Captaincy

[Palmer Stoat]

double post

 

[Palmer Stoat]

What makes Heater the obvious choice? Is it the repeated hissy fits he throws when something doesn't go his way, both at the umpires and his team-mates? Or the childish demeanour he has off the field?

Well, I scratch my head in just the same way when you say he obviously isn't captaincy material. Perhaps it's obvious to you, but it's not obvious to me. As for his 'hissy fits', are you serious? Yes, he's demonstrative on the field, but that's because he's passionate and he assumes responsibility. There are plenty of player who shout instructions, issue orders, and tee off at teammates who aren't doing the right thing. That's exactly why I think he's leadership material. Could he moderate his behaviour a little? Perhaps, though I'm not wringing my hands over it. (Buckley learned to do so. I don't see why Shaw couldn't if it was a problem.)

And if you're gonna disqualify people for disputing umpiring decisions there would scarcely be a single player fit for the captaincy at the entire club. Just this year Burns has given away 50m penalties for disputing decisions. I've seen Buckley do the same. So I think this is pretty weak reasoning on your part.

I've never witnessed the 'childish off-field demeanour' you're talking about. I've seen him interviewed a couple of times and he was fine, so I'm not sure what you're referring to.

He's a fantastically courageous courageous player, but there's a reason he's never mentioned by Malthouse.

Maybe. But I'm offering my opinion based on what I see -- I noted from the start that we're all judging from the outside looking in.

As for the other guys mentioned, Travis has stated he doesn't want it, Josh's chance has sailed by, and Thomas is more childish than Heath. O'Brien is an interesting name, but ultimately was probably mentioned more out of respect than anything.

I wouldn't hold Travis to any statements he's made at this point. Who knows what he'd think if it was offered to him at the end of this year or the next? As for Thomas, where do you get this stuff about players being 'childish'? Do you actually have some evidence? Some personal experience? If you don't, it's a pretty negative and churlish thing to say about a player in my view.

When you consider that Pendles was the only young player put in the leadership group and look at his increasing media profile (an intentional effort of the part of the club, I think, to groom him for captaincy), he's a lock barring something drastic.

Look, I like Pendles a lot too. But one of the things I like about Burns as a captain is his uncompromising physicality. Just rewind to the QB match for evidence of what I'm talking about. He's tough, he's brave, he puts his body on the line. That's what you want from a captain: someone who leads the way by putting his body on the line repeatedly. Pendles, for all his great attributes, doesn't do this enough for my liking. I'm hopeful that he will add this to his game, but he's not there yet. This is the major reason why I personally don't think anyone should anoint Pendles the captain in waiting, particularly when the likes of Shaw, Thomas, and Cloke are fine young players and are presently stronger in this area than Pendles is.

I wonder if your enthusiasm for all things Pendlebury isn't blinding you to the good attributes that other players would bring to the table?

 

[gav3039]

penduls has captain material written all over him.
Lockyer and swan for vice

 

[mdc]

Well, I scratch my head in just the same way when you say he obviously isn't captaincy material. Perhaps it's obvious to you, but it's not obvious to me. As for his 'hissy fits', are you serious? Yes, he's demonstrative on the field, but that's because he's passionate and he assumes responsibility. There are plenty of player who shout instructions, issue orders, and tee off at teammates who aren't doing the right thing. That's exactly why I think he's leadership material. Could he moderate his behaviour a little? Perhaps, though I'm not wringing my hands over it. (Buckley learned to do so. I don't see why Shaw couldn't if it was a problem.)

And if you're gonna disqualify people for disputing umpiring decisions there would scarcely be a single player fit for the captaincy at the entire club. Just this year Burns has given away 50m penalties for disputing decisions. I've seen Buckley do the same. So I think this is pretty weak reasoning on your part.

I've never witnessed the 'childish off-field demeanour' you're talking about. I've seen him interviewed a couple of times and he was fine, so I'm not sure what you're referring to.

There's a difference between barking instructions, being passionate etc...and simply not being able to control your temper and losing your composure. Heath does the latter (as do Didak, Medhurst and a bunch of other players on the team).

You bring up Burns. He has certainly gone off at the umps once or twice, but it's a fairly rare occurrence. Usually, he's very composed. The word that comes to mind is professionalism. It's something that Buckley and Clement personified (and yes, Buckley certainly improved in this regard with time). Burns is probably the next step down, but he's not far off. For me, that's the most important quality in a leader. Perhaps childish was a little harsh, but Heath, and Dale Thomas (to avoid repeating myself later on), don't scream professionalism and composure to me on or off the field.

I wouldn't hold Travis to any statements he's made at this point. Who knows what he'd think if it was offered to him at the end of this year or the next? As for Thomas, where do you get this stuff about players being 'childish'? Do you actually have some evidence? Some personal experience? If you don't, it's a pretty negative and churlish thing to say about a player in my view.

I don't immediately have any qualms with Travis other than he seems very self-involved on the field (i.e.focused on his own thing). Otherwise he's probably a good candidate. Although, given his form this year I can't imagine him changing his mind.

Look, I like Pendles a lot too. But one of the things I like about Burns as a captain is his uncompromising physicality. Just rewind to the QB match for evidence of what I'm talking about. He's tough, he's brave, he puts his body on the line. That's what you want from a captain: someone who leads the way by putting his body on the line repeatedly. Pendles, for all his great attributes, doesn't do this enough for my liking. I'm hopeful that he will add this to his game, but he's not there yet. This is the major reason why I personally don't think anyone should anoint Pendles the captain in waiting, particularly when the likes of Shaw, Thomas, and Cloke are fine young players and are presently stronger in this area than Pendles is.

I think you're being too much of a traditionalist. Other than Shaw, Pendlebury is better than any of those players defensively, so it's not like his preference for not getting crunched is harming the team. He's shown that when absolutely necessary, he'll take a hit (see ANZAC day match), but usually he's good enough to avoid it and still get the ball. He's just smarter than your average.

I wonder if your enthusiasm for all things Pendlebury isn't blinding you to the good attributes that other players would bring to the table?

My check-list for captain looks something like this:
- Leadership
- Composure
- Professionalism
- Top 3 player
- Media Savvy

The only player who IMO checks all the boxes is Pendlebury. The only other two I'd consider are Travis and Swan, but they're not in the running as far as I know.

As for my man-crush on Pendlebury, I tend to have man-crushes on great Collingwood players who are routinely underrated (even by their own supporters). It had been Clement for a lot of years, now it's Pendlebury.

 

[TRAVCLOKE#32]

Pendlebury for captain

Travis Cloke and Dane Swan to be his deputies!

 

[Palmer Stoat]

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

I haven't seen Heath lose his composure on the field. Get animated and annoyed? Yes. But not lose his composure. And I haven't seen any evidence of Thomas and Heath lacking composure or professionalism off the field (or being childish, however you want to put it) -- and I note that when asked for evidence you haven't supplied any.

I don't think physicality, toughness, and courage will ever be old-fashioned. The ideal captain will have these attributes in spades. Just like Gavin Brown did, Burns has this 'follow me' effect in my view that can inspire players with his attack on the contest and his willingness to take a hit. I've seen Pendles do courageous things and put his head over the ball, but he doesn't do it as often as I'd like. In this respect, he lags behind other players who I think ought to be captaincy candidates.

I suspect Pendlebury will get the captaincy at some point. But it shouldn't be a foregone conclusion. We'd be doing ourselves a disservice if we didn't look at all candidates.

And I have to say, MDC, I don't think I've come across a Collingwood supporter who underrates Pendlebury. You must be running with a very different crowd than I am.

Anyway, it's an interesting debate.

 

[Bloben]

I want Pendlebury to be our next captain.

Saying that I remember reading something that IF Burns retires this season and Pendles is made captain next year, he would be the youngest ever captain of Collingwood and may possibly break Buckleys record of most games played as captain.

 

[mdc]

PS, I'm not exactly sure what you want me to give you in the way of evidence. I'm making an admittedly subjective reading of a player's character. Just as you are in dismissing my contention.

As for underrating Pendlebury, you lead the pack Seriously though, I've believed he was our premier talent since mid-2006 (when Thomas-mania was raging). I also believe he is currently our best player. Not best prospect, not in 2-3 years time - right now. So yeah, I think he's underrated.

 

[sunnyTEE]

Pendles for Captain.

Maxwell for Vice.

I agree with the on-going argument in this thread about Heath. He is courageous and brilliantly skilled, however I do believe his personality is not suited to the captaincy.

Anyone that has ever sat on the fence 2 hours before the match and watched the players interact would understand where I am coming from. He looks like a fantastic bloke, but the difference between the way he and the likes of Pendles, Burns, Maxwell and Bucks before him conduct themselves is huge.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

PS, I'm not exactly sure what you want me to give you in the way of evidence. I'm making an admittedly subjective reading of a player's character. Just as you are in dismissing my contention.

Fair enough. (You seemed so adamant about it that I thought you must have some specific incidents in mind.)

As for underrating Pendlebury, you lead the pack Seriously though, I've believed he was our premier talent since mid-2006 (when Thomas-mania was raging). I also believe he is currently our best player. Not best prospect, not in 2-3 years time - right now. So yeah, I think he's underrated.

Heh. Well, it's true that I'm not quite as bullish about Pendlebury as you -- I don't think he's our best player, for example. However, I do rate him very highly.

 

[magpies42]

I tend to agree that cloke is abit "internally focused" perhaps this will change has he matures. but not a player i would have as captain anyway.

Heath is an interesting one, plays with his heart on his sleeve i think that is a good trait. captains are rarely born and heath will grow into it!

the only query that i have is that it may take away from his natural game...

 

[Seeks]

Look, I like Pendles a lot too. But one of the things I like about Burns as a captain is his uncompromising physicality. Just rewind to the QB match for evidence of what I'm talking about. He's tough, he's brave, he puts his body on the line. That's what you want from a captain: someone who leads the way by putting his body on the line repeatedly. Pendles, for all his great attributes, doesn't do this enough for my liking. I'm hopeful that he will add this to his game, but he's not there yet. This is the major reason why I personally don't think anyone should anoint Pendles the captain in waiting, particularly when the likes of Shaw, Thomas, and Cloke are fine young players and are presently stronger in this area than Pendles is.

I wonder if your enthusiasm for all things Pendlebury isn't blinding you to the good attributes that other players would bring to the table?

Absolutely spot on! The captain needs to lead by example, when the game gets tough and hard the captain needs to get in and amongst it. Whilst Pendles is on his way to stardom, is silky smooth blah blah blah he just lacks that hard steak.

Now I don't mean he needs Archer like hardness but you need to know that if he has to take a hit and put his head over it he will.....every time. You knew this with Bucks even though he wasn't really hard at it like Voss you knew that if he had to go he would.

I don't think Pendles has that in him. And that's why he can't be the next captain.

But I hope I'm wrong....because if he had that in him, well, he could be one of the best!

 

[dannydickfos99]

With all due respect, if you watch Heath Shaw closely (body language/interaction with team-mates) it's pretty obvious he's not captain material.

I'd be surprised if Pendlebury didn't get it in a couple of years.

Do you go to the games mdc - most ridiculous thing I've heard.

It's like saying Travis Cloke doesn't have strong hands

 

[Seeks]

Do you go to the games mdc - most ridiculous thing I've heard.

It's like saying Travis Cloke doesn't have strong hands

Must agree.

It's like saying Nathan Brown's not a man mountain!

It's like saying Alan Didak doesn't have a right foot!

It's like saying Ryan Lonie doesn't shirk it!

It's like saying Ben Reid keeps his feet!

It's like saying Scott Burn doesn't put his head over the ball!