Training 2017 Preseason Thread

[MightyDon]

Hooker has hamstrings? I always just figured he had two metal rods running up the back of his legs

 

[Keystone agony]

Because Ambrose hardly knows his way around a forward line?

Has played there aplenty

Maybe reading into things too much but to be training as a back then played as a forward wouldnt be comforting for Brown. Plenty of options who couldve filled the void.

 

[THOMO_31]

Is it just me or is everyone getting a lil worried with our big blokes all on modified programs or injured this early... hartley,hooker joey, belly.....

 

[BrunoV]

Has played there aplenty

Maybe reading into things too much but to be training as a back then played as a forward wouldnt be comforting for Brown. Plenty of options who couldve filled the void.

If Ambrose was really capable he would have continued to play forward last year and we would have left Brown in defence as was originally intended.

 

[BrunoV]

Is it just me or is everyone getting a lil worried with our big blokes all on modified programs or injured this early... hartley,hooker joey, belly.....

In a word, no.

Bellchambers is a sad story. While I don't see a spot for him in the side having arrived at this point he deserved a genuine shot at best 22 spot. He's a mile behind now.

Hooker has been carefully managed because of chronic hamstring issues in his past and a year off.

Hartley has a small strain and will have hardly missed a beat.

Daniher is also being managed. It's frustrating that he wont be able 110% for round 1 but he'll be fine for the season.

If we are still unsure by the start of the pre season tournament I'd be a little concerned.

It does go to show that the ruck stocks are thin. Two rucks with a first year rookie and 196cm pseudo ruck. Would be nice to have another option.

 

[Saint]

In a word, no.

Bellchambers is a sad story. While I don't see a spot for him in the side having arrived at this point he deserved a genuine shot at best 22 spot. He's a mile behind now.

Hooker has been carefully managed because of chronic hamstring issues in his past and a year off.

Hartley has a small strain and will have hardly missed a beat.

Daniher is also being managed. It's frustrating that he wont be able 110% for round 1 but he'll be fine for the season.

If we are still unsure by the start of the pre season tournament I'd be a little concerned.

It does go to show that the ruck stocks are thin. Two rucks with a first year rookie and 196cm pseudo ruck. Would be nice to have another option.

Surprised we didn't go for somebody like Nathan Vardy as a dependable but un-miraculous backup during the trade period.

It's tough to manage that area of the list though.

 

[efcboy]

In a word, no.

Bellchambers is a sad story. While I don't see a spot for him in the side having arrived at this point he deserved a genuine shot at best 22 spot. He's a mile behind now.

Hooker has been carefully managed because of chronic hamstring issues in his past and a year off.

Hartley has a small strain and will have hardly missed a beat.

Daniher is also being managed. It's frustrating that he wont be able 110% for round 1 but he'll be fine for the season.

If we are still unsure by the start of the pre season tournament I'd be a little concerned.

It does go to show that the ruck stocks are thin. Two rucks with a first year rookie and 196cm pseudo ruck. Would be nice to have another option.

I think there is merit in having an experienced ruckman on the list for break in emergency type of situation. Someone like Cameron wood - good enough to fill the void in emergency but not good enough that he won't get upset by playing VFL most of the time or seek opportunities elsewhere.

 

[BrunoV]

Surprised we didn't go for somebody like Nathan Vardy as a dependable but un-miraculous backup during the trade period.

It's tough to manage that area of the list though.

I take it that you're being ironic?

It's still a bit early in the morning.

 

[Pweter]

Daniher is also being managed. It's frustrating that he wont be able 110% for round 1 but he'll be fine for the season.

So he's only going to be 100%? Far out man!

Surprised we didn't go for somebody like Nathan Vardy as a dependable but un-miraculous backup during the trade period.

Dependable in a "he still comes to the club despite being forever injured" kind of dependable?

 

[Saint]

So he's only going to be 100%? Far out man!


Dependable in a "he still comes to the club despite being forever injured" kind of dependable?

Bad example because of the injuries, but there are lots of people who fill this mould, guys who can at least compete in the ruck and require an opponent in the forward line. (note Vardy did play 14 games last year, his highest yet.) Wouldn't be at all surprised to see him do well this year for the Coast and hold his spot up forward when Nic Nat is back.

Mark Blake won a premiership medal. (not that I'm suggesting him).

 

[vaughany]

Is there any intra club matches or open training this week?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[ezard15]

Is there any intra club matches or open training this week?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

good Q.

They usually train Friday morning.

If so I might try and make it.

You thinking of going?

I could bring my footy and we could have a bit of kick to kick!

 

[eDPS]

Bloody hell look at the gains on Colyer

 

[eth-dog]

Bloody hell look at the gains on Colyer

Who's the guy closest to the camera?

 

[eDPS]

Who's the guy closest to the camera?

That would be big boy Draper

 

[bombreys]

Agree. Everyone who came back knew that things would be different as far as the pecking order goes. Everyone of the players interviewed since being back have stated they need to be more flexible and prepared to play in other spots. However everyone is getting a fair shot. The way Wallet describes it seems to be saying some where never going to be in the picture.
Hocking is on the fringe but i think he has used a poor example. If Heath has to play VFL he will play VFL and give it exactly the same as he would playing AFL.
The only thing he has correct is the 4 mentioned can not be in the middle at the same time. Not that they may all not be on the ground at the same time.

Some blokes will miss out but i fail to see how that is any different to say Collingwood who have traded players in, or Hawthorn who have traded players in and out or anyone for that matter. All clubs will have players in the VFL who feel they should be in the AFL. It happens every year. Yes our circumstance is a little different but at the end of the day it will be no different. The blokes who play this year will be the ones who want to buy into the team and the game plan and you can take that to the bank ! The ones who do not can please themselves.

Exactly.

I don't think Craig Bird is going to be salty towards the club if he goes out for Heppell.

Wallace has always hated Essendon - it could have actually been an interesting discussion (on team balance with the returning guys), but again he let his hatred of Essendon get in the way.

Also - you're spot on about Hocking - even though it's a hypothetical, Wallace couldn't have chosen a worse example. Hocking is one bloke who would not drop his head or sook up - he's going to give his all at any level.

 

[Milanista28]

Draper massive for 18.

 

[westking]

My guess is that Wallace has no idea about the integrity both Hocking and Stanton have. To suggest they'd crack the sads because somebody has earned their spot on merit is a slight on their character. Maybe you could question a young bloke with known attitude problems but to use these two club stalwarts as examples is a bloody poor summation from a supposed expert analyst. I think Stants and Buddha are quality blokes with genuine integrity and respect from their peers. They'd be the last blokes on our list to kick up a fuss to the detriment of the team dynamic.

What an utter ********.

Wallace has been a bit of a sniper towards the EFC for a while now. Supporters from the 17 other clubs can be happy to read/listen about his opinion, but I think the EFC would prefer us to actually hear from an actual player at the club. I know I do.

http://m.essendonfc.com.au/news/2017-01-23/i-just-want-to-play

 

[BrunoV]

Exactly.

I don't think Craig Bird is going to be salty towards the club if he goes out for Heppell.

Wallace has always hated Essendon - it could have actually been an interesting discussion (on team balance with the returning guys), but again he let his hatred of Essendon get in the way.

Also - you're spot on about Hocking - even though it's a hypothetical, Wallace couldn't have chosen a worse example. Hocking is one bloke who would not drop his head or sook up - he's going to give his all at any level.

How do you read Essendon hatred into the article?

I will preface this by saying I do not necessarily expect that this scenario will end in disaster but everyone is focusing on discussions held before banned players, and others, re-committed or committed to the club in isolation. I would have thought it is more complicated.

Clearly these conversations were all positive, otherwise the relevant players would not be on our list, but do you really think that any of the players heard "you might have to play for your spot" and thought "that's cool, if I don't make the cut so be it"? I would be amazed if any of the players did not approach those discussions from the perspective that playing for a spot would be a teammate's problem problem. That's not a criticism of anyone in any way, it reflects the self belief that I would expect of a professional athlete.

In many way anything that happens until a tough choice is made will be irrelevant. It's when the tough call is made that someone will be disappointed and emotion then enters the equation.

How does Worsfold go to Howlett, for example, and say "Ben you're doing everything right but Fantasia and Walla are the small forwards and we like the run of Parish and Langford in the middle so we just don't have a spot". Howlett will know that nothing will have changed between his re-committing and my hypothetical conversation. The same goes for any returning player who is left out. When does he start thinking that this was the second time he was used? It's very much on the club to be clear about its ultimate intentions.

What flimsy rationale is Worsfold going to try to sell to Gleeson or McKenna who finds himself in the twos despite finishing 2016 the way they did? They'll both know that they are at the required standard and they'll know that they made way for a senior player they did not need last year. They'll know that the hardest place to play for your spot is in the VFL and that "playing for a spot" borders on being bullshit corporate speak.

I do not think these reactions are unreasonable. At the end of the day there will be arbitrary decisions which are made. That's team selection, do we really believe that the ordering of a log jam, in our case between 18 and probably 26, on a list is ordered according to some objective scientific formula that is beyond dispute?

I would not hold it against any player for being pissed off. We're trying to "have our cake and eat it too" and that is an approach that does not usually work. It strikes me as naive to just assume that we will get away with it before we have even arrived at the first potential problem. The player are human, afterall.

 

[Mercuri Rising]

Bloody hell look at the gains on Colyer

i was gearing up to say he was big in 2015, etc...

nope, looks huge there. mirin

 

[Runk]

Bloody hell look at the gains on Colyer

Fingers crossed he can still run at mach speed. #unit

 

[Saint]

How do you read Essendon hatred into the article?

I will preface this by saying I do not necessarily expect that this scenario will end in disaster but everyone is focusing on discussions held before banned players, and others, re-committed or committed to the club in isolation. I would have thought it is more complicated.

Clearly these conversations were all positive, otherwise the relevant players would not be on our list, but do you really think that any of the players heard "you might have to play for your spot" and thought "that's cool, if I don't make the cut so be it"? I would be amazed if any of the players did not approach those discussions from the perspective that playing for a spot would be a teammate's problem problem. That's not a criticism of anyone in any way, it reflects the self belief that I would expect of a professional athlete.

In many way anything that happens until a tough choice is made will be irrelevant. It's when the tough call is made that someone will be disappointed and emotion then enters the equation.

How does Worsfold go to Howlett, for example, and say "Ben you're doing everything right but Fantasia and Walla are the small forwards and we like the run of Parish and Langford in the middle so we just don't have a spot". Howlett will know that nothing will have changed between his re-committing and my hypothetical conversation. The same goes for any returning player who is left out. When does he start thinking that this was the second time he was used? It's very much on the club to be clear about its ultimate intentions.

What flimsy rationale is Worsfold going to try to sell to Gleeson or McKenna who finds himself in the twos despite finishing 2016 the way they did? They'll both know that they are at the required standard and they'll know that they made way for a senior player they did not need last year. They'll know that the hardest place to play for your spot is in the VFL and that "playing for a spot" borders on being bullshit corporate speak.

I do not think these reactions are unreasonable. At the end of the day there will be arbitrary decisions which are made. That's team selection, do we really believe that the ordering of a log jam, in our case between 18 and probably 26, on a list is ordered according to some objective scientific formula that is beyond dispute?

I would not hold it against any player for being pissed off. We're trying to "have our cake and eat it too" and that is an approach that does not usually work. It strikes me as naive to just assume that we will get away with it before we have even arrived at the first potential problem. The player are human, afterall.

I think it's worth pointing out where we finished on the ladder and while some players may have looked better than others, we're talking about a bottom team, so I don't think anyone missing a game this season is going to get really upset about things. And if they're playing VFL for us and somebody else offers them a contract at the end of the year, then they can go with our blessing.

Nobody is going to crack the sads in the magoos and if they're that type of person, the sooner they're gone, the better. Every club has people missing out, the better clubs have more people missing. Essendon is no special case and neither are any of our players. There's a full list with no suspensions, everyone picked on merit, as it should be.

It's the way Wallace made this out to be a specific Essendon problem when the only difference is that a lot of our VFL guys will have previous AFL experience (which they probably wouldn't have otherwise had).

 

[BrunoV]

I think it's worth pointing out where we finished on the ladder and while some players may have looked better than others, we're talking about a bottom team, so I don't think anyone missing a game this season is going to get really upset about things. And if they're playing VFL for us and somebody else offers them a contract at the end of the year, then they can go with our blessing.

Nobody is going to crack the sads in the magoos and if they're that type of person, the sooner they're gone, the better. Every club has people missing out, the better clubs have more people missing. Essendon is no special case and neither are any of our players. There's a full list with no suspensions, everyone picked on merit, as it should be.

It's the way Wallace made this out to be a specific Essendon problem when the only difference is that a lot of our VFL guys will have previous AFL experience (which they probably wouldn't have otherwise had).

It is specifically an Essendon problem.

Name another club where you and old are in the same battle to the same extent.

 

[efcboy]

How do you read Essendon hatred into the article?

I will preface this by saying I do not necessarily expect that this scenario will end in disaster but everyone is focusing on discussions held before banned players, and others, re-committed or committed to the club in isolation. I would have thought it is more complicated.

Clearly these conversations were all positive, otherwise the relevant players would not be on our list, but do you really think that any of the players heard "you might have to play for your spot" and thought "that's cool, if I don't make the cut so be it"? I would be amazed if any of the players did not approach those discussions from the perspective that playing for a spot would be a teammate's problem problem. That's not a criticism of anyone in any way, it reflects the self belief that I would expect of a professional athlete.

In many way anything that happens until a tough choice is made will be irrelevant. It's when the tough call is made that someone will be disappointed and emotion then enters the equation.

How does Worsfold go to Howlett, for example, and say "Ben you're doing everything right but Fantasia and Walla are the small forwards and we like the run of Parish and Langford in the middle so we just don't have a spot". Howlett will know that nothing will have changed between his re-committing and my hypothetical conversation. The same goes for any returning player who is left out. When does he start thinking that this was the second time he was used? It's very much on the club to be clear about its ultimate intentions.

What flimsy rationale is Worsfold going to try to sell to Gleeson or McKenna who finds himself in the twos despite finishing 2016 the way they did? They'll both know that they are at the required standard and they'll know that they made way for a senior player they did not need last year. They'll know that the hardest place to play for your spot is in the VFL and that "playing for a spot" borders on being bullshit corporate speak.

I do not think these reactions are unreasonable. At the end of the day there will be arbitrary decisions which are made. That's team selection, do we really believe that the ordering of a log jam, in our case between 18 and probably 26, on a list is ordered according to some objective scientific formula that is beyond dispute?

I would not hold it against any player for being pissed off. We're trying to "have our cake and eat it too" and that is an approach that does not usually work. It strikes me as naive to just assume that we will get away with it before we have even arrived at the first potential problem. The player are human, afterall.

Howlett's manager looked around for better offers but there wasn't much interest. I don't think he can be too upset if he ends up playing VFL as other afl clubs were hardly knocking down doors to get him.

 

[efcboy]

I think it's worth pointing out where we finished on the ladder and while some players may have looked better than others, we're talking about a bottom team, so I don't think anyone missing a game this season is going to get really upset about things. And if they're playing VFL for us and somebody else offers them a contract at the end of the year, then they can go with our blessing.

Nobody is going to crack the sads in the magoos and if they're that type of person, the sooner they're gone, the better. Every club has people missing out, the better clubs have more people missing. Essendon is no special case and neither are any of our players. There's a full list with no suspensions, everyone picked on merit, as it should be.

It's the way Wallace made this out to be a specific Essendon problem when the only difference is that a lot of our VFL guys will have previous AFL experience (which they probably wouldn't have otherwise had).

Yep our VFL team will be hard to beat this year