BRODIE MARTIN

Remove this Banner Ad

AFC979810 said:
You say that Vader has no right to make a conclusion on Martin because he hasn't been given a shot - yet would have Kerridge (who has played 1 game) right down your pecking order? How does that work?

Martin has had opportunities. He played 5 games in a row last year before he got injured (again). His body has shown so far that he cannot stay fit long enough to be consistent for AFL footy. The question also needs to be asked as to whether his development has been stunted. He is 24 and this is his 5th year with us and he has only had 17 afl games. I think the club is making the right decision in playing blokes like Crouch/Brown/Kerridge/Laird because they will benefit more from AFL football.
Click to expand...
Im just tired of people on here putting players like kerridge at the front of people like martin. He has played 1 standout game in the SANFL last week and that is it!!! His year last year was average to say the least at SANFL level. All of the sudden 24 is too old already- a player needs to be played if he is tearing up the SANFL each week as Brodie is. Sturts best again yesterday. What I am saying is that some players get gold passes week in week out and some were not even established SANFL players but were given significant chances in the AFL ie Van Berlo in the SANFL. Ok I may have gone a little over top with my comments earlier but I am frustrated that coaches can ruin players like Brodie- what do they want the guy to do???
 
I actually rate Martin as a player but do wonder if his body is up to the rigours of AFL footy. The problem for Martin is after being on the system for 5 years he hasn't made himself indespensable at the selection table and is now competing with very talented youngsters for one of the final spots in the 22.

He needs to ask for a trade as his time with the AFC is only as a depth player
 
Question... A hypothetical. If todays game happened to be a final would everyone still rather take the 20 year olds with loads of 'potential' or Brodie?
i think you'll find by the time players like kerridge and crouch get to around the 20 game mark where brodie is, his 20 games would have shown a lot more about him being able to play the game at this very time, not 5 years down the track.
i just go back to my point about it being a final? would you rather play the young guys who dont have a lot less games played than brodie or would you take martin and know he can handle himself and actually give a bit to the side, not mentioning his flexibility.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

jumpman23 said:
Question... A hypothetical. If todays game happened to be a final would everyone still rather take the 20 year olds with loads of 'potential' or Brodie?
i think you'll find by the time players like kerridge and crouch get to around the 20 game mark where brodie is, his 20 games would have shown a lot more about him being able to play the game at this very time, not 5 years down the track.
i just go back to my point about it being a final? would you rather play the young guys who dont have a lot less games played than brodie or would you take martin and know he can handle himself and actually give a bit to the side, not mentioning his flexibility.
Click to expand...
Yeh but it's not a final today....
 
jumpman23 said:
Question... A hypothetical. If todays game happened to be a final would everyone still rather take the 20 year olds with loads of 'potential' or Brodie?
i think you'll find by the time players like kerridge and crouch get to around the 20 game mark where brodie is, his 20 games would have shown a lot more about him being able to play the game at this very time, not 5 years down the track.
i just go back to my point about it being a final? would you rather play the young guys who dont have a lot less games played than brodie or would you take martin and know he can handle himself and actually give a bit to the side, not mentioning his flexibility.
Click to expand...

Even if it was a final, they'd take Crouch over Martin. Don't for a second underestimate how good a player Crouch will be, it would be negligent of us not to develop a future multiple club champion over an injury prone player
 
beartoo said:
Is it a question of Crouch or Martin or can both play in the same side?
Click to expand...

Both can play in the side but as people who are plumping for Martin have mentioned, his best spot is wing/hff. He isn't going to replace Sloane on the wing and Hendo, dick jokes aside, seems to have the other wing. If it isn't going to be Hendo then you would think Smith would be ahead of him in that spot.

Then you go to HFF, is he going to get a look in before Douggie? I'd very much doubt it, particularly with the form Douggie is displaying this year. That leaves the other HFF which is controlled by Porps/Pets. People have been very critical of these two but they have come off surgery affected pre seasons which will dictate their form early on. I do agree with some here that Pets would have been better served with a few games in the SANFL but it is what it is now.

People here don't seem to understand the role Pets plays in the team, up until last year if we didn't mark in the forward 50, the ball trampolined back out under no pressure, now we have someone who chases every defender to put pressure on his kick. His role of inferred pressure is key to our ability to keep the ball going back into our forward 50, as he gets a few more games under his belt, he will start kicking some more goals and as such I don't see Marto taking that role off him.

The trouble is Martin is too specialised a player and those roles are taken already. He is a very handy back up for us but at present that is what he is. For him to become more than that then he can't get injured next time he gets a run at AFL level, one more stretch of two or three games followed by a hammy tear, knee or back and his card will be marked as too injury prone at this level
 
CrowCro said:
VB runs like a shetland pony. Is not a talented sportperson , runs like a marathon runner not like a player who plays a ball sport. Just watch him carefully for once . he is one player who has had all the luck on his side.
Click to expand...
So you rate Brodie Martin but don't rate VB, who successive coaches have made the Captain of the AFC. I think you just lost all credibility as a football judge and one who has "an eye for football" right there. Game Over.
 
CrowCro said:
sando was an average player that slotted well into a good Cats team. im not big on avverage players becoming good coaches. A hard tryer but was not a talented reader of the game. The same goes for Doc Clarke. Could do nothing but tap, could not take a contested mark or even kick a football and we have him coaching our squad.
Click to expand...
Another example of your poor judgement. Average players make up the majority of AFL coaches, because they had to learn what worked and what didn't - and they had to do it the hard way. Elite players usually make poor coaches, because it all came easily to them and they are frequently unable to communicate what they need to because they can't understand why others can't achieve what they found so easy. Leigh Matthews is an obvious exception to this rule, but he is overwhelmed by the number of coaches who do fit this mould.
 
jumpman23 said:
Question... A hypothetical. If todays game happened to be a final would everyone still rather take the 20 year olds with loads of 'potential' or Brodie?
i think you'll find by the time players like kerridge and crouch get to around the 20 game mark where brodie is, his 20 games would have shown a lot more about him being able to play the game at this very time, not 5 years down the track.
i just go back to my point about it being a final? would you rather play the young guys who dont have a lot less games played than brodie or would you take martin and know he can handle himself and actually give a bit to the side, not mentioning his flexibility.
Click to expand...
Let's be clear about this - Kerridge has not been selected at Martin's expense. Kerridge has been selected because he plays a similar game style to VB, who is MIA due to injury. If VB weren't injured, then Kerridge may not have been the player selected. That said - I doubt Martin's name even came up at the selection meeting on Wednesday night.

Martin is probably competing against Lyons. Lyons can match Martin run for run in the SANFL and is 3 years younger, with a potential upside that Martin can't go close to matching. At 24 years of age, Martin is a mature footballer with little or no scope for further improvement. He is what he is, for better or for worse. Lyons is as good as Martin, with considerable scope for improvement as he continues to develop. On that basis alone, I'd go with Lyons over Martin.
 
CrowCro said:
sando was an average player that slotted well into a good Cats team. im not big on avverage players becoming good coaches. A hard tryer but was not a talented reader of the game. The same goes for Doc Clarke. Could do nothing but tap, could not take a contested mark or even kick a football and we have him coaching our squad.
Click to expand...



This topic is worth a thread I think.
 
Elite Crow said:
That's crap. Sando played what 200 games? The Cats weren't the powerhouse they are now when he was playing. And why do you need to be a good player to be a good coach? It's irrelevant as long as they can coach. Plenty of champion players have been s**t coaches.
Click to expand...


You're right in saying that there's plenty of example on both ends to disprove the theory, ie -ordinary players who have made great coaches, great players who have made ordinary coaches, and everything else in between - but I think the topic of a mercurial mind in the coaches box is one worth discussing further.

Some players have mercurial footy minds and can pass that knowledge on, but for other reasons, don't turn out to be great players themselves. Other players don't have mercurial minds and make poor coaches, yet some of those have been champion players who did it all on instinct.

I remember Wayne Carey saying once that he didn't class himself as a great student of the game, and that coaching others wasn't something that came naturally to him. I reckon Darren Jarman was in this boat too. Now, you'd be hard pressed to find two smarter, more naturally gifted footballers than those two.

Great coaches have mercurial minds, usually have a good dose of player empathy, and also know that ones size doesn't fit all.

Are there any mercurial minds in our coaches box? It's worth debating.

Mods - if you want to move this into its own thread, feel free.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Slippery Pete said:
This topic is worth a thread I think.
Click to expand...

The fact that CrowCro's ramblings are nonsensical?

Sanders correctly proved that average players can be good coaches (Kevin Sheedy/Mick Malthouse/Alistar Clarkson/Ross Lyon).

Sidenote - Why the hell are people bringing up Doc Clarke as a bad ruck coach? If he is such a liability as a ruck coach - where was this concern in 2012 when Jacobs had a break out year and was in All Australian form. It is the same stupid uneducated bullshit that happened on this board in 2011 posters blaming campo for our midfield. Surprisingly those same posters didn't utter a word about campo in 2012.
 
Slippery Pete said:
Great coaches have mercurial minds, usually have a good dose of player empathy, and also know that ones size doesn't fit all.

Are there any mercurial minds in our coaches box? It's worth debating.

Mods - if you want to move this into its own thread, feel free.
Click to expand...
Bailey out of the match day coaching box is a huge loss.

Campo & Clarke don't come across as mercurial...
 
AFC979810 said:
The fact that CrowCro's ramblings are nonsensical?

Sanders correctly proved that average players can be good coaches (Kevin Sheedy/Mick Malthouse/Alistar Clarkson/Ross Lyon).

Sidenote - Why the hell are people bringing up Doc Clarke as a bad ruck coach? If he is such a liability as a ruck coach - where was this concern in 2012 when Jacobs had a break out year and was in All Australian form. It is the same stupid uneducated bullshit that happened on this board in 2011 posters blaming campo for our midfield. Surprisingly those same posters didn't utter a word about campo in 2012.
Click to expand...
My point is more if I were appointing a ruck coach- i would look at the attributes that coach had as a player. I think its hard to coach a skill set that you did not possess yourself- especially a specialist coach. ie how can you teach a guy to kick or mark when you couldn''t do those things well yourself. I know who I'd rather have.

As far as coaches go- some are in the right place at the right time and reap the benefits of talented players ie anyone could coach geelong, Hawthorn or Collingwood at the moment. I think the ones that copme to the fore are ones like Hinkley so far- you can see a great difference in their game.
 
Yes I would select Martin over VB. Speed, lateral movement, movement in traffic, kicking, ball carrying ability, football smarts- Matin has it over VB in all these areas. Where VB may have the upper hand is endurance and leadership by voice- and the fotunate thing was that Adelaide was trying to essemble a team of leaders under Craigy. I would prefer footballers over a team of leaders anytime. You only need a few leaders leading a good team of players and in my opinion the best leaders are the ones who let their football do the talking.

As for Lyons he is not a Martin type ball carrier . He is more in the mould of crouch or Thompson. Lacks the leg speed to be a ball carrier
 
CrowCro said:
My point is more if I were appointing a ruck coach- i would look at the attributes that coach had as a player. I think its hard to coach a skill set that you did not possess yourself- especially a specialist coach. ie how can you teach a guy to kick or mark when you couldn''t do those things well yourself. I know who I'd rather have.

As far as coaches go- some are in the right place at the right time and reap the benefits of talented players ie anyone could coach geelong, Hawthorn or Collingwood at the moment. I think the ones that copme to the fore are ones like Hinkley so far- you can see a great difference in their game.
Click to expand...

Well then I am very glad that you aren't appointing our coaches. So your whole coaching criteria is how good of a player the candidate is? Laughable. Even if we go with your ridiculous thought process - I would say his 258 games as a ruckman would put him in a good position to be a coach.

I am not saying Clarke is a good coach. I am not saying he is a bad coach. I am saying I have no bloody idea. I have the same info as you (sweet FA).

The thing that frustrates me is that posters such as yourself set out to vilify these assistant coaches when certain players or groups don't perform. Its 100% crap.
 
AFC979810 said:
Well then I am very glad that you aren't appointing our coaches. So your whole coaching criteria is how good of a player the candidate is? Laughable. Even if we go with your ridiculous thought process - I would say his 258 games as a ruckman would put him in a good position to be a coach.

I am not saying Clarke is a good coach. I am not saying he is a bad coach. I am saying I have no bloody idea. I have the same info as you (sweet FA).

The thing that frustrates me is that posters such as yourself set out to vilify these assistant coaches when certain players or groups don't perform. Its 100% crap.
Click to expand...
Whilst I am largely in agreement, there is something going on with our ruckmen. There is compelling evidence that ruckmen do not thrive at the afc.
 
Allefgib said:
Until they move to other clubs. ..

Having said that I think trading ruckmen before 26 could always bite you
Click to expand...

It's one of those things where people look at how a ruckman performs after he leaves to determine how well we've done out of a trade - and foolishly, I think.

Maric wasn't going to get a go here (until this year, perhaps?) and would have sat in the SANFL stagnating. We ended up getting Lynch for him. Does the fact that he went on to play some excellent football last year really mean anything to us? I mean, it's obviously a good thing for Richmond, and perhaps if we were competing with them for a premiership it would have been meaningful, but otherwise his form over there doesn't change the effect his trading had on us.

In the end we just traded one player who didn't quite fit into our structure, for another player with the same problem in Lynch :p
 
cmndstab said:
It's one of those things where people look at how a ruckman performs after he leaves to determine how well we've done out of a trade - and foolishly, I think.

Maric wasn't going to get a go here (until this year, perhaps?) and would have sat in the SANFL stagnating. We ended up getting Lynch for him. Does the fact that he went on to play some excellent football last year really mean anything to us? I mean, it's obviously a good thing for Richmond, and perhaps if we were competing with them for a premiership it would have been meaningful, but otherwise his form over there doesn't change the effect his trading had on us.

In the end we just traded one player who didn't quite fit into our structure, for another player with the same problem in Lynch :p
Click to expand...

My comment is not about maric specifically mate. Rucks often look s**t til post 25
 
AFC979810 said:
Sidenote - Why the hell are people bringing up Doc Clarke as a bad ruck coach? If he is such a liability as a ruck coach - where was this concern in 2012 when Jacobs had a break out year and was in All Australian form.
Click to expand...
Oh, no one is criticising Carlton's ruck coach. There is no doubt Clarke inherited a future quality ruckman who had much of his development done already.

The concern is that as the Carlton influence wanes and the Doc Clarke influence increases that the results are worsening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BACCS
Toast Brodie Smith 250
2
Replies
43
Views
1K
Eagleboy2011
Eagleboy2011

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top