Changes Round 4

[Toothpick Vic]

When I was playing our senior coach would refuse to pick players who weren't in form regardless of whether the situation warranted them being picked or not. It sent a message to everyone on the list that if you want to play at the highest level you have to earn the game. Now granted I was nowhere near playing at AFL level but the message was very effective as it meant that everyone had to bust their ass to ensure that they were playing at their peak every week.

Ever thought that perhaps Hardwick is using the current situation where our talls are undermanned to send a similar message to squad to say that the only way you're going to get games at senior level is to earn them, rather than just have them handed out because circumstances dictate that we need to select someone whose form is quite up to scratch.

Sure it might hurt in the short term but in the long run we'll be better off as the players would have worked hard to not only get their spot in the 22 but will also have to continue to work hard to maintain that spot.

Dunno if I agree with this. It's still to the detriment of the side. Gotta get the balance right and it def wasn't against the hawks..

At the end of the day if Astbury has another quiet game, you're not going to swap him for Nason because he is showing the most form out of those at Coburg....

I'd be bringing in another tall (Goo or Post) regardless of form because the side is screaming out for it.. And anyway what is the difference between bringing in someone out of form, like post as opposed to leaving in someone who is out of form, like Astbury??

 

[The Rusty Trombone]

I think this week should be the week of whole sale changes. It will be amassive juggling act as even though I'd like Batchelor , Conca , Hellbig , Grimes and Astbury to get the experience of playing on the g against the Pies they will all have to be monitored as to burn out.

I think Astbury should keep his spot hands down and should be given the job on Cloke.

I'd prefer to see Thurstfield play on Dawes rather than Grimes as he will spoil a lot more than Grimes will get his hands on the footy because of body size and experience. I don't believe we can just send out the backline we did last week and hope for a ten goal loss. It will be more like 100 if we do that.

I believe if fit and not totally all run down Batchelor , Conca and Hellbig should keep their spots but I would make Conca or Hellbig the sub if they are knocking up but if not I'd make Dea the sub. Batchelor is travelling along fine and is getting more composed every week. He also gives us options with Lids.

Tuck , Nason , Webberly , Dea have to be very close to getting a game. Throw in Thirsty and that would make 5 and then Miller as well because we need a centre half forward and that would make 6 changes.

These guys are in the firing line after the last 3 games.

Grimes - Thurstfield : There is learning and there is slaughter
Nahas - Nason : I thought Nahas was our best last week but he simply had to be considering the conditions. We can't have him running around like a chook with his head chopped off this week. He's been given some great experience and now it is time for him to head for coburg and learn some composure.
Edwards - Webberly : Edwards has been nothing but poor for 3 rounds. He needs to go back to Coburg and find some touch. I do believe he is part of our long term future but he should only survive if the coaching staff decided that our 3 draftees need a rest but we can't gift games for that type of form.
Connors - Dea : Connors needs to be dropped for lack of accountability and for not hitting a target in 3 weeks.
Houli - Tuck : Watching the weekends games I swear Richard Tambling had grown a beard and changed numbers on his jumper. All this talk of elite kick. I've seen him hit 5 targets in 3 weeks. I believe he will be a great pick up in time but surely Tuck will ad more than him. Maybe we can trade him to Adelaide next year for picks 27 and 50.
Morton - Miller : I'd like to see Morton keep his spot and be played further up the ground but not this week , save that for the roos game after a week dominating for Coburg in the guts. It's Miller time this weekend and he needs to be played at CHF with Jack right next to him on the flank. I'd love to see Harry Obrien run it out of the back line only to know that he is leaving Jack reiwoldt un marked.

Don't worry we will still lose by 50 points with this side below but it will at least bring us into the game at times if we can slow it down aka Sydney Swans and most importantly if Vickery , Miller and Reiwoldt can take some marks and kick straight for goal and take their opportunities. All players should be instructed to take all set shots in side 50 and take their time kicking it so the rest of the team can man up in case they miss. It is time to be accountable.

BP: Newman FB : Astbury : BP : Batchelor
HB : Grigg CHB : Thursty HB : Deledio
W : Conca C: Martin W: Webberly
HF: Rewoldt CHF : Miller HF : King
FP : Cotchin FF : Vickery FP : Hellbig

Ruck : Graham R/Rover : Jackson Rover : Foley

Bench : Tuck , Nason , White
Sub : Dea
__________________

 

[The Rusty Trombone]

which quarter do you think Astbury will rack up his possession this week

Last week he got 2 possessions in the 3rd quarter so its obvious he's a grand final specialist.

 

[santa claws]

I think this week should be the week of whole sale changes. It will be amassive juggling act as even though I'd like Batchelor , Conca , Hellbig , Grimes and Astbury to get the experience of playing on the g against the Pies they will all have to be monitored as to burn out.

I think Astbury should keep his spot hands down and should be given the job on Cloke.

I'd prefer to see Thurstfield play on Dawes rather than Grimes as he will spoil a lot more than Grimes will get his hands on because of body size and experience. I don't believe we can just send out the backline we did last week and hope for a ten goal loss. It will be more like 100 if we do that.

I believe if fit and not totally all run down Batchelor , Conca and Hellbig should keep their spots but I would make Conca or Hellbig the sub. Batchelor is travelling along fine and is getting more composed every week. He also gives us options with Lids.

Tuck , Nason , Webberly , Dea have to be very close to getting a game. Chuck in Thirsty and that would make 5 and then Miller as well because we need a centre half forward and that would make 6 changes.

These guys are in the firing line after the last 3 games.

Grimes - Thurstfield : There is learning and there is slaughter
Nahas - Nason : I thought Nahas was our best last week but he simply had to be considering the conditions. We can't have him running around like a chook with his head chopped off this week.
Edwards - Webberly : Edwards has been nothing but poor for 3 rounds. He needs to go back to Coburg and find some touch. I do believe he is part of our long term future but he should only survive if the coaching staff decided that our 3 draftees need a rest but we can't gift games for that type of form.
Connors - Dea : Connors needs to be dropped for lack of accountability and for not hitting a target in 3 weeks.
Houli - Tuck : Watching the weekends games I swear Richard Tambling had grown a beard and changed numbers on his jumper. All this talk of elite kick. I've seen him hit 5 targets in 3 weeks.
Morton - Miller : I'd like to see Morton keep his spot and be played further up the ground but not this week , save for the roos.

Don't worry we will still lose by 50 points with this side below but it will at least bring us into the game at times if we can slow it down aka Sydney Swans and most importantly if Vickery , Miller and Reiwoldt can take some marks and kick straight.

BP: Newman FB : Astbury : BP : Batchelor
HB : Grigg CHB : Thursty HB : Deledio
W : Conca C: Martin W:

i can agree with a fair bit of that.
but you forget one thing. ask yourself how does collingwood structure up up forward.
do i hear cloke. do i hear dawes, sheesh two big buggers but i dont hear brown. whats going on.this is their structure.

to me play grimes put him on cloke but have some cover. play astbury on dawes but place gourdis on brown to do nothing but a stopping job.
at least with gourdis hes a big body if one of the others gets monstered chab=ge it around it at least gives you decent options and it gives good structure. sheesh a richmond side with the ability defensively to apply a plan b got to be unheard of.

now lets go forward and look at their structure.
sheesh ive seen weak pricks like maxwell go to water when hes been made accountable and has to play one on one.
reid maxwell tarrant. with harry o and shaw the main runners.again make em accountable.
it may mean playing an out of touch tall but hey we are playing out of touch smalls so what the.

for me id go like this.

riewoldt will get tarrant. for me vickery to reid. the third tall match up should be post to maxwell a risk i know but if it fails his inclusion does give us options to change it all up.
for this week only deledio onto obrien. jake king to h shaw. and the other forward well depending helbig or morton. lets play em like for like and lets try to play em one on one.

midield wont go into it much needless to say we will need to win contsted footy and use well.

 

[santa claws]

Dunno if I agree with this. It's still to the detriment of the side. Gotta get the balance right and it def wasn't against the hawks..

At the end of the day if Astbury has another quiet game, you're not going to swap him for Nason because he is showing the most form out of those at Coburg....

I'd be bringing in another tall (Goo or Post) regardless of form because the side is screaming out for it.. And anyway what is the difference between bringing in someone out of form, like post as opposed to leaving in someone who is out of form, like Astbury??

now this is what ive been trying to say in long winded posts for ages

 

[The Rusty Trombone]

i can agree with a fair bit of that.
but you forget one thing. ask yourself how does collingwood structure up up forward.
do i hear cloke. do i hear dawes, sheesh two big buggers but i dont hear brown. whats going on.this is their structure.

to me play grimes put him on cloke but have some cover. play astbury on dawes but place gourdis on brown to do nothing but a stopping job.
at least with gourdis hes a big body if one of the others gets monstered chab=ge it around it at least gives you decent options and it gives good structure. sheesh a richmond side with the ability defensively to apply a plan b got to be unheard of.

now lets go forward and look at their structure.
sheesh ive seen weak pricks like maxwell go to water when hes been made accountable and has to play one on one.
reid maxwell tarrant. with harry o and shaw the main runners.again make em accountable.
it may mean playing an out of touch tall but hey we are playing out of touch smalls so what the.

for me id go like this.

riewoldt will get tarrant. for me vickery to reid. the third tall match up should be post to maxwell a risk i know but if it fails his inclusion does give us options to change it all up.
for this week only deledio onto obrien. jake king to h shaw. and the other forward well depending helbig or morton. lets play em like for like and lets try to play em one on one.

midield wont go into it much needless to say we will need to win contsted footy and use well.

Would love to see Post and the goo play each week but something seems to have gone a miss over the summer with these 2. Who knows maybe they tag teamed Dimma's missus or have photos of March's old girl.

I don't think we will be seeing them play this Friday Santa but we can hope and pray.

 

[delediofan3]

as stated without good structure and size and these two things are the foundations on which all else is built you cannot even begin to look at implementing any sort of game plan or system because simply put you cant even compete.

who cares if you have good structure and size? that doesnt count, they could just stand there and have good structure and size.
they need skill. you can have size but cant mark or kick a ball.
you can have structure but can't use that structure effectively, they should just stand there if nothing goes your way.

 

[Rayzorwire]

I'd be bringing in another tall (Goo or Post) regardless of form because the side is screaming out for it..

We sure didn't need another tall in the pouring rain on Saturday night (who knows what the weather will be like this week), and even playing with only two talls forward or back we were still totally outrun, so I wouldn't say we were 'screaming out' for an option which leaves us with less run up against the hardest running side in the league.

The Hawks' talls didn't hurt us in that game, their run cut us to shreds going both ways.

I'd be all for playing one more tall if we had the runners to do it, but playing the first year kids and other non-full game players which we have been means we just can't afford that luxury, we couldn't play out three hard quarters, let alone four, and we'd be downright embarrassing if we copped an injury or two.

 

[MightyTiger]

why dont you watch the coburg game stupid and and decide for yourself

I did, and thought he was very average.

Well said...if you are going to be an armchair critic ......

A bit like yourself?

 

[_RT_]

cmon its two bob each way around here. if we are not to play players in form all of the following should be dropped. deledio, newman, connors edwards foley houli morton conca king graham helbig batchelor astbury riewoildt.and i probably missed a few.
as far as im concerned far better to try something new.
seems its okay to reward mediocrity in the seniors but because of needs we cant try and adress the basics like structure. yep some really want their cake and eat it too.
we had 5 yrs of exactly this sort of thing under wallace.
oh thats right new coach he can do no wrong and we dont need to learn from the past.

OK then Claws which players at VFL level are in good enough form to replace those players you named above? Going on the reports from the round 1 game, there are about 3 players who didn't play Saturday night that deserve a spot and they are Dea Webberley & Nason. You see thats exactly what I'm talking about, you want those with mediocre performances at AFL level replaced by those who can't perform at a lower level. All that does is create a culture where players can coast at the lower levels and be rewarded with games at AFL level. Have a look at the successful sides and see how they treat their youngsters trying to break into the senior side. All of them force their kids to earn their spots through good form and its only when their form is considered better than those in the side that they get a game. When that starts happening with us then we'll start moving in the right direction.

Dunno if I agree with this. It's still to the detriment of the side. Gotta get the balance right and it def wasn't against the hawks..

At the end of the day if Astbury has another quiet game, you're not going to swap him for Nason because he is showing the most form out of those at Coburg....

I'd be bringing in another tall (Goo or Post) regardless of form because the side is screaming out for it.. And anyway what is the difference between bringing in someone out of form, like post as opposed to leaving in someone who is out of form, like Astbury??

So you're happy to have players coasting through and getting a game because circumstances rather than form warrants that they should be picked. How exactly is that going to benefit the side in the long run?

 

[Cathal Brugha]

I did, and thought he was very average.



A bit like yourself?

Gourdis played better than Grimes in that game but was implicated in the goal that gave Sandy the win.

 

[Toothpick Vic]

We sure didn't need another tall in the pouring rain on Saturday night (who knows what the weather will be like this week), and even playing with only two talls forward or back we were still totally outrun, so I wouldn't say we were 'screaming out' for an option which leaves us with less run up against the hardest running side in the league.

The Hawks' talls didn't hurt us in that game, their run cut us to shreds going both ways.

I'd be all for playing one more tall if we had the runners to do it, but playing the first year kids and other non-full game players which we have been means we just can't afford that luxury, we couldn't play out three hard quarters, let alone four, and we'd be downright embarrassing if we copped an injury or two.

Yeah I can appreciate that we are playing some guys who as yet don't have the tank to get through a full game of footy yet (Conca, Batch, Helbig) These guys are well and truly excused but we still have got certain 'runners' who don't have the skill and find themselves getting knocked off the ball far too easily. Having a fleet of runners isn't going to help if half of them don't know where to run then butcher the cod when they get it anyway.

I'd just love one more tall in there for some extra cover at either end of the ground and anyway wasn't Gourdis touted as an elite athlete himself? If there were people on here who claimed that he could physically go with Buddy then have we really lost all that much by way of run?

Do you honestly believe someone like Edwards is more important to the side currently??

 

[camiam]

we need strength back in our side, we need gourdis and tucky back, and maybe webs or nason for pace. give miller a go down in the forward line. i have no idea why tuck hasnt played. when we get him in he will kill it and play the rest of the year and finish top 5 again. so frustrated with the way we played last saturday. we equaled them with stats but couldnt convert

 

[santa claws]

OK then Claws which players at VFL level are in good enough form to replace those players you named above? Going on the reports from the round 1 game, there are about 3 players who didn't play Saturday night that deserve a spot and they are Dea Webberley & Nason. You see thats exactly what I'm talking about, you want those with mediocre performances at AFL level replaced by those who can't perform at a lower level. All that does is create a culture where players can coast at the lower levels and be rewarded with games at AFL level. Have a look at the successful sides and see how they treat their youngsters trying to break into the senior side. All of them force their kids to earn their spots through good form and its only when their form is considered better than those in the side that they get a game. When that starts happening with us then we'll start moving in the right direction.


So you're happy to have players coasting through and getting a game because circumstances rather than form warrants that they should be picked. How exactly is that going to benefit the side in the long run?

as i said its two bob each way. how does it help culture when we keep on playing blokes who are performing terribly in the seniors. shouldnt we be saying at this level we are not going accept mediocrity and if you perform poorly you will be replaced even by an out of form player if need be.

it cuts both ways this is exactly the same debate we had for yrs when wallace was in charge.

look atm in an ideal world we should drop astbury but we cant its called structure. its the same reason why we gave griffiths 5 very ordinary games last yr its called structure.
it is a case of damned if you do damned if you dont. me id prefer we get some benefit if we have to play out of form players we get that by playing a few extra talls and actually structuring up properly. we get that by playing bigger bodies if possible.

how often over the yrs have i gone on about this bigger stronger faster with skill.

you know damn well when talk about structure that i also consider all other aspects how often have i said in getting the balance right. how often have i named teams stating that the team named has adequate height size pace and minimal poor kicks and decision makers. all this while adequately catering to development.

our depth is so poor atm the lack of experienced players established footballers etc means we are always going to be picking players out of form weather that be players out of form in the seniors or players out of form at coburg.

ya know if we insisted like you suggest we play only blokes who have performed well at coburg astbury griffiths grimes conca helbig batchelor and many others would not have got a game.

make no mistake i would normally agree that all players earn their spot thru good form at coburg. i would also suggest all players in the seniors must perform at the required level and have good form or risk getting the chop regardless.
you are actually advocating keeping poor senior performers in the team. me im advocating we dont we play kids like gourdis and post who can do with the experience anyway and at least structure up properly despite them also being out of form.

i will say again under wallace the philosphy was to persevere with undeserving players we are doing it again.

 

[William6]

nahas get's aot of ball but is crap when he has got it. why isn't he back in the foward line, isn't that where he belongs?? if thats so bring tuck back in. i'd also take out connors just annoys the crap out of me alot, idn who for though. but proberly not gonna happen. so i'll say

in: tuck
out: nahas

 

[ize_]

I'd bring it Tuck and one of Gourdis/Thursty. Drop Edwards, have a good look at Morton, Connors and Conca.

 

[santa claws]

nahas get's aot of ball but is crap when he has got it. why isn't he back in the foward line, isn't that where he belongs?? if thats so bring tuck back in. i'd also take out connors just annoys the crap out of me alot, idn who for though. but proberly not gonna happen. so i'll say

in: tuck
out: nahas

no he doesnt get a lot of ball. hes played 3 games thus far with good game time and primarily thru midfield. hes had it 13 16 and 15 times each game. for a mid this is way too low. to top it off he has not kicked a goal one of the primary reasons why you would pick him.
yep hes done okay defensively but is that what hes there for. they should all be doing their bit defensively and if they dont send em back to coburg as well.
the two areas as a team that scream at us so far is the lack of ball and the shoddy use when we do get it. nahas has contributed to both these malays despite him doing okay defensively.

its simple play a bloke who can find more of it, use it better, who will apply pressure when he doesnt have it and is effective when he has to be physical.

 

[Bazzar]

Nahas so far after 3 games.

1st Pressure acts.
1st Bounces
3rd Tackles. (8th in league)
8th Contested possessions.
8th Inside 50`s
8th DT
9th Disposals.

Something tells me Dimma would be happy.

 

[_RT_]

as i said its two bob each way. how does it help culture when we keep on playing blokes who are performing terribly in the seniors. shouldnt we be saying at this level we are not going accept mediocrity and if you perform poorly you will be replaced even by an out of form player if need be.

it cuts both ways this is exactly the same debate we had for yrs when wallace was in charge.

look atm in an ideal world we should drop astbury but we cant its called structure. its the same reason why we gave griffiths 5 very ordinary games last yr its called structure.
it is a case of damned if you do damned if you dont. me id prefer we get some benefit if we have to play out of form players we get that by playing a few extra talls and actually structuring up properly. we get that by playing bigger bodies if possible.

how often over the yrs have i gone on about this bigger stronger faster with skill.

you know damn well when talk about structure that i also consider all other aspects how often have i said in getting the balance right. how often have i named teams stating that the team named has adequate height size pace and minimal poor kicks and decision makers. all this while adequately catering to development.

our depth is so poor atm the lack of experienced players established footballers etc means we are always going to be picking players out of form weather that be players out of form in the seniors or players out of form at coburg.

ya know if we insisted like you suggest we play only blokes who have performed well at coburg astbury griffiths grimes conca helbig batchelor and many others would not have got a game.

make no mistake i would normally agree that all players earn their spot thru good form at coburg. i would also suggest all players in the seniors must perform at the required level and have good form or risk getting the chop regardless.
you are actually advocating keeping poor senior performers in the team. me im advocating we dont we play kids like gourdis and post who can do with the experience anyway and at least structure up properly despite them also being out of form.

i will say again under wallace the philosphy was to persevere with undeserving players we are doing it again.

The key for me is you shouldn't be rewarding mediocrity at a lower level by just handing out games at a higher level. IMO all you do then is just continue the cycle by bringing in out of form players for out of form players you're going to have to turn around in 3-4 weeks time and just replace them again which means the cycle starts again.

By going about it the way I'm suggesting you're forcing the players at the lower level to lift their game to take the spot if they don't or can't then you find our very quickly who needs replacing.

In an ideal world I would love to have a bunch of kids who are fit and in form to turn to but the facts are we simply don't have them, so we either continue to put senior games into players that are currently in the senior side or we replace them with players who aren't performing at a lower level and in turn reward players for not putting in the hard work to earn a spot at AFL level.

Seems to me that once more we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

 

[_RT_]

no he doesnt get a lot of ball. hes played 3 games thus far with good game time and primarily thru midfield. hes had it 13 16 and 15 times each game. for a mid this is way too low. to top it off he has not kicked a goal one of the primary reasons why you would pick him.
yep hes done okay defensively but is that what hes there for. they should all be doing their bit defensively and if they dont send em back to coburg as well.
the two areas as a team that scream at us so far is the lack of ball and the shoddy use when we do get it. nahas has contributed to both these malays despite him doing okay defensively.

its simple play a bloke who can find more of it, use it better, who will apply pressure when he doesnt have it and is effective when he has to be physical.

Hmm interesting comments Claws, I wonder what you make of the following?

Nahas averaging 15 disposals 7 tackles and 4.3 turnovers a game and Cotchin averaging 22 disposals 1.6 tackles and 11 turnovers a game.

Going on what you've just said Cotchin should be making his way to Coburg this weekend given he isn't exactly getting a heap more of the ball than Nahas is and when he does get it he is turning it over 50% of the time. To top it off when he doesn't have it he is managing to lay less than 2 tackles a game.

 

[santa claws]

in answer simply put i thought deledio should nhave been drpped after the carlton game.his lack of accountability was terrible and he should have been told in no uncertain terms and thru action that it would not be tolerated. it should be the same for all players despite their standing at the club.
we drop cotchin or jack or deledio for good reason so be it.

as for cotchin do you think he plays unaccoutable footy despite the low tackle count. does that just mean hes first to the ball most of the time.
as for turn overs well that stat is a worry but you know as well as me there is much more to it than just posting a stat. i will ask who do you think is the better kick stats aside.

who would you rather cotchin or nahas who has the greater upside.and im not defending cotchin, it patently clear one has enormous potential upside and one does not. one is the future despite as you imply being ordinary atm
the other is ordinary and is not.

i can categorically say nahas is no good ordinary and vfl standard, i cant say that about a player 3 yrs his junior and who has hardly had a decent pre season since he was drafted.its like saying graham is a better player than vickery because hes doing better than him atm do we sack vickery. and im not saying nahas is doing better than cotchin atm that is you implying it.
as i have repeatedly said on many threads im all for playing as many kids as we think are going to be part of the future. play these kids with good structure good size as many decent kicks as possible. and despite your infatuation with using stats to try to score a point cotchin is one of those better kicks. also we need to have enough experince spread thru out.
i dont believe i have ever deviated from this stance ironic that im still forced to scream out for it.

 

[_RT_]

in answer simply put i thought deledio should nhave been drpped after the carlton game.his lack of accountability was terrible and he should have been told in no uncertain terms and thru action that it would not be tolerated. it should be the same for all players despite their standing at the club.
we drop cotchin or jack or deledio for good reason so be it.

as for cotchin do you think he plays unaccoutable footy despite the low tackle count. does that just mean hes first to the ball most of the time.
as for turn overs well that stat is a worry but you know as well as me there is much more to it than just posting a stat. i will ask who do you think is the better kick stats aside.

who would you rather cotchin or nahas who has the greater upside.and im not defending cotchin, it patently clear one has enormous potential upside and one does not. one is the future despite as you imply being ordinary atm
the other is ordinary and is not.

i can categorically say nahas is no good ordinary and vfl standard, i cant say that about a player 3 yrs his junior and who has hardly had a decent pre season since he was drafted.its like saying graham is a better player than vickery because hes doing better than him atm do we sack vickery. and im not saying nahas is doing better than cotchin atm that is you implying it.
as i have repeatedly said on many threads im all for playing as many kids as we think are going to be part of the future. play these kids with good structure good size as many decent kicks as possible. and despite your infatuation with using stats to try to score a point cotchin is one of those better kicks. also we need to have enough experince spread thru out.
i dont believe i have ever deviated from this stance ironic that im still forced to scream out for it.

Its interesting when you have a go at Nahas there is nothing that can be said to change your opinion of him. Doesn't matter if I say that I've seen Nahas do things at the game that don't get shown on TV, or produce stats to show that he is doing what is being asked of him. He always will be nothing more than a sub standard player in your view.

Yet when it comes to one of our 'stars' or 'good' ball users like Cotchin rather than address what appear to be flaws currently in his game questions just get thrown up like who would you prefer to have the ball or who has the better upside. Its not just you that do it either, I've been guilty of it, as have plenty of others on the board.

 

[Rayzorwire]

I'd just love one more tall in there for some extra cover at either end of the ground and anyway wasn't Gourdis touted as an elite athlete himself? If there were people on here who claimed that he could physically go with Buddy then have we really lost all that much by way of run?

I could only guess why he's not getting a run ahead of Grimes Vic, but leaving that aside, I honestly don't know how he'd go away from a key defensive role, I haven't seem him play anywhere else since his junior days when he looked a promising forward. He is a good athlete but I'm not sure that extends to stamina yet and I'm not sure how he'd match up on a small if required to.

Do you honestly believe someone like Edwards is more important to the side currently??

There's a few players I'd have in ahead of Edwards ATM, but I'd be swapping running player for running player - Tuck and Webberley for starters. Be very surprised if one of them doesn't get a game Friday.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Hmm interesting comments Claws, I wonder what you make of the following?

Nahas averaging 15 disposals 7 tackles and 4.3 turnovers a game and Cotchin averaging 22 disposals 1.6 tackles and 11 turnovers a game.

Going on what you've just said Cotchin should be making his way to Coburg this weekend given he isn't exactly getting a heap more of the ball than Nahas is and when he does get it he is turning it over 50% of the time. To top it off when he doesn't have it he is managing to lay less than 2 tackles a game.

RT ,despite mentioning it on a number of different threads, I honestly can not believe you actually think anyone on the CP , fair less than the majority and/or casting vote, would rank Nahas higher than Cotchin ?
As pointed out previously Nahas has lost considerably more contests and therefore his tackle count should be far superior to Cotchins , and superior to what it is , whilst DE% is 1 of , if not , the biggest flawed stat available !

 

[partycorolla]

in answer simply put i thought deledio should nhave been drpped after the carlton game.his lack of accountability was terrible and he should have been told in no uncertain terms and thru action that it would not be tolerated. it should be the same for all players despite their standing at the club.
we drop cotchin or jack or deledio for good reason so be it.

as for cotchin do you think he plays unaccoutable footy despite the low tackle count. does that just mean hes first to the ball most of the time.
as for turn overs well that stat is a worry but you know as well as me there is much more to it than just posting a stat. i will ask who do you think is the better kick stats aside.

who would you rather cotchin or nahas who has the greater upside.and im not defending cotchin, it patently clear one has enormous potential upside and one does not. one is the future despite as you imply being ordinary atm
the other is ordinary and is not.

i can categorically say nahas is no good ordinary and vfl standard, i cant say that about a player 3 yrs his junior and who has hardly had a decent pre season since he was drafted.its like saying graham is a better player than vickery because hes doing better than him atm do we sack vickery. and im not saying nahas is doing better than cotchin atm that is you implying it.
as i have repeatedly said on many threads im all for playing as many kids as we think are going to be part of the future. play these kids with good structure good size as many decent kicks as possible. and despite your infatuation with using stats to try to score a point cotchin is one of those better kicks. also we need to have enough experince spread thru out.
i dont believe i have ever deviated from this stance ironic that im still forced to scream out for it.

Lucky for us you're not on the MC Santa otherwise we would have missed out on Lids brilliant game on Goddard and probably 2 premiership points. I don't want to go back to the days of a player has 1 bad game so they are dropped, a replacement is brought in who has an average game so they are then dropped for the senior bloke who was dropped and picked up 30 nothing possies in the VFL... Give these blokes the coaching and the message just as you said but they need chances Santa... dropping 4 blokes every week equals losses plain and simple.