Jump to content

Gator

Life Member
  • Posts

    6,592
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    79

Everything posted by Gator

  1. Just watched the game again. The mistakes and turnovers were incredible. The amount of goals they kicked from our basic disposal errors was amazing. They also had 3 shots at goal from deliberate out of bounds. And 2 of those were rubbish decisions. Our kicking and decision making into our forward 50 was also the pits. It makes you wonder why the game was relatively close. Obviously we did some things well, but I'd argue we almost couldn't play any worse. It's easy to pick one the usual suspects like ANB, Harmes and the McDonalds, but Lewis, Viney, Vince, Watts, Jones, and especially Tyson (understandably rusty) had some horific disposal errors where they couldn't spot up easy 20-30 metre targets. That said, most of that stuff is quite easily rectified.
  2. Yeah, I can't come at it. Spencer is just not a good enough footballer for me. I'll be disappointed if he's named, but I'm virtually certain he won't be.
  3. I feel as though Spencer diminishes Gawn. Gawn's not great resting forward, he's much better drifting forward with the flight of the ball and taking a mark inside the 50 while still playing on-ball. When he's stationed there I don't see him being much of a forward threat. And Spencer is no full-forward either. Fair enough if they don't include Weideman or Spencer, but given the choice of the two I'd rather Weideman, as I feel he works better with Hogan. Spencer will just get in Hogan's way and is useless with defensive pressure. Anyway, I appreciate your thoughts.
  4. As was pointed out to me today, to lose by 4-5 goals against a good team on their deck when only two players played very good games shows there's a bit to take out of the hitout. Other than Oliver and Hunt, I'd say not one other player played what they'd call a good/very good game. That's somewhat an issue in itself, as we need Brayshaw, Petracca, Stretch, Viney, etc. to start making a real impact THIS year. Top notch 21-22 year olds start making an impact at AFL level. For us to be the team we expect we need these players to start impacting games in 2017.
  5. You really think they'll play Spencer in round 1 against the Saints at Etihad ? I very much doubt it will happen.
  6. Why was it a mistake to take him ? If a player was crook or tweaked something in the warm up then he would have played.
  7. I'm not sure why there's such angst. West Coast named 24 also and only played 22. Clubs are gearing up for round one and wanted to make it as similar to normal home & away matches as possible.
  8. I'm not sure why so many quote me or are fascinated by my modest contributions. No, I wouldn't play Spencer. And I'm almost certain Goodwin won't.
  9. The sun in the eyes didn't help in the first. Naturally, it wasn't an issue in the second. This time last year West Coast were favourites for the flag. They'll be good this year. This game will be great for the coach/players to review. Despite most of our good players being underwhelming our gameplan held up. It's rock solid and will be the foundation for many wins in 2017. We're still an improving side, so it's unsurprising there were mistakes in a practice match. Notwithstanding his 3 goals I don't like the two ruck policy and Gawn is the poorer for it. It robs us of run and diminishes Gawn's role. I wouldn't play Spencer round 1.
  10. In most things in life one can come up with all sorts of possibilities and every now and then an unlikely one turns out to be correct. I'm a little unusual in that I tend to default to the bleeding obvious.
  11. I don't have "whipping boys". I speak plainly about every player on our list. I laud them when required or observe deficiencies as noted. I'm not a Neal-Bullen fan, as I don't like his disposal or decision making under pressure, but I rarely get taken to task for this view (although he looks better this preseason). The thread was started because it was newsworthy. There was new detail reported in the media that vindicated a poster who had been ridiculed by others for sharing information they'd received. I note it wasn't merged, so others in authority clearly agreed.
  12. What did I do ?
  13. A 28 page thread is testament to the fact that the thread was on point and worthy of existence. Naturally, it was up to you to partake or not. Most of the threads on the first page I've never opened. We all have choicesl.
  14. Took you a while to come up with that. Wasn't worth it.
  15. So instead of not training at the required "intensity" for a "few months" apparently he hasn't gone to a "new level" based on today's Nathan Jones interview. The fantasy world some live in is incredible and driven by idolatry. They'd convince themselves of anything if it suited their cognitive bias. PC egalitarian on display at its best.
  16. I agree. But if Steven is allowed to run amok he'll cut us up. Running one hard tag doesn't mean a man-on-man game-plan. I'd tag him. Efit: they may go head to head in the first instance, but if he gets off the chain ...
  17. You have rare sense. Alas, it still won't be enough for some.
  18. The track watcher you're referring to thought Viney was below average last preseason and therefore didn't include him in his round 1 best 22. Naturally, it was poor insight and Viney had his best year. People put too much emphasis on amateur "track watchers". I've been to training plenty of times myself and while reports are fun to read no real relevant insight into training standards is gleaned. They're best for "who trained, who didn't and who is in rehab". I'd never read anything more into them than that.
  19. Steven is the player who concerns me most. I think our midfield is better and I like our contested brand where we outnumber the opposition at the stoppages. But if we can't control Steven I think we'll lose. If we can nullify him I reckon we'll win. By meaningless I was referring to their win by 92 compared to our win by 54. Nothing should be read into the margins, because the personnel was vastly different.
  20. With regards to the Saints beating Carlton by more... Carlton were more competitive against the Saints than the Dees in the first quarter. Scores were level with about 2 minutes to play before 2 late goals gave the Saints an early lead. Then the floodgates opened. Against us Carlton fielded Gibbs, Murphy, Kreuzer, Simpson, Docherty, Casboult. None of these players lined up against St Kilda, although Cripps had his first hitout. In other words, the margins vs the Blues are meaningless.
  21. Firstly, I won't be moderated by you. Secondly, some players are behind in the pecking order. In a list of 40 players plenty won't get a look in. They'll either be depth, young, not in great form, or simply not as talented. Goodwin has made it clear that he's been getting game time into his best team. There's no suggestion that other player's training "intensity" has been below standard, only Watts. There's no evidence whatsoever that Watts has been singled out and it's mindnumbingly stupid to suggest otherwise. Goodwin would have made it clear what he expected of the group and Watts has been found wanting. He didn't meet quantifiable criteria. I don't know what that criteria was, but I don't need to know. Credit to him that he's taken it on board and risen to the challenge and takes his place back in the team.
  22. These are the types of comments I find absurd. You have no basis of fact to back up this comment. You'd rather blame the coach for not accepting poor standards than the player not producing what's required. Unfathomable to me.
  23. I can live with the odd poorly weighted kick. Without pressure he usually hits his target. I'd like to see him more composed under pressure. The better mids, like Hannebery, make better decisions and have cleaner disposals in extreme heat. I'm sure he's working on it, but for me it's the aspect of his game he needs to work on most.
  24. "Seasoned track watchers" ? Thanks, I needed a laugh. There seems to be an incredible amount of yearning for a lack of "intensity" during training sessions to be anything other than a lack of intensity during training sessions. You say he may have "fallen asleep" during a meeting, whereas the coach says it's an issue that has been evident for "months". What appears to be clear at face value suddenly isn't necessarily clear as posters are desperate to believe it's actually not what the coach says it is. Maybe he hasn't been leaving the toilet seat down ? FMD.
  25. Oh, that "attack" ? Right.
×
×
  • Create New...