News Jarrod Lienert signs for North Melbourne VFL

Remove this Banner Ad

Last edited:
TheFVK said:
Reckon it's correct weight.
Click to expand...

I think you’ll find it’s Clurey who is making way.

Jonas, Howard and Clurey are listed as key position defenders by the club. We don’t need three of them playing in the same side if the plan is to push up the ground.
 
Janus said:
I think you’ll find it’s Clurey who is making way.

Jonas, Howard and Clurey are listed as key position defenders by the club. We don’t need three of them playing in the same side if the plan is to push up the ground.
Click to expand...
The self-criticism of our ball movement out of defence at the Members' Convention would support this too. It will take a team effort to replace the run from Polec, Wingard and Pittard so guys like Lienert will have their importance boosted in the team.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Janus said:
I think you’ll find it’s Clurey who is making way.

Jonas, Howard and Clurey are listed as key position defenders by the club. We don’t need three of them playing in the same side if the plan is to push up the ground.
Click to expand...
If you have a tall, fast player who can hold their own with contested marking you don't have to lock into the fact they began as defenders.
 
Powerstufff said:
If you have a tall, fast player who can hold their own with contested marking you don't have to lock into the fact they began as defenders.
Click to expand...

Clurey isn't a great contested mark. What gives you the impression that he is?

He's your archetypal third tall, except Lienert has a better kick. Clurey also has never once used his speed as a defender - he's forever anchored into the back line. Last season he was listed as a hybrid at he convention, but then the club realised that he will never push up the ground like he's supposed to, so they shifted him into the key back category.

Clurey played the intra-club like a man who knows his spot is in jeopardy, whereas Lienert played like a man who knows there's a spot up for grabs.
 
Janus said:
Clurey isn't a great contested mark. What gives you the impression that he is?

He's your archetypal third tall, except Lienert has a better kick. Clurey also has never once used his speed as a defender - he's forever anchored into the back line. Last season he was listed as a hybrid at he convention, but then the club realised that he will never push up the ground like he's supposed to, so they shifted him into the key back category.

Clurey played the intra-club like a man who knows his spot is in jeopardy, whereas Lienert played like a man who knows there's a spot up for grabs.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was talking about Lienert. But on re-reading your earlier post and my reply I see how things went that way.
 
His kicking today was outstanding. His general defending was good but his kick ins were magnificent to watch. When we get Dixon back and fully fit he will have Ryder, Lycett, Dixon and Howard as a target and as he kicks the ball in 15-20m from goal line and usually belts it 55m, it puts us in a good position if the big blokes take a mark.

He is 8th on average metres gained per game as only has played 6 games compared to the 4 guys who have played 11 games and the other 3 more than Jarrod. He is one extra 30m medium kick per game away from toping that average stat.
 
For all our deficiencies I like that we're building a team of superboots in defence.

Lienert, Houston, Hartlett, Burton, Bonner floating around the half forward line when we press up is a nice goal threat.
 
Solid C+ game yesterday just like all of his other games.

He's 26. He's decent at best and he's not getting any better. I don't see how we as a football club wouldn't be better off if every game we've given him over the last couple of years had gone to Garner or Bergman instead.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Schulzenfest said:
Solid C+ game yesterday just like all of his other games.

He's 26. He's decent at best and he's not getting any better. I don't see how we as a football club wouldn't be better off if every game we've given him over the last couple of years had gone to Garner or Bergman instead.
Click to expand...
There must be a critical mass of youth at some point. Having someone like Lienert who can come in and more often than not play a serviceable role isn’t a bad thing now we are a top 8 side.
 
It Just Is said:
There must be a critical mass of youth at some point. Having someone like Lienert who can come in and more often than not play a serviceable role isn’t a bad thing now we are a top 8 side.
Click to expand...

Last week we dropped Houston (23), Ladhams (22), Farrell (21) and Duursma (20) for Westhoff (33), Ebert (30), Lienert (26) and Bonner (23). 'Critical mass of youth' my arse.
 
Schulzenfest said:
Last week we dropped Houston (23), Ladhams (22), Farrell (21) and Duursma (20) for Westhoff (33), Ebert (30), Lienert (26) and Bonner (23). 'Critical mass of youth' my arse.
Click to expand...
I was thinking more broadly but even still this year is all about winning a flag. If Lienert is even 1% better than the alternative he should play. With no reserves it’s not an informed argument to say Bergman or Garner are better.

He’s serviceable and while we are right in the mix for a top 4 finish it’s a great position to be in having mature bodies who can come in a fairly reliably play a role.
 
It Just Is said:
I was thinking more broadly but even still this year is all about winning a flag. If Lienert is even 1% better than the alternative he should play. With no reserves it’s not an informed argument to say Bergman or Garner are better.

He’s serviceable and while we are right in the mix for a top 4 finish it’s a great position to be in having mature bodies who can come in a fairly reliably play a role.
Click to expand...

And what if Garner and Bergman are 1% better than him? How would we ever find out if we won't give them a game?
 
Schulzenfest said:
And what if Garner and Bergman are 1% better than him? How would we ever find out if we won't give them a game?
Click to expand...
I think I’ll back the coaches in on that one. They only see the team train every day.

As I said, without reserves it isn’t an informed argument to assume Bergman is currently better. We don’t even know for sure what position he’s been training in.
 
It Just Is said:
I think I’ll back the coaches in on that one. They only see the team train every day.

As I said, without reserves it isn’t an informed argument to assume Bergman is currently better. We don’t even know for sure what position he’s been training in.
Click to expand...

Yes because our coaching staff have an unquestionable record of getting selections right.

Sam Gray (96 PAFC AFL games) can't get a game for 16th placed Sydney and Jake Neade (66 PAFC AFL games) can't get a game for ****ing North Adelaide.
 
Schulzenfest said:
Yes because our coaching staff have an unquestionable record of getting selections right.

Sam Gray (96 PAFC AFL games) can't get a game for 16th placed Sydney and Jake Neade (66 PAFC AFL games) can't get a game for ****ing North Adelaide.
Click to expand...

That's just a ridiculous example. 2017 Eddie Betts couldn't get a kick for 2020 Sydney. https://www.sydneyswans.com.au/players/622/sam-gray#playerstatistics. He's above average in basically every criteria for his position at a career level. Kicked 20, 21, and 28 goals in his last 3 years as a defensive small forward who averages 17 disposals over his career. Jake Neade was the weird one. Got 16 games in his first year which I thought he earned. 11disp, 1.2 goals 2nd year (8 games). Averaged 0.9 goals a game and 12,11, 15 disposals in his 3rd-5th years. He had a knack for getting Joe the goose goals and kicking a couple of goals when he was close to being dropped. I definitely thought he got a few extra chances than he earned, but he earned a fair crack at AFL level. He would have showed more than Karl Amon in his first 25-30 games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RossFC
News Nathan Barkla signs with WWT Eagles
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
RossFC
RossFC

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top