Past #13: Ryan Clarke - officially traded to Sydney in exchange for #61 in 2018 ND - thanks Clarkey

Remove this Banner Ad

Ryan is important for our future no doubt, as handy depth at worst, and perhaps is being treated a bit harshly here. However, they've consistently asked him to back up form in the VFL, so perhaps complacency wrt the defensive side of his game is an issue.

Love his goal sense and seems to get to a lot of good places, his hands in close need some work.
 
Is filling the strange coaches whipping boy spot at the minute.

Kills it at VFL level, gets put back into the side, has a quiet game (along with the rest of the team) is the token sacrifice back to the seconds ahead of others that have been meh for longer.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Rubbish. Talented kid, has been s**t for a while and not working hard enough defensively and was deservedly dropped. Had a great 1st half in the Bs then dropped off and was barely sighted afterwards. I'm a big fan but he doesn't deserve to be playing AFL football at the moment.
 
remfan101 said:
Rubbish. Talented kid, has been s**t for a while and not working hard enough defensively and was deservedly dropped. Had a great 1st half in the Bs then dropped off and was barely sighted afterwards. I'm a big fan but he doesn't deserve to be playing AFL football at the moment.
Click to expand...
It's not "rubbish".

I'm not saying he didn't deserve to be dropped. I'm saying he gets dropped regularly when the standard plan seems to be to keep people in the team regardless of their form. How long did it take to drop Swallow and Thomas? Petrie last year had immunity. Goldstein has been a shadow of his former self, Atley til recently gave us nothing, Garner couldn't kick a set shot to save his life, Wood has been mostly pus, Daw.... Don't get me started.

What I'm saying is he doesn't get afforded that immunity that most others get. He is rightfully dropped, and it's a way that the coaches can say "We dropped someone".

If they're going to play underperforming players, Clarke would be one that I would afford that luxury, he needs games to adjust to the different flow and tempo, he's proven he can accumulate at AFL level.
 
DarkPhoenix said:
It's not "rubbish".

I'm not saying he didn't deserve to be dropped. I'm saying he gets dropped regularly when the standard plan seems to be to keep people in the team regardless of their form. How long did it take to drop Swallow and Thomas? Petrie last year had immunity. Goldstein has been a shadow of his former self, Atley til recently gave us nothing, Garner couldn't kick a set shot to save his life, Wood has been mostly pus, Daw.... Don't get me started.

What I'm saying is he doesn't get afforded that immunity that most others get. He is rightfully dropped, and it's a way that the coaches can say "We dropped someone".

If they're going to play underperforming players, Clarke would be one that I would afford that luxury, he needs games to adjust to the different flow and tempo, he's proven he can accumulate at AFL level.
Click to expand...
Or he could continue to 'under-perform', lose confidence and we'd be saying he wasn't managed well.
 
Kimbo said:
Or he could continue to 'under-perform', lose confidence and we'd be saying he wasn't managed well.
Click to expand...
Then start dropping others that need dropping.

Inconsistency is the frustrating thing.

Goldstein doesn't deserve to be within 10km of the ground this week (yes I'm aware Preuss failed his medical)
 
Deadeyeroo said:
Selection committee dont know wtf their doing. The selection of the team week in week out has Scotts written all over it.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What an extraordinarily novel approach to follow the coaches ideas as to selection. Would there have ever been another club in the history of the world as we know it who would have followed that approach?
 
DarkPhoenix said:
Then start dropping others that need dropping.

Inconsistency is the frustrating thing.

Goldstein doesn't deserve to be within 10km of the ground this week (yes I'm aware Preuss failed his medical)
Click to expand...
Older players are generally given more time to turn it around or, in Goldy's case, there are other factors at play.

Which other younger players are being given more chances, or that you feel the selection committee is being inconsistent with? (Not a loaded question; just asking.)
 
Kimbo said:
Older players are generally given more time to turn it around or, in Goldy's case, there are other factors at play.

Which other younger players are being given more chances, or that you feel the selection committee is being inconsistent with? (Not a loaded question; just asking.)
Click to expand...
A lot of the inconsistent picking has come from our middle aged players to be honest, we've played that band of players from 2009-2013 ahead of all else trying to build a core and neglected the younger players at times.

Guys like Mullet etc have been persisted with when giving nothing, luckily Mullet has come good this year.
Dumont another one.
Simpkin, while I love the kid has struggled to crack double figure possessions when he's been in and for a forward hasn't exactly kicked a bag.
Wood is another while promising has been given too much leniency in regard to inclusion, has been saved by red time goals more than once in games he may as well have been sitting on the bench for 90% of it.

Clarke seems to be dropped after big/bad losses where we get smashed in the clearances, but comparing him to other guys around his age he's going alright.
 
Kimbo said:
Older players are generally given more time to turn it around or, in Goldy's case, there are other factors at play.

Which other younger players are being given more chances, or that you feel the selection committee is being inconsistent with? (Not a loaded question; just asking.)
Click to expand...
Just noticed your comments above re Atley, Garner, Wood, Goldstein. I'd leave Atley and Goldstein out of this, as I don't think they're in the same 'younger player' category. They're going to be sent back to learn. There is more trust in them to turn things around or, to try different things positionally or tactically.

I also think we're looking at it the wrong way around if we're looking at the individuals, versus team development. We all know the midfield is our biggest issue. Swallow has been put back in there, with Clarke and now Dumont dropped. Garner has been tried in there these past couple of weeks in patches etc. In other words, my sense is that it matters less about what it happening to individuals per se, as to what they're experimenting with.

With Zurhaar as a forward, perhaps this means they're going to persist with Garner in the middle more, or rotate them a bit? With both Clarke and Dumont, letting them find a bit of leather and/or laying more tackles etc. which could be good for the confidence.

Also, recognising that we can't see the likes of Mountford and Wagner (and Hibberd etc.) without rotating places in the team; there simply isn't room for them all at once. Again, that's about team development as the priority, all without wanting to resort to a complete lack of competitiveness.
 
DarkPhoenix said:
A lot of the inconsistent picking has come from our middle aged players to be honest, we've played that band of players from 2009-2013 ahead of all else trying to build a core and neglected the younger players at times.

Guys like Mullet etc have been persisted with when giving nothing, luckily Mullet has come good this year.
Dumont another one.
Simpkin, while I love the kid has struggled to crack double figure possessions when he's been in and for a forward hasn't exactly kicked a bag.
Wood is another while promising has been given too much leniency in regard to inclusion, has been saved by red time goals more than once in games he may as well have been sitting on the bench for 90% of it.

Clarke seems to be dropped after big/bad losses where we get smashed in the clearances, but comparing him to other guys around his age he's going alright.
Click to expand...
See my post above, drafted at the same time as this.

Dumont I see as on the younger side, more than middling, in terms of experience. (He entered 2017 with 20 games to his credit, vs Mullett 67).
Wood has been very frustrating, no doubt, and perhaps saved by Waite's injuries. (Entered 2017 with 16 games to his credit).
 
DarkPhoenix said:
Then start dropping others that need dropping.

Inconsistency is the frustrating thing.

Goldstein doesn't deserve to be within 10km of the ground this week (yes I'm aware Preuss failed his medical)
Click to expand...

Like the calls for Preuss to come in at all costs, there are some players who are considered safe long term players. It is better to work out what some of the unknown players, like Daw, Wagner (position), Nielsen (exposure) can do than guys we already know.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kimbo said:
Older players are generally given more time to turn it around or, in Goldy's case, there are other factors at play.

Which other younger players are being given more chances, or that you feel the selection committee is being inconsistent with? (Not a loaded question; just asking.)
Click to expand...
Garner is one.
 
DarkPhoenix said:
Then start dropping others that need dropping.

Inconsistency is the frustrating thing.

Goldstein doesn't deserve to be within 10km of the ground this week (yes I'm aware Preuss failed his medical)
Click to expand...

Goldstein had more contested possessions than anyone except Jack and Ben10 last weekend against Freo. He also had more contested marks than anyone except Brown and Hunter. He may have had some s**t games this year and be nowhere near the form he was in 2 years ago but he was among our best players on the weekend (and got no votes from here) and if he had kicked that goal he would probably be called our best player.
 
ferball said:
Goldstein had more contested possessions than anyone except Jack and Ben10 last weekend against Freo. He also had more contested marks than anyone except Brown and Hunter. He may have had some s**t games this year and be nowhere near the form he was in 2 years ago but he was among our best players on the weekend (and got no votes from here) and if he had kicked that goal he would probably be called our best player.
Click to expand...

He's a ruck, I'd hope the majority of his possessions were contested. He disposed of those possessions at about 45%.

He had THREE marks. Only 6 players had less. He was beaten in the ruck by a guy most people wouldn't even realise was on a teams list.

What this indicates is he's not working hard enough around the ground, something that's supposed to be his strength.

He's getting possessions from the ruck and that's about it, and as such his possessions are rushed and innefective.

He wasn't as bad as he has been in previous weeks but to say if he'd slotted that goal at the end he would have been our best player is way off the mark. A goal which anyone over the age of 5 should have been able to slot.
 
DarkPhoenix said:
He's a ruck, I'd hope the majority of his possessions were contested. He disposed of those possessions at about 45%.

He had THREE marks. Only 6 players had less. He was beaten in the ruck by a guy most people wouldn't even realise was on a teams list.

What this indicates is he's not working hard enough around the ground, something that's supposed to be his strength.

He's getting possessions from the ruck and that's about it, and as such his possessions are rushed and innefective.

He wasn't as bad as he has been in previous weeks but to say if he'd slotted that goal at the end he would have been our best player is way off the mark. A goal which anyone over the age of 5 should have been able to slot.
Click to expand...

Despite all that he had the second highest contested possessions for the side and second highest contested marks for the side. If he hadn't played who else would have got the ball? 3 weeks ago he wasn't even taking marks in game after game, let alone contested marks. And he should have been dropped then but since then he has improved significantly.
 
Outstanding game, his link up work was nothing short of superb.
 
Very good footballer. Needs to tidy up by hand, but you can't teach his footy smarts, awareness, knowledge of running and game patterns and willingness to gut run.
 
Took another step this arvo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

giantroo
Past #15: Daniel Howe - #31 in '14 ND to HFC - delisted end '22 - #33 in '23 RD to NM -retires from AFL & NM end '23 - 107 AFL games / 11 NM games
12 13 14 15 16
Replies
399
Views
28K
r00boy96
r00boy96

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top