Brett Ebert

[*PAF]

*PAF you are mixing your key forwards up.

Honestly if mark keeps him as a 175cm FF with a bung shoulder, his days look numbered. Atleast put him on a wing when warrens resting at CHF and i'm sure he could manage atleast 5 minute rotations a quarter in the middle, so he can atleast show what he can do.

See, you can make sense at times.

 

[cro_Magnum]

He won the Magarey medal in 2003, the year after he was drafted.

I have not said Ebert is better than Reilly at present or even the other way around. I have also not said that either will or will not star in the AFL.
What I have said is that Ebert 2005 vs Ebert 2001 >> improvement than Reilly 2001 Vs Reilly 2005.
Reilly was a first round draft pick in 2001, Ebert was not.

I have not rewritten any history, just stated some facts.

You're right about the Magarey, my timing was out. Still I think he was a good pick as a 3rd round. We picked Ben Finnin I think.

Never said that you thought he was better than Reilly, although I know who I'd rather have in my team ATM. Both of them have the added expectation (surname + Magarey vs 1st round pick + Dal Santo comparison) so they can't hide. Both of them also have the ability to succeed, as do most draftees
- D Gallagher aside - but we all know it takes more than ablity.

 

[macca23]

IMO, and let's remember it is only that as I am no expert, the type of small forward that he can provide is not suited for Port Adelaide atm. Not when we have good tall key position players and good resting ruckman such as Lade. If he is to make it, it needs to be in the midfield.

Actually we are in total agreement on this point.

Where we differ is whether he will make it as a mid-fielder at AFL level.

My point was that last year Port were desperate for a mid-fielder and still didn't see Ebert as one. Why would they this year when there are more options than last year.

Personally I can't see him being any better than an average mid-fielder at AFL level, which is why I think he could be in long term trouble.

That's not a wish, just an opinion.

 

[*PAF]

Actually we are in total agreement on this point.

Where we differ is whether he will make it as a mid-fielder at AFL level.

My point was that last year Port were desperate for a mid-fielder and still didn't see Ebert as one. Why would they this year when there are more options than last year.

Personally I can't see him being any better than an average mid-fielder at AFL level, which is why I think he could be in long term trouble.

That's not a wish, just an opinion.

You have probably seen him play in the midfield (SANFL) more often than I have. I can only go on what I have seen, and that does not include much midfield time at all. Thus it is virtually impossible for me to have an opinion wrt Ebert being up to AFL standards for a midfielder or not.

 

[portentous]

I think he's another Damian Squire-great in the SANFL but lacking something to really make it in the AFL. Hope he proves me wrong, but I don't see it at this stage.

 

[macca23]

I think he's another Damian Squire-great in the SANFL but lacking something to really make it in the AFL. Hope he proves me wrong, but I don't see it at this stage.

Exactly how I see him.

Too good for SANFL but only just at AFL.

As a distant rellie of mine, I do wish him well though, and am quite happy to be wrong for his sake.

 

[Macca19]

My point was that last year Port were desperate for a mid-fielder and still didn't see Ebert as one. Why would they this year when there are more options than last year.

A marked improvement in attitude and also work ethic. It has been said before that Mark hasnt given him a go in the middle because he has felt he hasnt deserved it. An improvement in attitude and work at training may see him given a proper shot there this year.

 

[StickerMan]

Exactly how I see him.

Too good for SANFL but only just at AFL.

As a distant rellie of mine, I do wish him well though, and am quite happy to be wrong for his sake.

Brett Chalmers anyone????

 

[ExpectToWin]

If Brett is not going to be played in the midfield then I say dont play him.

He has proven time and time again that playing as a small forward is not his position and besides we have one of the best small forwards in Mahoney already.

It all comes down to what they call the 'Engine'. If Brett can get a stronger fitness base which is what he is working on then a midfield position will be his because he the skills.

 

[Damp Squarie]

No, I really don't think they would have picked him up. I think he is over rated.

Winning a Magarey Medal doesn't mean you can play AFL - ie Paul Thomas.

k
xx

But like DT says,there would've been 15 other clubs queueing up after his Magarey Medal win.
It must count for something? Or has our state league diminished that badly.

 

[Damp Squarie]

Thats always remained a mystery to me.
The fact that players can win a Magary and struggle in AFL ranks...surely the two comps are not poles apart

 

[tribey]

Under the spotlight:

Shattock,

Should be under a landfill.

The William Hung of football.

 

[tribey]

Port were struggling for mid-fielders last year, and still didn't use Ebert in that capacity. They can't be that wrong in their judgement.

They did continue to play Thurstans up forward, Primus in ruck and Francou and Cochrane in midfield at times when they clearly didn't look up to it.

It never ceased to amaze me how Choco wheeled out so much loyalty post-Premiership when prior to that his ruthlessness was what had kept them at the top for so very long. 2003 being a case inpoint when Cockatoo-Collins, Paxman and Kingsley - all solid players with plenty to give come matchday - were delisted (with the latter redrafted after getting his arse into gear).

But 2005 saw decidedly average talent and woefully out of form or underdone players given repeated chances as the season continued to lurch from bad to worse.

As has been well-documented, Choco obviously sees Brett as a small forward (which clearly he isn't despite some decent makeshift performances here and there), but IMO it was his bloody-mindedness and his famous 'golden tickets' that were more the reason for Ebert not getting a proper run in the guts, rather than any general consensus on perceived lack of talent.

 

[*PAF]

... but IMO it was his bloody-mindedness and his famous 'golden tickets' that were more the reason for Ebert not getting a proper run in the guts, rather than any general consensus on perceived lack of talent.

That is one criticism of Choco.
I am confident (or is it hopeful) that once given a decent go in the middle Ebert will come through. Tidy up a couple of areas and there is no reason he could not be a Goodwin type for us.

 

[dreamkillers]

That is one criticism of Choco.
I am confident (or is it hopeful) that once given a decent go in the middle Ebert will come through.

Whilst it might be a criticism Macca19 summed up the real reason Brett didn't get those chances last year..........

A marked improvement in attitude and also work ethic. It has been said before that Mark hasnt given him a go in the middle because he has felt he hasnt deserved it. An improvement in attitude and work at training may see him given a proper shot there this year.

He's not the first and won't be that last AFL player that thought 'he had made it' and relaxed a little in attitude and effort after getting some game time.

Thankfully indications are that he reacted positively to his post season review and is putting in extra work to ensure he gets those chances in 2006.

 

[Crow-mo]

it's funny isn't it. with some players the supporters want it more for them, than they do for themselves.

 

[jc67]

I'm in the minority here, i rate the bloke!
And i have well before he was playing senior footy.
He has poise and balance that cant be taught, i would be delighted if the crows traded for him
The one thing that most agree on is that Williams hasn't given him a fair go.

 

[outback jack]

They did continue to play Thurstans up forward, Primus in ruck and Francou and Cochrane in midfield at times when they clearly didn't look up to it.

It never ceased to amaze me how Choco wheeled out so much loyalty post-Premiership when prior to that his ruthlessness was what had kept them at the top for so very long. 2003 being a case inpoint when Cockatoo-Collins, Paxman and Kingsley - all solid players with plenty to give come matchday - were delisted (with the latter redrafted after getting his arse into gear).

But 2005 saw decidedly average talent and woefully out of form or underdone players given repeated chances as the season continued to lurch from bad to worse.

As has been well-documented, Choco obviously sees Brett as a small forward (which clearly he isn't despite some decent makeshift performances here and there), but IMO it was his bloody-mindedness and his famous 'golden tickets' that were more the reason for Ebert not getting a proper run in the guts, rather than any general consensus on perceived lack of talent.

of the players you mentioned which would of taken bretts spot in the middle? Eckerman and thomson both got good goes in there and pearce got games with no problem. Still cant see how the wilson, primus, francou types were given 'gold cards' either, this is just popular opinion from some posters in ports BF gang. Like really what else did they expect from them after such serious injuries? If anything primus' career was finished early because of mark and he was unfairly treated as a whole and really should and would still be playing afl football today if it wasnt for marks lack of imagination and desperate state mid last yr. Certainly wasnt loyalty on marks part.

While it seems illogical for ebert not to spend atleast some time in the middle, these gold cards werent the reason. Clearly there were other issues like his endurance that they werent happy with. If anything rather than holding on and being loyal, mark uses his players as scapegoats to cover that he is actually a pretty average coach when it comes to matchday and on the big stage, that was no different in 05.

 

[portentous]

You have to earn a midfield spot. Brett hasn't done that prior to this preseason. I'm sure he'll get opportunities-and soon-to show what he's made of.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Thats always remained a mystery to me.
The fact that players can win a Magary and struggle in AFL ranks...surely the two comps are not poles apart

Sadly they probably are. Have a look at the MMs since 1997 and it's hardly an inspiring list. Ebert would probably be the one young bloke on the list who hadn't already had a crack on an AFL main/rookie list (yes he was on one, but only just starting out).

Having said that, he didn't just win the medal that year he romped it in. I don't think he polled more than 1 vote in the first 8 rounds, but he won running away with a swag of votes, especially first preferences. Over those last 14 rounds it would have been near as dominant a performance as his old boy put up in winning the 1976 medal (1 umpire record of 42 votes).

So he can play, there's no question. I saw a reasonable amount of him that year and was impressed by his ability to find the ball - and more importantly his ability to hurt the opposition with it - he genuinely won games off his own boot, his strength, his tackling, his long kicking, yes even his pace (at least burst pace). People say there's a question over his engine - well he runs out full games at SANFL level - yes the AFL you run harder, faster, longer, but he can do that - and even with what he showed he could run on ball bursts at AFL level - 10-15 minutes. His tackling has been maligned at AFL level, yet he was one of the better tacklers I saw at SANFL level, yes the AFL bodies are bigger, stronger and faster, but he's no squib and good technique is good technique. Danyle Pearce brought down Craig Parry in a tackle in a SANFL game not long before his promotion, so technique and body strength count for a lot. He's not accountable ... well I think top on ballers rarely are - they let you worry about them. And he was so dominant at SANFL level, he really was the one othres worried about. Maybe it's a bad habit, but then not every top AFL on baller hunts an opponent and the ball like Kane Cornes for example.

In the end I think it comes down to attitude. From second hand reports I've heard, he doesn't have a balls to the wall training ethos like say Stuart Cochrane had. Williams looks for that at training, if you show it you get a chance. If not, you struggle. So this is Ebert's make or break. Preliminary reports are that he's putting in the hard yards and Williams has spoken of midfield game time for him. So we'll find out if he can make it in that role - he won't as a small forward. I'd like to still think he has what it takes, famous surname or not.

 

[jmorg1]

My title used to be Hentschel > Ebert.

A couple of Port Power supporters thought it was funny at the time. But I think it's a fact now.

 

[spice18]

If anything rather than holding on and being loyal, mark uses his players as scapegoats to cover that he is actually a pretty average coach when it comes to matchday and on the big stage, that was no different in 05.

I'm pretty certain the Brisbane Lions will disagree with you on that one. And history will pencil Mark as the coach who orchestrated the downfall of one of the greatest ever football sides who were gunning for 4 premierships in a row. No mean feat, regardless of whatever excuses you will dig up in your desparate attempt not to credit Mark with that achievement.

 

[- PC -]

I'm pretty certain the Brisbane Lions will disagree with you on that one. And history will pencil Mark as the coach who orchestrated the downfall of one of the greatest ever football sides who were gunning for 4 premierships in a row. No mean feat, regardless of whatever excuses you will dig up in your desparate attempt not to credit Mark with that achievement.

Tactics like sending people out to deliberatley punch injured body parts( not condoning playing injured people either)

Port wanted it more...all Mark had to do was make sure Brown got a knock to the knee ..or 4 or 5

 

[outback jack]

My title used to be Hentschel > Ebert.

A couple of Port Power supporters thought it was funny at the time. But I think it's a fact now.

its fair to say skippy>>ebert now. Who would of thought.

 

[outback jack]

I'm pretty certain the Brisbane Lions will disagree with you on that one. And history will pencil Mark as the coach who orchestrated the downfall of one of the greatest ever football sides who were gunning for 4 premierships in a row. No mean feat, regardless of whatever excuses you will dig up in your desparate attempt not to credit Mark with that achievement.

well i've had a careful look and the initial point was regarding eberts exclusion from the midfield and dyertribes bandwagonish thoughts that players like primus, francou etc were given gold cards ahead of him, when really the opposite happened. In marks own words nothing was expected at the start of the season from them anyway, but that sort of changed when mark got put under pressure. So you've taken that quote out of context as its not talking about 04 specifically, but if you dont think mark is an average match day coach atleast, then its poor judgment as most of your own supporters would admit its not one of his strengths. Whenever we go into a showdown i know who i'd want coaching my team.


With regards to the Brisbane lions i saw an article a while back from m. voss that wasn’t exactly complementary to your performance and as perthcrow has pointed out with brown injured and lynch gone it wasn’t exactly a masterstroke performance from mark either. Without a doubt though history will remember the occasion when instead of accepting victory gracefully and with honor as paul roos did in 05, mark instead couldn’t contain his bitterness and decided to bag the major sponsor for all to see. (Only to crawl back some weeks later with scott on his death bed asking for forgiveness) -one of my all time favourite port power moments. If i find the time i’ll look into my personal collection to see if i can find the picture of the occasion.