Clint Bartram played every game in his first year. Is that fast tracking?

Newton was always going to play games this year, unless his form was so bad at Sandy that you just couldn't play him.

This is a kid that took 2 seasons to establish himself in the Sandy Reserves, and looked ordinary in a lot of those games. This year is the first year that you would even have considered him at AFL level, and his specific circumstances meant that he had to be treated differently to other players.

If he had been played after one good game (ie, about round 7) then he probably would have really struggled and it would have taken a lot of work to get his confidence back. Once he knew he was ready to go, you give him an extra game to make him hungry and then let him loose. He's had 2 good games since then in the AFL.

It all depends on what you want to see as to how you judge the decision. It's "he's playing well so the decision was right to keep him back" versus "he's playing well so he should have played earlier".

Also, 3165, your answer to Rhino suggests that you haven't seen Newton at all until a week ago. I think this is the likely scenario.

tim, there were certain posters on this site (who have been very quiet on the topic lately) who claimed that they had the inside information on the club's so called 'long term' plan for the kid, which has just been proven to be absolute codswollop. There were also remarks made about him being 'mentally weak' as well, which is also crap.

Hi Jarka, I hope you were not referring to me once again as those who have been quiet on the topic as I for one have not been suprised by his output. I still think that if Newton had the same form and we had a chance to make the finals and Neitz was fit he would not have played at least for a couple more weeks. I also do not necessarily think that would have been the incorrect thing to do. I believe the club did/do have a long term plan for the kid to minimise the risk of him not living up to his potential. I believe he was played out of necessity and it is not suprising that he has performed as he is a quality player as you have seen. This was about developing the kid in the right way to ensure he becomes the best player he can be not about whether he can play. He was still developing at Sandy not being stagnated and he has now had his development fasttracked even more by playing Seniors. I have not stated at any point that he is mentally weak but potentially mentally immature and to this point in his first 2 games I am happy to be proven wrong.

Jarka, what those posters said was true. There was/is a long term plan for him. Did to stop to consider Newton may have met all requirements of him? He certainly used to be mentally weak, whether he still is, I don't know. He has improved in this area.

Brocky, if he was mentally weak then a couple of games with Sandy would not have fixed the problem, it would have taken alot more than playing with a cash strapped, second rate team.

Clint Bartram played every game in his first year. Is that fast tracking?

Bartram is entirely different, he would have been considered a first round pick by the footballing community except for his poor disposal. Apart from that he was ready to go from the very start.

My issue with Newton is that I would have preferred him learning from Neitz rather than Sautner.

bartram could have been a first round pick, but even ND said he was surprised he got a run that early but just worked so hard over summer.

regarding the newton situation, he has come in and played some good footy. there are now two arguments. ND held him back for just the right amount, or ND should have played him earlier. you know what? i don't care, neither point can be proved and ND is now gone, so its not worth arguming. but it should be noted that he started the year not kicking many goals and got progressively better. his form has continued to improve all year until he finally got picked for the dees.

all we can say is that whatever we have done with newton has worked thus far.

regarding the newton situation, he has come in and played some good footy. there are now two arguments. ND held him back for just the right amount, or ND should have played him earlier. you know what? i don't care,

Well I do care because it's yet another season wasted. We've desperately needed another KPP to help and cover for Neitz for years, but nothing happened. It's an important lesson for our club to learn.

Newton may have been played one week too late.

What difference does it make in the big scheme of things?

We've done a good job developing our kids, and they get a good education playing for a very successful VFL side while they're learning.

Unless you work at the club, you would not have a clue what sort of developmental programs we have in place, or what is Newton's long-term plan.

The fact of the matter is, he was struggling in Sandy reserves until this year, and only lately started to come good in the seniors. There would have been no justification playing him earlier, and it would have made no difference to our team.

Better safe than sorry when it comes to dealing with the individual.

Newton may have been played one week too late.

What difference does it make in the big scheme of things?

We've done a good job developing our kids, and they get a good education playing for a very successful VFL side while they're learning.

Unless you work at the club, you would not have a clue what sort of developmental programs we have in place, or what is Newton's long-term plan.

The fact of the matter is, he was struggling in Sandy reserves until this year, and only lately started to come good in the seniors. There would have been no justification playing him earlier, and it would have made no difference to our team.

Better safe than sorry when it comes to dealing with the individual.

That's rubbish Jaded and I'll use Garland as proof.

That's rubbish Jaded and I'll use Garland as proof.

You really think that skill is the only thing that comes under consideration?

There are so many different components that come under the definition of 'being ready'.

Garland was not expected to come in and dominate. The plan for him was probably to be given a taste, and be set a motivating target to move forward and work on his deficiencies.

The idea with Newton, was to get him ready enough to come into the side and stay. He had attitude problems, and his head was not always where it should have been. He worked on it, and has been rewarded accordingly.

I find it hilarious that you sit on the sidelines and bask in the glory of Newton's excellent debut, saying he should have been played earlier because he's been playing so well. What would you have said if we debuted him against Sydney, he had a horrible game, sulked his way back to Sandy never to regain form again?

That was a realistic risk, and I'm glad that unlike you, our club has a long-term vision not a short-sighted one.

Almost every footballer to have debuted for this club under Neale Daniher and his team, has gone on to make it, often playing a long string of games following their debut. McLean, Rivers, Miller, Sylvia, Jones, Petterd, Bartram, Bate, Dunn... you could not have asked for a better transition into senior footy from those guys.

I am getting the same feeling about Newton and Bate as I am when Neitz and Schwarz started off their careers

Very exciting

Well I do care because it's yet another season wasted. We've desperately needed another KPP to help and cover for Neitz for years, but nothing happened. It's an important lesson for our club to learn.

Jarka, I would love to know the basis for the idea of 'wasted time'. Newton had a serious back injury in his first year. He spent time working back to fitness and form in his second year. He has debuted for the Dees half way through his third year. He had shown a steady increase in his application and output across last year and this year (averaged out of course). How is playing him now he has hit the targets that coaches set, 'wasting time'?

In fact, the burden of proof is on you - prove he was ready before now - and you cannot use the last two weeks as evidence because it is disputed.

Well I do care because it's yet another season wasted. We've desperately needed another KPP to help and cover for Neitz for years, but nothing happened. It's an important lesson for our club to learn.

in 2006, newton played 10 games for the sandringham senior side and kicked only 5 goals.. 3 goals in one game, and a single goal in two others. last year he also played 11 games for the sandy reserves side. he managed to boot 53 goals in those 11 games. he obviously struggled to perform at a higher level.

this year:

newtons season for sandringham this season (the B stands for best, not behind)

Date/Time Played For Opposition No Gls B

Sat 7/Apr 1:10 PM Sandringham Geelong 29 1 -

Sun 15/Apr 2:00 PM Sandringham Werribee 29 1 -

Sun 22/Apr 2:00 PM Sandringham Bendigo Bombers 29 1 -

Sun 29/Apr 2:00 PM Sandringham Casey Scorpions 29 6 3

Sun 6/May 2:00 PM Sandringham Frankston 29 5 4

Sat 19/May 2:00 PM Sandringham Williamstown 29 2 -

Sat 2/Jun 2:00 PM Sandringham North Ballarat 29 5 -

Mon 11/Jun 2:00 PM Sandringham Coburg Tigers 29 2 -

Sun 17/Jun 2:00 PM Sandringham Box Hill Hawks 29 3 -

Sun 24/Jun 2:00 PM Sandringham Port Melbourne 29 3 5

rounds 1 -3 he kicked 1 goal a game. he then bagged 6 and 5 in successive weeks, the first time he had ever kicked more than 3 in a game for sandy seniors. after the 5 there was a byebefore he kicked 2 against williamstown. there was then another bye (SoO i think) and then he kicked 5 the week after. he has then missed a lot of shots at goal since then.

jarka. im not sure which part of the season you wanted him played. was it round one when he had never played a good game for sandringham and had gone missing preseason in the intra club game? was it round 5 when he had kicked 3 goals in 3 games for sandringham, and was being used all around the ground wing etc and was struggling for consistency? was it the middle of may when he had played two good games for a vfl side for his career? or perhaps it was late may or early june when he was coming off a weeks bye for sandringham having not played?

maybe you could say he couldve come in for queens birthday, but we had our forward line together and were coming off our first win of the season, not exactly a time to make unforced changes...

i know you wanted him played earlier, but i think whe you look at it rationally you realise he was played when his form warranted it, and when we could get him in. we didnt rush him in before he was ready, and we didnt drop neitz or robbo for him. we picked him when he was ready and when we could fit him in the team.

EDIT: timD i just read your post and want to add that the back injury did in fact hamper his firt year at the club. in that year he played 15 games with the sandringham reserves, kicked 21 goals including two bags of 6 goals, and one of 3 goals. he kicked a solitary goal in 6 games and didnt trouble the scorers in 6 games. while he may have shown potential in a few games in his first two years at the club, it hasnt been until the past 6 weeks that he has really shown he can play at a level above vfl reserves consistently. perhaps jarka forgets this.

The fact of the matter is, he was struggling in Sandy reserves until this year

I thought I read that he topped the goal-kicking in the reserves last year.

I have no idea whether this is right - anyone know how he went in '06?

I thought I read that he topped the goal-kicking in the reserves last year.

I have no idea whether this is right - anyone know how he went in '06?

I should have said he was struggling at Sandy, not in the reserves. Sorry.

Enough of the tantrums fellow posters!

The salient point is that we played nine players aged under 21 against Carlton. Thank goodness some of our older players were unavailable and getting themselves right for '08 or the last few rounds. It's a win/win situation.

Circumstance will see Newton, Frawley, Buckley and probably Garland amongst others given significant game time against the big boys in the weeks to come and this can only be a positive for our list. (You could have added Petterd until last weekend).

Playing 'I was right, you were wrong' games is a waste of time and space.

Let's enjoy the unfolding of the future regardless of how it pans out.

It makes a refreshing change.

I should have said he was struggling at Sandy, not in the reserves. Sorry.

All good. Just wondered what some of the posters were hanging their hat on if Newton was struggling in the reserves last year

in 2006, newton played 10 games for the sandringham senior side and kicked only 5 goals..

No deanox, you miss my point. Newton isn't the complete issue, it was about developing key forwards to back up and cover for Neitz. Our team has completely missed the boat on a very open year, sure we've had injuries but so has other teams who are still challenging for the finals this year. This year we've been terribly exposed up forward, but anyone who seriously watches the team from year to year would have predicted it. With a couple of semi decent big targest up forward we would have won a couple more games and still be in an opportunity to play finals.

Instead of starting the process a couple of years ago the club has waited for Neitz to be on the verge of retiring, and we must learn by this mistake.

Jarka, I would love to know the basis for the idea of 'wasted time'. Newton had a serious back injury in his first year. He spent time working back to fitness and form in his second year. He has debuted for the Dees half way through his third year. He had shown a steady increase in his application and output across last year and this year (averaged out of course). How is playing him now he has hit the targets that coaches set, 'wasting time'?

In fact, the burden of proof is on you - prove he was ready before now - and you cannot use the last two weeks as evidence because it is disputed.

You want proof of what I'm saying?

http://www.afl.com.au/

Click on that link and have a look at the ladder.

It's a disgrace that this team is in this position.

Instead of starting the process a couple of years ago the club has waited for Neitz to be on the verge of retiring, and we must learn by this mistake.

The process started long ago...We recruited Molan, Breese, Rogers and Smith and all were failures.

The process started long ago...We recruited Molan, Breese, Rogers and Smith and all were failures.

Thankyou RR, that's exactly what I'm referring to.

After ten years of trying we still don't have a spine, we must learn by these mistakes or else we will never be a successful club.

Thankyou RR, that's exactly what I'm referring to.

After ten years of trying we still don't have a spine, we must learn by these mistakes or else we will never be a successful club.

Sorry, it just different to what you said here:

"Instead of starting the process a couple of years ago the club has waited for Neitz to be on the verge of retiring..."

The recruitments of the players I mentioned were to address that. Toss in Miller too.

I actually see Newton, Bate, Rivers and Frawley as a reasonable spine going forward.

Sorry, it just different to what you said here:

"Instead of starting the process a couple of years ago the club has waited for Neitz to be on the verge of retiring..."

The recruitments of the players I mentioned were to address that. Toss in Miller too.

I actually see Newton, Bate, Rivers and Frawley as a reasonable spine going forward.

How long did it take though RR? Imagine if like all the other clubs we managed to develop another key forward in the last ten years to play alongside Neitz, we may have seen a premiership, instead we're basically starting all over again. We have to wait for Newton and Frawley to get 50 games under their belts before we'll have a serious crack.

How long did it take though RR? Imagine if like all the other clubs we managed to develop another key forward in the last ten years to play alongside Neitz, we may have seen a premiership, instead we're basically starting all over again. We have to wait for Newton and Frawley to get 50 games under their belts before we'll have a serious crack.

I guess the question then is, is it the club's fault that they haven't drafted and developed any players properly or were the players just never good enough?

I guess the question then is, is it the club's fault that they haven't drafted and developed any players properly or were the players just never good enough?

I would have thought Schwartz was rather good. Even after he had 3 knee reconstructions, he turned out to be one of our best CHF's in quite some time.

I would have thought Schwartz was rather good. Even after he had 3 knee reconstructions, he turned out to be one of our best CHF's in quite some time.

Schwartz was already at the club

I guess the question then is, is it the club's fault that they haven't drafted and developed any players properly or were the players just never good enough?

In the last ten years we are the only club to have not developed a consistent key forward, and a ruckman too.