Past Andrew Raines (2009-2014)

Remove this Banner Ad

blynd_freddie said:
Yeah I'd also like to know where you have located this.
I read Raines currently [2013 season] obtains 40% of his possessions in a contest and also [as of Rnd6 2013] averages 2.5 clearances, with 4 against Adelaide. (but don't have centre attended/won clearance numbers)
Click to expand...

Going on 2012 as he's only played a few games this season:

In Raines' 19 games, there were 571 centre square bounces at an average of 30.05 per game. It's recorded that he attended the 2nd most centre square bounces for the Brisbane Lions in 2012; let's call it at the lower end of 80% at an average of 24 per game.

Raines only won 43 clearances of any type for the season, some were around the ground. Even with the benefit of the doubt saying he won 2 per game from 24 centre square "contests", it a poultry win % of just over 8%.
 
Can someone please explain what they think Voss is doing with Raines? Left out of the season opener, back in for Round 2, dropped for the game against Sydney (Round 6.) after a really strong game against Melbourne and now straight back into the Seniors for Round 7. Voss seems to be making some random and not very intelligent decisions in relation to Raines.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

3KZ is Football said:
Can someone please explain what they think Voss is doing with Raines? Left out of the season opener, back in for Round 2, dropped for the game against Sydney (Round 6.) after a really strong game against Melbourne and now straight back into the Seniors for Round 7. Voss seems to be making some random and not very intelligent decisions in relation to Raines.
Click to expand...

I would say he was left out of the Sydney game because they wanted to bring in an extra tall forward to "stretch" the swans defense and he was the one that got dropped. Now it looks like they are going for more mid's in the rotation so he gets the call back up.

I think his inability to play in more positions other then as an onballer/tagger don't work in his favor either, unlike a Lester per-se who has the ability to go through the midfield or as a 3rd-tall in the front or back half.
 
Sanchez365 said:
I would say he was left out of the Sydney game because they wanted to bring in an extra tall forward to "stretch" the swans defense and he was the one that got dropped. Now it looks like they are going for more mid's in the rotation so he gets the call back up.
Click to expand...

Whatever the strategy was against the Swans ... it didn't work. Perhaps if they wanted to bring in an extra tall forward they might have looked at dropping a small run with backman who is well out of form and retaining Raines, who can perfrom that role and is in form.

Sanchez365 said:
I think his inability to play in more positions other then as an onballer/tagger don't work in his favor either, unlike a Lester per-se who has the ability to go through the midfield or as a 3rd-tall in the front or back half.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is just plain silly. Perhaps we should have dropped Redden, Rockliff or Moloney because they are basically onballers who have a limited ability to play in many other postions. Also you seem to have completely missed the fact that Raines is more than capable of playing on a half back flank, wing and in midfield rotations. He is one of the best endurance athletes in the team, with a demonstrated willingness to run and run against the competition's elite midfielders.

By way of comparison, on form, who do you think has had more to offer our team this year, Andrew Raines or Ash McGrath? Then try and explain why Raines was dropped while McGrath was retained for the Sydney game.

Postscript:
Against Melbourne McGrath had a season high 23 Disposals and against Sydney 11 Disposals (6 Kicks/ 5 Handballs). His disposal tally this year has been 8, 6, 12, 0, 23 and 11, which are very poor numbers, yet he has retained his place in the Seniors for every game.

Against Melbourne (before being dropped) Raines had 20 Disposals (8 Kicks / 12Handballs) and as a tagger, shut down Nathan Jones. As Dylan12 pointed out, Mark Neeld noticed how well Raines did (Mark Neeld),

"What I thought was particularly good for the Lions and not so good for us was [Andrew] Raines' job on Nathan Jones was particularly good...Raines had a really, really good game on Nathan, so you add those two things together, it doesn't fall in our favour."
Click to expand...

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/afl/afl-news/brisbane-makes-a-point-20130428-2imtn.html#ixzz2SqXXkq5x

It is a complete puzzle how Vossie missed this. Either that or he is simply "overcooking" things at the selection table. Happy to see he has got it right this week by having Raines back in the Seniors, which is where he should stay.
 
3KZ is Football said:
Whatever the strategy was against the Swans ... it didn't work. Perhaps if they wanted to bring in an extra tall forward they might have looked at dropping a small run with backman who is well out of form and retaining Raines, who can perfrom that role and is in form.
Click to expand...

Yes it does seem that the plan failed, which is why I'm not surprised to see him included again this week. However it seemed the plan was to use Lester/Adcock in defensive roles in the midfield instead of Raines so I can at least see what the coaching staff were trying to do.

3KZ is Football said:
Sorry, but this is just plain silly. Perhaps we should have dropped Redden, Rockliff or Moloney because they are basically onballers who have a limited ability to play in many other postions. Also you seem to have completely missed the fact that Raines is more than capable of playing on a half back flank, wing and in midfield rotations. He is one of the best endurance athletes in the team, with a demonstrated willingness to run and run against the competition's elite midfielders.
Click to expand...

I would not be surprised to see any of those three you mentioned get dropped if we had a set out plan to cover their losses. For example if Moloney got dropped for Black it would make sense because they fill the same role in the midfield rotation.

As for Raines versatility I feel like you are exaggerating his abilities. He is definitely one of the best endurance runners in our team, but his ability to play as an attacking or defensive HBF would (in my eyes at least) be behind Adcock/Golby/Docherty/Yeo/McGrath/Harwood. I seem to recall him struggling against midfielders when they have dropped forward in the past, but I am not 100% certain of that.

3KZ is Football said:
By way of comparison, on form, who do you think has had more to offer our team this year, Andrew Raines or Ash McGrath? Then try and explain why Raines was dropped while McGrath was retained for the Sydney game.
Click to expand...

I think it seems pretty clear so far this season that there is a relative emphasis on structure when it comes to selecting out team each week. As for why McGrath was retained and Raines dropped my only guess is that they felt they could cover Raines loss with Adcock/Lester while they didn't feel like they had a replacement for McGrath.

I'm not trying to say Raines doesn't deserve his spot in the team or he is a spud or anything like that. I just don't see the outrage on him getting dropped. His defensive tagging is great, but he managed to shut down Melbourne's only decent midfielder when our entire midfield unit was destroying them. Personally I think a player such as Lester or Adcock playing a run with role could have had a similar impact. Perhaps Jones would have gotten a few more touches, but maybe a Lester/Adcock would have gotten 30 possessions instead of 20. To me that is the angle that I saw the coaches coming from.

As for Raines I'll keep an close eye on him this week and try to see what you see in him 3KZ.
 
Sanchez365 said:
As for Raines versatility I feel like you are exaggerating his abilities. He is definitely one of the best endurance runners in our team, but his ability to play as an attacking or defensive HBF would (in my eyes at least) be behind Adcock/Golby/Docherty/Yeo/McGrath/Harwood. I seem to recall him struggling against midfielders when they have dropped forward in the past, but I am not 100% certain of that.
Click to expand...


• Raines’ finest run-with roles came against some of the 2012 Brownlow Medal fancies in Gary Ablett (in Round 4), Matthew Boyd (Round 13), and Trent Cotchin (in Round 19).
• Raines’ unheralded role was recognised by the Lions’ Match Committee on Club Champion night when he finished =11th – his highest placing since joining the Lions.
• He also received the Marcus Ashcroft Most Professional Player Award and was named in the Queensland Team of the Year for the second successive season.
Click to expand...

http://www.lions.com.au/player-profile/andrew-raines
 
Sanchez365 said:
Are you trying to highlight the fact his greatest use is as a tagger? Or the fact that it briefly mentions he's a HBF even though he hasn't played in that position for 2 seasons?
Click to expand...
All of the above. ;)
 
For those of us who love the fringe players (because they are always the guys who try the hardest) and rigorously defend them when they become whipping boys it does appear that Raines is harshly treated.

I think it isnt about Raines specifically. But more about Voss coaching for list development and Raines rightly or wrongly being the guy who is making room for players the selection panel believe have a greater up-side. I agree that arguments can be made for dropping any one of five or six other players each week. I dont want to put a knock on Raines as he definitely gets the most out of his ability and gives his all every time he puts on the jumper. However he is unique in that his disposal efficiency decrease in line with the amount of time he has to decide what to do with the ball.

I guess in the longer term the coaching panel would prefer to have a player who can do a tagging job and be relied on to link up when we have the ball. I see Voss trying Redden, Beams, Lester and Adcock in this type of role. Even allowing for this approach I believe that Raines can make a very valuable contribution over the next few years to team depth through his ability to do a specific task against specific teams. Hopefully he is getting some feedback on his on-going value to the group from the coaching staff.
 
Great game against West Coast Andrew Raines! In the 5 games prior to the Brisbane game, West Coast's Luke Shuey had averaged 26.6 disposals, with Raines on him yesterday he had just 12 disposals. Raines himself picked up 16 disposals and provided great run and rebound. I notice he was listed in the best players on the AFL website and I had him in my best for the day.

While he is in this sort of touch, I wonder if he can hold his place in the seniors?
Over to you now Vossie.:confused:
 
In a performance that many may have missed, Raines did a fanatstic job on Stanton today. Not only did he nullify Stanton, but he kicked a nice goal himself. A gritty performance!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The best and worst of Raines, I thought.

Excellent tagging effort with a couple of really bad errors as well as hesitant ball movement.

They seem to be using him only on outside running mids and he's quite effective defensively on them. But it means he's getting the ball more in the open where his kicking and decision making efficiencies are more exposed.
 
Though Raines did a good shut down job. However at the same time I noticed on a few occasions he is clearly not the same level as the other mids. Tends to bomb it long into forward 50 and hd play up as well. Has a bit if tunnel vision with ball in hand as well.
 
Kerry OT said:
Though Raines did a good shut down job. However at the same time I noticed on a few occasions he is clearly not the same level as the other mids. Tends to bomb it long into forward 50 and hd play up as well. Has a bit if tunnel vision with ball in hand as well.
Click to expand...

Yep - his disposal is really bad and just doesn't have the 'vision' to be an attacking player. As a defensive purely negating player, he has a role in the team. But once he gets it , i'd prefer he handballs to someone running forward
 
Kerry OT said:
Tends to bomb it long into forward 50
Click to expand...

I think part of my issue is that he's really not a long kick. So when he does bomb it into the forward 50, it tends not to be a deep entry which not only favours the defender in the contest but exposes us on rebound before we can reset our defensive structure. Further, to get any sort of distance, he has to kick the ball up which takes all the penetration away from the forward entry again favouring the defender.

It is funny - we need him and he plays a great team oriented role. But he's also a liability. Whether we can better carry him as the side improves (as St Kilda did with Clint Jones) or whether he gets overtaken by a player with fewer weaknesses is the big question.
 
I still see him borderline best 22. I'd like him to be able to go back to a back flank if there isn't a tagging role for him.
 
I actually see rainesy as somebody who can play that defensive foward role, he clearly knows how to find the goals, his limited kicking skills are NOT highlighted as badly as say commming out of defensive 50. and he has that defensive mindset to lock down on a rebounding defender.
 
Grimreepah said:
Pendlebury is the first player this year that Raines has failed to successfully tag.
Click to expand...


Interestingly he's done pretty well on him in the past. It definitely looks like Pendlebury's picked up another gear that he can turn on for a burst. Raines definitely kept him quieter later on, but the damage was already done.
 
Rohan Bewick and Andrew Raines responded to their senior omissions in the best possible fashion by leading the way for the Reserves out on the field. Bewick booted three goals and was listed as best-on-ground, while Raines wasn’t far behind with a sterling job in the midfield.

“They came back (to the Reserves) with the right attitude. They didn’t go outside the boundaries and just played to their strengths,” Harding said. “They were obviously disappointed to be left out of the seniors, but played the way we wanted to, and took the young blokes along for the ride. It was great for their development.

“Raines, in particular, is a very good leader both in voice and through his actions on the field.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top