Preview Changes V Hawks (Cox, Elliott, Ramsay & Thomas in; Schaz, Brown & Reid - gulp! - emergencies)

[TheSierBear]

I would have still preferred Kirby over Mayne. Been consistently better over a longer period. Brings some additional pace to the team as well as some real x-factor.

I reckon it's good having Mayne and Kirby play in the two's. Mayne seems very level-headed, watched one VFL game and Kirby seems the opposite, he lost it in the game I saw. Plus they are similar players in terms of size, they poay a marking forward sort of a role. I know Kirby has greater upside, but at the end of the day Mayne has played 175 more games at AFL level and kicked considerably more goals. So Mayne mentoring/coaching/role model for Kirby is a good thing in the VFL for now.

 

[Finnishpie]

Sorry to rain on your perennial Buckley excusing parade but that wasn't the case.
He wanted Mayne and the only sticking point was the length of the contract.

That's not what the rumours are saying.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

That's not what the rumours are saying.

Solid argument!!!

 

[DaVe86]

Cox - 16 goals from 5 games
Kirby - 21 goals from 8 games
Mayne - 14 goals from 8 games

Mayne has had a good fortnight, but he's been less consistent than both Cox and Kirby, who both incidentally have had big hauls in consecutive weeks too.

Until he out performs those two and puts together at least a month of dominant output in the VFL he should be well and truly behind those two in the pecking order imo.

I agree, but Cox is a promoted American rookie experiment, and Kirby is a late draft pick in his first year in the system. Mayne on the other hand is on a long term contract on big bucks and is in the latter end of his career.

I have no problem not selecting Mayne....and I am not being critical. Just merely saying that if he is not ahead of those guys, then it seems he is a long way back in the pecking order. Especially considering our forward line has been our weakness and change is needed.

Doesn't bode well. I know he is on a long term contract, but a decision may need to be made about paying him out. Can't keep him clogging it up for 4 years.

 

[Gone Critical]

I agree, but Cox is a promoted American rookie experiment, and Kirby is a late draft pick in his first year in the system. Mayne on the other hand is on a long term contract on big bucks and is in the latter end of his career.

I have no problem not selecting Mayne....and I am not being critical. Just merely saying that if he is not ahead of those guys, then it seems he is a long way back in the pecking order. Especially considering our forward line has been our weakness and change is needed.

Doesn't bode well. I know he is on a long term contract, but a decision may need to be made about paying him out. Can't keep him clogging it up for 4 years.

Not sure the American rookie or the late recent draft pick considerations come into play here. Surely picked on merit is the criteria. If Cox's good form is considered superior and makes him the better fit then he is picked. We dont need to pay Mayne out based on this decision just tell him to continue his good form and a chance is likely to come.

 

[Apex36]

I agree, but Cox is a promoted American rookie experiment, and Kirby is a late draft pick in his first year in the system. Mayne on the other hand is on a long term contract on big bucks and is in the latter end of his career.

I have no problem not selecting Mayne....and I am not being critical. Just merely saying that if he is not ahead of those guys, then it seems he is a long way back in the pecking order. Especially considering our forward line has been our weakness and change is needed.

Doesn't bode well. I know he is on a long term contract, but a decision may need to be made about paying him out. Can't keep him clogging it up for 4 years.

Contract length and $$ should never come in to consideration for selection. Ever.

 

[Wooljay]

Sorry to rain on your perennial Buckley excusing parade but that wasn't the case.
He wanted Mayne and the only sticking point was the length of the contract.

Really? I remember when it was being touted prior to Gubby going that Bucks wasn't at all comfortable with it.

Interesting though!

 

[Bad Horse]

I agree, but Cox is a promoted American rookie experiment, and Kirby is a late draft pick in his first year in the system. Mayne on the other hand is on a long term contract on big bucks and is in the latter end of his career.

I have no problem not selecting Mayne....and I am not being critical. Just merely saying that if he is not ahead of those guys, then it seems he is a long way back in the pecking order. Especially considering our forward line has been our weakness and change is needed.

Doesn't bode well. I know he is on a long term contract, but a decision may need to be made about paying him out. Can't keep him clogging it up for 4 years.

At some point a balance will need to be struck between the importance of the list spot versus the waste of just paying someone to leave and losing even his ability as a backup. I dont think we have passed the tipping point yet but it cant be far off

 

[Quicky]

Really like what you say here mate, and agree with a lot of it. I never intended to perceive it as changing Howe's role, he's been one of the few shining lights this year. More suggesting the shaz needs more freedom to play his natural game and play at the level everyone is expecting him to. i agree he needs to be defensive and take onus of having an opponent, as every player does, however making him play a pure lockdown role almost, then dropping him back to the 2's to play as a free wheeling rebound defender, what does it teach him? I could see he and Howe combining amazingly of the half back line together, so maybe there should be a difference in the amount of game time shaz spends locking down a player and then having time to push up the ground and get his own disposals?

That means, in general, Schaz needs to play on the oppositions least dangerous small forward in that half back role. Both Howe and him will be half backs. It's a tall half back line but we have no smalls screaming out for selection either.

Basically:

FB: - Ramsay/Varcoe - Dunn - Maynard
HB: - Scharenberg - Goldsack - Howe

Very little room for Langdon in that structure though.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Not sure the American rookie or the late recent draft pick considerations come into play here. Surely picked on merit is the criteria. If Cox's good form is considered superior and makes him the better fit then he is picked. We dont need to pay Mayne out based on this decision just tell him to continue his good form and a chance is likely to come.

Merit and skillset. All three are different types of players.

Cant see how Cox and Kirby are remotely comparable except they play at the same end of the ground!!!

 

[THATSGOLD]

Cox must play for our forward line to have any target at all.

 

[DaVe86]

Not sure the American rookie or the late recent draft pick considerations come into play here. Surely picked on merit is the criteria. If Cox's good form is considered superior and makes him the better fit then he is picked. We dont need to pay Mayne out based on this decision just tell him to continue his good form and a chance is likely to come.

You haven't read my post properly.

I actually don't have an issue with picking Cox over Mayne.

I'm merely saying that if he isn't ahead of these guys in the pecking order, then it says a lot.

 

[THATSGOLD]

If Chris Mayne can't get selected after 9 goals in 2 weeks, and when our forward line looks basically impotent, then that says a lot about how Buckley see Mayne. Obviously he is not in Buckley's thinking at all. Probably adds weight to rumours he never wanted him to begin with.

Hope you know Gubby is coming back.

 

[DaVe86]

Contract length and $$ should never come in to consideration for selection. Ever.

Not saying it should. My post was merely an indication that if Mayne can't get a game over those other guys, then his wasting a spot on our list.

FWIW, I would have also picked Cox over Mayne. I would have also picked Kirby in pace of Callum Brown.

 

[unplugged]

Seems to perform well against us so I'm happy with this news.

 

[Sunbot]

Comparing the team to the last time we played the Hawks rather than last week.
Outs: Aish, Blair, Schade, Smith and Wells.
Ins: Cox, Langdon then three off the 6 listed that didn't play in round 9 - Broom, Brown, Ramsey, Reid, Schaz, Thomas.
I think it will be a better team than Rnd9 - Blair and Schade were putrid, Aish sacrificed his face that day but wasn't doing anything to that point, Wells didn't have impact and although Smith did play well that night he was very shaky early on.
Hawks haven't had to deal with Cox so will be interesting. We were small in May with Blair - I prefer this as Darcy has another tall so he plays CHF. White not up so Cox in is ok for me.
I would select Schaz, Broom and Thomas. Schaz over Reid for me and I would even try him down forward as a swing from the start - we could grab 2-3 goals from him there easy. That would mean we miss Reid's 196 (no Schade) - could swap late Reid for Langdon but I just don't have Reid up forward as it always is a fail. Langdon+Schaz better option over Reid or Ramsey combos for the missing Schade/Smith.
I go with Broom+Thomas to replace Aish/Wells from Round 9. Brown is not up and Josh will give much more grunt inside - look for him to ping from 50. Broom is skating thin for me and he's lucky Varcoe failed his test.
That's my thought Schaz off the bench forward and back and Greenwood, Thomas and the Broom rolling through the mids.
I suppose I'll see soon.

 

[danielnajdek]

Oh dear it's going to be a battle royal.
I love Scharenberg for so many reasons, but it's actually up to him to demand selection, it's not a Langdon issue.
But anyway, it's Langdon on the boxing bag these days

So if getting 35 everytime he plays in the VFL isn't demanding selection then what is? Getting 45? Meanwhile Langdon wasn't even that impressive when he was in the VFL.

 

[DaVe86]

So if getting 35 everytime he plays in the VFL isn't demanding selection then what is? Getting 45? Meanwhile Langdon wasn't even that impressive when he was in the VFL.

To be honest, I don't see what playing VFL is achieving for Shaz. He is just playing loose and racking up the numbers and playing the intercept role.

At AFL level, Howe and Ben Reid do this, so it means when he comes in he is forced to play accountable and isn't really getting the footy.

I reckon the club is better to either play him more on a wing at VFL level, or play him at full back on bigger bodied opponents so he learns to defend one on one.

Playing off half back racking up the numbers isn't helping him unless he also plays that role at AFL level.

 

[CFC2010]

So if getting 35 everytime he plays in the VFL isn't demanding selection then what is? Getting 45? Meanwhile Langdon wasn't even that impressive when he was in the VFL.

It seems you need to go also.............because Langdon played a great game according to some.

 

[Mkcaptain]

And now we melt. Shaz

 

[manicmagpie]

Why is Reid out?

 

[danielnajdek]

It seems you need to go also.............because Langdon played a great game according to some.

View attachment 387361

Probably the rare time I agree with you on something. Schaz not playing VFL and Langdon playing is bewildering to me.

 

[Sunbot]

Ramsey over Schaz??

 

[Soups]

Boo no Shaz. Getting worried he may be gone

 

[Saintly Viewed]

So if getting 35 everytime he plays in the VFL isn't demanding selection then what is? Getting 45? Meanwhile Langdon wasn't even that impressive when he was in the VFL.

I'd pick him.

But he's still an emergency this week