View Full Version : The tanking debate
freocuz
29 Jun 2008, 17:03
Is sure to hot up this week now that Melourne are on 2 wins, along with us and the Coasters. We have games ahead of us against both of these teams, so we are sure to be under scrutiny.
My question is this. Should I load up on these two games, whatever the odds, becasue the other two will surely tank, or is it not safe because we might be tanking also?
fat wombat
29 Jun 2008, 17:08
Freo are losing games because they just aren't good enough atm. There's no need to tank!
Alvin Purple
29 Jun 2008, 17:21
Freo are losing games because they just aren't good enough atm. There's no need to tank!
True but the same can be said for the others too especially WC.
It's going to get interesting, all three teams play each other before the end of the year, but I think the battle for the spoon will come down to round 20 Dee's v WC (simply because it's the last of the three matches.
I still think all three teams would rather finish 14th or 15th regardless of draft picks.
Juddrockz
29 Jun 2008, 17:24
Freo are losing games because they just aren't good enough atm. There's no need to tank!
Apparently this is referred to as "tanking":rolleyes:
Apparently this is referred to as "tanking":rolleyes:
No...pulling Fevola off whilst in winning positions is tanking...:)
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 18:12
No...pulling Fevola off whilst in winning positions is tanking...:)
I hope Pavlich plays 100% of every game then from now until the end. Otherwise we may be accused.
Hairy Cat Mooney
29 Jun 2008, 19:21
If Melbourne wanted to tank, why would they try, and actually succeed to win against the Lions?
I honestly don't believe any team has been tanking. WC have been rubbish since Round 2, a little early to start the tank if we were going too. Fremantle have been putting in the effort but coming up short and Melbourne are in the same situation as us, been rubbish since the start of the year.
Simple fact is, we haven't been good enough to win games. I haven't noticed any suss selections from the teams yet, so I don't know how any of the three teams can be accused of it.
I know WC came under the spotlight a few weeks back when we didn't pick Kerr, Fletcher and Braun, but Kerr was actually injured and Fletcher and Braun were, well .. Fletcher and Braun. Aren't we tanking if we do pick them? ;)
The situation might change later on in the year, say from Round 15 onwards, but for now all teams have just been not good enough to win.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 19:48
I honestly don't believe any team has been tanking. WC have been rubbish since Round 2, a little early to start the tank if we were going too. Fremantle have been putting in the effort but coming up short and Melbourne are in the same situation as us, been rubbish since the start of the year.
Simple fact is, we haven't been good enough to win games. I haven't noticed any suss selections from the teams yet, so I don't know how any of the three teams can be accused of it.
I know WC came under the spotlight a few weeks back when we didn't pick Kerr, Fletcher and Braun, but Kerr was actually injured and Fletcher and Braun were, well .. Fletcher and Braun. Aren't we tanking if we do pick them? ;)
The situation might change later on in the year, say from Round 15 onwards, but for now all teams have just been not good enough to win.
Either way buddy, how the ____ do you go from winning a premiership 18 months ago, losing 2 key players and then come 2nd last? That is a joke, and is why people accuse you guys of tanking.
It's kinda some good symmetry that Freo and WC always seem to bottom out at the same time. Though I think we are going somewhere after this bottom out this time.
Either way buddy, how the ____ do you go from winning a premiership 18 months ago, losing 2 key players and then come 2nd last? That is a joke, and is why people accuse you guys of tanking.
It's kinda some good symmetry that Freo and WC always seem to bottom out at the same time. Though I think we are going somewhere after this bottom out this time.
Well, just shows how good those two players were. I know Chick and Rojo aren't in the same calibre as Judd and Cousins, but losing them has taken that extra experience out of our side too.
Even though our decline has been pretty disgraceful, it can be turned around fairly quickly. Remember it was only in 2006 when Geelong were an absolute rabble, now look at them. I'm not saying WC will do this, but hopefully we'll be on the improve next year.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 20:16
Well, just shows how good those two players were. I know Chick and Rojo aren't in the same calibre as Judd and Cousins, but losing them has taken that extra experience out of our side too.
Even though our decline has been pretty disgraceful, it can be turned around fairly quickly. Remember it was only in 2006 when Geelong were an absolute rabble, now look at them. I'm not saying WC will do this, but hopefully we'll be on the improve next year.
You're not going to luck out on that midfield again, at least, it is very very unlikely. You have almost no KPPs that are any good (a lot of B graders though) so I really think you guys aren't going anywhere, any time soon.
Freo though, we have a few A grade KPPs, just a shit midfield. We will come good real soon after we pick up Rich.
You're not going to luck out on that midfield again, at least, it is very very unlikely. You have almost no KPPs that are any good (a lot of B graders though) so I really think you guys aren't going anywhere, any time soon.
Freo though, we have a few A grade KPPs, just a shit midfield. We will come good real soon after we pick up Rich.
Well, even though they're not A grade (bar Glass), we had 4 KPP's who did the job for us in 2006. That's all you can ask for really.
Next crop coming through is too young to tell how they will turn out. But still happy with Kennedy, McKinley, Brown, Wilkes, Spangher etc.
Anyway, I hope you don't think Rich will lead you to a Premiership, not for a few years yet (that's if you even get Rich).
You're not going to luck out on that midfield again, at least, it is very very unlikely. You have almost no KPPs that are any good (a lot of B graders though) so I really think you guys aren't going anywhere, any time soon.
Freo though, we have a few A grade KPPs, just a shit midfield. We will come good real soon after we pick up Rich.
Lol - it will take more than Rich. You guys simply should be in a top eight position at the moment. It quite frankly staggers me that you arn`t.
The problems run deep.
We will come good real soon after we pick up Rich.
Will have to finish below us to get him, and that looks unlikely at the moment.
Well, just shows how good those two players were. I know Chick and Rojo aren't in the same calibre as Judd and Cousins, but losing them has taken that extra experience out of our side too.
I have seen this statement crop up here and in the media a few times this year and I don't buy it at all. Daniel Chick was desperate to play on with the Eagles and was shown the door, so he wasn't really "lost". I thought it was the right call at the time, still do. But fair cop, the Eagles obviously didnt think they needed him.
I have seen this statement crop up here and in the media a few times this year and I don't buy it at all. Daniel Chick was desperate to play on with the Eagles and was shown the door, so he wasn't really "lost". I thought it was the right call at the time, still do. But fair cop, the Eagles obviously didnt think they needed him.
Yeah fair call. Even if we did need him (like Cousins), we weren't really in the position to keep him on after all that happened.
raffrox
29 Jun 2008, 21:30
The problems run deep.
Glass houses I reckon.
Really, thanks for your opinion. :rolleyes:
SupersonicDocker
29 Jun 2008, 21:30
Lol - it will take more than Rich. You guys simply should be in a top eight position at the moment. It quite frankly staggers me that you arn`t.
The problems run deep.
That sentence seems more appropriate if you were addressing the eagles...
We were garbage last year. We are still garbage this year. But we have plenty of upswing to it.
There is no justification for the decline in your team other than lack of care by players who have already climbed the mountain.
Once this side has the ability to drop
Schammer / Mcmanus / Peake / Thornton
Things will be a lot better. I appreciate everyone saying Schammer tried hard today but that is no justification for a spot when you are not doing anything with it. Schammer's biggest problem has never been his ball winning ability, effort or even his skills to an extent. It's his decision making that lets him down just like thornton. More often than not he either runs too far and is forced to handball to a guy not expecting it, or he doesn't run hard when he should be... Decision making cant be fixed unless someone knows how to do a brain transplant
The_Ruffneck
29 Jun 2008, 21:50
i'd like to see freo in the mix next year , their fans have been through a lot
as a west oast fan i have been blessed with 3 flags in 20 years so a bad season here or there is no biggie
hope you blokes do alot better next season:thumbsu:
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 21:52
Lol - it will take more than Rich. You guys simply should be in a top eight position at the moment. It quite frankly staggers me that you arn`t.
The problems run deep.
Seriously, if you had any football knowledge use it now. The ONLY reason we are constantly beaten at the moment is the lack of a decent midfield. We dominate taps all day, but when you have an aging J Carr/Bell, incompetent Peake, and rookies like Palmer you can't expect much.
Argue all you want about whether or not we get rich, it's possible we won't. But we have other benefits to look forward to, Cousins, improvements, injured players coming back. It's all good over in Freo land.
Hase, Headland, Rich/whoever (whatever the best mid we can get) will all be added to our side, and Palmer/Ibbo will improve. Pharlap aint going nowhere, neither is Pav, Tarrant, Sandi, Hayden. Next year we are going to step up once our midfield gets an improvement through the removal of duds, and injection of the currently injured and non drafted. Good day to you sir.
salim malik
29 Jun 2008, 21:53
Schammer is 23 and played 97 games.His time as a gun mid fielder is about to explode,if we trade him now we are crazy.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 21:59
Schammer is 23 and played 97 games.His time as a gun mid fielder is about to explode,if we trade him now we are crazy.
Ever notice how every team that plays us seems to catch a case of the "cant kick it" ? For some reason poor disposal seems to catch on like pink eye at a gay party. Schammer is king of poor disposal, cost us at least one goal directly today.
We need to trade him while he is worth something because he is a constant liability and we don't need that thing going forward.
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 22:03
Ever notice how every team that plays us seems to catch a case of the "cant kick it" ? For some reason poor disposal seems to catch on like pink eye at a gay party. Schammer is king of poor disposal, cost us at least one goal directly today.
We need to trade him while he is worth something because he is a constant liability and we don't need that thing going forward.
Quite clearly you haven't watched a Freo game in the last month then. Schammer has been our best midfielder in terms of disposals combined with efficiency. He is hitting his straps and as the previous poster said, we'd be crazy to trade him. There is a reason teams want him ok, its not like no one really wants him, otherwise Port wouldn't keep asking every single trade period if he is available. Sorry Memories but I wouldn't want you managing our list.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 22:05
Quite clearly you haven't watched a Freo game in the last month then. Schammer has been our best midfielder in terms of disposals combined with efficiency. He is hitting his straps and as the previous poster said, we'd be crazy to trade him. There is a reason teams want him ok, its not like no one really wants him, otherwise Port wouldn't keep asking every single trade period if he is available. Sorry Memories but I wouldn't want you managing our list.
He is getting BETTER than his previous form, but he is still shockingly bad. Being "good" in the freo midfield isn't some proud achievement here. Schammer cost us the game today with his turnover which resulted in the goal.
A few passes to Pav or Tarrant which didn't miss don't undo that. Hitting targets isn't something special, it's a requirement.
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 22:07
He is getting BETTER than his previous form, but he is still shockingly bad. Being "good" in the freo midfield isn't some proud achievement here. Schammer cost us the game today with his turnover which resulted in the goal.
A few passes to Pav or Tarrant which didn't miss don't undo that. Hitting targets isn't something special, it's a requirement.
Well then every midfielder in the comp is worse than Schammer. How many hit 100% of their targets? None. Not even the great Judd of Judd land or Jesus (Ablett Jr) hit 100% of their targets. God damn, what is wrong with you? Didn't see the passes that others did that resulted in turnovers? more specifically.. Brett Peake and Ibbotson?
You are completely blinkered because from Day 1 this year you have said get rid of Schammer and you are blinkered for your own gain, unable to see the truth.
Ever notice how every team that plays us seems to catch a case of the "cant kick it" ? For some reason poor disposal seems to catch on like pink eye at a gay party. Schammer is king of poor disposal, cost us at least one goal directly today.
We need to trade him while he is worth something because he is a constant liability and we don't need that thing going forward.
See Memories that's crap.
he made one error as far as I can tell and it did cost us a goal
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 22:09
Well then every midfielder in the comp is worse than Schammer. How many hit 100% of their targets? None. Not even the great Judd of Judd land or Jesus (Ablett Jr) hit 100% of their targets. God damn, what is wrong with you? Didn't see the passes that others did that resulted in turnovers? more specifically.. Brett Peake and Ibbotson?
My comment that he was the king of poor disposal was a slight exaggeration but he is up there with Peake over his career. The amount of wind it takes out of every single Freo player when they see yet another clanger is enormous.
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 22:11
My comment that he was the king of poor disposal was a slight exaggeration but he is up there with Peake over his career. The amount of wind it takes out of every single Freo player when they see yet another clanger is enormous.
You have no idea do you? You are just making yourself look more like a blinkered idiot.
Just go make another "We should tank" thread and be off on your lonesome. Its quite clear that you have an agenda that can't be persuaded or even argued because you are so stubborn that even a fantastic effort by a player is 100% ignored because of one tiny error.
dugrene
29 Jun 2008, 22:13
The Dees winning today might have an upside for us. They wont get first hit at knockers if the toast slip under them.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 22:18
You have no idea do you? You are just making yourself look more like a blinkered idiot.
Just go make another "We should tank" thread and be off on your lonesome. Its quite clear that you have an agenda that can't be persuaded or even argued because you are so stubborn that even a fantastic effort by a player is 100% ignored because of one tiny error.
Go read the votes thread, Schammer isn't scoring that highly, even the AFL website doesn't have him in the top 6-7 for Freo. He didn't have a "fantastic" game, it was serviceable. The point remains his clanger which cost us a goal is just part and parcel of who Schammer is. Every week he does something similar if he actually gets his hands on the ball.
Every single week Parker kicked it in to an opposition player that scored a goal he was crucified regardless of his game. Giving cheap, easy goals to the opposition is nearly unforgivable.
Well then every midfielder in the comp is worse than Schammer. How many hit 100% of their targets? None. Not even the great Judd of Judd land or Jesus (Ablett Jr) hit 100% of their targets. God damn, what is wrong with you? Didn't see the passes that others did that resulted in turnovers? more specifically.. Brett Peake and Ibbotson?
You are completely blinkered because from Day 1 this year you have said get rid of Schammer and you are blinkered for your own gain, unable to see the truth.
See Memories that's crap.
he made one error as far as I can tell and it did cost us a goal
I agree , Scham bleeds purple and is a new improved Macca. Worth persisting with.
The Dees winning today might have an upside for us. They wont get first hit at knockers if the toast slip under them.
Too many nicknames nowadays. Knockers??
dugrene
29 Jun 2008, 22:21
Too many nicknames nowadays. Knockers??
Warnock :thumbsu:
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 22:21
Go read the votes thread, Schammer isn't scoring that highly, even the AFL website doesn't have him in the top 6-7 for Freo. He didn't have a "fantastic" game, it was serviceable. The point remains his clanger which cost us a goal is just part and parcel of who Schammer is. Every week he does something similar if he actually gets his hands on the ball.
Every single week Parker kicked it in to an opposition player that scored a goal he was crucified regardless of his game. Giving cheap, easy goals to the opposition is nearly unforgivable.
And as I said, many players also made erorrs that cost goals. Pavlich, Sandilands and Mayne missed set shots. You can bullshit all you want about how they aren't direct goals for the opposition, but they pretty much are. They give them a lift thinking that the guy should have got the goal. They can change momentum and also, they cost us 5 bloomin points! Overall that cost us 20 points those 4 set shots that were dead set easy.
Warnock :thumbsu:
Ahh.
Good point.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 22:29
And as I said, many players also made erorrs that cost goals. Pavlich, Sandilands and Mayne missed set shots. You can bullshit all you want about how they aren't direct goals for the opposition, but they pretty much are. They give them a lift thinking that the guy should have got the goal. They can change momentum and also, they cost us 5 bloomin points! Overall that cost us 20 points those 4 set shots that were dead set easy.
I will take our forwards making mistakes over midfielders and backline players every day of the week. Kicking for goal is much harder than field kicking, anyone will tell you this. If you are a midfielder, and you can't accurately kick to a player you shouldn't be played there, if you have no other role you should be delisted. It's quite simple. I don't care if 9 out of Schammers 10 kicks hit their mark, he consistently makes mistakes that cost us goals or momentum. It is a liability that just having picked schammer you are automatically giving the opposition team a 6 or 12 point headstart for the game.
Good players when they have limited options still set the ball up so it is contested, our bad players seem to directly help the opposition.
There is little need for Schammer in his current form, we should look at trading him if it's worthwhile or keep him for POSSIBLE depth, and help him work on his disposal. In my opinion trading him whilst he still has some value might be the best move. With Palmer, Hase, Rich/whoever, Headland, Crowley, Ibbo he isn't in the best 22 when we are fit.
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 22:32
I will take our forwards making mistakes over midfielders and backline players every day of the week. Kicking for goal is much harder than field kicking, anyone will tell you this. If you are a midfielder, and you can't accurately kick to a player you shouldn't be played there, if you have no other role you should be delisted. It's quite simple. I don't care if 9 out of Schammers 10 kicks hit their mark, he consistently makes mistakes that cost us goals or momentum. It is a liability that just having picked schammer you are automatically giving the opposition team a 6 or 12 point headstart for the game.
Good players when they have limited options still set the ball up so it is contested, our bad players seem to directly help the opposition.
There is little need for Schammer in his current form, we should look at trading him if it's worthwhile or keep him for POSSIBLE depth, and help him work on his disposal. In my opinion trading him whilst he still has some value might be the best move. With Palmer, Hase, Rich/whoever, Ibbo he isn't in the best 22 when we are fit.
Kicking a goal, standing still, no one touching you is harder than kicking to a moving target with pressure on you? Thats just absolutely ridiculous. As for picking Schammer is a liability. Thats just a ____ing joke and you know it. Stop trying to hide your agenda you scum supporter. All you have is one agenda and that is tank and trade. Thats it. You want to tank completely and then trade all of our players for picks. Well I'm so glad that you have absolutely nothing to do with our list management. Picking Palmer is more of a liability at this point in time because Schammer is hitting more targets than he is.
Schammer will be a class midfielder towards the end of this year and all throughout next. If this club trades him we can add it to the number of stupid trades already done and have you eat your words, and hopefully your supporter gear, thats if you have any.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 22:39
Kicking a goal, standing still, no one touching you is harder than kicking to a moving target with pressure on you? Thats just absolutely ridiculous. As for picking Schammer is a liability. Thats just a ____ing joke and you know it. Stop trying to hide your agenda you scum supporter. All you have is one agenda and that is tank and trade. Thats it. You want to tank completely and then trade all of our players for picks. Well I'm so glad that you have absolutely nothing to do with our list management. Picking Palmer is more of a liability at this point in time because Schammer is hitting more targets than he is.
Schammer will be a class midfielder towards the end of this year and all throughout next. If this club trades him we can add it to the number of stupid trades already done and have you eat your words, and hopefully your supporter gear, thats if you have any.
Seriously, your complete and utter bias to any Victorian and South Australian born players is obvious. Next you'll be saying Mundy had a great game and we shouldn't trade him.
Mundy and Schammer are the perfect trade bait for us to get some west australians on the team who can actually kick the ball well and won't shirk the contest. I don't think we will trade them this year due to the fact we are getting rid of so many players already, but you never know, we could get a decent offer and it should be taken. Schammer is never going to be in Hasleby's or Palmers class, never.
POOR DISPOSAL breeds POOR DISPOSAL. I'm not surprised Palmer is having trouble when the guys he has passing on their "experience" can't hit a barn door at 5m.
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 22:45
Seriously, your complete and utter bias to any Victorian and South Australian born players is obvious. Next you'll be saying Mundy had a great game and we shouldn't trade him.
Mundy and Schammer are the perfect trade bait for us to get some west australians on the team who can actually kick the ball well and won't shirk the contest. I don't think we will trade them this year due to the fact we are getting rid of so many players already, but you never know, we could get a decent offer and it should be taken. Schammer is never going to be in Hasleby's or Palmers class, never.
POOR DISPOSAL breeds POOR DISPOSAL. I'm not surprised Palmer is having trouble when the guys he has passing on their "experience" can't hit a barn door at 5m.
I'm bias to Victorian players? I'm born and bred South Australian so (no offence) but I dislike every Victorian player there is that doesn't play for Freo.
Speaking of bias. What is wrong with Victorian or SA players? You want just WA players? Thats just stupid. But makes sense coming from you
estibador
29 Jun 2008, 22:48
Ever notice how every team that plays us seems to catch a case of the "cant kick it" ?
Maybe we can give our players pressure a little credit for that?
And even if Schammer is to blame that sounds like a good reason to keep him in.
I don't care if 9 out of Schammers 10 kicks hit their mark, he consistently makes mistakes that cost us goals or momentum.
Don't be silly. Any player with a hypothetical 90% efficiency rate deserves a spot in any team.
Picking Palmer is more of a liability at this point in time because Schammer is hitting more targets than he is.
Don't be silly.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 22:50
Don't be silly. Any player with a hypothetical 90% efficiency rate deserves a spot in any team.
Don't you think there is a difference in the "how they miss" their disposals? Some players have a poor disposal and it ends up in a dead ball. Some have poor disposal and it leads to a goal.
I think we know which group Schammer belongs to.
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 22:52
Don't you think there is a difference in the "how they miss" their disposals? Some players have a poor disposal and it ends up in a dead ball. Some have poor disposal and it leads to a goal.
I think we know which group Schammer belongs to.
Glad you never coached one of my teams, otherwise we'd have none of our best players. You have no idea of Australian Rules Football, absolutely none. Stop pushing your agenda, you've been defeated.
NiGHTFuRY
29 Jun 2008, 22:55
Well, even though they're not A grade (bar Glass), we had 4 KPP's who did the job for us in 2006. That's all you can ask for really.
Next crop coming through is too young to tell how they will turn out. But still happy with Kennedy, McKinley, Brown, Wilkes, Spangher etc.
Anyway, I hope you don't think Rich will lead you to a Premiership, not for a few years yet (that's if you even get Rich).
Reckon you could be right there. He has the promise of a decent AFL mid prospect, but he well could be a developmental player, even with his seemingly large abundance of natural talent.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 22:58
Glad you never coached one of my teams, otherwise we'd have none of our best players. You have no idea of Australian Rules Football, absolutely none. Stop pushing your agenda, you've been defeated.
I always thought you supported a few AFL teams.... makes sense now.
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 23:00
I always thought you supported a few AFL teams.... makes sense now.
How does that make sense? You are nothing more than an idiot :D
Heres a good avatar for you.
http://sherrychandler.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/pink_tank.jpg
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 23:09
How does that make sense? You are nothing more than an idiot :D
Hard to follow is it?
Glad you never coached one of my teams, otherwise we'd have none of our best players. You have no idea of Australian Rules Football
You're glad I never coached one of your AFL teams, teams being plural. I wouldn't make a good coach anyhow, don't have enough charisma.
Hard to follow is it?
You're glad I never coached one of your AFL teams, teams being plural. I wouldn't make a good coach anyhow, don't have enough charisma.
Anyone? :D
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 23:10
Hard to follow is it?
You're glad I never coached one of your AFL teams, teams being plural. I wouldn't make a good coach anyhow, don't have enough charisma.
Australian Rules Football != AFL. Australian Football League = AFL.
Glad we cleared that one up.
Memories
29 Jun 2008, 23:16
Australian Rules Football != AFL. Australian Football League = AFL.
Glad we cleared that one up.
Freudian slip mate, we are onto you now. Just have to figure out your "secret" team that you are keeping from us. Is it Port Power?
Bradesmaen
29 Jun 2008, 23:18
Freudian slip mate, we are onto you now. Just have to figure out your "secret" team that you are keeping from us. Is it Port Power?
Freudian slip? I was talking about myself as a player you ignorant little shit.
NiGHTFuRY
29 Jun 2008, 23:18
Freudian slip mate, we are onto you now. Just have to figure out your "secret" team that you are keeping from us. Is it Port Power?
HIEaIf7lMaM