Chook

Bailey really talked up Rivers' leadership on FC the other day, so I would expect him to come in. And Sylvia selects himself, so I couldn't see this happening. But the fact that we did so well means that the Football Department need to have very good reasons for dropping the guys they do.

I posted this in another thread, but thought it might have some value here too. I hope that's okay. From footywire, a comparison of our 2009 team on that horrible day against Adelaide and the team that played Collingwood last week: 2009 VS ADELAIDE Moloney, McLean, Morton Davey, Bruce, Jones Sylvia, Frawley, Petterd Rivers, Johnson, Bennell McDonald, Warnock, Bartram Jetta, Bate, Dunn Meesen, Miller, Newton, Martin 2010 VS COLLINGWOOD Grimes, Davey, Bail Green, Bate, Bartram Moloney, Bruce, McDonald Macdonald, Warnock, McKenzie Bennell, Frawley, Dunn Petterd, Scully, Jones Strauss, Newton, Trengove, Jamar INS: GRIMES, BAIL, GREEN, MACDONALD, MCKENZIE, SCULLY, TRENGOVE, JAMAR, Strauss OUTS: MCLEAN, MORTON, Johnson, JETTA, Meesen, Miller, Martin, RIVERS, SYLVIA Those in caps are who I would consider possibly in our best 22 if available tomorrow. Also note that Rivers and Sylvia, who are listed in the OUTS, both have a strong chance of returning to our team vs Adelaide. This post has been edited by Chook: Yesterday, 05:31 PM

He poos rainbows, don't you know?

Why? They were once my opinions, but I saw I was wrong, admitted it and posted my new opinions. Should we retroactively delete everything that is incorrect?

Wow. Pretty much exactly what I got from the game too. The only thing I might disagree with is dropping Bennell. I'd do it if it's clear that we're not "punishing" him for squibbing, because that might make it worse. I trust the Club to do the right thing. I'd drop Strauss ahead of Bennell, but if dropping the latter would help him, I'd certainly do it.

I remember Brad Green being on the Footy Show right after Brock donated, and he all but said "I donated money, but you don't see me bragging about it. The guy just wants to be Captain so bad he'll do anything."

The problem with playing it in GF week is that you might have players like Pavlich, Davey, Sandilands, Cox, Naitanui (in the future), Goodes, Jurrah and so on in the team despite not having played football for nearly a month. I think we should either have a break between the last round and the finals and play it then, or we should play it mid-season in one of the bye weeks.

He kicked five goals in the NAB Challenge match we played against them, but I think three were gifted to him from free-kicks. Warnock played on him, so if we're going to bring Martin in, I'd prefer it to be to replace Newton. But I'd keep Newton in for at least another week for the sake of team continuity.

One thing that those stats don't take into account is the extra endurance and speed that being lighter can give you. We saw what Essendon were able to do against Geelong with a fast, running game-plan, so I think that there is room for smaller, lighter players in the AFL just as long as they are used correctly, and their strengths enhanced rather than exposed.

Why shouldn't I admit when I'm wrong? I don't think it's very good form to make dumb jokes about a guy when he's just said he was a little harsh. I don't have any reputation to save, and have no illusions of that. I'm just a faceless football forum geek - and so are you. So get off your high horse and recognise that it really wouldn't matter if I made good or bad calls on anything, so I don't know where you get this "good move" rubbish from. Frawley was good on the week-end, but his poor disposal at times cost us goals. That's a fact, but I guess I was too damning of those errors and didn't recognise the other good things he did. Any other smart aleck comments?

Now you're just being silly, substituting "Watts" for anything that sounds even remotely similar.

Before you lay the boots in, recognise that I've since changed my opinion and apologised for being so wrong. But he did make some crucial errors on the week-end. I'd not drop him now though.As I said above: Posted 05 April 2010 - 03:12 PM I obviously was way too harsh on Frawley after the game and should have reserved my judgment until I watched the replay on Fox. Sorry and thank you to all those people who called me out on it. I was certainly wrong about him. But he still had a couple of crucial turnovers that resulted in goals, despite his otherwise fab defensive game. I want to set the record straight and say I think Frawley is an awesome player, and if it weren't for these crucial mistakes today, I would have put him in our best. Such is the nature of being a defender that errors just become so much more costly due simple to where you're playing. I know this from experience.

That's true. He was. When Bail got it, Petterd started sprinting to the goalsquare and was just run down by Dayne Beams which put him off the mark.

The MCG is my Church, Dean Bailey my God, and Bate my Master. Amen.

His "mistake" there put the ball right in the hot-spot, where it was quickly snapped up by a player who sent it straight to Rohan Bail. Bail then put it right back to the goal-square rather than kicking a goal himself. Even if he had missed, we would have at least gotten the two points. But he put it to Petterd, who failed to take the mark. Any number of mistakes were, as you say, made in that passage of play, but Rohan Bail is touted as one of our best on the weekend. Ricky Petterd, whose turnovers cost us two goals, is widely proclaimed best-on-ground. But perennial whipping-boy Bate is condemned based on that mistake which, when thrown together with the ungainly way he looks when playing, makes him appear far worse than he is. Bail was good, Petterd was great, and Bate was also good, but he doesn't get the credit for it. The fact is that even though Bate "cost us the game" by putting the ball to the top of the goal-square rather than hitting Petterd (which he obviously should have done), we still would have won if Bail had kicked the goal, would have drawn at least if he had kicked the behind, and would have won if Petterd had taken the simple mark. I put it to you that nobody can cost you a game if, even after the mistake, you still could have won. Many mistakes are made in a game of footy, some right at the end, but that shouldn't discount all the other great things that were done by every player on the ground. I have and will continue to defend Matthew Bate because he is a great link-man in a lot of our inside 50s and he rarely turns the ball over in parts of the ground where turnovers are dangerous. And that's even when he's not fully fit. Out of curiosity, is there anyone you think had an underrated or overrated game on the week-end? I'm not asking so I can pick it apart, I'm just curious.

If the players did that, I'd be mad at them. But what's the harm in me doing it? It's not as though my attitude will affect how the players play.

It still is tough. Just not "boxing match" tough. More like "marathon while being attacked by ninjas" tough. And no I wouldn't. I worship McKenzie as much for the way he tackles as the frequency of his tackles. He knows what a tackle's purpose is: to dispossess someone of the ball. It is not to injure them.

Totally agree. As the week has gone on, I've managed to watch the game on two more occasions, and the backup that Newton gave, both in the ruck and in the forward line, was much better than I had thought after my first viewing. There's no way I'd drop him after we nearly won. I'd give Strauss a run at Casey and bring in Sylvia to replace him. If we want to bring in Rivers and/or Garland, I could see dropping Jones (because of his poor disposal and lack of speed) and/or Bennell (but only if it will help him with his hardness, not "punish" him for his mistakes). But the problems with doing that might be that we create a little imbalance bringing in two taller defenders for a midfielder and a speedy player. So I'd end up just doing the following: INS: Sylvia OUTS: Strauss

Yeah, but it's hard to break someone's leg with any kind of tackle. It's much easier to hurt their shoulder, which "Gorilla" Guerra has done before on a number of occasions. Besides, do you think Nathan Brown blames Matthew Whelan for breaking his leg. Accidents happen. But they happen more often if you're reckless - and Brent Guerra is reckless in his tackles.

He does a bit. He also looks a bit like Stephen from Survivor: Tocantins if anyone else watches that show. I've also seen him compared with that squirrel thing from Ice Age.

Yeah. If anything, Footy Classified ripped off the OP, the esteemed Mr. frank Rugolo - whoever that is.

From footywire, as edited by Chook: 2009 VS ADELAIDE Moloney, McLean, Morton Davey, Bruce, Jones Sylvia, Frawley, Petterd Rivers, Johnson, Bennell McDonald, Warnock, Bartram Jetta, Bate, Dunn Meesen, Miller, Newton, Martin 2010 VS COLLINGWOOD Grimes, Davey, Bail Green, Bate, Bartram Moloney, Bruce, McDonald Macdonald, Warnock, McKenzie Bennell, Frawley, Dunn Petterd, Scully, Jones Strauss, Newton, Trengove, Jamar INS: GRIMES, BAIL, GREEN, MACDONALD, MCKENZIE, SCULLY, TRENGOVE, JAMAR, Strauss OUTS: MCLEAN, MORTON, Johnson, JETTA, Meesen, Miller, Martin, RIVERS, SYLVIA Those in caps are who I would consider possibly in our best 22 if available tomorrow. Also note that Rivers and Sylvia, who are listed in the OUTS, both have a strong chance of returning to our team vs Adelaide.

What in God's name are those? Some sort of artificial sunlight generators or something?

I nearly fell for that trap, but notice the "a". This is just the poster's subtle suggestion that people get Ricky PettErds name right.

Excellent. I was scouting them on TV on the week-end, and noticed that he was not right. Something wrong with his knee. Burton was poor too, so that should go in our favour as he's killed us many at time over at AAMI.