and getting into the favourite Demonland pastime of speculating without any solid information to go on, I wonder if they don't keep playing him because they understand that if we are to have a realistic chance of going deep in finals we have to have an effective big-bodied forward alongside JVR. Petty isn't that guy at the moment, but he's the only person on the list who could be. 

 

You make a lot of sense.Thanks 

2 hours ago, chook fowler said:

That was a roaring success

London to a brick Tomlinson gets dropped for the Lions when Lever is back.Won't matter if he has 30+ possessions and his opponent has none. Meantime,Petty won't get  near it and he'll retain his place. I'll say it again. Try Tomlinson up forward. Petty to Casey. Nothing to lose.

I'd leave kolt in for the rest of the year 

15 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Cop out excuse.

It is really...

If someone is way off the boil then really what point gifting them games ? The argument sometimes is to play someone back into form. That hardly ever happens with us and certainly hasn't with Petty.

Much  better imo to play someone with 'some' ability who puts in and just maybe might grow. 

They are the only two choices at the moment.

If A not working...  insane to continue

I'm going on a different tact than all of you. Reckon Petty will have a breakout game Saturday night. Just a gut feel. Happy to play the kids and hope in hell they can perform and lift the others like Petty, Fritta, Chandler etc. Also hoping Rivers and Mcvee have blinders and actually break lines and hit up targets. Maybe I've had to many VB's and wine with dinner but what else have we got.

 

27 minutes ago, praha said:

You're trying to explain a sunk cost fallacy to a Melbourne member who sinks $1500 a year into his membership costs lol

45 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Re Petty:  No-one's saying the situation is ideal, but he keeps getting a game because we have no other options. Why is that so hard to grasp?

He had a serious foot injury which meant that not only did he miss a lot of football/preseason, he's probably working through building confidence in his body again. Perhaps he'd be better off doing that at Casey, but then which big-bodied forward with a bit of aggression comes in? Crickets.

No point, moving him down back either, who does he replace? In spite of everything, Tom Mac has been doing (very) well down there, and you start robbing Peter to pay Paul.

But beyond all that and getting into the favourite Demonland pastime of speculating without any solid information to go on, I wonder if they don't keep playing him because they understand that if we are to have a realistic chance of going deep in finals we have to have an effective big-bodied forward alongside JVR. Petty isn't that guy at the moment, but he's the only person on the list who could be. 

 

We do have a choice though... It's left field with no guarantee of success.

So in a fashion a choice of similar certainties.   Plan A aint working....soooooo... ??? 

13 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Tbh...  the whole  circus with JW was very poorly conceived and handled..   The hype was off the charts.   No reason reallyba player can't debut in any game.

Of Course