Preview Changes V GWS

[Jack is Back]

Happy with the faith shown in the kids. Jack, you owe Sando an apology.

My only concern is the lack of a small crumbing forward. I would have replaced Porps with Callinan.

E.C. please point out where I criticised Sando for the selections this week.

My first post was on page 15 when I suggested Out - Tambling, Porplyzia; In - van Berlo and Laird. Shortly after I said that it could be Jaensch that misses out depending upon where vB plays. CRAZY STUFF E.C? I at no stage did I say that Sando would drop Kerridge and Lyons and in fact I said that Sando wanted to play them and Laird (Quote: "Come on Sando, I know you want to do it")

My comments were directed at other posters who were advocating that Lyons and Laird should miss out, one even suggested that Kerridge should be dropped.

I did point out that we had a poor record for playing KIDS last year (do you dispute this fact?) and we continued to favour the fading journeymen earlier this season (e.g. not playing Crouch in round 1).

The very astute AFGM said at the start of last season that we shouldn't build a backline around Doughty and Johncock and our small forwards shouldn't be both Callinan and Porplyzia and that they would not be part of our next premiership team. He copped heaps of flack but was he wrong?
No wonder AFGM doesn't post here anymore

 

[Glenno23]

The very astute AFGM said at the start of last season that we shouldn't build a backline around Doughty and Johncock and our small forwards shouldn't be both Callinan and Porplyzia and that they would not be part of our next premiership team. He copped heaps of flack but was he wrong?
No wonder AFGM doesn't post here anymore

Sure he doesn't

 

[Mattrox]

The pompous nature of some people give me the shits.

Can't blame people for this with all the going off half cocked and firing off blindly that was going on prior.

 

[Jack is Back]

I also posted earlier that I do not blame Sando for the poor record in playing KIDS last year. I believe there was great pressure on him to produce the Sando Spike by S.T. and the Corporates and the below average injury rate plus our chance of a top two finish forced his hand. I agreed to stand up at the G when we won the prelim, drop my dacks and hold up a "I was wrong Sando" sign. When Stiffy kicked that goal I was happily loosening my belt but alas along came Cyril and the rest is history.

The bottom line was that we didn't win the flag and we were further from a premiership at the end of the season than at the beginning (Thanks Triggy). If we are to have any chance over the next few years we need to be bold. I like the way we have been heading in recent weeks and it will be painful in the short term.

P.S. What gave it away Glenno? Possibly my post that my old log in wasn't working so I had to set up a new account?

 

[Mattrox]

E.C. please point out where I criticised Sando for the selections this week.

My first post was on page 15 when I suggested Out - Tambling, Porplyzia; In - van Berlo and Laird. Shortly after I said that it could be Jaensch that misses out depending upon where vB plays. CRAZY STUFF E.C? I at no stage did I say that Sando would drop Kerridge and Lyons and in fact I said that Sando wanted to play them and Laird (Quote: "Come on Sando, I know you want to do it")

My comments were directed at other posters who were advocating that Lyons and Laird should miss out, one even suggested that Kerridge should be dropped.

I did point out that we had a poor record for playing KIDS last year (do you dispute this fact?) and we continued to favour the fading journeymen earlier this season (e.g. not playing Crouch in round 1).

The very astute AFGM said at the start of last season that we shouldn't build a backline around Doughty and Johncock and our small forwards shouldn't be both Callinan and Porplyzia and that they would not be part of our next premiership team. He copped heaps of flack but was he wrong?
No wonder AFGM doesn't post here anymore

The only player who is close to being a Journeyman is Tambling, ok I'll give you Callinan as well because he has trained with other AFL clubs unsuccessfully.......

We are essentially kids or AFC stalwarts.
AFC will always show loyalty to veterans and give them a chance to show some form. You put some trust in people and your people will perform better as a whole. It adds stability to the group. Once they show they need a spell they get one.

Posters wanting quick changes to the side are wide of the mark. Can't have players always worried about job security. It's the same argument about playing kids for several games in a row, give them a chance for the sake of team stability.

 

[Jack is Back]

The only player who is close to being a Journeyman is Tambling, ok I'll give you Callinan as well because he has trained with other AFL clubs unsuccessfully.......

We are essentially kids or AFC stalwarts.
AFC will always show loyalty to veterans and give them a chance to show some form. You put some trust in people and your people will perform better as a whole. It adds stability to the group. Once they show they need a spell they get one.

Posters wanting quick changes to the side are wide of the mark. Can't have players always worried about job security. It's the same argument about playing kids for several games in a row, give them a chance for the sake of team stability.

Interesting point of view. Are you suggesting that we need a balance of experienced players to assist in the development of the KIDS? Would you like a comparison of experienced players (100+ games) versus players in the early stage of their development (less than 30 games) over each of the last 10 years? It makes interesting reading.

 

[Glenno23]

P.S. What gave it away Glenno? Possibly my post that my old log in wasn't working so I had to set up a new account?

What post? Never seen it

 

[cmndstab]

Good changes

However, I still don't and have never seen the need to pick a squad of 25 players.

Why not just come out and say, these are our in's and they are out outs and these 3 guys are out emergencies. It's only 24 hours, they are not going to trick anyone but they still feel the need to be all secret about it. It's pointless.

Clubs with guts and fortitude, pick their battles.

Clubs like the Crows, need to take baby steps and pick battles they can win. We don't pick any battles because we don't want to upset the apple cart.

Are you serious with this aiof? First of all, it's a bit rich accusing the Crows of being weak here when literally every team abides by this rule and has done for years.

Secondly, this is nothing to do with the Crows. It's just the way team selections are announced. The AFL gives the teams playing on Sunday an extra day to settle down their emergency list. Yes, the club would know who they want in their best 22 on Thursday, but an extra day makes sense when you consider that it will be three more days before they play.

I don't understand why you're making such a big issue over this, and that aside, I don't see why your ire is directed at the Crows. Should they come out and announce their team a day early as well, just to thumb their nose at the AFL? What a bizarre thing to have a whinge about.


As for the changes, I'm relatively happy with them. Unlike some others here I think Wright has a legitimate future at our club and am not unhappy to see him nursed through some down (but not awful) form. Lyons, Kerridge and Laird all being in the side is great to see and it's interesting to hear that Harper acknowledges their selection policy has been a tad flawed in the past when it comes to dropping early players after acceptable performances.

In the end, this is not a game we should be fearing (despite anything we say publicly) so it makes sense to give our future youth some game time. I hope we choose a senior player as sub this week.

 

[Mattrox]

Interesting point of view. Are you suggesting that we need a balance of experienced players to assist in the development of the KIDS? Would you like a comparison of experienced players (100+ games) versus players in the early stage of their development (less than 30 games) over each of the last 10 years? It makes interesting reading.

We have a new coach so patterns will necessarily change.

Besides over that period in which we had a long list of experienced players who were forced to play an unworkable game plan. It would have been hard to break into that side.

How many sub 50 game players is the ideal for a Premiership side?






If I suggest 3 or 4 looks like a good number ....

 

[Jack is Back]

We can't afford to be too smug and other than Tex we have selected virtually all of our best 15 players (Crouch will be in this group soon and I believe Sam Shaw will as well but they are currently on the borderline).

What we can do is give Smack more time on the ball and Patty and Thommo plenty of time in the forward 50. I expect to see Lyons and Kerridge spend plenty of time in the guts.

 

[AFC979810]

We can't afford to be too smug and other than Tex we have selected virtually all of our best 15 players (Crouch will be in this group soon and I believe Sam Shaw will as well but they are currently on the borderline).

And what a foolish strategy that is. What side plays their best 15 players?

 

[Mattrox]

Interesting point of view. Are you suggesting that we need a balance of experienced players to assist in the development of the KIDS? Would you like a comparison of experienced players (100+ games) versus players in the early stage of their development (less than 30 games) over each of the last 10 years? It makes interesting reading.

As a snapshot.
Round 19 2006 4 players under 50 games Right in line with the premiership and GF sides I posted previously, 2 players with 4 and 5 games respectively.
View attachment 17856

Round 14 2008

6 players under 30 games with a few more rounding out the sub 50 category with 8 players.

I call bullshit that we don't blood new talent and give the kids a chance.

 

[SnookAU]

We can't afford to be too smug and other than Tex we have selected virtually all of our best 15 players (Crouch will be in this group soon and I believe Sam Shaw will as well but they are currently on the borderline).

What we can do is give Smack more time on the ball and Patty and Thommo plenty of time in the forward 50. I expect to see Lyons and Kerridge spend plenty of time in the guts.

Thompson should not go near the goals full stop. Horrid kick.

 

[AFC979810]

Thompson should not go near the goals full stop. Horrid kick.

Actually isnt that bad.

Has kicked 140 goals and 105 behinds (57% accuracy) over his career.

Taylor Walker has kicked 163 goals and 101 behinds (62% accuracy).

 

[King Elvis]

And what a foolish strategy that is. What side plays their best 15 players?

One that is still trying to figure out who the best other 7 are?

 

[macca23]

The very astute AFGM said at the start of last season that we shouldn't build a backline around Doughty and Johncock and our small forwards shouldn't be both Callinan and Porplyzia and that they would not be part of our next premiership team. He copped heaps of flack but was he wrong?
No wonder AFGM doesn't post here anymore

Why don't you pump your own tyres up AFGM.

Different pseodonym, same arrogance.

 

[moogerfooger]

I am concerned we don't have a small crumbing forward

the good teams have at least two and sometimes three. we usually play with none or at best one. Pets doesn't count. there's a reason the ball comes out of our front half so easily.

 

[Elite Crow]

Interesting that Sando said when Shaw comes back he could play up forward. I've mentioned this before, I reckon he would be an extremely hard match up on the flank. Size, pace, decent mark and mobility. If he can have some accuracy he could be dangerous. With Otten in form we don't need him down back.

 

[Wood_Duck]

And your resorting to hyperbole isn't disproving my argument.

You're right. You are disproving it all by yourself.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Interesting that Sando said when Shaw comes back he could play up forward. I've mentioned this before, I reckon he would be an extremely hard match up on the flank. Size, pace, decent mark and mobility. If he can have some accuracy he could be dangerous. With Otten in form we don't need him down back.

Nah, can't play blokes out of position.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Nah, can't play blokes out of position.

He was recruited as a midfielder .....playing down back was playing him out of position

No-one knows how he would go as a forward but IMO he has a good turn on him (not a straight line player) and could play forward

 

[Stripple]

We have a new coach so patterns will necessarily change.

Besides over that period in which we had a long list of experienced players who were forced to play an unworkable game plan. It would have been hard to break into that side.

How many sub 50 game players is the ideal for a Premiership side?
View attachment 17852

View attachment 17853

View attachment 17854

If I suggest 3 or 4 looks like a good number ....

Yep and by the end of next year we will only have 3-4 in the side.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

It seems that the penny has finally dropped at the AFC, selection is now based on form, team comes first before individuals and a young player is no longer last in first out after a loss or one poor performance

Now all we need to do is get some players back in their natural positions

Our future is well and truly on display tomorrow

 

[Slippery Pete]

Can someone please list the confirmed ins and outs plus the three emergencies, cheers.

 

[spexau]

Can someone please list the confirmed ins and outs plus the three emergencies, cheers.

EMERG: Ian Callinan, Ricky Henderson, Matthew Jaensch
INS: Nathan van Berlo, Rory Laird
OUT: Richard Tambling (omitted), Matthew Jaensch (omitted)