View Full Version : Matthew Spencer should play
tin can sam
20 Mar 2007, 11:35
seriously, with King out, Spence should come in and play as a key forward, and probably start on the bench, he's done enough in the vfl to suggest he deserves a run, lets see what he can do up forward.
thehoff
20 Mar 2007, 11:49
BBBBBBBBAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!
That is some funny sh.it!
BlueNWhite
20 Mar 2007, 11:51
With the news king is out this is not a bad suggestion…
We need to stretch the bulldogs defence for height, it’s an advantage to us to do so, with several of their key defenders missing (harris, grant(?) etc)…
With Mooney, Nablett, Spanner, Ottens (rotating in ruck) up forward we could cause some genuine headaches for their undersized defenders.
On the other hand, with NAB and Spanner’s limited mobility, they’ll have more opportunities to run off the half back flank with little accountability.
Also, if Henry lines up Rd 1 our selection committee is a joke
slimeball
20 Mar 2007, 12:00
With the news king is out this is not a bad suggestion…
We need to stretch the bulldogs defence for height, it’s an advantage to us to do so, with several of their key defenders missing (harris, grant(?) etc)…
With Mooney, Nablett, Spanner, Ottens (rotating in ruck) up forward we could cause some genuine headaches for their undersized defenders.
On the other hand, with NAB and Spanner’s limited mobility, they’ll have more opportunities to run off the half back flank with little accountability.
Also, if Henry lines up Rd 1 our selection committee is a joke
I would be gutted if H got a gig in front of The Block!!
u have got be kidding about spencer, i had to hear the same crap with Playfair last year and Spencer is prob worse then Playfair, i mean we r not running a circus down there are we, Spencer is a pathetic footballer and anyone who suggests he should be getting a game is in fantasy land, cmon fellas we r trying to move fwd this year not backwards.
BlueNWhite
20 Mar 2007, 12:10
Della - I'm talking round 1 vs bulldogs, not the entire year. I have my questions about Spanner being up to it as well, but he's been putting in a very solid preseason and kicking goals, which is more than we can say for H, who would be the other alternative we'd have in that key forward position mould.
What are your suggestions for the round 1 team mate?
Don't see the need to replace King with a forward.
Blake will take over the ruck reigns, and share the duties with Otto (who will be the relief for, say, 10 mins a quarter).
Our forward structure shouldn't be shaken too much. The role Charlie is playing is already allowing Moons to play closer to goal, and Nathan will probably have to occupy a legitimate key post in the occasional absence of Otto.
Yeah i agree it shouldn't upset our fwd structure much, Mooney mut stay at CHF and when Otto rucks for his 10mins per qtr Nathan can play deep out of the square, Nathan has to relise he has to step up this year ans show us all hes interested in playing footy and not a stroll in the park in the local league!
I mean Gardiner getting a game is bad enough, i don't want Spencer and Playfair, reminds me of that semi final in Syd when our 3 main fwds were kingsley, Playfair and Gardiner, i don't want to see that kind of fwd structure again in my lifetime.
catswhiskers
20 Mar 2007, 12:47
If they want to see what Ottens can do as pretty much a permanent forward over the long haul then selectors will have to look at another tall who can play forward /ruck.
There aren't many ready. So they may bite the bullett (against the doggies at least) and just go with Blake alone and play some extra legs.
If Ottens is going to do serious ruck work another big forward is needed. Who?
I would prefer to let Blake do nearly all rucking - that big preseason has to count for something!
Letting Blakey do all the rucking would be to not learn from our mistakes. Kingy Mk II.
Rhombus
20 Mar 2007, 12:59
........
BlueNWhite
20 Mar 2007, 13:04
Give him a run I say...it's not like he's our '1st' tall, that honour goes to Moons, 2nd to Ottens when not rucking, 3rd to Nabs and Spencer as the 4th option we can rotate off the bench. He's been playing well, give him a run, otherwise it's H and from what I've seen this preseason, we don't want that.
thejester
20 Mar 2007, 13:07
Playing against the fastest team in the league and you want bring in the most ponderous bloke in the side?
BlueNWhite
20 Mar 2007, 13:14
Playing against an undersized defence - why shouldn't we exploit this?
If we try to match them on pace we'll get slaughtered - we need to maximise our strengths. Who's going to fill the hole when Ottens goes into the ruck?
thejester
20 Mar 2007, 13:20
Playing against an undersized defence - why shouldn't we exploit this?
Because we'll presumably be playing Mooney, Ottens, Charlie and Nath as well - plus Mackie and even Egan could go down there to exploit height. I can't believe you would have forgotten the total failure of our forward line - particularly Ottens - to be able to stop smaller, faster defences running it out. Remember Gillbee's stroll down the park? If you play Spencer they'll just leave him behind every time.
If we try to match them on pace we'll get slaughtered - we need to maximise our strengths. Who's going to fill the hole when Ottens goes into the ruck?
Nath. Mooney. Gardiner. None of them have the presence (with the possible exception of Cam) that Ottens does at FF but they're still tall and can take a grab. What we emphatically don't need is Spencer filling the hole. They'll simply lump two defenders on him and then run it out while he desperately tries to get some physical momentum up.
BlueNWhite
20 Mar 2007, 13:33
Because we'll presumably be playing Mooney, Ottens, Charlie and Nath as well - plus Mackie and even Egan could go down there to exploit height. I can't believe you would have forgotten the total failure of our forward line - particularly Ottens - to be able to stop smaller, faster defences running it out. Remember Gillbee's stroll down the park? If you play Spencer they'll just leave him behind every time.
Nath. Mooney. Gardiner. None of them have the presence (with the possible exception of Cam) that Ottens does at FF but they're still tall and can take a grab. What we emphatically don't need is Spencer filling the hole. They'll simply lump two defenders on him and then run it out while he desperately tries to get some physical momentum up.
What we also have is the small forwards (chapman rotating out of the midfield, gablett, djerrkura, mackie) at the big men's feet keeping the small defenders honest.
I'm not disputing the fact that spencer is a big slow guy. But he's been kicking goals and could provide us with a 'Stalking horse' option... another avenue to goal to distract the defenders from Nabs, Moons and Otto. I'm not suggesting we rely totally on him. That goes to Moons and Nabs and Otto... but he's a useful card up our sleeve to consider.
catempire
20 Mar 2007, 13:55
Hands up who has seen Spencer play forward in the past couple of VFL matches?
I will only bother to read the opinions of those who have.
Hands up who has seen Spencer play forward in the past couple of VFL matches?
I will only bother to read the opinions of those who have.
Playing forward in the VFL means diddly-squat.
There's no need to play Frank or Hawkins.Mooney plays CHF,NA FF,Ottens up forward when not rucking and Charlie can play as a tallish type player for short periods.Even the former fat FF from the Falcons can be used up forward.In fact I'd consider putting Milburn up forward if needed and bring in Sam Hunt to fill in for Milburn.
Inferno
20 Mar 2007, 14:18
So what? Kent was kicking 3-4 goals a game in the VFL and we all know how that ended up.
Im not sure though since I haven't seen Spencer play this year.
thehoff
20 Mar 2007, 14:22
So what? Kent was kicking 3-4 goals a game in the VFL and we all know how that ended up.
Im not sure though since I haven't seen Spencer play this year.
Aaron Edwards kicked 100 goals in the VFL last season. I am tipping he will kick no more than 20 in the AFL though.
VFL means very little! If he has the talent then sure, but IMO he is not up to AFL standard, forward or back!
darren forssman
20 Mar 2007, 14:28
VFL means very little! If he has the talent then sure, but IMO he is not up to AFL standard, forward or back!
or the ruck...before anyone suggests that.
catempire
20 Mar 2007, 14:37
So far, that's no one that has seen him play forward in the VFL.
Someone must have...
tiredcat
20 Mar 2007, 14:49
"So far, that's no one that has seen him play forward in the VFL."
spencer was reported as best on ground 3 weeks ago and I watched all of the reserves game against willi where I thought he was our second best player. I got to see 2 quarters saturday where he looked our best forward. In the games I have se]en him he is leading like he is a forward and taking one grab marks. Unfortunately his kicking lets him down although nowhere near as bad as playfair and on par with most of our other forwards. Included a couple of pics of spencer
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/9955/1000751resizegq5.jpg
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/5265/1000752resizefd0.jpg
catempire
20 Mar 2007, 14:57
"So far, that's no one that has seen him play forward in the VFL."
spencer was reported as best on ground 3 weeks ago and I watched all of the reserves game against willi where I thought he was our second best player. I got to see 2 quarters saturday where he looked our best forward. In the games I have sen him he is leading like he is a forward and taking one grab marks. Unfortunately his kicking lets him down although nowhere near as bad as playfair and on par with most of our other forwards
Thanks tiredcat.
someday-somehow
20 Mar 2007, 15:05
"So far, that's no one that has seen him play forward in the VFL."
spencer was reported as best on ground 3 weeks ago and I watched all of the reserves game against willi where I thought he was our second best player. I got to see 2 quarters saturday where he looked our best forward. In the games I have se]en him he is leading like he is a forward and taking one grab marks. Unfortunately his kicking lets him down although nowhere near as bad as playfair and on par with most of our other forwards. Included a couple of pics of spencer
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/9955/1000751resizegq5.jpg
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/5265/1000752resizefd0.jpg
Sounds like Kingsley all over again
Jim Boy
20 Mar 2007, 15:13
I'm looking forward to amatch featuring both Street and Spencer
slimeball
20 Mar 2007, 15:32
VFL means very little! If he has the talent then sure, but IMO he is not up to AFL standard, forward or back!
So how would you know if he's not up to AFL standard then the hoff?? By watching him in the VFL? But it means very little in your opinion.....
IMO the VFL is the stepping stone for young players trying to push their way into the one's!!!
I'm looking forward to amatch featuring both Street and Spencer
The date would be ideal
;)
thehoff
20 Mar 2007, 16:09
So how would you know if he's not up to AFL standard then the hoff?? By watching him in the VFL? But it means very little in your opinion.....
IMO the VFL is the stepping stone for young players trying to push their way into the one's!!!
I've seen him play seniors, i've also seen the ball hit him in the face in the seniors because he was too slow to duh, slowto grab the ball.
VFL form means little when comparing skill level however its a great gauge to determine is someone will succeed at AFL level or not. Basically what i am saying is just because you are killing it at VFL levels, it does not mean you will make any form on impact at AFL level.
VFL to AFL is a huge step and unfortunatly, IMO (like so many before him), he will be unable to make the adjustment.
Now, stop picking sh.it out of everything i say and target one of the other Spencer Haters. There seems to be many!
P.S. It seems his family members are the only ones that defend him... interesting.
is this a koke or r people serious when they say they want Spencer in the side, what the hell is going on, this bloke is a joke and if anyone suggests he should be playing at all this season then i give up, we all have diff opinions but cmon peoples, Spencer, he is worst then Playfair is and we all saw how far hes gone.
Partridge
20 Mar 2007, 16:22
Playing against an undersized defence - why shouldn't we exploit this?If we try to match them on pace we'll get slaughtered - we need to maximise our strengths. Who's going to fill the hole when Ottens goes into the ruck?
I agree totally, but remember assuming Blake is first ruck, we've still got Mooney, Ottens and Nathan Ablett in the forward 50. If those 3 can't stretch their defence then we're not up to it. Simple. Even when Blake goes off and Ottens relieves him there's also Gardiner - who has been in solid form in the preseason. I can't really see the need for either Playfair or Spencer to be honest.
We simply have to trust that Ottens, Mooney and Ablett can do the job. If they were going to throw in an untried forward (and they won't) it would be Hawkins.
slimeball
20 Mar 2007, 16:24
is this a koke or r people serious when they say they want Spencer in the side, what the hell is going on, this bloke is a joke and if anyone suggests he should be playing at all this season then i give up, we all have diff opinions but cmon peoples, Spencer, he is worst then Playfair is and we all saw how far hes gone.
Would be good to see him given the opportunity to play AFL. It is a joke that GFC persist with players that have had ample opportunity (i.e Charlie & H) and don't deserve to be there.
IMO there are 2-3 players running around in the VFL that deserve to play in the ones.
thejester
20 Mar 2007, 17:34
Hands up who has seen Spencer play forward in the past couple of VFL matches?
I will only bother to read the opinions of those who have.
Taking VFL form into account is important, but by the same token so is what we already know about Spencer. Yes, he's been kicking goals in the VFL - but he's also the footballing equivalent of a supertanker. I have a very hard time believing that the things that showed him to be a fundamentally flawed footballer in the 1sts last year have changed. *shrug* But if people have seen him play in the VFL and think his actual skills and above all movement have been improved (and he was kept on the list) then maybe he should be given another chance - but not against the Dogs. Even if he's improved 200%, he'll still be too slow against them.
RememberMe
20 Mar 2007, 21:46
Playing against the fastest team in the league and you want bring in the most ponderous bloke in the side?
Actually, in those 1-16 rankings (size, speed, etc.) Essendon was listed as the fastest side. The Bulldogs only claim to fame is that they have more players over 30 than any other club. Probably why they're already ****ed because of injuries.
catempire
20 Mar 2007, 21:49
Taking VFL form into account is important, but by the same token so is what we already know about Spencer. Yes, he's been kicking goals in the VFL - but he's also the footballing equivalent of a supertanker. I have a very hard time believing that the things that showed him to be a fundamentally flawed footballer in the 1sts last year have changed. *shrug* But if people have seen him play in the VFL and think his actual skills and above all movement have been improved (and he was kept on the list) then maybe he should be given another chance - but not against the Dogs. Even if he's improved 200%, he'll still be too slow against them.
My point, made in another thread, was that if he keeps taking strong grabs and kicking bags of 3 or 4 goals, then he must be considered for AFL selection.
People harp on about his turning circle and his speed, but there are some positions on the ground where you can hide those traits. Full forward is definitely one of them. I don't give a stuff about his turning circle if he can consistently kick goals.
Go_Ramjet!
21 Mar 2007, 09:08
Funnily enough Spencer was drafted as a forward but has rarely played there.
I've watched the last 2 VFL Practice Matches and he has dominated.
Go Ramjet!
thehoff
21 Mar 2007, 09:21
Funnily enough Spencer was drafted as a forward but has rarely played there.
I've watched the last 2 VFL Practice Matches and he has dominated.
Dominated by kicking a whopping bag of 4 goals? SPARE ME!
Domination is what Gary Ablett Senior used to do when kicking backs of 8-9 goals plus!
BlueNWhite
21 Mar 2007, 09:29
Dominated by kicking a whopping bag of 4 goals? SPARE ME!
Domination is what Gary Ablett Senior used to do when kicking backs of 8-9 goals plus!
How many players are regularly kicking 8-9 these days?
4-5 is usually referred to in the papers as 'a bag' these days...
How many players are regularly kicking 8-9 these days?
4-5 is usually referred to in the papers as 'a bag' these days...
All jokes aside I think it is great that he is playing well. Honestly at this stage see it as unlikely he will get a game.
I would have a forwardline of:
Ottens, Mooney, N.Ablett with Gardiner as well (playing during our mini ruck crisis).
If one of those goes down I would play S.Hunt down back and move Egan forward. I also see Hawkins putting his hand up ahead of him once Tom gets himself fit. That makes it pretty tough for him to crack into the side. If he continues his good form he might push himself ahead of Gardiner but I think he will be lucky to play 3 games this year.
BlueNWhite
21 Mar 2007, 12:15
Can I just emphasise this: at no stage do I think Spanner will/should get a regular gig in the seniors this year. There are other players ahead of him in the pecking order and development players who need a chance to prove themselves.
What my point is that it would be to our advantage for the squad in Round 1 vs the Bulldogs whilst King is out with his calf injury. After that, all bets are off. It looks as though Grant will be fit to play, if we have a tall forward line more likely than not Grant will be forced to play in our backline where we want him, leaving our backs to concentrate on Johno et al...
gocats88
21 Mar 2007, 13:51
don't you guys realise that tin can sam is actually matthew spencer. arnet u guys good enough at anagrams:rolleyes:
don't you guys realise that tin can sam is actually matthew spencer. arnet u guys good enough at anagrams:rolleyes:
What have you been smoking ? http://deephousepage.com/smilies/bongsmi.gif
gocats88
21 Mar 2007, 14:58
What have you been smoking ? http://deephousepage.com/smilies/bongsmi.gif
bomber thompsons coaching plans
RememberMe
21 Mar 2007, 15:02
I've only ever seen him play a few times, and he didn't really play all that well, but you guys seem to be pretty harsh on him. Why do you guys think he is on our list? From the sounds of things, he has been doing really well, and I think he should be considered for a game? If McCarthy can get a game and chance to prove himself, then why not Spencer?
thejester
21 Mar 2007, 15:16
I've only ever seen him play a few times, and he didn't really play all that well, but you guys seem to be pretty harsh on him. Why do you guys think he is on our list? From the sounds of things, he has been doing really well, and I think he should be considered for a game? If McCarthy can get a game and chance to prove himself, then why not Spencer?
At the end of last year I would have pointed out that Gardiner was still on the list and thus it was hardly a compelling argument to say 'Oh but they're still on the list!' However, Charlie's actually doing improved considerably so maybe it does have some weight.
Even if we assume that Hoff and I are wrong and that Spencer might actually be able to break into a senior side, the question becomes - can he find a spot in Geelong's? We already have a lumbering full forward in Ottens. We already have definite CHF, CHB, FB. We already have three additional height options - Mackie, Gardiner, Nath - in the team. In the longterm we have kids like Grima and ultimately Hawkins. Where does Spencer fit in? He sure as hell doesn't against the Dogs, where we will already have enough height to murder them up back.
Partridge
21 Mar 2007, 16:11
Even if we assume that Hoff and I are wrong and that Spencer might actually be able to break into a senior side, the question becomes - can he find a spot in Geelong's? We already have a lumbering full forward in Ottens. We already have definite CHF, CHB, FB. We already have three additional height options - Mackie, Gardiner, Nath - in the team. In the longterm we have kids like Grima and ultimately Hawkins. Where does Spencer fit in? He sure as hell doesn't against the Dogs, where we will already have enough height to murder them up back.
That's it precisely. In round 1 we're going to have Ottens, Mooney, Nathan Ablett and Gardiner in the forward line. For sure. He can't get past those guys. Even if Ottens were to relieve Blake in the ruck it won't be for more than 10 minutes a quarter. When that happens put Nathan Ablett at full forward. Judging from the second half against Melbourne a forward line with Mooney and N.Ablett might be pretty effective.
And that's the other point, as soon as Hawkins is match fit (which won't be long), he'll be right in contention - ahead of Spencer. I just can't see a spot. Plus I'm not convinced he's up to it.
sarah.13
21 Mar 2007, 16:16
bomber thompsons coaching plans
If that's the case JubJub better go see a doctor,you never Know where they've been!:)
If that's the case JubJub better go see a doctor,you never Know where they've been!:)
"Dr Ben Dover ..... paging Dr Ben Dover"
;)
Generalissimo
21 Mar 2007, 18:07
The way I see it is, our ideal complement of tall forwards is Otto, Mooney and Nathan. Gardiner as the "medium" forward and two of about four smalls rotating through the midfield. Now, Blake can't ruck the whole game so Otto will need to ruck a bit as well. That leaves someone to play as a tall forward to cover Otto, and you're suggesting Spencer. I can see the logic in that.
But how about this: when Blake gets tired, bench him. Put Otto in the ruck, Darren Milburn into the forward line and Sam Hunt off the bench into defence. That way, not only do we get a third tall forward who can take a grab and kick accurately, we don't lose anything in pace.
Inferno
21 Mar 2007, 20:03
The way I see it is, our ideal complement of tall forwards is Otto, Mooney and Nathan. Gardiner as the "medium" forward and two of about four smalls rotating through the midfield. Now, Blake can't ruck the whole game so Otto will need to ruck a bit as well. That leaves someone to play as a tall forward to cover Otto, and you're suggesting Spencer. I can see the logic in that.
But how about this: when Blake gets tired, bench him. Put Otto in the ruck, Darren Milburn into the forward line and Sam Hunt off the bench into defence. That way, not only do we get a third tall forward who can take a grab and kick accurately, we don't lose anything in pace.
Good point, I would much rather the latter.
tiredcat
21 Mar 2007, 20:44
"Would be good to see him given the opportunity to play AFL. It is a joke that GFC persist with players that have had ample opportunity (i.e Charlie & H) and don't deserve to be there."
Im with you slimeball. Ive read this thread and fail to see how somebody can be given up on after 4 senior games all in the backline. The whole idea of a reserves side is to monitor progress and nurture future talent with the premise that good form will be rewarded with senior elevation. Playfair has been given 59 chances, Gardiner 54 Lonergan 10 Nablett 18 all in the forward line and I cant remember to many 4 goal hauls out of any of them. No one should be an automatic inclusion into the senior side purely because we expect them to do good. Players fighting (not wc fighting) for the same position is very healthy. Unless a lot more people attend vfl football than I notice I'd like to know the basis for their opinions as geelong dont make many appearances on ABC
Partridge
22 Mar 2007, 09:10
But how about this: when Blake gets tired, bench him. Put Otto in the ruck, Darren Milburn into the forward line and Sam Hunt off the bench into defence. That way, not only do we get a third tall forward who can take a grab and kick accurately, we don't lose anything in pace.
How about this; put Ottens in the ruck and leave just Ablett and Mooney as the key forwards. That's what we had in the last quarter against Melbourne on Saturday and they looked pretty good.
Also, how does Sam Hunt get a game? And who does he replace?
tiredcat
22 Mar 2007, 10:58
Also, how does Sam Hunt get a game? And who does he replace?
A ready made replacement for Harley who I think may struggle again with injuries. Ive been impressed with hunt so far. Ground skills need improvement but dispossal is good
darren forssman
22 Mar 2007, 11:11
A ready made replacement for Harley who I think may struggle again with injuries. Ive been impressed with hunt so far. Ground skills need improvement but dispossal is good
sam hunt is one of the few actual geelong players that can spear a pass into a team mate. obviously his decision making has to get better (that kick out against brisbane in the NAB Cup was awful) but he does show promise, especially with Harley being oft injured.
thehoff
22 Mar 2007, 11:14
Also, how does Sam Hunt get a game? And who does he replace?
A ready made replacement for Harley who I think may struggle again with injuries. Ive been impressed with hunt so far. Ground skills need improvement but dispossal is good
Yep, agree. Sammy is a ready made replacement behind Egan who is already our second best defender.
Partridge
22 Mar 2007, 13:48
A ready made replacement for Harley who I think may struggle again with injuries. Ive been impressed with hunt so far. Ground skills need improvement but dispossal is good
Fair enough, I don't think he'll be picked. We've still got Scarlett and Egan, plus Milburn to cover a 3rd tall. Remember Footscray aren't exactly filled with giants up forward. From what we've seen, can you honestly see any of J.Hunt, Enright, Wocjinski, Milburn or even Mackie missing out?
Nothing against Hunt, and you're right his disposal is good. I just can't see Thompson selecting him.
Generalissimo
22 Mar 2007, 19:25
Also, how does Sam Hunt get a game? And who does he replace?
Well, King's injured. Harley's probably injured. Henry Playfair ought to be dropped. That leaves a bit of room to juggle.
Spencer should have left the club at the end of '05 when he won the B&F in the reserves. I believe he was offered a contract back in the West... not 100% on that. Geelong's backline has been fantastic, if not the best in the league for the last 3-4 years. He would definately get good game time at other clubs so why stay at Geelong?? Playfair and Gardiner get game time for the opposite reason... our forward line is crap, and has been crap for years. I was really suprised he didn't try and leave at the end of last year... no way is he getting a game of AFL this year... Get out while your still young son!!
chapmanmagic35
23 Mar 2007, 22:05
Spencer should have left the club at the end of '05 when he won the B&F in the reserves. I believe he was offered a contract back in the West... not 100% on that. Geelong's backline has been fantastic, if not the best in the league for the last 3-4 years. He would definately get good game time at other clubs so why stay at Geelong?? Playfair and Gardiner get game time for the opposite reason... our forward line is crap, and has been crap for years. I was really suprised he didn't try and leave at the end of last year... no way is he getting a game of AFL this year... Get out while your still young son!!
He probably banked on getting an oppotrunity at Geelong - as Harley was/is injury prone, Egan was yet to blossom and the club still had dreams of pushing Scarlett forward.
He was unlucky not to debut in 2005, when we had a spate of injuries at the end of the season.