How much longer can Priddis be debated?

[Pottering]

Then how does he get so many tackles if he is first to the ball?
Does he run a lot of players down?

No, he gets a lot o tackles because he's in the thick of the action and he's got a good tackling technique. There's a couple of others who I won't mention who's tackle technique is to basically hang out an arm and watch them sail by por another who only ever attempts a tackle when an opposition players runs headlong into him.

Plus Priddis is a master of freeing his arms when he's tackled and dishing off as well as locking it in when there's nothing on but not giving away a free for holding the ball.

 

[RookiePick]

Maybe a video of another slow, inside mids game could be useful as a reference either way. How does Kennedy or Mitchell go when they are named in their sides best?

 

[Pottering]

Two things - one - show me an inside mid at a top 4 team who isnt a good disposer of the ball


And two - pick a game

You are grasping at straws. It's not what others do at other clubs, it's what can do with what we have. You seem to part of a clique that thinks because Priddis doesn't have the kicking skills of Gary Ablett or the explosiveness of Dangerfield then he's a liability and we need a combination of Ablett/Pendlebury/Dangerfireld/Cotchin/JP Kennedy.

As for an inside mid at a top 4 team who isnt a good disposer of the ball I notice that Nat Fyfe is out for a couple of weeks and Brad Sewell is back for the Hawks, two guys whose kicking isn't their strong suit.

Until someone comes along who can first of all get the ball in congestion and then deliver it lace out then Priddis keeps the job, it's up to others to move him on by outperforming him in his role and nobody has come within cooee of that in recent times.

 

[Godfather32]

No, he gets a lot o tackles because he's in the thick of the action and he's got a good tackling technique. There's a couple of others who I won't mention who's tackle technique is to basically hang out an arm and watch them sail by por another who only ever attempts a tackle when an opposition players runs headlong into him.

Plus Priddis is a master of freeing his arms when he's tackled and dishing off as well as locking it in when there's nothing on but not giving away a free for holding the ball.

I think I've seen him do this once this season...

 

[kranky al]

You are grasping at straws. It's not what others do at other clubs, it's what can do with what we have. You seem to part of a clique that thinks because Priddis doesn't have the kicking skills of Gary Ablett or the explosiveness of Dangerfield then he's a liability and we need a combination of Ablett/Pendlebury/Dangerfireld/Cotchin/JP Kennedy.

As for an inside mid at a top 4 team who isnt a good disposer of the ball I notice that Nat Fyfe is out for a couple of weeks and Brad Sewell is back for the Hawks, two guys whose kicking isn't their strong suit.

Until someone comes along who can first of all get the ball in congestion and then deliver it lace out then Priddis keeps the job, it's up to others to move him on by outperforming him in his ro;le and nobody has com,e wiythimn cooee of that in recent times.

Silly example - fyfe is absolutely immense overhead and has pace and evasive skills second to none

I cant believe you actually used him as an example - even though his de isnt fantastic - he hurts you on the scoreboard - you know - that bloody great thing that they have on each side of the ground that tells you if you have won or not?

Fyfe is a pure example of a mid who has one flaw - his disposal could be better - priddis is the textbook example of the opposite





So how about selecting a game?

 

[Smotie]

You are grasping at straws. It's not what others do at other clubs, it's what can do with what we have. You seem to part of a clique that thinks because Priddis doesn't have the kicking skills of Gary Ablett or the explosiveness of Dangerfield then he's a liability and we need a combination of Ablett/Pendlebury/Dangerfireld/Cotchin/JP Kennedy.

As for an inside mid at a top 4 team who isnt a good disposer of the ball I notice that Nat Fyfe is out for a couple of weeks and Brad Sewell is back for the Hawks, two guys whose kicking isn't their strong suit.

Until someone comes along who can first of all get the ball in congestion and then deliver it lace out then Priddis keeps the job, it's up to others to move him on by outperforming him in his ro;le and nobody has com,e wiythimn cooee of that in recent times.

Yes a combination of Judd/Cousins/Kerr would be nice.

You freely admit his kicking is an issue or is not up to scratch. You quote stats and yet ignore the facts presented in the video. Coupled with the explanation of how his possessions amounted to 2 behinds for the whole game. And in the second quarter his disposal count was 3 and we had our best quarter for the game kicking 6 goals.

Stats are useless. I can have 40 hand balls a game at 90% DE simply by playing off half back and hand balling to team mates all the time.
We need an inside mid that can hurt the opposition, not butcher his possessions or give dappy little s**t hand balls or s**t kicks even when he isn't under pressure.
Why do you not understand any of this.

 

[Smotie]

No, he gets a lot o tackles because he's in the thick of the action and he's got a good tackling technique. There's a couple of others who I won't mention who's tackle technique is to basically hang out an arm and watch them sail by por another who only ever attempts a tackle when an opposition players runs headlong into him.

Plus Priddis is a master of freeing his arms when he's tackled and dishing off as well as locking it in when there's nothing on but not giving away a free for holding the ball.

He has to be, he can't run fast enough or evade and constantly gets tackled.

 

[paran]

Man, the ignore function makes for some really weird reading here! I thought there be a notice or something saying there's a blocked/ignored post.

Anyway, it's pretty sad and telling that there are those that can't even admit that Ploddus was terrible on the weekend - rushed kicks, blind hand passes, bad composure on top of the terrible open field kicking.

 

[The Dodger]

No, he gets a lot o tackles because he's in the thick of the action and he's got a good tackling technique. There's a couple of others who I won't mention who's tackle technique is to basically hang out an arm and watch them sail by por another who only ever attempts a tackle when an opposition players runs headlong into him.

Plus Priddis is a master of freeing his arms when he's tackled and dishing off as well as locking it in when there's nothing on but not giving away a free for holding the ball.

but that answers your question does it?
So he can get tackles as well as get the footy. Now he doesn't tackle when he has the footy so that would mean he is second to it in some circumstances wouldn't it?
He is a good tackler in close but after that his defensive game falls off a cliff.

 

[eaglesfan99]

Silly example - fyfe is absolutely immense overhead and has pace and evasive skills second to none

I cant believe you actually used him as an example - even though his de isnt fantastic - he hurts you on the scoreboard - you know - that bloody great thing that they have on each side of the ground that tells you if you have won or not?

Fyfe is a pure example of a mid who has one flaw - his disposal could be better - priddis is the textbook example of the opposite





So how about selecting a game?

"Show me a mid who has bad disposal in a top 4 team" Gets shown a mid. "Nope that's unfair"

 

[kranky al]

"Show me a mid who has bad disposal in a top 4 team" Gets shown a mid. "Nope that's unfair"

Or another way of putting it would be - gets shown the second best midfielder in the competition who despite having question marks over his disposal - has a lot better disposal than priddis.

Although you are 100% correct i did frame my initial assertion badly. I hope my initial assertion doesnt confuse you as to who is the better midfielder.

 

[winnyblues]

I'msorry I was in Priddis's corner but after last week game, man we would be better off without him. Slow, s**t kick and yeah he might get inside ball but * hes useless with his disposal

 

[Gizza]

It might comfort you to say all I do is talk stats, but that's your way of avoiding the truth. I use the stats to show that people like kranky al, who claim Priddis' "only attribute is getting first hands on the footy", are categorically wrong. He is clearly one the league's best tacklers and that can be confirmed by both direct observation and by the numbers.

See, this right here. You're using the word 'best' when it's not really accurate. 99% of all Priddis' tackles come from in close congested type footy and the vast majority at best result in a secondary bounce. Or perhaps even a third or fourth bounce. You could have 10 great Priddis tackles resulting in 10 consecutive bounces, but if we end up losing the clearance the net result would be 10 absolutely worthless Priddis tackles. When tackles actually mean something Priddis is as good as a post in the ground.

 

[Gizza]

You seem to part of a clique that thinks because Priddis doesn't have the kicking skills of Gary Ablett or the explosiveness of Dangerfield then he's a liability and we need a combination of Ablett/Pendlebury/Dangerfireld/Cotchin/JP Kennedy.

Nobody is saying that. We're saying he is a liability because he costs us probably on average 3-4 goals a game with his poor disposal and witches hat impersonations.

 

[Daveismad]

What priddis does well is get the ball and most times gets it to team mate

People here bagging priddis actually don't know the game very well ...sorry but half of we big footy have never played ...well it appears like they have never played

If priddis has it .....what does that mean? Think about for second or two?

What it means the opposition doesn't have it. If priddis wasn't in our team we would get destroyed in the contested ball and they would be spreading quickly. Because priddis gets it a out it keeps the opposition honest ...they just can't run forward or "cheat" as I call it.

There is 3 simple elements to footy


We have it
They have it
It's in dispute

I would suggest priddis is good at two of those getting it and disputed ball

Yeah sure he has some flaws, who doesn't to be honest but I think he's been a great player and will continue to get a game because he wins contested ball which stops the opposition getting it ....it's a very simple footy philosophy you have to remember.

 

[kranky al]

What priddis does well is get the ball and most times gets it to team mate

People here bagging priddis actually don't know the game very well ...sorry but half of we big footy have never played ...well it appears like they have never played

If priddis has it .....what does that mean? Think about for second or two?

What it means the opposition doesn't have it. If priddis wasn't in our team we would get destroyed in the contested ball and they would be spreading quickly. Because priddis gets it a out it keeps the opposition honest ...they just can't run forward or "cheat" as I call it.

There is 3 simple elements to footy


We have it
They have it
It's in dispute

I would suggest priddis is good at two of those getting it and disputed ball

Yeah sure he has some flaws, who doesn't to be honest but I think he's been a great player and will continue to get a game because he wins contested ball which stops the opposition getting it ....it's a very simple footy philosophy you have to remember.

Priddis "has it" for around 2 minutes a game.


He stops them from scoring for 2 minutes a game - what does he do with the other 78 minutes aside from trudge 20m behind the play after they have run around him? He sure isnt stopping anyone then is he - not even hindering them.



Even if we were awarded points for having possession - we would get two points off him.

But you dont - you get awarded points for kicking goals and behinds.

 

[Goosecat]

What priddis does well is get the ball and most times gets it to team mate

People here bagging priddis actually don't know the game very well ...sorry but half of we big footy have never played ...well it appears like they have never played

If priddis has it .....what does that mean? Think about for second or two?

What it means the opposition doesn't have it. If priddis wasn't in our team we would get destroyed in the contested ball and they would be spreading quickly. Because priddis gets it a out it keeps the opposition honest ...they just can't run forward or "cheat" as I call it.

There is 3 simple elements to footy


We have it
They have it
It's in dispute

I would suggest priddis is good at two of those getting it and disputed ball

Yeah sure he has some flaws, who doesn't to be honest but I think he's been a great player and will continue to get a game because he wins contested ball which stops the opposition getting it ....it's a very simple footy philosophy you have to remember.

.
It's a waste of time mate

 

[Eagle87]

.
It's a waste of time mate

Agreed Goosecat.

You can't see past a bloke who works hard and gets the most out of himself playing in a position the better teams fill with more well rounded footballers.

Because of that blind spot (and you're far from alone) it's a waste of time arguing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tazmania]

A friend of mine is a Scout here in W.A for a Melbourne based team and he fancies himself as a bit of a coach and tells the story of Simon Black during the 2003 Grand Final in which he won the Norm Smith Medal, which Leigh Matthews tells.

Apparently Simon had the ball in his possession for a total of - 37 seconds for the entire game. So what was he doing for the other 1hr, 59mins and 23 seconds? Pressure acts, defending etc etc etc. The point being that what you do when you don't have the ball is as important as when you do have the ball.

 

[ZergMinion]

A friend of mine is a Scout here in W.A for a Melbourne based team and he fancies himself as a bit of a coach and tells the story of Simon Black during the 2003 Grand Final in which he won the Norm Smith Medal, which Leigh Matthews tells.

Apparently Simon had the ball in his possession for a total of - 37 seconds for the entire game. So what was he doing for the other 1hr, 59mins and 23 seconds? Pressure acts, defending etc etc etc. The point being that what you do when you don't have the ball is as important as when you do have the ball.

39 possessions in 37 seconds is a good effort. 9 tackles too. Doesn't Priddis lead the team for pressure acts this season?

 

[paran]

39 possessions in 37 seconds is a good effort. 9 tackles too. Doesn't Priddis lead the team for pressure acts this season?

Like letting Chappy scoot away from him and acting like a revolving door for Heppell? Acting like he's moving into the left hand lane when opposition is running near him with the ball? Honestly his defence in open play is beyond pathetic and effectively leaves us a man down.

 

[Goosecat]

Agreed Goosecat.

You can't see past a bloke who works hard and gets the most out of himself playing in a position the better teams fill with more well rounded footballers.

Because of that blind spot (and you're far from alone) it's a waste of time arguing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No you still haven't quite got me pegged. Everyone knows his weaknesses. Including the player and coaching group. They also balance that against the strengths. Good coaches do.
Until someone else sticks up their hand and a least shows they can dominate WAFL and apply some pressure the spot is his. This is not Melbourne. We don't play to lose for picks or award games to wannabes. We build a culture. Repeatedly focussing on negatives is just keyboard heroes P***ing in the wind and loving the taste cause it's theirs
I still say 150 games and club life membership deserves a little more respect. He's not playing juniors!

 

[ZergMinion]

Like letting Chappy scoot away from him and acting like a revolving door for Heppell? Acting like he's moving into the left hand lane when opposition is running near him with the ball? Honestly his defence in open play is beyond pathetic and effectively leaves us a man down.

Have done any objective analysis on this (comparing with other non-tagging midfielders in our team and other teams over several matches), or is this just the feeling you get from watching the games?

 

[Spartan]

Missed the last few pages, good to see this thread still going strong and I'm going to assume that its just been the usual arguements and counter arguements.

Got a question, I've seen the comment "Priddis can't be part of a premiership core midfield" and variations along those lines.

Do we think the Swans (replace Kennedy), Freo (replace Mundy), Cats (replace Selwood) or Hawks (replace Mitchell) couldn't win the flag if we swapped out Priddis?

I think the Cats are the only team that would be really hit given Selwood's general importance to the team however imo the other 3 teams wouldn't really miss a beat.

 

[Eagle87]

No you still haven't quite got me pegged. Everyone knows his weaknesses. Including the player and coaching group. They also balance that against the strengths. Good coaches do.
Until someone else sticks up their hand and a least shows they can dominate WAFL and apply some pressure the spot is his. This is not Melbourne. We don't play to lose for picks or award games to wannabes. We build a culture. Repeatedly focussing on negatives is just keyboard heroes P***ing in the wind and loving the taste cause it's theirs
I still say 150 games and club life membership deserves a little more respect. He's not playing juniors!

The last paragraph is neither here not there IMO. Respect is earned and he gets some for turning up and giving his best. But IMO he's played in the worst 7 season period in our clubs history. And in any other period of similar length the players in his position were better and he likely wouldn't have played much. That places some discount on the value of said games.

I'm not advocating losing for picks. I am advocating building a midfield along principles that allow you to win a flag. A player with his flaws, in his role, is a handicap against the best sides IMO.

Playing him cos he's the best of a bad bunch could equally be seen as perpetuating mediocrity rather than continually looking for better.

I'm sure we won't agree on this. I just reckon we need to move past him and build a midfield that has more potency, more ability to damage when we have the ball.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk