AFL standard?

[ImperialPurple]

And when did I ever say you couldn't discuss it? When did I say I didn't like it? Quite simply put, I was arguing with your list and putting forth my opinion on it. If you want to back away with your tail between your legs, then fine, be my guest. Just typical of the culture of supporters really.

Oh get over yourself.

Ho hum... you said:

I honestly don't know why I bother coming back to this forum sometimes when I see threads like this

It's a discussion forum, and people discuss stuff. You don't have to come here if you don't like what is being discussed.


But as I said, I am not going to argue with you as it goes nowhere fast. Or rather it just ends up going rouind and round in cricles and then you start name-calling. I've seen it happen a dozen times before and I'm not going to get into it.

And FWIW - I stand by what I wrote in the OP. We are not good enough - that's why we are 1-7 and sitting comfortably in the bottom 4. 8-10 "true" AFL standards players - max. And a number who are just there, and another group who are almost there.

 

[freoextra]

"I can tell you that. Quite easily. He doesnt have all this apparently "class" that everyone keeps saying he has. Class is Judd/Goodwin etc. Mayne does not ooze class. He oozes McManus.. who is apparently not wanted around here anymore."

I really don't know what games you have been watching! Mayne oozes McManus - that is just weird. Mayne has a great set of hands, takes a good hang, skills are very good and is a very good shot on goal. Now I agree he is nothing like Judd/Goodwin and probably wont ever poll their brownlow medal votes. But your comparison to McManus is silly, even though I admire McManus he clearly does not have some of the skills of Mayne, he makes up for that with heart. Mayne is on the way up but will be inconsistant, I would be very surprised if he plays WAFL again this year - 25 possessions on saturday from a forward flank shows you his work rate.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Oh get over yourself.

Ho hum... you said:



It's a discussion forum, and people discuss stuff. You don't have to come here if you don't like what is being discussed.


But as I said, I am not going to argue with you as it goes nowhere fast. Or rather it just ends up going rouind and round in cricles and then you start name-calling. I've seen it happen a dozen times before and I'm not going to get into it.

And FWIW - I stand by what I wrote in the OP. We are not good enough - that's why we are 1-7 and sitting comfortably in the bottom 4. 8-10 "true" AFL standards players - max. And a number who are just there, and another group who are almost there.

ANd yet again, I never said people can't discuss. I was expressing my displeasure and the nature of many of these threads and how supporters tend to throw in the towel on players very early, hence why many are not head coaches at any level.

Oh and all of the sudden, I'm the one gonna start name calling? Brilliant call that one. You may be an established member around here, but I'm not gonna take crap from you, nor anyone else.

Also, FWIW really, we are good enough. We are sitting 1-7 more to a mental issue than anything else. We were in with a chance in the Collingwood game and lost the last quarter. We were in with a chance against Adelaide and lost the last quarter. We were in with a chance against Hawthorn and lost the last quarter. We were in with a chance against Geelong and lost the last quarter. We were leading Melbourne and we lost the last quarter. We were leading the Bulldogs and lost the last quarter.

All but one loss was due to the last quarter fade out. So clearly we were good enough to get to the teams and have a real shot. Most of these are the same players that could close out games 2 years ago. You cannot tell me that in the space of 2 years, they have lost their skill. Skill is not something you lose, confidence and mental ability to handle pressure are things that you can lose through close losses and tumultuous times. These players are definitely skilled enough. They just haven't conquered the mental demons. Geelong had that problem in 2006. They battled the demons of 2005 after losing a game they shouldn't have... they bounced back. No one back in 2006 was saying Gary Ablett, Paul Chapman etc had lost their ability to play. So why should we?

 

[Lach72]

We don't have Chapman and Ablett...

 

[Pav for AA]

ANd yet again, I never said people can't discuss. I was expressing my displeasure and the nature of many of these threads and how supporters tend to throw in the towel on players very early, hence why many are not head coaches at any level.

Oh and all of the sudden, I'm the one gonna start name calling? Brilliant call that one. You may be an established member around here, but I'm not gonna take crap from you, nor anyone else.

Also, FWIW really, we are good enough. We are sitting 1-7 more to a mental issue than anything else. We were in with a chance in the Collingwood game and lost the last quarter. We were in with a chance against Adelaide and lost the last quarter. We were in with a chance against Hawthorn and lost the last quarter. We were in with a chance against Geelong and lost the last quarter. We were leading Melbourne and we lost the last quarter. We were leading the Bulldogs and lost the last quarter.

All but one loss was due to the last quarter fade out. So clearly we were good enough to get to the teams and have a real shot. Most of these are the same players that could close out games 2 years ago. You cannot tell me that in the space of 2 years, they have lost their skill. Skill is not something you lose, confidence and mental ability to handle pressure are things that you can lose through close losses and tumultuous times. These players are definitely skilled enough. They just haven't conquered the mental demons. Geelong had that problem in 2006. They battled the demons of 2005 after losing a game they shouldn't have... they bounced back. No one back in 2006 was saying Gary Ablett, Paul Chapman etc had lost their ability to play. So why should we?

The ladder is a fair indicator of where the club is at.

You've put the finger on it though. The last quarter fade out's could it be we need to get better?

 

[Sman-21]

bit harsh on the list go through the bulldogs list that harsh or many other teams lists an u will see our list is good enough to compete.

Trouble is we have major problems with culture an now we have a 4th quarter problem where every team is going to never give up an always think they can still win if they just up the pressure.

Like bulldogs coach said cannot underestimate freo there a good side they have been able to push the best teams for 3 quarters an been in winning positions just havent got the wins.

 

[Latro]

I thought I might take it back on topic. Edited IP post to fit my selections.

1. Webster - no
2. JCarr - just
3. Schammer - no
4. Hasleby - yes
5. Dunn - no
6. Solomon - yes
7. Peake - no
8. McManus - shit no
9. MCarr - shit no
10. Palmer - yes
11. Des - yes
12. Brock - jury out
13. Pratt - ?
14. Grover - just
15. Crowley - getting there would be one of the better young taggers.
16. Mundy - yes
17. MaJ - not any more
18. McPharlin - yes
19. Hinkley - ?
20. Tarrant - yes
21. Black - just
22. Thornton - shit no
23. Mayne - will be soon enough
24. Campbell - no
25. Dodd - just
26. Kepler - just
27. Gilmore - no
28. Murphy - no
29. Pav - yes
30. Drum - getting there
31. Sandi - yes top 10 ruckman.
32. Bell - yes
33. Farmer - just
34. Warnock - getting there
35. Ibbotson - getting there
36. Browne - no
37. MiJ - no
38. Smith - ?
39. Mourish - ?
40. Foster - jury out
41. Duffield - no
42. Head - ?
43. Hayden - yes
44. Connelly - ?

 

[MadMac]

Can anyone of you that brabble about "standards" give me a definition of AFL Standard ? What is an AFL standard. What is the benchmark?

More questions to follow.

Ta

 

[freocynic]

I think everyones definition varies but to me it would mean would they get a game in a mid range to top level AFL team?

In some cases like MCarr, McManus and Schammer i think the answer would be a definite NO. No top 8 team would have those guys on their list, or if they did they would be there as depth players, on the fringe of selection hardly being used for most games. MCarr has gone that way now but the other 2 I think should not be walk up starts for selection. In fact I wouldn't have either of them there.

In other cases, like Murphy, he has WAS a good player back in '06, but at the moment whenever he gets picked to play he is pretty average. So he would be a NO....but he could be a YES if he found some of his 2006 form.

 

[MadMac]

I think everyones definition varies but to me it would mean would they get a game in a mid range to top level AFL team?

In some cases like MCarr, McManus and Schammer i think the answer would be a definite NO. No top 8 team would have those guys on their list, or if they did they would be there as depth players, on the fringe of selection hardly being used for most games. MCarr has gone that way now but the other 2 I think should not be walk up starts for selection. In fact I wouldn't have either of them there.

In other cases, like Murphy, he has WAS a good player back in '06, but at the moment whenever he gets picked to play he is pretty average. So he would be a NO....but he could be a YES if he found some of his 2006 form.

Fair enough.
Now, would you agree that most Freo fans here would label Medhurst and Polak as "not up to AFL standard" when they played for Freo in their last couple of seasons here?

 

[PintofPale]

Now I know a lot of water has gone under the bridge since 2002, but i remember hearing CC speak not far into the 2002 season, and at the time, his opinion was that we had 2 true AFL quality players on our list - Bell and Farmer.

He said then that there were others that were "getting there" or "close" (from memory he mentioned Pavlich and Hasleby, as well as JLo and Parker), but the harsh reality was that we had two AFL quality players playing at Freo.

To the best of my knowledge, CC was talking about "A-grade" players, not "AFL standard" players. In any team, you're going to have a mix of A, B, and C-grade players. You have to. Hopefully you won't have many D's or F's.

One of our problems atm is that our C's haven't become B's, and the B's haven't become A's. But to claim that Sandi is borderline AFL standard is completely missing the point.

 

[Belnakor]

Murphy is AFL standard. In a team that does not have a FF already (not Freo), he is quite clearly AFL standard and he proved that in 2006. He would work wonders are a team like the Western Bulldogs. A tall marking target. However his confidence is shattered by Freo's persistence to play him as the third marking tall who is rarely used.

Honestly, are you related to Murphy?

he is not AFL standard because he has the heart the size of a pea. He only wants the easy ball, and doesn't want to do any defense pressure. AFL standard my ____ing arse.

 

[ImperialPurple]

To the best of my knowledge, CC was talking about "A-grade" players, not "AFL standard" players. In any team, you're going to have a mix of A, B, and C-grade players. You have to. Hopefully you won't have many D's or F's.

One of our problems atm is that our C's haven't become B's, and the B's haven't become A's. But to claim that Sandi is borderline AFL standard is completely missing the point.

He may have meant "A-grade", but he said "AFL standard" cos that's aterm that has stuck with me ever since, and I have taken an interest in seeing whether our players can / have progressed to the next level.

The term is very ambiguous, and I apologise for any confusion / misunderstanding my usage of it may have caused, but I had the "CC meaning" in my mind - but of course even that is open to interpretation.

FWIW - I don't think we have 8-10 "A-grade" players on our list, so that in itself differs significantly from what I meant. I think we only have one A-grade player - and we all knnow who that is, and a couple of "almost A-graders" in Bell and Hayden.

Also - I am not advocating that we slash and burn through everyone who is not "AFL standard" - and I guess by that I mean guys who would get a game at the Top 4 clubs without too many questions asked about their selection or not.

The fact that we had 3 reps picked for the "Dream Team" and "Big V" squads, and only one make the final team says a lot about where we are at IMO.

But as I said, we shouldn't slash and burn through everyone who isn't in the Top 8-10 players at the club - but we need more of the "Just" list and the "Getting there" list and the "jury out" lists to move up. Like you said - Bs to become As, Cs to become Bs and rank outsiders to work their way into contention as C-graders.

We are carrying too many passengers and I reckon if we are all brutally honest we would see that we still have too many Bs and Cs just cruising and losing it when the going gets tough.

Bloody hell - have I not been the #1 fan of anyone wearing purple in the time I've been here?? It's not as if I am Mdme Negative Nelly always slagging them off... I might not have quite the positive outlook of Ripper, but I am much closer to Ripper's optimism than, say, GJ's pessimism.

I just think it's time we got our heads out of the sand and realised we're going nowhere fast at the moment, and a harsh assessment of the list is well due.

I just hope that those in charge are not too "close" and can objectively review the list and get rid of the dead wood.

And as for Sandi - love the big fella, and he's getting better and better and better every game. However, until he can consistently dominate and his taps go directly to midfielders (other than Rhys Palmer who just seems to know where to be), and we start to win more clearances than the opposition, I'm not prepared to say he's "A-grade". But I promise you "nearly there" is a compliment, not an insult, and is no slur on the Big mans's abilities.


Oh and one other thing - if we went through every list i reckon we'd find something similar in terms of how many AFL standard players they have - apart from the top 5 or 6 teams perhaps.

And there is always room for improvement for any player to lift himself up to a higher category, but that comes down to development by the coaching staff and hard work and dedication by the player himself. (Medhurst being a case in question).

 

[Ripper]

^^^ CC used "A graders" every time I heard him.

I think we need to step back a bit and get a bit of perspective.

What we are going through is a direct result of changing the coach .

New Game plan
New players
New Coaching panel learning on the job.

I will say that it is not all bad. Even though we have been losing the "process" is fine for the most part and getting better for longer.

Harves has been hamstrung a bit in selection , but this will be a blessing in disguise as We get games into players that wouldn't normally get a game as happened mid 2005 when Peake , Crowley & Johnno got a run.

This will help sort out the wheat from the chaff.

Our draw has seen us play the entire top four so far and We have mixed it with them all despite not playing anywhere near our best side in any of them (although what is actually our best 22 is anybodies guess at the moment).

We are not far off the pace and there is lots to be excited about going forward.

The 2009 team with Hase back should be unbeatable.

 

[malpaso]

And FWIW - I stand by what I wrote in the OP. We are not good enough - that's why we are 1-7 and sitting comfortably in the bottom 4. 8-10 "true" AFL standards players - max. And a number who are just there, and another group who are almost there.

IP, although I think your OP has some truth to it, I still wonder whether our losses can be put down to 'we are not good enough' based on talent etc.

We have lost games some very important games due to letting our guard down, strange coaching decisions (or lack thereof), bad umpiring and rotten luck.

I believe we are having one of those seasons akin to a detox. Harvey has been playing the youngsters, he has moved players around. If anything I sense a respect for their coach from the players (something I believe was never there before). They want to play well for Harvey. As we get rid of the pus/infection we will get better and there is definite proof of that. We are playing way better football than the first 3 weeks of the season albeit without wins.

 

[Lach72]

Well, if it's any consoation, we have the best overall record against the top 3

That is a total loss in points of 19

 

[dockers_bengals]

Great thread I.P. although i don't think it'll get stars like the sack harvey thread
Although I don't agree with all your placements,it's a valid point and as we know it really can't be changed til the end of the year or over time depending on the player.
One of the many problems IMO is we don't play as a team and like Harvey said is that we don't have a settle side, so if you add injuries to key players,poor form,high error rate and new coach we are are going to struggle as we have.

 

[Pav for AA]

^^^ CC used "A graders" every time I heard him.

I think we need to step back a bit and get a bit of perspective.

What we are going through is a direct result of changing the coach .

New Game plan
New players
New Coaching panel learning on the job.

I will say that it is not all bad. Even though we have been losing the "process" is fine for the most part and getting better for longer.

Harves has been hamstrung a bit in selection , but this will be a blessing in disguise as We get games into players that wouldn't normally get a game as happened mid 2005 when Peake , Crowley & Johnno got a run.

This will help sort out the wheat from the chaff.

Our draw has seen us play the entire top four so far and We have mixed it with them all despite not playing anywhere near our best side in any of them (although what is actually our best 22 is anybodies guess at the moment).

We are not far off the pace and there is lots to be excited about going forward.

The 2009 team with Hase back should be unbeatable.

 

[Ripper]

Well, if it's any consoation, we have the best overall record against the top 3

That is a total loss in points of 19

It is a consolantion that our best is as good as anyone's at times.

We are losing it through the rotations though at the moment.

When Headland , Josh & Hase are rotated on instead of Macca , Schammer , Peake you would expect more consistancy of performance.

 

[dockertor]

It is a consolantion that our best is as good as anyone's at times.

We are losing it through the rotations though at the moment.

When Headland , Josh & Hase are rotated on instead of Macca , Schammer , Peake you would expect more consistancy of performance.

Peake addds a lot to the team. There has been a lot of bashing of him around here of late, but it's misguided. Macca and Schammer are liabilities, best out of the side.

 

[Belnakor]

Its weird, when we started the season i thought we had a really good draw - bad teams away, good teams at home. Now because the team is travelling shit our draw is even worse - we don't have the bad teams at home so we aren't winning a thing.