2005 AFC side

[Stiffy_18]

Watts is not ready for AFL and I don't think he will be for another year or 2.

Hentschel will be there. Either on the flank or in a KP. I like the idea of Biglands up forward

 

[Cap]

what about bock is there room in our team for him ?

i reckon he is going for the same spot as S Stevens (no not the medium sized soft player with potential but the skill levels of a sheep on morphine)

also this would have to be josh kreugers last season to impress where will he fit in the side ?

 

[tztommo]

did anyone hear craigy say that he wanted to use biglands up forward more in 05' (sorry if this has been mentioned).

were does that leave the likes on hentschel and Watts ? is this telling us that he doesnt think that they will be ready for AFL football 05 ? (well you would think hentschel is considering he played most of the season)

i suggested about a month ago that biglands played centre half forward for a tall target up forward but no one listened to me. Biglands should play in the square resting while welsh leads from the square into an open forward line.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Biglands is generally shyte as a forward. Best for him to concentrate on improving as the ruckman to lead us when Clarke retires.

IMO, S Stevens > Bock.

 

[tinman]

Re: T H E C O N S E N S U S

AFC one-side players:
Mattner
Goodwin
Biglands
Clarke
Bassett
Perrie
Ladhams
Schuback

Co-incidence that a lot are left footers?
Many highly successful players have played the game being predominately one-sided.

How did Begley miss this list? Close to the most one sided of anyone at the club. Looks a million $ on his right side and $1.50 on his left.

Harsh on Sarge........ A magnificent right foot goal at AAMI late in the season. I think he even shocked himself

 

[Mad Dog]

what about bock is there room in our team for him ?

i reckon he is going for the same spot as S Stevens (no not the medium sized soft player with potential but the skill levels of a sheep on morphine)

also this would have to be josh kreugers last season to impress where will he fit in the side ?

IMO - the only time these 2 will cross paths is when the Pams play the budgies.

 

[Mad Dog]

Biglands is generally shyte as a forward. Best for him to concentrate on improving as the ruckman to lead us when Clarke retires.

.

Good plan...but...IMO 87 games in 5 years is enough time for anyone to concentrate on anything........ .......I fear it just ain't gonna get any better

 

[Alex99]

Good plan...but...IMO 87 games in 5 years is enough time for anyone to concentrate on anything........ .......I fear it just ain't gonna get any better

This is Patrick’s (Biglands) last year to impress. If he doesn’t step up and dominate the ruck he has to find a new home.

 

[imbecile12]

I think persisting with Biglands up forward is a good move. The few times he's played there he has caused problems not so much in direct impact (that is what needs to be worked on) but just causing defenders to have to watch their back, leading out of the square at 100 miles an hour and causing spillages.

The thing was that Ayres always had his rotation policy re: Clarke and Biglands. It never allowed:
a) the ruckman in play to have much of an influence around the ground, since he had to concentrate on getting to the ruck contest
b) there was never an opportunity to rest the ruckman up forward

Biglands (or Hudson, whoever is chosen to be the backup to Clarke) should be spending 100% of the time on the ground either rucking or in the forward line.

Im glad Craig is going to try some new things and not be so set in his ways in this area.

 

[slappy]

I think persisting with Biglands up forward is a good move. The few times he's played there he has caused problems not so much in direct impact (that is what needs to be worked on) but just causing defenders to have to watch their back, leading out of the square at 100 miles an hour and causing spillages.

The thing was that Ayres always had his rotation policy re: Clarke and Biglands. It never allowed:
a) the ruckman in play to have much of an influence around the ground, since he had to concentrate on getting to the ruck contest
b) there was never an opportunity to rest the ruckman up forward

Biglands (or Hudson, whoever is chosen to be the backup to Clarke) should be spending 100% of the time on the ground either rucking or in the forward line.

Im glad Craig is going to try some new things and not be so set in his ways in this area.

Agree with you totally mate.

Here's my team for what it's worth.

FF :- McLeod, Welsh, Biglands
HF :- Perrie, Hentschel, Jericho
C :- Edwards, Thomson, Burton
HB :- Goodwin, McGregor, Johnc*ck
FB :- Torney, Rutten, Hart
1R :- Clarke, Ricciuto, Bode

INT :- Hudson, Doughty, Reilly, Mattner

I'm assuming Mark Stevens will retire which is what I think will happen.

By playing Biglands up forward it reduces the pressure on Welsh, Hentchel & Perrie somewhat.

Biglands could also take all the ruckwork in the forward lines thus enabling Clarke & Hudson to swap off the bench as required.

I still find it somewhat perplexing that many fans rate Nathan Basset.

He would have found himself on the trade table very quickly if I had had my way.

I saw him play one good game this season and that was against Richmond so I question whether it should even count.

 

[imbecile12]

I still find it somewhat perplexing that many fans rate Nathan Basset.

He would have found himself on the trade table very quickly if I had had my way.

I saw him play one good game this season and that was against Richmond so I question whether it should even count.

Bassett being overmatched against the big forwards was a real issue. With Rutten there now, Bassett can play more as a flanker or on a medium sized forward. I believe he's in the best 22 no question.

 

[blighty]

He would have found himself on the trade table very quickly if I had had my way.

And mine....the most over rated player on our list.It took Eade about 20 minutes to get rid of his equally non talented brother too....

 

[macca23]

He would have found himself on the trade table very quickly if I had had my way.

And mine....the most over rated player on our list.It took Eade about 20 minutes to get rid of his equally non talented brother too....

The beauty of opinion - we all have one, we're all entitled to one, and they're all different.

On the contrary, I thought that Bassett played extrememly well once he was relieved from playing on much larger opponents when Rutten came into the side.

He'd be in my best 18 - one hell of a trier and an absolute champion dummy spitter!!

 

[Mad Dog]

The beauty of opinion - we all have one, we're all entitled to one, and they're all different.

On the contrary, I thought that Bassett played extrememly well once he was relieved from playing on much larger opponents when Rutten came into the side.

He'd be in my best 18 - one hell of a trier and an absolute champion dummy spitter!!

agreed....was always played out of his weight division by Ayreshead...looks a different prospect since the Truck parked at FB

 

[Stiffy_18]

He'd be in my best 18 - one hell of a trier and an absolute champion dummy spitter!!

That he is .

I just don't understand some of the people on these boards. Anyone with half a footy brain will realise the value Nathan Bassett brings to the side. Yes he gets beaten by bigger forwards but can you blame him. He gives up a couple of cms and few kgs against every opponent. Bassett is a superb team man. The number of times he leaves his man to cover up his team-mate's backside or to help him out is evident to any astute football watcher out there. His form has been very good since Rutten was moved to FB.

Makes my best 18 every time. If he was that crap why did Mark Williams ask if he was available at the end of 2003 season, before Bassett signed a 3 year deal???????

 

[tribey]

Yep. Another vote of confidence for Bassett.

Was in the top 10 spoilers again last season - as good a third-up defender as any going around.

 

[tribey]

BASSETT, Nathan

2004:

21 games
229 disposals @ 10.90 dpg
82 marks @ 3.90 mpg
27 tackles @ 1.28 tpg
78 spoils @ 3.71 spg - #7 in AFL
1 goal

Not sure what some here expect of Fred...

 

[Crowked]

BASSETT, Nathan

2004:

21 games
229 disposals @ 10.90 dpg
82 marks @ 3.90 mpg
27 tackles @ 1.28 tpg
78 spoils @ 3.71 spg - #7 in AFL
1 goal

Not sure what some here expect of Fred...

I wouldnt mind another goal.

 

[slappy]

That he is .

I just don't understand some of the people on these boards. Anyone with half a footy brain will realise the value Nathan Bassett brings to the side. Yes he gets beaten by bigger forwards but can you blame him. He gives up a couple of cms and few kgs against every opponent. Bassett is a superb team man. The number of times he leaves his man to cover up his team-mate's backside or to help him out is evident to any astute football watcher out there. His form has been very good since Rutten was moved to FB.

Makes my best 18 every time. If he was that crap why did Mark Williams ask if he was available at the end of 2003 season, before Bassett signed a 3 year deal???????

No need to resort to childish name calling now Stiffy_18. We are all friends and Crow supporters here.

My quote was "I still find it somewhat perplexing that many fans rate Nathan Basset."

Nowhere there did I refer to anyone as being football intellectually challenged now did I ?

I feel that Nathan Bassett is too small for a key position post and several posters above have agreed with that assessment even yourself.

I also feel that Nathan Bassett is far too slow to play as a half back flanker or forward.

I would have used Nathan Bassett as part of a trade for Adam Cooney if the Bulldogs were willing.

Given the age of Bassett I felt that there were better, younger options available to us.

Thus he was surplus to requirements especially if it meant we got Cooney.

We agree to disagree about Bassett but please refrain from suggesting that people who don't agree with you must be football minded impaired.

I can assure you that I have watched my fair share of football.

 

[tribey]

I feel that Nathan Bassett is too small for a key position post and several posters above have agreed with that assessment even yourself.

I also feel that Nathan Bassett is far too slow to play as a half back flanker or forward.

But the fact remains, in season 2004 he earned 11 touches, 4 marks, 4 spoils and a tackle per game on average.

Whichever way you look at it, for a backman those are impressive stats, regardless of his perceived physical limitations.

 

[Stiffy_18]

No need to resort to childish name calling now Stiffy_18. We are all friends and Crow supporters here.

My quote was "I still find it somewhat perplexing that many fans rate Nathan Basset."

Nowhere there did I refer to anyone as being football intellectually challenged now did I ?

I feel that Nathan Bassett is too small for a key position post and several posters above have agreed with that assessment even yourself.

I also feel that Nathan Bassett is far too slow to play as a half back flanker or forward.

I would have used Nathan Bassett as part of a trade for Adam Cooney if the Bulldogs were willing.

Given the age of Bassett I felt that there were better, younger options available to us.

Thus he was surplus to requirements especially if it meant we got Cooney.

We agree to disagree about Bassett but please refrain from suggesting that people who don't agree with you must be football minded impaired.

I can assure you that I have watched my fair share of football.

Firstly if I was having a crack at you I would quote you and tell you exactly what I think. Secondly you are not the only one that doesn't rate Bassett and to be honest I don't undstand why.

As a 3rd tall defender, Bassett is as good as any going around. When he is given a reasonable match up (so he is not fighting out of his height and weight divsion) he does an exceptional job. He is the first one to leave his man and help out his team mates. When played as a 3rd tall he also provides some run out of the backline. Rutten's emergence has done wonders for Bassett.

No player is untouchable (except maybe Roo) so if the right deal is there Bassett would be traded BUT why would WB get him when they need a KPP and have plenty of his types. He is far from surplus to our requirements and we would need to give up a LOT LOT LOT more for Cooney. Bassett would probably make up the 5% of that deal in terms of value.

Bassett is a required player. Just because he is not flashy enough and doesn't pick up his 20 possesion it doesn't make him an expendable player.

 

[Mad Dog]

I feel that Nathan Bassett is too small for a key position post and several posters above have agreed with that assessment even yourself.

and that's why he didn't play KP for the last 9 rounds - and if you look at the sides we've selected for R1 2005 - he is not mentioned as KP.

I would have used Nathan Bassett as part of a trade for Adam Cooney if the Bulldogs were willing.

How can I put this... ...I think that Nathan Bassett would be inconsequential in any discussions with the Bulldogs on Cooney

 

[Mad Dog]

we would need to give up a LOT LOT LOT more for Cooney. Bassett would probably make up the 5% of that deal in terms of value.
.

how does it go?????

Nail. Hammer. Head.

 

[tribey]

Picka. Damir. Dead.

 

[Mad Dog]

Picka. Damir. Dead.

club: West Adelaide......