View Full Version : Lloyd was playing upfield to develop Gumby and Neagle
ManWithNoName
19 Apr 2009, 20:03
So why the hell is he STILL playing this rubbish upfield role. He's clearly so much better playing out of the goalsquare. He plays better footy, we kick more goals, we look more threatening. Can anyone explain why it took until the 4th quarter for him to play out of the square?
kelvin_sheedy
19 Apr 2009, 20:06
Knights is playing Russian Roulette with the side and no one really cares because we are in development.
It's a shame that our winning culture and pride are disappearing right in front of us.
Before we know it we'll be Richmond and crying out for our 10th new coach in 2020 after we've made mistake after mistake.
danielgb123
19 Apr 2009, 20:08
Because Matthew Knights still believes in the young guys. Even though we have to rely on the midfielders to kick the goals at the end of the day ;)
Liked that post better the first time I saw it Kelvin
kelvin_sheedy
19 Apr 2009, 20:16
Liked that post better the first time I saw it Kelvin
It's getting to me. I'm repeating myself because we have fallen into that Carlton/Richmond trap of playing too many kids.
Most topics on here can be answered with that reply because they all come down to too much experimentation at the moment.
I'm peeved that this is a game we should have won and could have if we just made a few tweaks. To lose to 10.9 with 42 inside 50's is a joke. We got out coached.
It's not as if Knighter has just suddenly decided to play the kids. He's always said he was gonna play them. And I'd rather Darcy play than say NLM...
lloyd has played closer to home the last two matches...
danielgb123
19 Apr 2009, 20:21
It's not as if Knighter has just suddenly decided to play the kids. He's always said he was gonna play them. And I'd rather Darcy play than say NLM...
Just worked out who NLM is, ROFL!
Yeah, I would even play Daniher over NLM, at least he is young!
ManWithNoName
19 Apr 2009, 20:22
It's not as if Knighter has just suddenly decided to play the kids. He's always said he was gonna play them. And I'd rather Darcy play than say NLM...
What have Darcy and NLM got to do with Lloyd playing upfield?
What have Darcy and NLM got to do with Lloyd playing upfield?
Nothing ;)
kelvin_sheedy
19 Apr 2009, 20:29
It's not as if Knighter has just suddenly decided to play the kids. He's always said he was gonna play them. And I'd rather Darcy play than say NLM...
He has never thrown em to the wolves like he is this year. He started last year by picking a more experienced side with a few kids sprinkled through. Injuries took their toll and then he had no choice.
Now he seems to be just shoving them all in and hoping for the best.
The balance is not right and it will never be right when you carry two duds like Nash and Dyson. NLM should play but in front of Quinn and not Daniher as they aren't playing for the same position. We forget that NLM's best form is a running defender or forward.
We are currently walking the tight rope of another 100 point mauling like last year if we aren't careful.
Well pretty much the only players we can replace Nash and Dyson are the kids. Sad but true. Sure once two of Welsh, Reimers & Prismall get fit Dyson will be out, and Nash was only in cause Hocking was out anyway wasn't he?
Anyway perhaps you should make this into a new topic? As I don't think MWNN is enjoying us hijacking his topic...:p
Ben the Gooner
19 Apr 2009, 20:45
To be fair though, kelvin, would you rather Darcy and Tayte (and Hurley for that matter) be thrown to the wolves this year with Fletch floating around and helping out, or next year (or 2011) when there's no Fletch to help out?
kelvin_sheedy
19 Apr 2009, 20:46
Yep, sorry for hijacking.
I'll leave it until I put it all in my ramblings thread once I see the whole game.
EssendonPride
19 Apr 2009, 20:47
It's getting to me. I'm repeating myself because we have fallen into that Carlton/Richmond trap of playing too many kids.
Most topics on here can be answered with that reply because they all come down to too much experimentation at the moment.
I'm peeved that this is a game we should have won and could have if we just made a few tweaks. To lose to 10.9 with 42 inside 50's is a joke. We got out coached.
Which experienced players would have come in and made the difference?
Knights doesn't have a whole lot of options.
You want Monfries, Dyson and Nash out this week, and want to bring in Jetta and Houli??
You've probably called for McPhee and Lucas to be dropped at times this year knowing you.
Knights is playing too many kids, yet you want to drop experienced players, for .... more kids?
You've given up havn't you. Used to actually be decent value at times.