Preview Changes: R5 2021 vs Fremantle

Remove this Banner Ad

Golumless

I'm kind of a big deal on the east side
Jul 12, 2013
31,846
38,288
Wherever the ESH clubrooms are
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Newcastle, Rockies, Oceanics
As much as I like Ned, I'm not sure about the comparison between him and Rowe?

View attachment 1105272
View attachment 1105273

Ned obviously the better pressure player, which is why I think we need to persist with him (different kind of small role), but we've put each of them in for a reason. Give them an extended run of games to gain confidence, then they'll become confident forward/midfielder types
Good pickup. They're much closer.
 

Pilchard_Adams

Premiership Player
Sep 11, 2009
4,328
2,788
AFL Club
Adelaide
The reason it looks like that is we've had a culture of playing our most experienced side each week, even when injured. The fact that we're still doing that, less Mackay who missed as sub last week. So there is reasonable concern that the culture hasn't changed as there's a difference between choice and necessity. What it looks like this week is that we'd still prefer to play a senior under duress than a fully fit replacement. It may turn out that they're all fine, but we've got 5 under a cloud and they've all gotten up at this moment. In a rebuilding side with Worrell having put in 2 excellent games, why bother waiting on a game day fitness test for Jake Kelly?
I dont agree. We just moved on a bunch of the older players rather than stacking our list with aged experienced B or worse graders who everyone wants to just play SANFL. Perhaps the club realizes that there is absolutely zero point in having older players on the list if they arent being played. Not only does this piss off the player who probably feels they can get games elsewhere, but it clogs a development position on the list.

Hartigan, Greenwood, CEY, Keith, Jenkins, Betts, Sauce, Atkins, Douglas, Gibbs, Knight. Adelaide could have kept every one of those for longer if they desired. Choice and necessity as you say. MacKay, as much as I cant stand him being selected, is more versatile as cover than any of those listed above.

There has to be a balance of experience and youth. Too young and inexperienced you turn into Carlton or the Suns and get belted into the ground every week with demoralizing smashings that takes the club 10 years to get passed. You as a supporter have no idea what the fitness test means. Kelly has been fairly decent this year and is our 7th most experienced player in the 22. Our 7th most experienced player doesnt even have 100 games yet, shows how much youth is being played.

Worrell will get his chance pretty soon I am sure.
 

1970crow

Hall of Famer
Jun 7, 2011
40,952
41,976
Mount Gambier
AFL Club
Adelaide
I dont agree. We just moved on a bunch of the older players rather than stacking our list with aged experienced B or worse graders who everyone wants to just play SANFL. Perhaps the club realizes that there is absolutely zero point in having older players on the list if they arent being played. Not only does this piss off the player who probably feels they can get games elsewhere, but it clogs a development position on the list.

Hartigan, Greenwood, CEY, Keith, Jenkins, Betts, Sauce, Atkins, Douglas, Gibbs, Knight. Adelaide could have kept every one of those for longer if they desired. Choice and necessity as you say. MacKay, as much as I cant stand him being selected, is more versatile as cover than any of those listed above.

There has to be a balance of experience and youth. Too young and inexperienced you turn into Carlton or the Suns and get belted into the ground every week with demoralizing smashings that takes the club 10 years to get passed. You as a supporter have no idea what the fitness test means. Kelly has been fairly decent this year and is our 7th most experienced player in the 22. Our 7th most experienced player doesnt even have 100 games yet, shows how much youth is being played.

Worrell will get his chance pretty soon I am sure.
You can disagree all you like, you're plainly wrong. It's your preferred way that has created the imbalance in the first place. Playing injured seniors has failed us miserable, embrace it all you like, it's rank stupidity.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

hey shorty

TheBrownDog
Jun 15, 2005
62,762
53,352
Where the Hills have eyes
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
AUFC, Everton, Sturt
The reason it looks like that is we've had a culture of playing our most experienced side each week, even when injured. The fact that we're still doing that, less Mackay who missed as sub last week. So there is reasonable concern that the culture hasn't changed as there's a difference between choice and necessity. What it looks like this week is that we'd still prefer to play a senior under duress than a fully fit replacement. It may turn out that they're all fine, but we've got 5 under a cloud and they've all gotten up at this moment. In a rebuilding side with Worrell having put in 2 excellent games, why bother waiting on a game day fitness test for Jake Kelly?
The difference being we actually moved those guys along. We could just as easily given those guys the contracts they wanted and kept playing them
 

Pilchard_Adams

Premiership Player
Sep 11, 2009
4,328
2,788
AFL Club
Adelaide
You can disagree all you like, you're plainly wrong. It's your preferred way that has created the imbalance in the first place. Playing injured seniors has failed us miserable, embrace it all you like, it's rank stupidity.
In 2017 we competed for a GF
In 2018 its perfectly acceptable to assume we would be up and about again
Since the end of 2018 the club has been introducing youth and moving on the older players. 13 of the starting 22 from the last game of 2018 have been moved on, with more than half still being on AFL lists. Is that not aggressively rebuilding?

Ill agree that on some occasions players who have been suffering niggly injuries shouldnt have been played. However at times the cupboard was pretty bare for replacements. This isnt just on the club. The player knows their body better than anyone else, players need to be held responsible as well. Playing a few seniors who werent at 100% fitness hasnt resulted in us landing where we are right now. Stretch for something to blame all you like, its come from contending for a flag and squeezing every little bit from the group they could before the inevitable rebuild was needed.
 

Burtonsgottago

Club Legend
May 5, 2019
1,356
1,342
AFL Club
Adelaide
As much as I like Ned, I'm not sure about the comparison between him and Rowe?

View attachment 1105272
View attachment 1105273

Ned obviously the better pressure player, which is why I think we need to persist with him (different kind of small role), but we've put each of them in for a reason. Give them an extended run of games to gain confidence, then they'll become confident forward/midfielder types
I like the fact that if Rowe is having a shot for goal he’ll probably kick it, unlike Ned. I think goal kicking accuracy is often overlooked
 

Burtonsgottago

Club Legend
May 5, 2019
1,356
1,342
AFL Club
Adelaide
15 players with less than 50 games AFL experience and an average age of 24.29 years of age and 63.8 average games experience for our 22 this week.

Compared to Freo who have 7 with less than 50 games experience, average age of 25.18 and 87 games average experience

North - 13 players selected with 50 games or less, average age of 24.13 and 71.5 games experience.

Suns - 10 players with 50 games or less, average age of 24.4, 71.72 games experience.

I think selection is fine, kids are being played. Probably the least experienced side in the comp this week, and 2nd youngest average age.
Are you an accountant?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Pilchard_Adams

Premiership Player
Sep 11, 2009
4,328
2,788
AFL Club
Adelaide
That’s not true, unless that was a typo and you mean 2019.

It was clear on all the evidence that they thought 2018 was just an abberation.
No I went from the starting 22 from round 23 2018 when we flogged Carlton. Gibbs, CEY, Atkins, otten, Jenkins, keath, Douglas, gooch, McGovern, knight, greenwood, betts and Jacobs all moved on
 

1970crow

Hall of Famer
Jun 7, 2011
40,952
41,976
Mount Gambier
AFL Club
Adelaide
The difference being we actually moved those guys along. We could just as easily given those guys the contracts they wanted and kept playing them
What guys? I saw he extended out to irrelevant listing of players and ceased reading. Long post to read when totally off-topic. I’m referring only to selection philosophy of the past and right now. That we list cooked seniors and players we’d offered contracts to has absolutely no bearing on the philosophy that plays injured Kelly ahead of Worrell in a rebuild off a spoon season. Noting that Kelly was dropped twice last year, so hardly a highly valued game day performer.
 

hey shorty

TheBrownDog
Jun 15, 2005
62,762
53,352
Where the Hills have eyes
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
AUFC, Everton, Sturt
What guys? I saw he extended out to irrelevant listing of players and ceased reading. Long post to read when totally off-topic. I’m referring only to selection philosophy of the past and right now. That we list cooked seniors and players we’d offered contracts to has absolutely no bearing on the philosophy that plays injured Kelly ahead of Worrell in a rebuild off a spoon season. Noting that Kelly was dropped twice last year, so hardly a highly valued game day performer.
We could still quiet easily have had Greenwood, Keath, Jenkins, Betts in this side, and Jacobs and Douglas last year.

Yes we are playing senior guys but Lynch aside they're all performing.
 

Remove this Banner Ad