Changes for Round Two

[catempire]

cats2rise, you missed the most obvious one...

19.39

 

[cats2rise]

Sorry, I was blinded by his inept football brain that I forgot about his goal kicking.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Dear oh dear.

I'll attempt to permeate the Shannon-love...

He would never be in my team to start with. I'm not satisfied of his value to the team over other players who are given nowhere near the same opportunities. His performance last night did nothing to change that view one way or the other. I thought it was a standard Byrnes performance.

What I am attempting to do is to look at it from the perspective of the selectors. They obviously see something that I (and many others for that matter) don't. So THE SELECTORS, having selected Byrnes numerous times after he's played games like last night (and worse), would be unlikely to see fit to drop him after another such similar game.

I'll try and permeate the short sightedness of this thread...

Geelong were not at their best last night. In fact they spent close to a half of footy no where near their best. Delivery into the forward line was especially poor in the second half. The first half Geelong had a more familiar look about it....but still it wasnt ever quite like last season or not for very long periods anyway...

Byrnes got 13 touches as a small forward and his efficiency rating was at 77%. Now as a small forward against Port Adelaide on their home ground that is a fair effort given the nature and style of footy they play. How he winds up getting dropped from Thursday night...or even relatively speaking is considered ordinary by his own standards is just idiocy IMO.

Now we have people selecting the side for next week. No idea what Essendon's side might look like or whether they are going to carry their fast moving and running style of footy from the preseason into the real season also not forgetting they only just lost to the Saints by a few pts and were pretty stiff in the process...everyone is tipping the Saints to challenge us for the flag lets not forget either...and they won the NAB Cup interstate...arent you taking the Bombers a bit lightly here?

But it gets better...Rooke isnt match fit...but hey lets play him...its all good, we got run off our legs against Port and Essendon is four weeks ahead of our training schedule...but lets bring unfit blokes in any wayz...should be fun. While we are at it...lets drop two guys (Byrnes and Tenace) who actually just both played quite reasonable games against quality opposition interstate and who have some leg speed against a side (Essendon) who are at this point in time as far as I know are one of the form sides of the preseason competition and one of the quickest in the league at the moment also as far as I can tell...and lets bring in Prismall and Rooke lets say? Play either Prismall or Selwood out of position to accommodate this move of genius and give Rooke about 30-40% game time...if that.

It gets better still...lets not forget the real beauty of this week that all the Prismall lovers on here seem to forget...or they just dont realise it cos they dont know footy very well...but if like they all mostly suggested Selwood was moved out of the middle to play on the half back line to make way for Prismall in the midfield against Port...we would have lost the game. Its that simple. Selwood was best on the ground/BOG in my book because he actually did things when it mattered at crucial times in the midfield when others were struggling. Class act, budding champion...there might be times he can play half back but not when the game is on the line as it was last night...so that being the case you are then forced to play Prismall out of position in the second half in a match where it ends up costing you the match for doing such a silly thing in the first place as picking an unnecessarily unbalanced side. Prismall doesnt play back flank...and he isnt a small forward type either....is that really so hard to understand? So where do you actually play Prismall then when Selwood simply MUST be played in the middle in the second half to try win that game of footy...as was the case Thursday night. And how useful would Rooke be on the bench in that second half also?

I just wonder how much sh1t people can actually write in such a short thread...its truly unbelievable.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Sorry, I was blinded by his inept football brain that I forgot about his goal kicking.

Byrnes' efficiency rating was 77% against Port. Alot higher than Steve Johnson and Bartel. So far this season Byrnes has had a good preseason and his first actual game this particular season...not last season...was quite solid against a quality football side. He is playing one of the hardest positions on the ground too.

Shannon Byrnes' football brain is light years ahead of yours mate...or wait a minute let me guess...you're a great footballer yourself? One of those 'would be' if you 'could be' people? Lets all hear about it then...your story?

 

[cats2rise]

Hahaha you are using that as an argument?

****. Byrnes gets paid for his 'football brain', yet he does not have one. As I do not play at AFL level, does that mean I am not allowed to comment on issues? Byrnes is an average AFL player. I do not care if he has had a good pre season. I do not care if his efficiency rating was 77%. He is average, and lets the team down on many many occasions. Yet, the sad thing is someone like Gamble who looks to have a future, will get pushed aside when Varcoe or whoever comes in, while your love child continues to run around in the blue and white hoops doing average things in his average career.

Why even bring Steve Johnson and Bartel into this? Are you trying to say because Byrnes was more efficient in one game, he is a better player? Bartel and Steve Johnson have proved they are up to AFL standart. Shannon Byrnes with his average foot skills and overall average decision making has not.

If you are happy to have a mediocre player being carried by a team, then so be it. I for one would rather someone better in the team.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Hahaha you are using that as an argument?

****. Byrnes gets paid for his 'football brain', yet he does not have one. As I do not play at AFL level, does that mean I am not allowed to comment on issues? Byrnes is an average AFL player. I do not care if he has had a good pre season. I do not care if his efficiency rating was 77%. He is average, and lets the team down on many many occasions. Yet, the sad thing is someone like Gamble who looks to have a future, will get pushed aside when Varcoe or whoever comes in, while your love child continues to run around in the blue and white hoops doing average things in his average career.

Why even bring Steve Johnson and Bartel into this? Are you trying to say because Byrnes was more efficient in one game, he is a better player? Bartel and Steve Johnson have proved they are up to AFL standart. Shannon Byrnes with his average foot skills and overall average decision making has not.

If you are happy to have a mediocre player being carried by a team, then so be it. I for one would rather someone better in the team.

Whats the point in talking to you mate? This is a completely subjective argument on your behalf where current football form is irrelevant.

Are you drunk?

Otherwise, if you dont talk about current football form then whats the basis of this discussion? Whats more relevant how some one is playing today...or last year...or two years ago? Can you answer that simple question for me?

You also claimed Byrnes showed an inept football brain against Port, one of the best sides in the league...yet his efficiency rating for the night was quite high at 77%? And 13 possessions for a small forward is more than a fair return, especially in a game like Thursday night.

I am drawing the simple conclusion you have no football brain as a result because you cant analyse a footy game or how a player has performed in even the most simplest of ways.

What other conclusion could I possibly come to mate after reading such dribble?

 

[eliiiiza]

I won't bother posting in reply to this crap. What does me thinking he is "hot" (oh god, I'm a normal female and find a player attractive - call the police!!!) have anything to do with this? Sure, make your point - and I'll admit they were good points - but if you want to resort to that patronising shit, then so be it.

I never said he played a super game. I never said "OmG sHaZzA iS sOoOOOoOooOo HaWt!!!". I never said he was the best player in the team. Surprise, surprise, I actually do know that he's one of the worse players in the team and am actually capable of criticising him.

By the way, cats2rise, who was your former favourite player? Oh that's right... KENT KINGSLEY! Great kick for goal he was too. But when I try to defend my favourite player, I get bagged for thinking he's hot. Nice double standards there.

 

[didak04]

Hahaha you are using that as an argument?

****. Byrnes gets paid for his 'football brain', yet he does not have one. As I do not play at AFL level, does that mean I am not allowed to comment on issues? Byrnes is an average AFL player. I do not care if he has had a good pre season. I do not care if his efficiency rating was 77%. He is average, and lets the team down on many many occasions. Yet, the sad thing is someone like Gamble who looks to have a future, will get pushed aside when Varcoe or whoever comes in, while your love child continues to run around in the blue and white hoops doing average things in his average career.

Why even bring Steve Johnson and Bartel into this? Are you trying to say because Byrnes was more efficient in one game, he is a better player? Bartel and Steve Johnson have proved they are up to AFL standart. Shannon Byrnes with his average foot skills and overall average decision making has not.

If you are happy to have a mediocre player being carried by a team, then so be it. I for one would rather someone better in the team.

don't let stats or the fact that he (Byrnes) played a relatively decent game get in the way of your hate for him. It is clear that he is a scapegoat, what i dont understand is why you and some other cats fans feel the need to search for something to complain about when your side is doing well and have had a win. can't you just enjoy it and maybe criticise him when he has had a shocker?

 

[Duskfire]

I dont think Brynes is all that great, but he did have a good game last night, and he had a pretty good pre-season. So if the coaching staff was going to look at that, there is no reason why Brynes wouldn't be picked again, purely because thus far in 2008 he is playing alot better then he was 2007. Who knows, maybe he is improving?

 

[volcboy]

Wow - so much personal hate over an issue that means so little.

My opinion is that the Geelong side would be a better one with Varcoe in the side instead of Byrnes and Prismall in instead of Tenace. I don't have stats to back it up, that's just what I think.

People are allowed to have an opinion and express it without being personally attacked, aren't they?

 

[bulletproof]

I thought both the maligned Shep duo were reasonable. I would not drop either of them. Def not Tenace, he needs confidence. Rooke is a player who needs a run, run out in the twos next week.

 

[cat_fanatic]

Byrnes played a reasonable game, he has played many worse games than on Thursday. He lead well and took a couple of good marks out in front for his size.

There's no doubt Prismall is a better player but honestly we have so many of his types in the team that bringing him in for Byrnes may cause more harm than good.

I have no doubt one of Varcoe, Davenport or Djerrkura will surpass Byrnes before long.

By the way, WAG, just because Byrnes' efficiency rate was at 77% does not mean 77% of his disposals were productive, it just means that his disposal ended up with the possesion of another Geelong player - completely discounting the fact that the receiving player had three Port guys ready to pounce all over him, really, this is typical 'Byrnes' screenplay.


If anyone should be dropped due to poor form it would be Tenace. I can understand them wanting to replace Wojcinski with another speedy line breaker, but that person can NOT be Tenace. His speed is either non-existent or he declines to use it.

We'd all love to see Tenace come out and prove his critics wrong, but how many opportunities do you need to give someone before the next guy gets a go?

Prismall will leave if he is not given game time again this year and i believe he offers more to the team than Tenace does (or doesn't) in the same position.

 

[cats2rise]

Otherwise, if you dont talk about current football form then whats the basis of this discussion? Whats more relevant how some one is playing today...or last year...or two years ago? Can you answer that simple question for me?

Why yes I can. Byrnes (for me) does not have much improvement, if any, in his game. The sensational 13 possessions and an efficiency rating of 77% will not continue.

I am drawing the simple conclusion you have no football brain as a result because you cant analyse a footy game or how a player has performed in even the most simplest of ways.

Considering I actually stated Byrnes played alot better than last year, and should not be dropped... does that mean you also have no football brain?

I am not arguing about one decent game Byrnes has played in, I am arguing about Shannon consistantly getting game after averager performaces, while others should be in before him. He played one good game, does that make up for 18 bad games last year, or another 18 bad games he is likely to play this year?

It is actually quite simple, and I do not see how you cannot get it... Byrnes is an average footballer, and we have more talent in the sidelines. His 'pace' is the only thing keeping him in the side.

 

[cats2rise]

I won't bother posting in reply to this crap.

You replied.

I never said he played a super game. I never said "OmG sHaZzA iS sOoOOOoOooOo HaWt!!!".

As if you havnt!

I never said he was the best player in the team. Surprise, surprise, I actually do know that he's one of the worse players in the team and am actually capable of criticising him.

Then why are we arguing? You asked for evidence on why he is a poor player, so I gave it to you. Why take it as a personal attack?

By the way, cats2rise, who was your former favourite player? Oh that's right... KENT KINGSLEY! Great kick for goal he was too. But when I try to defend my favourite player, I get bagged for thinking he's hot. Nice double standards there.

Totally different things. Kent was our best option for many years. Byrnes is not. When we had better options, I too thought that Kent should have been dropped. Plus my liking for Kent Kingsley was tongue in cheek. I liked him because everyone didnt... not because of his football skills.

Kingsley is a better footballer than Byrnes anyway.

 

[ZosoCat]

Tenace doesnt belong in the team.. I would have primsall infront everytime if I was a selector.

 

[winty]

- In todays game, you need to be able to kick with both feet. Byrnes has only his left, and it is so evident, that opponents stick to his left side knowing he cannot kick on his right.

IIRC, Peter Riccardi didn't really have a right foot either. The only time I can remember him kicking with his right foot he tore his hamstring and ended his career three or four weeks earlier than he should have. Most left footers rarely kick on their right. Can't recall Scott Lucas or Matty Lloyd kicking with their right foot too often, or Ben Graham for that matter. But the fact Shannon doesn't do it means he's a liability as a player?

I didn't think Shannon played too badly on Thursday night, and I'm generally one of the first ones to bag him as soon as he messes up. He certainly wasn't our worst player in that game. Not by a long shot.

 

[catempire]

I'll try and permeate the short sightedness of this thread...

You might want to read my first post in this thread WAG.

 

[cats2rise]

IIRC, Peter Riccardi didn't really have a right foot either. The only time I can remember him kicking with his right foot he tore his hamstring and ended his career three or four weeks earlier than he should have. Most left footers rarely kick on their right. Can't recall Scott Lucas or Matty Lloyd kicking with their right foot too often, or Ben Graham for that matter. But the fact Shannon doesn't do it means he's a liability as a player?

I didn't think Shannon played too badly on Thursday night, and I'm generally one of the first ones to bag him as soon as he messes up. He certainly wasn't our worst player in that game. Not by a long shot.

Yes, and like I said later in the exact same post... Players can get away with one or two of the flaws I mentioned, but not all of them.

Riccardi, Lucas, Lloyd are able to kick, mark and make quick decisions, while Byrnes seems to be a jumbled mess when in a sticky situation, cant kick, and cant mark.

Funny how you picked out one part of my post, while the second half actually answers your question.

 

[catempire]

IIRC, Peter Riccardi didn't really have a right foot either. The only time I can remember him kicking with his right foot he tore his hamstring and ended his career three or four weeks earlier than he should have. Most left footers rarely kick on their right. Can't recall Scott Lucas or Matty Lloyd kicking with their right foot too often, or Ben Graham for that matter. But the fact Shannon doesn't do it means he's a liability as a player?

How often did you see Peter Riccardi get trapped on his left side? Very, very rarely. Why? Because he was a brilliantly balanced player who was able to move his body around his opponents in a way that never exposed his one-sidedness. Byrnes gets trapped on his left several times per game. It's a problem.

Lucas, Lloyd and Graham were all key position players. It doesn't matter so much for them because they aren't getting as much of the ball and when they are, it's usually having a shot at goal (often a set shot).

 

[cats2rise]

Talking about Lucas, Lloyd and Graham...

Catempire, what is Byrnes stats like when going for goal? Seeings as 'We Are Geelong' loves his 77% efficiency rating, would you care to give him stats on his goal kicking?

Maybe compared to Steve Johnson, Chapman and Stokes considering they are small forwards also.

 

[catempire]

Steve Johnson - 158.106 = 59.8%
Paul Chapman - 174.94 = 64.9%
Mathew Stokes - 44.20 = 68.8

Shannon Byrnes - 19.39 = 32.8%

 

[cats2rise]

He is still awesome though, catempire. You cant forget his 77% efficiency rating.

 

[Redemptionin09]

That's a good point. He'd have to be under a cloud.

They've got the ten day break though and they probably wouldn't have let him play in the last quarter if they thought it was really serious

 

[AFL MAN]

For this round you have to keep Tenace and Brynes in. We are playing essendon and they will try and run around. Byrnes needs to play well this week if he wants his spot. They could possibly bring in Varcoe. I know his form isnt great but he would put so much presure on the blokes running out of defence.

 

[Copernicus]

In: Ottens
Out: West

Possibly Rooke for Tenace if they feel he is ready. If not, I see this as the only change, depending on Hunt's ankle.