Jump to content

Discussion on recent allegations about the use of illicit drugs in football is forbidden

Bombay Airconditioning

Life Member
  • Posts

    6,729
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bombay Airconditioning

  1. S$$T just got real. If true very interesting times ahead. Anyone seen Gill?
  2. All good, anyone listening to SEN. Western Bulldogs in betting scandal backing themselves to lose. Story broken by the Herald Sun just as It was about to say which game my radio dropped outt I'm assuming last week.
  3. Huddo - Frawleys disposal really stands out in this Hawthorn lineup.
  4. I think he will to, needs to look at Jones game and how he became more effective. Aggression is great, knowing when to use it is better.
  5. I appreciate that, I'm still waiting to see what Gill brings to the table. Right now he needs to sort out the mess that is "drugs in AFL". 1+ million a year to do what exactly.I'm aware CEO'S that generate large turn over for their company take home big dollars but right now he needs to step up.
  6. Players like Scully/Davis/Mumford/Shaw/Griffen? I don't think it was lack of trying. Everyone including us thought Scully was destined to be the next Judd.They had a wish of players they targeted including Buddy, look how that went.
  7. So could we save money by slashing the salary of Gill?
  8. It could be any player, everyone has a bad game or even a run of bad games. But if that run of games turns into a season or longer or it's the same mistakes made over and over its time for them to be dropped. The exception at the moment is probably Dawes for lack of other options. In Garlands case we have Frost who is up and about, Grimes can make way for Salem. If Nathan Jones form was to drop away all year and he became a liability he can go too and rediscover his touch. I don't care who it is. We need to set high standards. I remember when the Hawks sat out Sewell and the Swans Okeefe, many on thought, hey we could do with a player like that. That what successful clubs do, they make the tough calls.
  9. I can see where Buck's is coming from but 5-6 elite players also helps. Hawks/Cats/Swans and Freo all have 5-6 elite players. Yes Geelongs are getting on. Didn't Hawks have 8-9 AA this year or last? (Can't remember but my mate assures me they did). We have Nate Jones, Tyson has the potential to become elite but I wouldn't say he is there yet. H....you could make a case but you get my point. With regards to bottom six, I posted today in the "starting 22 round 1" thread about moving battlers on the list on in favour of young players with potential.
  10. Yes and no, could it be another year or two into some of our younger players?
  11. What suits my argument.....My argument is that there needs to be a time line on how long out of form players are given, if his stellar season was last year fair enough but it wasn't. The "one good season in four" a blatant lie? The line was used jokingly but as other posters have pointed out his form is debatable. As for your conversation with your work colleage....."bias towards the most recent season".....well that is his most recent form, how far back do we look? You could mount a case that he's been solid without being great just as you could mount a case that he can join his mate Jack Grimes in the VFL until they can display the kind of form on a consistent basis that warrants selection in an AFL team. Part of the reason we've been crap for so long is we hang on for too long, no ones made the tough calls. Garland is 26 and a professional sportsman so drop him, explain to him why he's been dropped and what areas he needs to work on. If the talent is there he will fight his way back, but as previously mentioned his best may not be good enough. Time will tell.
  12. Sylvia is the perfect example, (ok he had a handful of good games as opposed to s great year) but the point being we held onto him and continued to play him in the hope that eventually one day he would deliver, upon being traded to a good side he found out what was actually required. Garland isn't a champion of the game or our team so he should be awarded no favours, at 26 he still could recapture the form we know he is capable of but until then......
  13. And what one good season a few years ago warrants automatic selection? As already mentioned we now have other options, he needs to be dropped to go back and regain some form, even then depending on how others are going he may struggle to get back into the side.
  14. Bit harsh on Garland there Steve, he had a good season four years ago.
  15. This to me is an interesting one. You have people arguing players like Dunn and Jetta had their best year last year and they are 27 and 25 respectively, so based on that we need to give Grimes (25) Bail (26) M Jones (27) Garland (26) McKenzie (24) more time. Did Dunn and Jetta start playing their best footy happen because they reached a certain age or played a certain amount of games? Or did it happen due to Roos becoming coach and setting standards for the group and giving each player a role. I've said many times in the past Nathan Jones also had his best year last year under Roos/Stone because (a) he had more support and (b) he started to think his way through situations rather than try and barge his way through when there wasn't an immediate alternative. Other players games have also improved. With the addition of McCartney we have a formidable coaching group. We are now seeing some players fall behind from the main group in terms of skill/abilty/footy smarts, great clubs drop these players to the VFL, explain to them what areas they need to work on then give them the chance to do that. If players can't kick the footy/or grasp the gameplan under the current coaching regime will they ever be able to? Some posters on here seem hell bent on clinging on to these players. I would rather games be given to the likes of Toumpas, Mitchie, VB, Frost etc, whilst their output has been varied due to different reasons why can't these players be given the game time the others took for granted. Grimes is an automatic selection because he's in the leadership group? Garland had a good season 3 or 4 years ago, so what, if anything that may have warranted him selection the following season but injury aside there has been a slow decent in his form. The last two weeks has shown us we clearly don't have the depth many on here were banging on about. So we have two options, firstly continue to play people who have been in the system for years and still can't put it together or secondly give those same opportunities to the next batch coming through who may or may not have done enough to cement their spot but are deserving of the same opportunities given the potential they have. If they too can't cut they also can be moved on.
  16. In a initial urine test yes but once it goes to the lab all is revealed. If a player had a cocaine binge then took a pain killer with codeine in it, the lab would pick up both. Sorry are you suggesting he tried to mask it?
  17. I understand your points but I can't agree with regards to Grimes. I say that because he has no attacking side to his game, I could of got a kick in the first half on Saturday. Would you consider Toumpas on the other flank in place of Grimes? Toumpas has shown he doesn't mind getting amongst it, he can lay a tackle but he can also dispose of the ball.
  18. Yes and no Nasher, it's like champion team v team of champions argument. But let's go with that for this scenario, even if some of our key players were rested still would of thought there was enough quality out there to steady the ship once the Doggies had kicked their third straight. Practice match or not is has to be a concern.
  19. Doesn't matter who was playing it what position, the concern with me remains that we 18 players on the field (debatable how many are AFL standard) and we couldn't stop the run on. Surely we have such a tactic such as get the ball and slow the play down or something.
×
×
  • Create New...