Nasher

Cheers Lucy, sounds as if they're going to pick it up from the third quarter. News is on at the moment. Sandy: 7.7.49 Tassie: 4.4.28

So that makes the final changes In: Buckley, Valenti Out: Wheatley, Carroll

He's earned his chance, and it's always exciting when there's new blood. Best of luck to him.

I agree Jarka. It's taken PJ and Jamar a very long time to come on the way they have, and IMO these guys both prove the rule that talls take a long time to develop. Meesen has athleticism and skills that are rare for a man so big. He deserves another year at least before dismissing him IMO.

It's hardly concerning. He was the last player we took, a year ago. He was a true smokey who was only ever a minor chance to make it. If he was taken in the top 5 it might be a concern. At the moment it looks as if it was just an extremely low risk gamble that hasn't paid off. Judging by Dean Bailey's comments early in the pre-season, I'd suggest that Weetra was getting a game because he was one of the last men standing. Now he has been brought back to Earth by a full list, and he has to earn his stripes. Confidence is a funny thing, but it's not the difference between playing in the AFL and struggling in the VFL reserves. He just needs to continue to work on his game and get back in to the Sandy 1s. I'm not that confident that he'll make it, but he's still got plenty of time to prove us wrong (anyone remember Jace Bode's sudden rise last year?), and it's no great tragedy if he doesn't anyway.

I opened this thread to propose the same comparison myself actually. He's very highly rated by many in the footy world, but there's something NQR. I'm yet to see any evidence at all as to why people rate him so highly.

Yes, Pick 12 was West Coast's to begin with. It (with 28) went to Adelaide for Stenglein. Adelaide then gave 12 to us for Thomspon. We gave 12 to Geelong for Moloney, who then gave it (with Pick 16) to Richmond for Ottens. Richmond used 12 on Danny Meyer Richmond used 16 on Adam Pattison Adelaide used 28 on Chad Gibson You may not be able to, but it's more or less how it works out. I just explained it that way because IMO explaining it in steps makes it clearer than explaining it in one jumbled three-way trade.

Mostly right kieran, just a few corrections: We gave pick 12 for Moloney, which we had previously received from Adelaide for Scott Thompson. The Bizzell and Grgic deals were separate. We gave picks 17 (James Kelly) and 41 (Henry Playfair) for Bizzell, while in a second deal Geelong gave us pick 55 (Brad Miller) for Grgic. Ellis was a threeway swap. Essentially it went like this: Simmonds to Freo for Daniel Bandy and Pick 26 (Aaron Rogers). On-trade Bandy to WB for Ellis. If you think we got dudded there :lol: Ellis was a handy player until he did his knee and couldn't get back on the park. I thought it was an okay trade at the time and it was only rotten luck that it went pear shaped. Adelaide gave Peter Vardy to Freo for Daniel Schell. Freo on-traded Vardy to us in exchange for Pick 56 (Paul Medhurst).

That was the week before. He was "mysteriously absent" last week, injured at training apparently.

Being kept out of the side by Tarrant would raise alarm bells for me.

I've removed the point scoring pollution from this thread. Let's try and keep to the topic at least just a little bit.

Nailed it. Speed of foot is far less important than speed of ball.

I'd be pretty interesting to do a full survey of all current AFL players and find out what team they supported as a kid, then make a best 22 from each side. I wonder if every side would have enough players?

Millar is actually a fairly common variation of the name Miller, same for Maloney/Moloney. I agree though, it annoys the buggery out of me to.

Agreed. Stereotyping at its worst, and says a lot more about BT than it does about Aussie. As long as he is kicking goals and/or making a positive contribution to the team, who gives a rats about anything else.

Not every player has to "dominate", you know.

Doggo, good post, but I wouldn't gloss over the "once we have the ball" part like you just have without thinking about how it was we got the ball in the first place. In many cases in the last two weeks, if you took away Jamar, you also would've taken away the part about us actually having the ball to begin with. I know I'm getting a little ahead of myself on the back of two good games, but if he is able to continually assert himself at the contest as he has recently, he becomes an absolutely vital ingredient in the middle for winning the ball. You raise a good point about him contributing to the clutter of the forward line. If your delivery in to the forward line is as slow as ours has been all season prior to the second half of the Freo game, your forward line is going to end up cluttered no matter who goes down there. It'll almost always end up with someone outside 50 bombing it long to the square, and in that instance I'd prefer Jamar was down there as it increases our chances of someone actually grabbing it. If our movement of the ball is quick and precise like the second half of the Freo game, the ball will down the throat of a forward faster than Mark Jamar, Will Minson, David Hille or any ruckman without an S on his chest can get down there anyway.

That's probably a better way of putting it paddo. The overrated/underrated thing makes more sense than defend/won't defend, as I will not "defend" any particular player just for the hell of it.

Not for me. I took it for what it was; a crack at Y_M. No problems here :D

One.... two. He was just as good last week against Brisbane. But we got thumped, so nobody noticed. Dappa, I reckon you underestimate the value of having a huge, effective body in the middle. When Jamar's rucking we win clearances, and when he's not, we don't. I haven't got any evidence to back that up, but it's what my eyes tell me. Jamar uses his massive frame better than PJ and much, much better than White (probably because poor White is so small). IMO that is every bit as important as getting possessions around the ground. Jeff White has had a stack of possessions every game so far this year. How do you rate his influence on games? There's a very good reason why Jamar started on the field this week and it's not because Jeff is no good. I reckon Jamar gets a raw deal because people look for the obvious (stats) and not the subtleties.

Jamar's in good form and I doubt they'll drop White. Unforunately for PJ he will now have to fight for his spot again.

The thing about Jamar is that even though he doesn't do the "obvious things" (lots of possessions, marks etc), he'll often be the strongest man in the contest, and he has learned to use his body to good effect. As well as keeping the opposition big men out of the contest and bulldozing opposition smalls out of the way, he's added a new string to his bow this year in actually getting the ball himself and winning clearances. If having the likes of White and PJ can be called "extra midfielders" because they get possessions around the ground, then having Jamar in present form is akin to having an extra inside midfielder in the contests. Let's hope he can keep it up. Besides those nasty screwups against Carltno, he's been one of the surprising shining lights so far this year.

I did Rollo, in your apology thread. I did it about 10 minutes after I did it on here. It's probably on about page 5 by now

If you were in Yze's position, would you retire? Even if you ignore the fact that he is on huge money that he is never going to get outside footy, he is still an elite athlete who could not and will not consider his career over until he absolutely has to. If he's still fit and hungry, he's not going to close the door completely on his career until he's left with no other choice. As long as he's still on the list and under contract, which he is, he won't retire. The same goes for Holland. End of year is a different story, and I'll be very surprised if both aren't gone then. Mid year though? Barring career ending injuries, it is not going to happen.