View Full Version : INs and OUTs against Sydney.
we're looking at 3-6 next week.
Sydney will be a lot harder to beat than Hawthorn... and im just speechless.
OUT: THURSTANS, Pearce
IN: C. Cornes (if fit), Lower
reCOGnise
17 May 2008, 18:00
lower in every week and nothing happens, im sick and tired of him not being given a go. too many inconsistant players getting gold passes for games every week.
harden the ____ up choco and drop some of these clowns when they simply dont perform.
Pearce wasn't bad today. Westhoff's having very little impact at the moment, i'd love to see a fresh face be given a chance up forward. Thurstans tried hard and was beaten by a gun.
We badly missed Chad today. I dare say we might have clinched it with him in the side, despite the horrible strategy employed in the second half.
powaflag08
17 May 2008, 18:12
we're looking at 3-6 next week.
Sydney will be a lot harder to beat than Hawthorn... and im just speechless.
OUT: THURSTANS, Pearce
IN: C. Cornes (if fit), Lower
WTF, why would Pearce be dropped,he was one of our better players.
Do you even watch Port???
Maybe stick to the Nuggets.
On another note:
When the ____ will Choco wake up and smell the Roses, Thurstans can not match-up on a good/tall forward he is only useful (hardly anyway) if he is played in a 3rd man up role.
escobar75
17 May 2008, 18:12
westhoff had his best game for us this game....the stats will tell you he took 10 mark 8 contested....
Mr Magoo
17 May 2008, 18:15
I'd be looking at dropping one of the following
a small forward - Ebert, Gray, Motlop etc.
a tallish defender -
& bringing in an extra midfielder or two. Hopefully Chad's ok to go this week.
Power King
17 May 2008, 18:16
OUT: THURSTANS
In: Lower
Shane_Mag
17 May 2008, 18:17
Out Thurstans and well whoever comes in for sure will be better then him.
escobar75
17 May 2008, 18:17
I'd be looking at dropping one of the following
a small forward - Ebert, Gray, Motlop etc.
a tallish defender -
& bringing in an extra midfielder or two. Hopefully Chad's ok to go this week.
gray shouldnt be even thought of being dropped...why drop him he was brilliant today, few mistakes but his positives outweighed his negatives...
Out: Thomson, Logan
In: Wilson, Cornes
Logan for Chad.
I love Tommys commitment but hes just continually brushed aside.
I would leave Wilson out for 1 more
OUT - Thomson
IN - Cornes
dyertribe
17 May 2008, 18:32
I would leave Wilson out for 1 more
OUT - Thomson
IN - Cornes
Out: Thomson, Logan
In: Wilson, Cornes
Dropping Thomson would be an atrocious move at this point. And as much as I love Wilbur, he's not our future, Thomson is.
It also sends the wrong message to all the kids, aceing a guy because he has first quiet one (9d, 5t, 1g) in a month.
He needs continuity and stability, not a cabcharge back to Unley whenever he doesn't get his usual handful of clearances.
Out- Thurstans
In- Inanimate carbon rod
Dropping Thomson would be an atrocious move at this point. And as much as I love Wilbur, he's not our future, Thomson is.
It also sends the wrong message to all the kids, aceing a guy because he has first quiet one (9d, 5t, 1g) in a month.
He needs continuity and stability, not a cabcharge back to Unley whenever he doesn't get his handful of clearancesI tend to agree, but Gray came in for Cornes and has been very solid.
Who do you take out to bring in the Chad?
Logan maybe ...
Harsh call any way you look at it.
EDIT - Actually;
OUT - Thurstans
IN - Cornes > CHB!!!
finbarr
17 May 2008, 18:40
It also sends the wrong message to all the kids, aceing a guy because he has first quiet one (9d, 5t, 1g) in a month.
He needs continuity and stability, not a cabcharge back to Unley whenever he doesn't get his usual handful of clearances.
Would be interested to know how many minutes Thomson had on the field. Looked like he was barely out there. Started on the bench at every change & i'm pretty sure he had zero minutes in the last.
I'd play him every possible minute of every week. Williams will drop him. He's due a good scapegoating.
PJ Power
17 May 2008, 19:20
Thomson will be the scapegoat, unfortunately!
Lewis was drafted half a dozen spots higher than him in the '04 draft. Look at the difference in careers so far. I don't put it all down to Thommo though. He has deficiencies, but has no way been shown enough confidence by his coach. He did two or three outstanding things today (goal, tackle and smother).
Chad will come in. If it was me, I'd drop Thurstans. But I would have done that six weeks ago. We'll hear from someone this week how Toby has been great this year.
Sydney don't play alot of tall forwards.
Macca19
17 May 2008, 19:26
OUT: Lade, Logan
IN: Deluca, Cornes
Lade looks stuffed, is badly out of form and deserves a rest. Give him a week off to refresh and bring him in the week after.
I also wouldnt mind Wilson for Thurstans as well but it wont happen.
Power King
17 May 2008, 19:26
Thomson will be the scapegoat, unfortunately!
Lewis was drafted half a dozen spots higher than him in the '04 draft. Look at the difference in careers so far. I don't put it all down to Thommo though. He has deficiencies, but has no way been shown enough confidence by his coach. He did two or three outstanding things today (goal, tackle and smother).
Chad will come in. If it was me, I'd drop Thurstans. But I would have done that six weeks ago. We'll hear from someone this week how Toby has been great this year.
Sydney don't play alot of tall forwards.
^and it dumbfounds me
dyertribe
17 May 2008, 19:30
Lade looks stuffed, is badly out of form and deserves a rest. Give him a week off to refresh and bring him in the week after.
I can't believe Choco was allowed to put him in cotton wool for the DreamTeam game :mad: :mad: :mad: :no idea:
Ford Fairlane
17 May 2008, 19:47
I guess we'll see Chad and Wilbur in for probably Logan and Thommo. That's how it usually works.
Then we can stick with the four man forward line with Chad floating up there, and Wilbur 10 minutes/qtr on the ball. Is there a *sigh* smilie?
Heard Williams went well for Centrals again today. He's a decent size and hard working midfielder. But won't be picked.
Lade is struggling, but I can't see Choco dropping/resting him. Mind you, he had a week off last week and came back even worse than he's been looking.
Mr Magoo
17 May 2008, 19:48
gray shouldnt be even thought of being dropped...why drop him he was brilliant today, few mistakes but his positives outweighed his negatives...
I never said that he wasn't good today or that he in particular should be dropped, as the only gripe i have with his game is that he hangs onto the ball for far too long. I'm looking at team balance... 3 small forwards who play at small forwards for the majority of the game... & we always seem to be playing an extra tall defender while we got murdered in the middle, you do the maths.
Unless chocco decides to start playing Ebert, gray or motlop further up the field to relieve some of the pressure on our midfield then one of them should make way for a midfielder who can play up forward or down back. If one of those players could spend 10 minutes on the ball & give any of our midfielders a rest that would be great.
Porthos
17 May 2008, 20:01
Whoever gets dropped this week is very unlucky.
dyertribe
17 May 2008, 20:04
He's due a good scapegoating.
A 'cyberbollard IRL' if you will.
Dropping Thomson would be an atrocious move at this point. And as much as I love Wilbur, he's not our future, Thomson is.
It also sends the wrong message to all the kids, aceing a guy because he has first quiet one (9d, 5t, 1g) in a month.
He needs continuity and stability, not a cabcharge back to Unley whenever he doesn't get his usual handful of clearances.
DT, DT, DT.
You should know by now that I agree with all that you posted. :)
Jencke the Big Horse
18 May 2008, 07:50
I'd be looking at dropping one of the following
a small forward - Ebert, Gray, Motlop etc.
a tallish defender -
& bringing in an extra midfielder or two. Hopefully Chad's ok to go this week.
I wouldn't drop Gray from what I saw today. Enough glimpses there of class to keep him in the top flight. How many games has he played? Good talent. Especially the body use on Croad and banana goal.
Mr Magoo
18 May 2008, 09:15
Thomson will be the scapegoat, unfortunately!
Lewis was drafted half a dozen spots higher than him in the '04 draft. Look at the difference in careers so far. I don't put it all down to Thommo though. He has deficiencies, but has no way been shown enough confidence by his coach. He did two or three outstanding things today (goal, tackle and smother).
Chad will come in. If it was me, I'd drop Thurstans. But I would have done that six weeks ago. We'll hear from someone this week how Toby has been great this year.
Sydney don't play alot of tall forwards.
Thomson does all the team things & has improved in basically every faucet of the game since last year. His kicking is much better he chases, tackles & puts his body on the line. He does however lack a yard of pace which is why i would like to see Kane mentor him over the next few years to get his fitness levels up where they should be. His TOG was only 58% yesterday so unless he's carrying some sort of niggling injury that we are unaware of i am dumbfounded at the limited game time he gets every week, unless it comes to down to his fitness levels?
Sure will be interesting come selection night this week as i think we've been playing one too many talls nearly every week & i'm talking about defenders not forwards.
I wouldn't drop Gray from what I saw today. Enough glimpses there of class to keep him in the top flight. How many games has he played? Good talent. Especially the body use on Croad and banana goal.
I'm thinking more team balance or team versatility which is why i suggested dropping one of our small forwards - Motlop, gray or Ebert for someone who can come in & play in the midfield as well as up forward or down back. An example would be Burgoyne or Rodan can pinch hit in the forward line - both are exceptionally good crumbers & can kick goals. But chocco seems to favor playing those three guys purely as forwards & then wonders why we may run out of legs in the last quarters of games when our midfielders eventually start to tire. I don't normally like to question chocco but unless he starts showing some faith in these (small forwards) players & giving them a run on the ball or on a wing to give our other players a breather then i'm afraid that teams will continue to over run us. When we played Brisbane they had 3 running players on their bench & a ruckman whereas we had a ruckman, a tall defender & two running type players from memory.
I don't think it's a question of our teams fitness levels but poor team management as to why we have been getting over run in games. These days the game is won or lost in the midfield which was proven in the recent dream team vs Vics game. Chocco had an abundance of both tall & small forwards who could all kick goals but he didn't have the cream in the middle to get the footy to them often enough.
FenderKing
18 May 2008, 10:14
Out- Thurstans
In- Inanimate carbon rod
In - Lonie
I by no means am a Toby lover, but we should put his game into perspective. He was playing on what many believe to be the best player in he comp at the moment. Buddy has killed everyone he's played on this year. Buddy kicked straight this week. Sure Toby is not the greatest defender in the world, but he's pretty much all we've got at that height. Would've have Bob, Pettigrew or Chaplin done any better??? Toby is an easy target but he isn't he reason Port lost.
Outs:
Toby Thurstans:- Is not a football player, and never will be. He is too uncoordinated, lazy and stupid to be a good footballer. Always struggles in defence, and only does an ok job when his fellow defenders are helping him out.
Justin Westhoff:- I don't think he has enough of a presence. He just floats around the ground, but doesn't do anything special. Should be closer to goal imo, as that is where he can impact the game (ala last year). Needs to go to Reserves and get back his form and build his body up a bit too.
Tom Logan:- Tough one here, did a good job it seems yesterday, and has done well on the whole. However, Wilbur and Cornes are automatic inclusions, and we need to drop one more to bring in a tall.
In: Wilbur, Cornes, DeLuca
Blade to the forward line.
I by no means am a Toby lover, but we should put his game into perspective. He was playing on what many believe to be the best player in he comp at the moment. Buddy has killed everyone he's played on this year. Buddy kicked straight this week. Sure Toby is not the greatest defender in the world, but he's pretty much all we've got at that height. Would've have Bob, Pettigrew or Chaplin done any better??? Toby is an easy target but he isn't he reason Port lost.
Pettigrew would have done better. We don't need 4 tall defenders.
We have Chaplin, Carlile and Pettigrew. All are 192cm+
Thurstans has had the luckiest AFL Career ever. If Williams showed half the faith in Thomson as he has in Thurstans, Thomson would be a star already.
I don't see anything special about Toby. He isn't quick, he isn't strong, he isn't intelligent, he doesn't work hard. The only thing he is, is tall. That only gets you so far.....but apparently not.
I would have delisted him a long long time ago.
Forzaport
18 May 2008, 15:58
while i don't agree with most of the sentiment aimed at thurstans, i wouldn't mind seeing the "lower for thurster" move. I think we'll still be tall enough, especially if chad comes back next week. Unfortunately, thommo or logan will be the unlucky outs. i think pearce has redeemed himself over the last couple of games. Not sold on wilson returning looking at his SANFL stats, but i'm not sure how much TOG he got and where he played - maybe someone can shed some light on it in the SANFL power thread?
My ins and outs:
IN: C.Cornes, Lower
OUT: Logan, Thurstans
The Floodbuster
18 May 2008, 16:04
WTF, why would Pearce be dropped,he was one of our better players.
Do you even watch Port???
Maybe stick to the Nuggets.
On another note:
When the ____ will Choco wake up and smell the Roses, Thurstans can not match-up on a good/tall forward he is only useful (hardly anyway) if he is played in a 3rd man up role.
I watch Port and have watched everyone of Pearce's games this year. He is a frontrunner and one of our best when we are winning but when the pressure is on he is useless. Look at some of his disposal, fumbling and the goals he missed in the last half.
Obviously Kane Cornes and others had shocking disposal there but Pearce is ether very bad or very good and he seems to only be good when the rest of the team are good. Back to Sturt for Pearce!
passion_1930
18 May 2008, 16:22
Perhaps the team is playing well because Pearce is playing well. Have you ever looked at it that way? :) The centre got smashed in the third quarter so our forwards and wing had little chance to get the ball. We lost it in the centre... and the stats show it. Pearce was equal second with the most contested possessions in a hard fought game. Seems to contradict your analysis of him. Equal most assists and could have got more if two of the players had taken their shots in the fifty. He also got the most into fifties by a long shot. The one thing he should have done was convert his two kicks at goal, but everyone makes mistakes.
I watch Port and have watched everyone of Pearce's games this year. He is a frontrunner and one of our best when we are winning but when the pressure is on he is useless. Look at some of his disposal, fumbling and the goals he missed in the last half.
Obviously Kane Cornes and others had shocking disposal there but Pearce is ether very bad or very good and he seems to only be good when the rest of the team are good. Back to Sturt for Pearce!
Macca19
18 May 2008, 16:44
Outs:
Justin Westhoff:- I don't think he has enough of a presence. He just floats around the ground, but doesn't do anything special. Should be closer to goal imo, as that is where he can impact the game (ala last year). Needs to go to Reserves and get back his form and build his body up a bit too.
He played his best game of the year yesterday. I dont see anything wrong with his form considering the role he is playing this year. If he was playing closer to goal and not kicking goals then id agree.
Who do you play in his current role?
Pettigrew would have done better. We don't need 4 tall defenders.
We have Chaplin, Carlile and Pettigrew. All are 192cm+
QFT
Our top-heavy backline is probably the most under-the-radar issue that our team has faced over the last one and a third seasons. It has lead to such wonderful match ups as Chaplin on Steve Johnson. And then - we talk about bringing in Chad to pinch hit at CHB.
We're not too far removed from Darryl Wakelin being dropped intermittently (sp?) for match-ups. And Toby isn't deserving or more favourable treatment than D-Wak.
Bring in Lower, end this madness!
Power King
18 May 2008, 17:28
He played his best game of the year yesterday. I dont see anything wrong with his form considering the role he is playing this year. If he was playing closer to goal and not kicking goals then id agree.
Who do you play in his current role?
As far as I'm concerned, Westhoff is being blooded this year in a role different to last year's, where he plays further up the ground, taking marks and delivering the ball inside 50. If he gets a shot at goal it's usually around the 40-50m area. He is starting to improve in this position, and of course since it's his first year in it he is going to struggle, but he is a KP player so I say he needs to stay and continue to learn and improve in the role. He's only 21. I see his role in the team this season as investment for the future.
Bresh - agreed. I made a thread before the ahwks game questioning our tall defense, and am a supporter of the lower for thurstans change.
i_love_the_hoff
18 May 2008, 17:58
Justin Westhoff:- I don't think he has enough of a presence. He just floats around the ground, but doesn't do anything special. Should be closer to goal imo, as that is where he can impact the game (ala last year). Needs to go to Reserves and get back his form and build his body up a bit too.
FFS. You obviously have nfi.
If you haven't noticed, Westhoff has a different role this year - last year he stayed in the goalsquare and kicked goals. This year he is everywhere and passing it to people in the 50. You can't possibly compare him to last year when he isn't even playing in that postion really. Lay off alright. He is doing just fine and yesterday he played a really good game. And about the Body Building - WE ALL HAVE TO BE PATIENT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN OVER NIGHT -and you never know, it might not ever happen but we have all seen last year what he can do with out a very strong, muscly build.
Mitch Power
18 May 2008, 18:09
We really miss the aggression and attack on the ball/body of Cornes, Wilson and Thomas.
With Hall missing, Sydney have a small forward setup so we could drop a tall defender (probably Thurstans) and bring back Cornes if fit. That would be my only change as Wilson would be still underdone and Thomas is not available.
P.A.F.C
18 May 2008, 18:12
QFT
Our top-heavy backline is probably the most under-the-radar issue that our team has faced over the last one and a third seasons. It has lead to such wonderful match ups as Chaplin on Steve Johnson. And then - we talk about bringing in Chad to pinch hit at CHB.
We're not too far removed from Darryl Wakelin being dropped intermittently (sp?) for match-ups. And Toby isn't deserving or more favourable treatment than D-Wak.
Bring in Lower, end this madness!
Chaplin is more than competent on playing on small forwards as shown by his job on Mark Williams yesterday. Plus I wouldn't want to play Pettigrew on too many key forwards.
Personally:
IN: Chad, Wilson
OUT: Logan, Ebert
Put Bentley in if Wilbur doesn't come up.
we're looking at 3-6 next week.
Sydney will be a lot harder to beat than Hawthorn... and im just speechless.
OUT: THURSTANS, Pearce
IN: C. Cornes (if fit), Lower
I think we have a better chance of beating sydney at home than hawthorn, we were smashed earlier this year but we play terrible at the SCG, and this time there missing hall (who we have a hard time matching up on) and kenelly.
Out - Thurstans
In - Cornes
He played his best game of the year yesterday. I dont see anything wrong with his form considering the role he is playing this year. If he was playing closer to goal and not kicking goals then id agree.
Who do you play in his current role?
I too think he had a good to very good game. :confused:
Too many people looking for scapegoats in a game that we almost won against the best or second best team in the comp.
We should just ditch all of our players and coaching staff and start again hey? Geesh, be real?!? :rolleyes:
dyertribe
18 May 2008, 19:15
Bring in Lower, end this madness!
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e320/nz0g81a/thrusta.gif
great post above:thumbsu:
Forzaport
18 May 2008, 19:31
I think we have a better chance of beating sydney at home than hawthorn, we were smashed earlier this year but we play terrible at the SCG, and this time there missing hall (who we have a hard time matching up on) and kenelly.
Out - Thurstans
In - Cornes
On second thoughts, this makes the most sense to me. It's so simple, it works and it keeps thommo and logan in the side.
Still would like to see lower get a run though.
PowerFan_1993
18 May 2008, 19:42
IN:White,DeLuca,C.Cornes
Out:Westhoff,Lade(rested),Worstans
also maybe wilbur but havent heard how he went for the maggies yet. White should have had a go a long time ago i reckon he'd be startin to get sick of being an emergency. Obviously the coaching staff want him here because the persuaded him to stay and after some good games in the SANFL they should give him a game for sure
FFS. You obviously have nfi.
If you haven't noticed, Westhoff has a different role this year - last year he stayed in the goalsquare and kicked goals. This year he is everywhere and passing it to people in the 50. You can't possibly compare him to last year when he isn't even playing in that postion really. Lay off alright. He is doing just fine and yesterday he played a really good game. And about the Body Building - WE ALL HAVE TO BE PATIENT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN OVER NIGHT -and you never know, it might not ever happen but we have all seen last year what he can do with out a very strong, muscly build.
Yeh, i'm not stupid, I do realise he is playing a different role. However, he is not impacting the match enough. Sure, he has a different role, which explains why he is not kicking goals, but I don't see him setting many up either. He did very well last year close to goals. Why is his role changing? He played well yesterday, but he is not impacting the game enough imo. If we want someone playing a roaming marking player, it should be either Ebert or Motlop, who have the agility around the ground, are good marks, have good pace and can deliver good passes to the forwards.
And i'm allowed to critisize whoever i want. I gave my reasoning, so if you disagree with it, have some respect with your response and stop acting like a 4 year old.
He played his best game of the year yesterday. I dont see anything wrong with his form considering the role he is playing this year. If he was playing closer to goal and not kicking goals then id agree.
Who do you play in his current role?
I know it's not his fault he is being cast into this role, but he isn't very quick, or agile.
His strengths are his marking, smart play and straight kicking. This is far more useful infront of goal, like he was used last year.
PJ Power
18 May 2008, 21:47
I'd actually prefer to Westhoff to be playing closer to goal, but I think our coaches realise that with the extra attention he is being paid this year, including getting the opposition's best tall defender, it would be "lambs to the slaughter" to have him play close to goal and sit under high balls.
His job across half forward has been pretty good the last 2-3 weeks. If he had more power in his kicking yesterday and more accuracy (which has deserted him all year), he could have had 3 for the game.
Swans look like they are in very good form again going into a game against us. O'Loughlin warming up to tear us another new one - he'll have his customary three goals against us in the first 10 minutes.
P.A.F.C
18 May 2008, 21:52
What's most worrying about Westhoff is how poor his kicking for goal is lately. There was a time last year when i'd comfortably say he'd kick a goal from anywhere inside the forward 50 but this year he seems to have lost all his confidence.
EDIT: I should have just said I agree with PJ about Westhoff's goalkicking
ssfc0203
18 May 2008, 22:01
You guys would probably make mincemeat of us if we played like we had for the first half today. But saying that, you guys bring out the best in us so I'm hoping for the game to kick start the side into playing skilled football and convince me we're Top 4 material.
gopower
18 May 2008, 22:07
Out- Thurstans
In- Inanimate carbon rod
:D Hilarious
Out: Thurstans (counted 6 goals that came from his softness, not just Buddy's awesomeness), Westhoff (not because he was particularly bad last week but because he's done nothing all year
In: Wilson, The Chad (if either isn't fit then White and/or Stewart in)
Russian
18 May 2008, 22:54
In: Chad, Wilbur, Thomas
Out: Logan, Ebert, Gray
All 3 are unlucky but those 3 ins should be walk up starts. Good matchups for Thrust this week so he plays and Ebert misses out to fit in the extra midfielder we've lacked for much of the year. Don't want to drop Robbie as it seems he had a great first half, but his lack of impact when I was watching in the second half again raises questions about his ability to run out games. Until he can do that he's going to be unlucky number 23, 24 or 25. If either Burgoyne gets suspended or any of those ins don't come up then he survives.
gopower
18 May 2008, 23:01
In: Chad, Wilbur, Thomas
Out: Logan, Ebert, Gray
All 3 are unlucky but those 3 ins should be walk up starts. Good matchups for Thrust this week so he plays and Ebert misses out to fit in the extra midfielder we've lacked for much of the year. Don't want to drop Robbie as it seems he had a great first half, but his lack of impact when I was watching in the second half again raises questions about his ability to run out games. Until he can do that he's going to be unlucky number 23, 24 or 25. If either Burgoyne gets suspended or any of those ins don't come up then he survives.
Yeah good point on Gray, he only had about 20 touches and a couple of goals. What a hack. And Ebert's only kicked 10 goals in the last four weeks :eek:
Gray > Crowkiller. How about you drop Thurstans or Westhoff, two guys who have done NOTHING all year, instead.
footyfan_25
18 May 2008, 23:26
Cornes was listed as 1-2 weeks last week.
Only said last week that he was aiming for the Swans game.
Looking at the suggested changes, everyone seems pretty confident that he will return.
Any more word over the weekend suggesting if he will definately return this week?
Russian
18 May 2008, 23:45
Any more word over the weekend suggesting if he will definately return this week?It won't be a definite for the club until Saturday morning. He sees the surgeon Friday morning, if everything's ok he removes the splint, then he gets his hands on a footy at training on Friday afternoon, if he gets through that ok he plays on Saturday.
Cornes was listed as 1-2 weeks last week.
Only said last week that he was aiming for the Swans game.
Looking at the suggested changes, everyone seems pretty confident that he will return.
Any more word over the weekend suggesting if he will definately return this week?
None yet, he'd be itching to play after the weekend, but it lies in the coach's hands anyway
Peninsula Boy
19 May 2008, 00:22
What's most worrying about Westhoff is how poor his kicking for goal is lately. There was a time last year when i'd comfortably say he'd kick a goal from anywhere inside the forward 50 but this year he seems to have lost all his confidence.
EDIT: I should have just said I agree with PJ about Westhoff's goalkicking
I agree. I think he's been very good around the ground, learning that new position but his kicking which was a breath of fresh air last year has been woeful.
He still is a great kick but just needs to get his mojo back.
*PAFC*13
19 May 2008, 00:31
Thurstans is as useless as a used tampon at the moment. Time for his to spend some time with Sturt.
FFS BRING IN LOWER!!
PJ Power
19 May 2008, 01:10
We'll lose Lower at the end of this year, because of the lack of opportunity he has had with us, since the end of 2006.
Given his consistency at SANFL, his development has been badly stalled by him not getting AFL time.
I'd love for him to somehow find a spot in the team, but short of major injuries it will not happen, while Thomas, Chad and Wilbur are all due for returns. In fact, we're likely to revisit the Thomson merry-go-around all over in the next 1-2 weeks as these guys come back, which is a disgrace in itself.
Choco has all these young kids and they're doing ok, but he can't make them all have outstanding AFL careers when there are only 22 given a shot each week.
Our squad is very heavily balanced toward small-medium defenders at the moment, which is a problem as there are 2-3 spots for them on the field at any one time. Means that players like Farmer, Stewart, Lower, Williams, Boyle will find it especially hard to break into our team. We desperately need some of these guys to develop into very, very good tough midfielders.
Porthos
19 May 2008, 12:04
Our squad is very heavily balanced toward small-medium defenders at the moment, which is a problem as there are 2-3 spots for them on the field at any one time.I think the reason for this imbalance is because the club realises we don't have any lock-in small/medium defenders yet. It is inevitable that we will lose some. Hopefully we will keep the best.
I don't think Lower is one who would burn us.
RangaInTeal
19 May 2008, 12:16
Out: Logan Thurstans
In: Wilson Willits
Love Logan but Wilson is a first XVII bloke, Willits form has been good, Would be good to see him get a crack, Cornes still not fit!
TheFridge
19 May 2008, 12:51
Thomson does all the team things & has improved in basically every faucet of the game since last year.
Sorry Mr Magoo, as much as I detest highlighting typos, but is this some sort of reference about our leaking midfield.:D
TheFridge
19 May 2008, 13:14
There is some robust and intelligent debate in this thread, but it strikes me that we have seemingly avoid reference to the elephant in the room...
Port lost against Hawthorn due to a ridiculous clearance ratio in favour of Hawthorn. Overall, the Power forward line was significantly more efficient than Hawthorn's, which is either a big kudos to the forwards or the backs or both...
Consistently, this has been an issue all year, which partly explains how Port can have periods of domination and get a lead, but ultimately, our opposition are still always in the game.
Unfortunately, I am not the messiah and can't really put a finger on what the real issue is - we have seen guys like Junior B, Thomilf and Pearcey fluctuate in form (or getting game time), but still the clearance rate is poor, embarrassingly poor. It would be easy to point the finger at our rucks, as Ladey has been quite a bit down on his AA form of 2007, but overall Port aren't really being beaten in the hitout stakes - just the clearances (and our back ups have been running around in the SANFL magoos, so are not exactly pressing for a walk up start).
All this which suggests to me that either the midfield cattle ain't good enough (don't believe that to be the case) or our midfield setups are wrong....
As to what to do in terms then of ins and outs, then this suggests no real need to make personnel changes, but to focus more on how we set up, rotate and match up.
However, having said all that, against a Hall-less Sydney, I really can't see room for a third tall back, and therefore suggest that Thurstans would be a logical out (especially if Chad is back).
Forzaport
19 May 2008, 15:45
There is some robust and intelligent debate in this thread, but it strikes me that we have seemingly avoid reference to the elephant in the room...
Very good post. Totally Agree.
It's a good argument for keeping chad in the middle. I'd also add that we've lost cassisi in the middle structure as well, which has also hurt us.
I'm confident this will change once wilbur and chad are back in the team.
i_love_the_hoff
19 May 2008, 17:52
Yeh, i'm not stupid, I do realise he is playing a different role. However, he is not impacting the match enough. Sure, he has a different role, which explains why he is not kicking goals, but I don't see him setting many up either. He did very well last year close to goals. Why is his role changing? He played well yesterday, but he is not impacting the game enough imo. If we want someone playing a roaming marking player, it should be either Ebert or Motlop, who have the agility around the ground, are good marks, have good pace and can deliver good passes to the forwards.
And i'm allowed to critisize whoever i want. I gave my reasoning, so if you disagree with it, have some respect with your response and stop acting like a 4 year old.
Ohh I gave my reasoning as well, and if I wanted to I could have said a lot more. Me - 4??? ahahahahahahahaha
Freddy Bassett
19 May 2008, 18:16
Out: Logan Thurstans
In: Wilson Willits
Love Logan but Wilson is a first XVII bloke, Willits form has been good, Would be good to see him get a crack, Cornes still not fit!
Willits form has been good? Seriously?
Willits form has been very good in the SANFL
BIG DADDY
20 May 2008, 00:11
Chad and Wilbur IN
need some tuff bodies around the ball
Out probably Shaun.....aghhhhh and maybe Surj:confused:
Macca19
20 May 2008, 00:44
Willits form has been good? Seriously?
R8: 12k, 11m, 3hb, 1 goal
R7: 7k, 4m, 6hb, 1 goal
R6: 17k, 12m, 2hb, 1 goal
R5: 13k, 7m, 7hb, 1 goal
R4: 8k, 8m, 2hb, 2 goals
They are pretty impressive raw stats. Certainly a load better than previous years.
dreamkillers
20 May 2008, 12:45
R8: 12k, 11m, 3hb, 1 goal
R7: 7k, 4m, 6hb, 1 goal
R6: 17k, 12m, 2hb, 1 goal
R5: 13k, 7m, 7hb, 1 goal
R4: 8k, 8m, 2hb, 2 goals
They are pretty impressive raw stats. Certainly a load better than previous years.
The last column isn't the best but have there been misses or is the role a little different.
Ford Fairlane
20 May 2008, 13:20
He's playing CHF and pushing upfield a bit, as well as stints in ruck and down back. That's impacting on his goal-kicking.
The summary from this week's review by the club of SANFL games probably sums up his year.
Ryan Willits (for West v Central at Richmond) – Had 11 kicks, 10 marks and 3 handballs. Getting a lot of his ball further up the ground, but needs to have a bit more of a physical presence out there. He’s working very hard though, which is pleasing.
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/tabid/6038/Default.aspx?newsid=59844
dreamkillers
20 May 2008, 13:37
That's ok then.....at least he's not missing lots and his work rate is noticed.
Ohh I gave my reasoning as well, and if I wanted to I could have said a lot more. Me - 4??? ahahahahahahahaha
I never said you didn't give your reasoning, but there were some unnecessary comments in there too. And you don't tell people to 'back off' just because they are critisizing your favourite player.
Cruiser23
20 May 2008, 15:19
How far away is Matty Thomas for breaking in the 22 again? Had a chat with him a few weeks back, said he would be back training in a week or so. Chance this week?
Also where does Paul Stewart stand at the moment? Didn't play for the WWT on the weekend because of the bye, but has been fantastic ever since he has gone back. How come his name hasn't been thrown around? Thought he would be very close.
dyertribe
20 May 2008, 15:24
I don't think Lower is one who would burn us.
Not so sure, especially when he's seeing his twin playing week-in week-out at Arden St.
There's also the matter of not getting a game since R22, 2006.
Forzaport
20 May 2008, 15:29
Thomas as been given another week off going by our latest injury list. Not sure on stewart.
i_love_the_hoff
20 May 2008, 16:52
I never said you didn't give your reasoning, but there were some unnecessary comments in there too. And you don't tell people to 'back off' just because they are critisizing your favourite player.
It's not because he is my favourite player, it's because he doesn't deserve the critisism when he does fine. :thumbsu:
*PAFC*13
21 May 2008, 00:49
It's not because he is my favourite player, it's because he doesn't deserve the critisism when he does fine. :thumbsu:
Bigfooty is a forum where people express opinions mate. If someone’s not happy with your 'favourite players' form you just gotta sit there and bite the bullet.
OUT: Unfortunately.......Shaun, Logan,
IN: Wilson, Chad if fit....
Who is going to be taged by sydney this week since Shaun is out and maybe Chad?
I reckon Salapek might get the tag since it would be stupid to tag Kane as he is out tager
Forzaport
21 May 2008, 14:22
With Shaun out, the next logical tag would be sal, unless peter is moved to the middle.
i_love_the_hoff
21 May 2008, 18:15
Bigfooty is a forum where people express opinions mate. If someone’s not happy with your 'favourite players' form you just gotta sit there and bite the bullet.
He expressed his opinion
and
I expressed mine.
Forzaport
22 May 2008, 18:11
B: Michael Pettigrew, Alipate Carlile, Jacob Surjan
HB: Peter Burgoyne, Toby Thurstans, Dom Cassisi
C: Travis Boak, Chad Cornes, Kane Cornes
HF: David Rodan, Warren Tredrea, Brett Ebert
F: Daniel Motlop, Justin Westhoff, Robbie Gray
Foll: Dean Brogan, Steven Salopek, Danyle Pearce
Interchange: Michael Wilson, Troy Chaplin, Tom Logan, Brendon Lade
Emergencies: Adam Thomson, Paul Stewart, Damon White
IN: Chad Cornes, Michael Wilson
OUT: Shaun Burgoyne (suspension), Adam Thomson (omitted)
That settles it - thommo is not in our best 22 - time to make arrangements to sent him across town :mad:
Oh, and Chad and Wilbur named!!!
Power King
22 May 2008, 21:03
^Thomson deserves to be ahead of at least one or two other players
seeing thurstans starting at CHB literally makes me physically cringe. why not at least put chaplin's name there and thurstans on the bench?
i know it makes no difference but seriously who is the better player
^Thomson deserves to be ahead of at least one or two other players
seeing thurstans starting at CHB literally makes me physically cringe. why not at least put chaplin's name there and thurstans on the bench?
i know it makes no difference but seriously who is the better player
Thurstans ATM, easily, but probably not for much longer.
Would like to see Chaplin develop a little more consistent confidence soonish, and with this his 50th coming up it could just be this weekend. Perhaps just a little more desperation might help - he doesn't seem to know what to do when cornered. Doing anything is better than doing nothing.
Mitch Power
23 May 2008, 17:19
We'll lose Lower at the end of this year, because of the lack of opportunity he has had with us, since the end of 2006.
Given his consistency at SANFL, his development has been badly stalled by him not getting AFL time.
I'd love for him to somehow find a spot in the team, but short of major injuries it will not happen, while Thomas, Chad and Wilbur are all due for returns.
PJ, I tend to agree with you. I don't know where Lower has been playing with Norwood this year but I see he has been named in the centre for the match against the Bays. I hope he starts there because that is one position I can see him playing in at Port, a team blessed with small defenders.
Power King
23 May 2008, 20:17
Thurstans ATM, easily, but probably not for much longer.
Would like to see Chaplin develop a little more consistent confidence soonish, and with this his 50th coming up it could just be this weekend. Perhaps just a little more desperation might help - he doesn't seem to know what to do when cornered. Doing anything is better than doing nothing.
Thurstans? Easily? Now?
Nothing against you personally, but I think that opinion is simply downright wrong.
Thurstans? Easily? Now?
Nothing against you personally, but I think that opinion is simply downright wrong.
I think it is right, so there you go. :)
Power King
23 May 2008, 21:38
Fair enough, everyone has the right to an opinion
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=446888