Axis of Bob

You: "For mine its about improving the playing list..bettering the best 22 not collecting kids for a rainy day." This is the direct quote I responded to. I then told you that it's about a balance between improving the best 22 and also picking kids for the future. You then agreed with me that balance is something we should be trying to achieve. I don't see where I said we shouldn't downtrade our early picks.

I've only seen the televised games this year, so I really have very little idea about what's happening. That said, it seems like the first group of players all still have some pretty big flaws that mean that none are a stand out choice. St Kilda seem to like McCartin (probably for the reasons you mentioned, as they are going to be looking for a go-to forward to replace Riewoldt). I like Durdin, despite his lack of output in the games I saw, although probably more as a rebounding key defender. As for the midfielders, there wasn't really a midfielder that stood up and showed why they were better than everyone else. You mentioned Petracca and Brayshaw leave me a little underwhelmed with his lack of explosiveness (which we need). I think we'll do well to trade down as the players we'd be more interested in are likely to be available at 10+, which seems to be where most of the skilled runners appear to be.

My point is that everything is a balance. It isn't about only recruiting for now nor is it about only recruiting for the future. It's about a balance.

Like what St Kilda did?

Zac Dawson? Anyway, I don't know whether he'll stay in the team. I just know that I don't know because I don't know what was expected of him.

Barry came on an seemed to be doing a run with role on Pearce for the majority of the last quarter. That's the role he's been playing for Casey, and he was promoted based on games where he didn't have high possession numbers. As a result, I don't think he's going to be judged on his possession numbers.

I will defend his efforts. He is one player whose effort is consistently excellent. His skill level is not, but that's got nothing to do with his effort.

Do you know who I think is the real problem? Dom Tyson. He turns the ball over all the time and he is singularly responsible for the losses today, earlier this season, the rest of the season and all future seasons, regardless of whether or not he plays. He makes my blood boil.

Because a long work improve his skill?

I'd suggest that we aren't going to be drafting many people who can't kick.

As an admin, I'd suggest that he is well aware of who the worst posters are. And he's felt a need to point out that you are the worst on more than one occasion. I'd take it as constructive feedback if I was you.

'there' Of course it is frustrating. It's the reaction to that frustration that says a lot about the poster.

...again. You sound like a Freo supporter during Ross Lyon's first season.

Yeah, we turn the ball over a bit. That's because we lack class. I love it how the emotional flakes here react like it's a sudden realisation.

I'm not an advocate for retaliation, but if someone is on top of you pushing your larynx I think you can forgiven for doing almost anything to get them off you.

If he's not playing his role then it doesn't matter how much of the pill he gets. If you were Salem, who is focussing on doing the right thing for the team by applying defensive pressure at the cost of his own attacking game (as the coach has instructed him), and you were dropped for a player who wasn't, then how would you feel? Furthermore, if you were dropped and then got into a situation in the future where you could either play your role or you could 'cheat' and pick up an easy possession, which option would you take? The logical answer is that you'd pick up the possession because you knew that it was more likely to get you a game. But the coaching staff clearly rate players' ability to play their role well before the number of possessions they get. And that is good for the team and future of it.

Tapscott has only had one game of note, which was last week. As a result of that he's an emergency. He's clearly being asked to do more running, and once he does it consistently then he'll get a game. Blease has problems with defensive intent and consistency of work rate. It has been a theme through nearly all the reviews. Until he does that then Roos won't be able to trust him to perform a role in the AFL.

If you read the VFL player reviews you usually don't get too surprised by the players coming in. The 'Bests' and the reviews don't necessarily reflect each other.

They play different roles. Toumpas is playing midfield/half back, whereas Salem is playing forward. They are not necessarily competing for the same position.

It was a sarcastic post to demonstrate the ridiculousness of Andrea Pirlo's theory (which was supported by beezlebub) that Frawley was being played forward because Roos thinks he's leaving.

My guess would be the general lack of class in the forward half and his defensive intent. More than anything I think it is about demonstrating that if you do what you are asked to do then you'll get a game, no matter the stats. He competes, works hard in defence and he uses the ball well. It probably also reflects the lack of damaging forward–of-centre options we have pushing for a game.

I've only seen a couple of games this year, but I've found Allison's reviews to be pretty accurate (in terms of what I saw). OLC, are you just upset that JKH has gone past Blease? Because if we are talking about defensive intent, JKH is in a different league. And the VFL reviews back that up.

Roos must have been pleasantly surprised that the team started playing much better once he was moved forward. Roos would also have confused himself by playing Frawley to intentionally make him play worse and therefore reducing his value as a free agent which would directly influence the amount of compensation the club he coaches gets. You know, because it makes no sense.

That's an awful review. You may as well not do it at all. If you are attempting to foster an environment of honest feedback then I don't see how these reviews would cause any issue. I find the reviews really good because they give me an idea of why people aren't getting a game and what the coaching staff is looking for from each player. Otherwise you end up with the situation like previous years where you have no idea why players aren't getting a game. Now I know that Blease isn't getting a game because he's not working hard enough defensively and that Fitzpatrick isn't because he needs to compete in the air better. There are plenty of positive reviews, like Georgiou. He had a bad review against Coburg, but has had excellent reviews over the last few weeks and now we know that he deserves a spot in the AFL except that he needs to wait until a spot opens up. I don't find the reviews to be negative. They are just straightforward. Also interesting that the topic was raised by OLC, who has 5 posts. 4 have been about Casey and the other was giving a detailed defence of Sam Blease.

Blease has always had a problem fulfilling his defensive role. It's just that Roos isn't going to let him play seniors until he does it consistently. The decision is pretty simple for Blease, unless he's physically (mentally?) incapable.