Preview Changes vs Collingwood

[Mckaye17]

Turns out Rutten didn't end up playing in the ressies so a for sure sign he'll play against the pies right there, so for me these will be the changes.

Outs: Lynch, Jaensch, Shaw and Petrenko

Ins: Walker, Douglas, Rutten and Lyons.

I'd like Martin to be given another shot, but honestly Lyons is a country mile ahead of him in form.

 

[beartoo]

I'd like Martin to be given another shot, but honestly Lyons is a country mile ahead of him in form.

Did you watch Martin's game against the Power 2s? BOG by a country mile. If form in the ressies is to be rewarded then Martin comes in. Can't do any worse than a number in the 1s.

 

[FullyBigKPro]

Lyons 100% MUST get a game.

It seems quite simple really, with the injuries we have and the pathetic loss to Melbourne, if he is not picked then his cards are marked.

Reilly, Petrenko, Shaw, Wright and Grigg would all be close to the edge and he could easily come in ahead of one of them.

 

[Vader]

So if he gets upgraded on Monday he will definitely get selected for Thursday night

I'd suggest that it would be a near certainty.

 

[Vader]

They could remain, we simply shuffle Shaw into Reilly, Jaensch or Lynch position. He's tall but the athleticism of a flanker.

The fact his disposal is awful means he shouldn't be in the back half. I'd like to see him tried at half forward.

But all said and done, shawly he will be dropped before Hartigan

Highly unlikely to happen. Reilly was far, far, far, far better than Shaw, who was up there with Petrenko for worst on ground. Shaw had just 6 disposals for the entire game, not one of which hit a target - Champion Data scored him at 0% DE for the entire game. 0%.

Athleticism counts for nothing if you can't hit a target - and Shaw couldn't hit the side of a barn from 3 feet away.

 

[footy4ever]

Turns out Rutten didn't end up playing in the ressies so a for sure sign he'll play against the pies right there, so for me these will be the changes.

Truck, Brodie Martin and C. Cameron were all late withdrawals. The plot thickens.

 

[Vader]

Turns out Rutten didn't end up playing in the ressies so a for sure sign he'll play against the pies right there, so for me these will be the changes.

Outs: Lynch, Jaensch, Shaw and Petrenko

Ins: Walker, Douglas, Rutten and Lyons.

I'd like Martin to be given another shot, but honestly Lyons is a country mile ahead of him in form.

I think the selectors made it fairly clear who would & wouldn't be playing, when they pulled Cameron, Martin & Rutten from the SANFL - leaving Lyons to play in the magoos. It's highly unlikely that Lyons will be playing against Collingwood on Thursday night.

 

[lunacy]

Surely Lyons won't play if he played in sanfl? He could only be a sub but even then it's unlikely because he would need to be prepared for a full game in case of injury.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Did you watch Martin's game against the Power 2s? BOG by a country mile. If form in the ressies is to be rewarded then Martin comes in. Can't do any worse than a number in the 1s.

Their is no correlation between SANFL form and AFL form. It just doesn't happen.

The reserves team is designed for structure and system. Coaches pick players on the structure they can fill.

Martin has had enough opportunities to prove if he's good enough or not - it's time to look towards someone else.

We should reward Lyons or CEY and if they don't provide that lift or improvement - delist them. We stick with the same old spuds way too much.

Martin is just another example.

 

[Vader]

I wouldn't say that there's no correlation between SANFL & AFL, but it is limited.

Good SANFL form does not necessarily result in good AFL form. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't.
Bad AFL form does not necessarily result in bad SANFL form. I've seen players get dropped and be BOG in the SANFL the following week. I've also seen players like McKernan & LJ who get dropped from the SANFL and just give up.
Good AFL form would almost certainly result in good SANFL form, but we only rarely see it because good AFL form usually results in ongoing selection at AFL level. The only time we see this is when we have a senior player return from injury, forcing a less senior player out of the side regardless of their form (eg Davi$ being dropped to make way for Bock - the week after he won the RS nomination).

As for rewarding or delisting Lyons & CEY.. Our ability to replace dead wood type players has been limited for the last 5 years. In 2009 the AFL changed the age eligibility, cutting the draft class by 1/3; 2010 & 2011 saw the GC/GWS draft concessions; 2012 & 2013 saw us lose our 1st & 2nd round picks due to the Tiprat penalties. This is the first year we've had unfettered access to the draft in half a decade and our list managers have ensured that every single "dead wood" type player is out of contract, giving them maximum flexibility in determining who they wish to cull. I think it's highly likely that Lyons & Martin won't be on our list next year and I would not be the least bit surprised of CEY isn't either.

Right now Martin, Lyons and (to a lesser extent) CEY serve a purpose as "depth players". At various times this year we've had up to 7 senior players missing due to injury. This is where the likes of Martin & Lyons come into their own. Most of the kids we have aren't ready to play AFL and we need someone who can step up if required and not make a fool of themselves at senior level. These players aren't good enough to be in our best 22, but are capable enough when called upon because other players aren't available for selection.

 

[craig crowing]

I wouldn't say that there's no correlation between SANFL & AFL, but it is limited.

Good SANFL form does not necessarily result in good AFL form. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't.
Bad AFL form does not necessarily result in bad SANFL form. I've seen players get dropped and be BOG in the SANFL the following week. I've also seen players like McKernan & LJ who get dropped from the SANFL and just give up.
Good AFL form would almost certainly result in good SANFL form, but we only rarely see it because good AFL form usually results in ongoing selection at AFL level. The only time we see this is when we have a senior player return from injury, forcing a less senior player out of the side regardless of their form (eg Davi$ being dropped to make way for Bock - the week after he won the RS nomination).

As for rewarding or delisting Lyons & CEY.. Our ability to replace dead wood type players has been limited for the last 5 years. In 2009 the AFL changed the age eligibility, cutting the draft class by 1/3; 2010 & 2011 saw the GC/GWS draft concessions; 2012 & 2013 saw us lose our 1st & 2nd round picks due to the Tiprat penalties. This is the first year we've had unfettered access to the draft in half a decade and our list managers have ensured that every single "dead wood" type player is out of contract, giving them maximum flexibility in determining who they wish to cull. I think it's highly likely that Lyons & Martin won't be on our list next year and I would not be the least bit surprised of CEY isn't either.

Right now Martin, Lyons and (to a lesser extent) CEY serve a purpose as "depth players". At various times this year we've had up to 7 senior players missing due to injury. This is where the likes of Martin & Lyons come into their own. Most of the kids we have aren't ready to play AFL and we need someone who can step up if required and not make a fool of themselves at senior level. These players aren't good enough to be in our best 22, but are capable enough when called upon because other players aren't available for selection.

Remember that we have a lot of young rookies and Osborn that might be elevated to help clear the decks and in supposed good draft could get up to 4 selections or use to trade . think we have to gamble on some kids to get us back on track after sanctions rather than keep fringe players.
But of course that is not going to help make our reserves competitive in near future.
Surely when we could not get a rusty nail for Smack should have been a indication how awful he is rather than keep him on.

 

[King Elvis]

Reports were that Lyons had his game time heavily managed??

 

[Elite Crow]

Reports were that Lyons had his game time heavily managed??

Yeh by Sando, SANFL game time only

 

[The Karma Bus]

Reports were that Lyons had his game time heavily managed??

No doubt a fall back plan in case someone, or a few, get sick, ping a hammy at training etc..

 

[King Elvis]

Fingers crossed then.

 

[The Karma Bus]

Fingers crossed then.

Amazing that's what it's come to for him to even be considered..
Definitely one of the outer boys..

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Managed his game time so that we didn't have to not pick him after a 35+ possession 3 vote game

 

[hey shorty]

Probably had 70% GT last night.

 

[Vader]

Remember that we have a lot of young rookies and Osborn that might be elevated to help clear the decks and in supposed good draft could get up to 4 selections or use to trade . think we have to gamble on some kids to get us back on track after sanctions rather than keep fringe players.
But of course that is not going to help make our reserves competitive in near future.
Surely when we could not get a rusty nail for Smack should have been a indication how awful he is rather than keep him on.

After 5 years of serial draft avoidance we have an abundance of dead wood that needs to be cleared. However, I doubt that we'll be clearing all of them at the same time, as doing so would leave us with virtually no depth at all in the event of injuries. I'm also far from convinced that we'll be upgrading so many rookie listed players - I think it's likely that Cameron will be the only one upgraded, with most of the rest being given a 2nd year on the rookie list.

As for the effect that has on our reserves team, quite frankly, it's irrelevant.

I doubt we'd get a rusty nail for any of the players that roo2macca listed. Including Lyons & Martin.

 

[King Elvis]

Our reserves are currently displaying how destructive the penalties Trigg and Co received will be to our AFL side in the next 3-5 years.

 

[hey shorty]

Yep add 3 more top 20s at the least and our squad looks great. Lets say O'Brien, Kennedy and Salem.........

 

[hey shorty]

And Bernie too......

 

[robboaustralia]

Game will probably go like this....

 

[pjcrows]

Highly unlikely to happen. Reilly was far, far, far, far better than Shaw, who was up there with Petrenko for worst on ground. Shaw had just 6 disposals for the entire game, not one of which hit a target - Champion Data scored him at 0% DE for the entire game. 0%.

Athleticism counts for nothing if you can't hit a target - and Shaw couldn't hit the side of a barn from 3 feet away.

My thoughts exactly!

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Reports were that Lyons had his game time heavily managed??

Fertile Phill was on MMM this morning and in his usual KGB way, didn't give anything away regarding selection.

By that, he didn't even mention Lyons name. I don't think he has a chance in hell of getting a game.

Douglas, Tex, Rutten will cone back. Cameron will be the 4th change if he is up graded and that would then make Lyons the 5th or 6th change.

Wouldn't get any hopes up.

He is gone at seasons end for nothing. He will sign with a Melbourne club as a delisted free agent and cone back and kill us as another player we have lost for nothing.