Remove this Banner Ad

2005

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Macca19 said:
But Pred have we experimented because weve wanted to or have we done it because we dont have a choice?

In Round 1 Pettigrew got a game because Wakelin was injured
In Round 2 Ebert got a game because Pickett was injured
White got a game because the players demanded he play
Surjan got games because of injury, ditto Chaplin.

Our young players cant fight their way into the side because they dont get an oppurtunity. You have to wonder if Pickett didnt do his collarbone in Round 1 if Ebert would have played the next week, or even half the games he played this year.

It's hard too know at this stage whether Choco would give the youngsters a run on good SANFL form alone. To be honest, last year Ebert deserved a game on SANFL, but didn't get one, this year he got games due to injury, he hasn't really performed that well at AFL level and his form last week for the Magpies was average. This year White has deserved a game on SANFL form but probably only really got AFL games because of injury, which isn't a great sign. But apart from those examples no one has really played great footy at SANFL over the past few years, mainly because of injuries.

To me the right thing to do is give a player a game when his form warrants it, be they 20 or 30, sometimes choco doesn't do that IMO. But i'd hope he knows better than us what match ups/strategy will work against each opposition and as such perhaps players get picked on other reasons rather than just form alone.

I'm not worried about our list management, i reckon it's pretty good. We had a problem with younger tall defenders, Chad pretty much took care of that. We only need a replacement FB as a major component of our team in the next few years. I'd imagine Pettigrew or Gilham will get there chance next year or perhaps even Ackland! You never know. The others like Gav, Dimma, Schoey and Monty have got replacements starting to make their mark in JB, Dom & Kane. Another young HBF would be nice, the Guru springs to mind but alas.
 
Hopefully our back six next year includes Pettigrew or Gilham.

I'd like to see:
JB, Wakes, Pettigrew or Gilham/Bishop
Wilbur, JT, Bishop/Monty

Would rather Gav spend more time up forward or in the midfield. Thrust should also get more time down there.

The year after there won't be room for all Wakes, Bishop & Monty.

I'd hope to see:
JB, Pettigrew or Gilham, Wakes/Bishop/Monty
Wilbur, JT, Monty/????

Again with Thrust being given a chance.
 
C. Cornes, Pettigrew, Gilham, Chaplin, Thurstans. How are they all going to fit in there, long-term? Something's got to give.

Assuming we keep Thrust up forward... Gilham and Chaplin take top 2 talls, Cornes continues his role against the third tall and we hope that Pettigrew can go with a medium-small forward? I see the Grew as a Bishop/Monty hybrid.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Pred said:
We haven't seen enough of any of these guys to be planning them into our defence.
No, all we had to do is look at the ages of Wakelin and Bishop.

I'm not saying they'll be in the team Round 1 2005, but that will be the core of our defense long-term.
 
Gilham must get a game or ten next year.
If not, he will fall way behind players he was in front of when he was drafted.
 
Long term we are gonna have trouble fitting these guys into the side.

This is how i see it in my opinion:

Pettigrew i dont see at Full Back. Id put him in a pocket and play him similar to Bishop except id tell him to use his pace a hell of a lot more than Bishop does.

Chaplin. Two options in my view. Play him at Full Back. Play him in a Forward Pocket. He is a natural forward, played forward most of his junior career. Give him Thurstans spot or play him out of Full Forward.

Gilham - Id like his as one of our key defenders but cant see where he fits at the minute. He either goes to CHB and we move Chad somewhere else...maybe to a back flank in place of Monty, or he takes Pettigrews spot and try the Grew on a wing for something different.

C Cornes - wouldnt mind him up forward again or even on the ball. But back flank in Montys role...taller, quicker, more attacking...he'd be All Australian HBF every year until he retires.

Thurstans - trade, or keep him as that floating forward type. Even tho I was hugely calling him to play in defence, everytime he does play back there he goes at half back and just doesnt have the urgency in my view.
 
Hmmm... I don't know about your assessment of Gilham. He's the most prototypical FB on our list since Paxman, IMO. Will be a cornerstone back there.

C. Cornes and Pettigrew will be our rebounding defenders, evidently. And won't that be a sight to behold.

Thurstans and Chaplin will need a bit of time to settle into a position, be it forward or back. They both have the talent.
 
Bresh said:
Hmmm... I don't know about your assessment of Gilham. He's the most prototypical FB on our list since Paxman, IMO. Will be a cornerstone back there.
...
Have been saying that ever since I saw him play in the one and only game I have seen him in so far. Seems to be a natural.
 
Arsene Wenger said:
Although its very early and there is still much to go in this season, I found myself today pondering as to who may get delisted at the end of the year

I thought the following (note this is pretty ruthless)

HALL
CHAMPION
FORSTER KNIGHT
HARDWICK (to retire)

ANyone wana throw up any other names?

Will GIlham get another go -- I would hope so !

I don't agree with delisting Champion - he is still relatively young in football terms and has great potential. Big men usually take longer to develope as evident with Thurstans.

I am hoping Port will keep Gilham and Pettigrew as they have shown they can play and I see them as replacements for Wakelin and Bishop over the next couple of years. If we can negotiate a good trade for Dewy, I think Port should go for it.
 
Scott said:
If Symes at 185cm's is tall for a footballer well Im bigger than I thought, although Brad still has about 15cm's on me. :D
I would suggest that even I would be "tall" compared to you, at 179cm ;)

Ok, so Symes is not a true 'tall', but certainly is tallish.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Pred said:
I would suggest that even I would be "tall" compared to you, at 179cm ;)

Ok, so Symes is not a true 'tall', but certainly is tallish.
Yes in comparison to me he is tall, what do you reckon the chances are that he makes a swap for my 170cm?

Even 179cm would be okay, how about a swap Pred?
 
Mitch Power said:
I don't agree with delisting Champion - he is still relatively young in football terms and has great potential. Big men usually take longer to develope as evident with Thurstans.

I am hoping Port will keep Gilham and Pettigrew as they have shown they can play and I see them as replacements for Wakelin and Bishop over the next couple of years. If we can negotiate a good trade for Dewy, I think Port should go for it.

I tend to agree. Just haven't seen enough of Champion to know what he is capable of at best. Would we better opening up room on our list and targeting the best young forward we can in the draft, ala a Fergus Watts?

The problem with that, is that by necessity our higher picks will need to be reserved for midfield talent.
 
With yours truly being '6"5 and a forward pocket/utility, Symes is certifiably undersized as a midfielder.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Champion would probably get another year if he wasn't injured all the bloody time. We can't afford to carry a player who's got chronic injury concerns - especially not a player that even if fit isn't a certainty to make it. The harsh realities of salary caps and fixed list sizes will most likely see Champion go at the end of the year.
 
Saw Symes in Darwin, and he is considerably taller than Pickett and Wilson.
Is he still growing?
Is he that 6'2" type player that "every team needs"?
Can he tag?
 
PAfolwr said:
Is he that 6'2" type player that "every team needs"?
That was the rationale behind Cochrane, wasn't it?
 
Porthos said:
That was the rationale behind Cochrane, wasn't it?
Yep, and by the looks of it, he will continue to get games till we have a replacement regardless of form.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom