Preview Rnd 6 - Carlton v Hawthorn Sunday April 28th 3.20PM @ UTAS - Team Post #1331

[HARKER]

Of course it's hope, the fact is he's only played about 15 games. Give the kid a go whether Cuningham is a better player or not.

The MC will make that decision for us. No problems, but that point posed just doesn't stack up.

Hope counts for nothing...zilch. Hoping alone gets you nowhere. Only informed and positive actions should come into play.
I'd even give the 'I've just got a gut feel" some credit but hope......Just no.

No wonder this forum is firing. All us selectors duelling. Just the way it should be.

 

[Blue and Blue]

People just like being negative. Last Sunday was the best win we've had for years. I've been to 8 premierships and not once walked away and said so and so played a shithouse game.

Even Scott Towel did ok yep........

 

[Macca43]

There will always be changes over a season. We just need to now lessen them as much as possible and I think that's happening. His point is valid

We should never pick a side simply because we don't want to make a change. If these 2 players were similar in quality or played significantly different roles Polson might stay for team cohesion but to put team cohesion as our main priority "regardless of who is playing" is just ridiculous.

 

[HBF]

Harry playing ruck at 20% of centre bounces and in F50 is fine, Jarryd Roughead has done it his whole career, didn't seem to affect him too much

Not sure about Harrys tank though, whereas Roughy has had 15 preseasons to build his tank.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

There’s no doubt that the chemistry of the team takes precedence although Barassi confused me many years ago. I’ll paraphrase his statement concerning the individual and the team. Everybody wants to be the best player but the team must come in as a very close second. It told me that he had no time for guys who just played for themselves. Gotta say I agree.

I don't think anyone is saying that cuningham plays for himself while polson is all self-sacrificing or vice-versa.

they're both just role players at this stage in their careers, but on exposed form and ability cuningham has polson covered by a considerable distance.

 

[Soapy V]

Soapy - you have yet to name 1 reason why Polson should actually be picked beyond "team cohesion", as if making 1 change by dropping an under performing player is going to throw the whole team into disarray. What role did Polson perform on the weekend? How would Cuningham coming in for him throw out team balance?

Did I say Cuningham would throw out balance?

Polson's role at the weekend was to shut down run and apply pressure. Was he great? No, but he has done the role well before. Too many people react quickly over one game and it was his first game back. Is it enough to keep his spot? Not sure but a win helps. Ed was poor IMO, do we drop him? Just saying it's not a simple selection

What's wrong with cohesion as a reason?

I think you are way over reading my comments

 

[Mr_Plow]

People just like being negative. Last Sunday was the best win we've had for years. I've been to 8 premierships and not once walked away and said so and so played a shithouse game.

Not at all, just the realization that Hawthorn is a huge challenge (far beyond the Bulldogs who were insipid) and we need our best and most competitive team out there to win.

Nothing personal, no emotional underpinnings, just about getting the win we all crave.

 

[Opine]

Well it seems that the logical extension of some views in this thread is that if we have a 15 win season moving forward we simply MUST have 15 unchanged 22s to follow them.

It's the only reasonable argument one can mount for retaining fav player/s who's performance/s simply don't warrant retention. While maintaining stability has merits, in this case its pure fluff.

 

[Soapy V]

We should never pick a side simply because we don't want to make a change. If these 2 players were similar in quality or played significantly different roles Polson might stay for team cohesion but to put team cohesion as our main priority "regardless of who is playing" is just ridiculous.

????

 

[Robertio]

The MC will make that decision for us. No problems, but that point posed just doesn't stack up.

Hope counts for nothing...zilch. Hoping alone gets you nowhere. Only informed and positive actions should come into play.
I'd even give the 'I've just got a gut feel" some credit but hope......Just no.

I meant we should give him a go, as you said the MC will take care of the rest. I would like to see Cuningham in as well.

 

[HBF]

No. Playing in the VFL. Was on limited minutes in his first game. Played a good chunk of the second game but didn’t see much of the ball.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Another one of our guys tbat can be given ample time in the VFL to build up his minutes.

 

[HBF]

I don't want Harry anywhere near a ruck contest..

Which is why Cas plays.
We almost have to play Charlie up the ground when he comes back.

 

[SammaGilberto]

Bring back Aisake O'Hailpin

 

[F_therest]

Cuningham has definitely been better although over a very small sample. We aren't exactly talking about 2 established stars either.

I rate both and have hope for their futures.

All I am saying is that IMO it isn't an automatic change and there are reasons for both to play. I have given mine.

I just get the impression on here that many just pick who they think is the best name without considering so many others variables, especially cohesion, team balance etc.

The major positive for me now is I trust the MC & Russell to select the best side to win. Been a long while since I could say that

Except Cunners for Polson doesn't have any negative impact on cohesion and team balance...it's still a speedy small for a speedy small, but Cunners is a better player right now and more versatile, being able to have stints in the middle.

I'm confident that if fit, the MC will pick Cunners over Polson this weekend.

 

[Opine]

I meant we should give him a go, as you said the MC will take care of the rest. I would like to see Cuningham in as well.

You make a fair point Rr. What, in your personal opinion, would constitute a fair go?

 

[agro]

Sorry if it’s already been said.

But I’d play Charlie between the 50 metre arcs - with instructions to stay out of Forward line, unless he’s creating a mismatch.

Casboult stays in Forward line and provides relief rucking, I don’t want to see Harry McKay in the ruck thank you.

 

[Robertio]

Not at all, just the realization that Hawthorn is a huge challenge (far beyond the Bulldogs who were insipid) and we need our best and most competitive team out there to win.

Nothing personal, no emotional underpinnings, just about getting the win we all crave.

I'm a Cuningham fan, just defending Polson. I was at the footy 40 years ago and said to my old man that bloke wearing no 4 is hopeless, it took 2 years but that no 4 become no 11 with a headband. Never say never.

 

[HARKER]

We should never pick a side simply because we don't want to make a change. If these 2 players were similar in quality or played significantly different roles Polson might stay for team cohesion but to put team cohesion as our main priority "regardless of who is playing" is just ridiculous.

I don't know. I just don't get that notion for many reason I've already put forward.
A club has to strive to get their best team/squad onto the park, regardless of whether it has some wins, let alone one win, behind it.

Players that may have come back from injury, or have solid form behind them can't have senior exposure closed to them because.......whatever, unless of course there are players in front of them that have simply cemented their spots. i.e Hard for Macreadie to come in given Jones & Weitering.
Macreadie would now need to show absolutely irresistible form to be considered and he'd know that because it's obvious and he'd just get on with business.

Even Williamson may not have been considered this week as much as there wasn't a spot open to him, given the form of our backline, as much as him 'needing another week in the 2's'

Our forward line after the talls though - Needs a lot of work.

 

[Macca43]

Did I say Cuningham would throw out balance?

Polson's role at the weekend was to shut down run and apply pressure. Was he great? No, but he has done the role well before. Too many people react quickly over one game. Is it enough to keep his spot? Not sure but a win helps. Ed was poor IMO, do we drop him? Just saying it's not a simple selection

What's wrong with cohesion as a reason?

I think you are way over reading my comments

If it was 1 game then fine, he has been ordinary in all 3 this year and most of his career. "Polson's role at the weekend was to shut down run and apply pressure." And yet he hardly laid a tackle or a 1%er - not only was he not great he was quite poor.

"What's wrong with cohesion as a reason?" Because you are assuming you can't bring Cuningham in and have cohesion. You are mistaking "continuity" for "cohesion".
"Did I say Cuningham would throw out balance?" No and that is the point, you have said people are picking the best name at the expense of team balance and cohesion, but you are yet to prove that making the change would jeopardise either.

As for Ed, he was poor but was a mile better than Poslon.

"Polson's role at the weekend was to shut down run and apply pressure." And yet he hardly laid a tackle or a 1%er - not only was he not great he was quite poor.

 

[My Hat]

As I said look at the alternatives. What has Polson showed that makes him worth taking over Cuningham? What is the risk reward?

The risk is that Cuningham would be underdone - which seems minimal given he has hardly missed a skills or fitness session and has been in full training for 2 weeks but most of all Russells track record.

The reward is that we get a player who is significantly better than Polson in every facet. The gap between them is vast.

On that basis Cuningham's selection seems a "must" to me.

I'd love to see any of the Polson backers take a shot at answering this question. I'm firmly in the Cuningham camp on this one, but if someone has an argument for why Polson is the better player then by all means make your case and I'll hear you out.

Arguments about team balance seem misplaced to me. Polson came in for Cuningham in Rd 2, so I'm not sure why reversing that change would suddenly throw our balance out.

Team cohesion -- by my count we've made 4 unforced changes to our teams so far this year, dropping Fasolo and Garlett in Rd 3, Polson in Rd 4, and Lobbe in Rd 5. We've also had 4 changes due to injury and 1 due to suspension. I'm not at all convinced that dropping Polson now is going to have some sort of detrimental effect on team cohesion.

 

[Arr0w]

Cunningham has shown he knows how to crumb to a pack when the ball spills.

Polson has shown next to no ability to play this role.

A role we desperately need with our big forwards able to bring the ball to the ground through their contesting.

Team game, everyone has a role

Cuners has shown that ability at JLT level only

 

[cfc4life]

If it was 1 game then fine, he has been ordinary in all 3 this year and most of his career. "Polson's role at the weekend was to shut down run and apply pressure." And yet he hardly laid a tackle or a 1%er - not only was he not great he was quite poor.

"What's wrong with cohesion as a reason?" Because you are assuming you can't bring Cuningham in and have cohesion. You are mistaking "continuity" for "cohesion".
"Did I say Cuningham would throw out balance?" No and that is the point, you have said people are picking the best name at the expense of team balance and cohesion, but you are yet to prove that making the change would jeopardise either.

As for Ed, he was poor but was a mile better than Poslon.

"Polson's role at the weekend was to shut down run and apply pressure." And yet he hardly laid a tackle or a 1%er - not only was he not great he was quite poor.

Spot on. There's no legitimate reason why he should be getting the spot over Cunningham. He's yet to show why he should be picked on a continual basis.

 

[HARKER]

I meant we should give him a go, as you said the MC will take care of the rest. I would like to see Cuningham in as well.

Sorry Rob. Read that wrong.

No one should be anti any CFC player and if they are selected, even if we don't like it - Good for them.
Polson is a terrier and it's hard not to like what he puts his heart into doing. It's just that for now, a lot of that isn't looking so good.

He'd know that this is a stop-gap role for him and just as we found out last week with a mid performing better as a mid (Gibbons) Amazing!

 

[Robertio]

You make a fair point Rr. What, in your personal opinion, would constitute a fair go?

Good question, from where i'm sitting i'd say the end of next year.

 

[Soapy V]

Except Cunners for Polson doesn't have any negative impact on cohesion and team balance...it's still a speedy small for a speedy small, but Cunners is a better player right now and more versatile, being able to have stints in the middle.

How do we know?