Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - PART III

[romeohwho]

Hawkins plays bad games but never gets dropped. Blicavs plays terrible games but never gets dropped. Kolo plays bad games but never gets dropped.

Stanley plays well in the VFL against a local plumber and Smith gets beaten by Max Gawn and gets the chop, hardly a fair comparison.

Kolo is coming along nicely and needs to be developed, so he plays. He is a lock in the 22 if he continues on his current trajectory.
Don’t think I have seen Hawkins play so poorly that he be dropped.
Smith should be playing.

 

[Cataholic]

Okay. That's got nothing to do with Thurlow/Murdoch as players.

As players they’re two of our weaker links.

 

[Partridge]

If I meant you I'd have said you.
The quality is irrelevant in the discussion as like most clubs our depth is similar, we're just dipping a little deeper into it atm than most clubs are. It was more centered around having some senior core to draw on, which I think we will do this week. Expect Smith, Thurlow and Murdoch to be heavily in contention.

I'm sure as glad right now we didn't punt GHS like these Couch Recruiters. Easy to make decisions from the couch with no one to answer to if you're wrong.

Ah yes the old staple. How dare posters have an opinion because we don't work at the club. Grade One idiocy right there.

Retaining Horlin-Smith is definitely useful - if they are actually going to use him at times like this. If he still stays in the VFL, keeping him around doesn't help at all because his mature body won't be called upon.

 

[Partridge]

Richmond started out last year still playing Taylor Hunt by choice.

Shows how much can change in a year.

Bit like us picking Gardiner, Tenace, and Playfair in 2006 and even into 2007.

 

[ATSAM]

Posted this in the Esava thread but it's more relevant here:

We all know (and at least now we all know for all the lovers) that Scott is a terrible coach with monumental stuff up after monumental stuff up.

But now, after the same problems have f*cked us for the first 3 games (not to mention the same weakenesses that have f*cked us for years that remain unfixed) he SURELY now has realised that we need to make the following changes:

1. Blicavs to KPD as a FB or CHB.

This stops stupid match ups like Zuthrie on Roughead. We effectively go Blicavs and Kolo as 2 tall defenders, Stewart as the 3rd rebounding defender. Frees up the smaller players too.

2. Bring Smith in to replace Blitz in the ruck.

Smith is our no.1 ruck who should NEVER have been dropped after round one. He is superior to Stanley and 1 bag game shouldn't banish him to the VFL when he is one of our more important players. If Scott played a ruck v West Coast (and I mean 17 other coaches and 99.999999% of Australians would have played a ruck against west coast) the outcome would've been different as Naitanui killed us (as expected) and drove them over the line with 3 goals directly from his taps.

3. Play Esava as a key forward together with Hawkins.

FFS scott, don't ruin this kid too by playing him all over the place (think Gregson, Gurthrie Parfitt playing forward, Lang even Smedts were all played out of position and lost confidence etc.) settle him as a second tall forward. Esava and Blitz can provide relief minutes to Smith, but Smith should be rucking the same minutes as Nank for tigs or Sandi for freo.. ie the maximum.

This give us STRUCTURE. It settles the team and it will improve our defence, ruck and gives Esava more rest up forward to impact games.

It is the most simple, logical and OBVIOUS coaching amendment... surely Scott will know to do this.... surely.... (he probably won't know to do this and will continue with our current set up... what's the definition of insanity again?)

Yes , yes, yes. Funny everyone Geelong supporter spoken to in the last weeks holds a similar position. Everyone is astonished by two issues- backline against Hawthorn and Z Guthrie on Roughead and no ruck to West Coast. Oh and why the hell take Ablett to Perth. Oh and why do we have so many hamstrings injuries to so many players-4 already 2 to one player-

 

[Two Planks]

Shows how much can change in a year.

Bit like us picking Gardiner, Tenace, and Playfair in 2006 and even into 2007.

I vividly remember 1 particular poster being hounded of this site because he picked out Playfair as a dud well before the rest of the board.

 

[Partridge]

I vividly remember 1 particular poster being hounded of this site because he picked out Playfair as a dud well before the rest of the board.

There's a shock.

He played very good football in the first half of 2005 before breaking his jaw. Never came close after that.

 

[cynical]

Can't win in any case can he?

Should have been consistent from the start, thats all you can really ask for.

If from now he decides to drop players for bad games then it has to be all players not just the ones he doesnt like.

 

[Partridge]

Can't win in any case can he?

Yes he can. Easily:

1. Pick as close as we can to two competent rucks. Preferably Smith and Stanley. Remember the oft-repeated mantra around here "well, he wasn't recruited play reserves", if that doesn't apply to Smith nothing does.
2. Play actual defenders in defence and actual forwards in the forward line.
3. Drop players when they have terrible games. That goes for everyone. Including his pets.
4. Promote players when they deserve it, and there is a role for them. Underperforming players like Gregson and Parsons for say Murdoch - as a forward - is a straight swap for example. We all like Zac Guthrie, but he's been down for a while and a straight swap for Thurlow (first round draft pick remember) could be good too.

If he were to start doing things like that, a lot of frustrations will be removed instantly.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Watch the last 10 minutes of the game again and tell me he didn't win the game for them.

He didn’t. 1 rotation won them the game.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Ah yes the old staple. How dare posters have an opinion because we don't work at the club. Grade One idiocy right there.

Retaining Horlin-Smith is definitely useful - if they are actually going to use him at times like this. If he still stays in the VFL, keeping him around doesn't help at all because his mature body won't be called upon.

Nonsense. 46 players for 22 senior team spots.

Constantly waffle on about players retained too long. Waffle on about wasting really late picks. Waffle on about retaining players we aren’t using. Well basics maths tells you we use less than half the list weekly.

It isn’t surprising that players aren’t used, it’s actually mathematically more likely than not for a player to miss the senior side. George is no different to the other 24 not being used, he’s there as back up. His age or games experience is irrelevant to that, as long as he’s deemed in the 46 best players for the list who cares about any other factors than that? Surely only that matters?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Yes he can. Easily:

1. Pick as close as we can to two competent rucks. Preferably Smith and Stanley. Remember the oft-repeated mantra around here "well, he wasn't recruited play reserves", if that doesn't apply to Smith nothing does.
2. Play actual defenders in defence and actual forwards in the forward line.
3. Drop players when they have terrible games. That goes for everyone. Including his pets.
4. Promote players when they deserve it, and there is a role for them. Underperforming players like Gregson and Parsons for say Murdoch - as a forward - is a straight swap for example. We all like Zac Guthrie, but he's been down for a while and a straight swap for Thurlow (first round draft pick remember) could be good too.

If he were to start doing things like that, a lot of frustrations will be removed instantly.

1. Pick one of those not both.
2. He actually is doing that. Name one defender from the last game who isn’t a defender? All the forwards last week were in their correct position.
3. He does and has.
4. What form does Thurlow have to warrant a game over anyone? Note: I am bringing him in for C.Guthrie but that’s not the same as what you’re saying? Gregson was good last week. Parsons should be dropped granted, although I have Murdoch in regardless for Cockatoo.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Hawkins plays bad games but never gets dropped. Blicavs plays terrible games but never gets dropped. Kolo plays bad games but never gets dropped.

Dropping Hawkins would be laughable since our forward line has been built around him since 2012 and he's always been one of our best players in that time.

Interesting that you single out Kolo too. What bad games are you talking about? I can't remember the last time he would've been in our bottom 5 players in a particular game. Not since 2016 I'd say. He's actually a really consistent performer who rarely stars but usually does his job ok.

 

[Landgraft]

Shows how much can change in a year.

Bit like us picking Gardiner, Tenace, and Playfair in 2006 and even into 2007.

It was just one example, its not as if even our 2007 team was ever composed of 22 superstars and the Richmond 2017 squad even less so.

Most likely Murda and Thurlow won't ever be more than average role players, but thats nothing unique to our situation. Its just an inevitability of the AFL system that your roster will need a few adequate warm bodies at times.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Richmond played Grigg as #2 ruck last year. Imagine the melts if Scott did the same with someone like Menegola.

 

[Footy Smarts]

4. Promote players when they deserve it, and there is a role for them. Underperforming players like Gregson and Parsons for say Murdoch - as a forward - is a straight swap for example. We all like Zac Guthrie, but he's been down for a while and a straight swap for Thurlow (first round draft pick remember) could be good too.

It's a bit hard to take your claims if promoting a meritocracy seriously when you suggest bringing in Thurlow now. I wouldn't mind him getting a game based on ability but he's done nothing recently to deserve it. It makes it hard to take your criticism of Scott playing favourites seriously. At best it's rank hypocrisy.

 

[allrighty]

But still close.........

Yep big difference. No doubt that we are light on for depth at the moment.

Put a few fit outs back in and you have - Henderson and Taylor up back. I'd throw Thurlow in there as a backup too, and if fit and firing in the 22.

Duncan and now Gaz in the guts. Cocky and Linc forward. Smith ruck (inexplicable why he is not playing, if only for his size).

Then there's the players playing injured and heaven knows how many of them there are. To be fair on that point all clubs have these.

On all levels these extra players give heaps of experience and or presssure, both being what I reckon we are sorely missing ATM. And a sustainable gameplan, but that's another issue.

 

[allrighty]

2. Playing Smith is fine, but what if Smith has terrible games? Does he get gifted games because he is better than Stanley?

If Smith struggles, and Stanley tears up the VFL, would you play Stanley ahead of Smith then?

You could say this for any number of players where there are options. Stanley for example can be so hot and cold from one week to the next it is nearly impossible to stick with him him I think.

 

[allrighty]

Ah yes the old staple. How dare posters have an opinion because we don't work at the club. Grade One idiocy right there.

Retaining Horlin-Smith is definitely useful - if they are actually going to use him at times like this. If he still stays in the VFL, keeping him around doesn't help at all because his mature body won't be called upon.

Spoton, why is he here if not for now?

 

[Vdubs]

Yes he can. Easily:

1. Pick as close as we can to two competent rucks. Preferably Smith and Stanley. Remember the oft-repeated mantra around here "well, he wasn't recruited play reserves", if that doesn't apply to Smith nothing does.
2. Play actual defenders in defence and actual forwards in the forward line.
3. Drop players when they have terrible games. That goes for everyone. Including his pets.
4. Promote players when they deserve it, and there is a role for them. Underperforming players like Gregson and Parsons for say Murdoch - as a forward - is a straight swap for example. We all like Zac Guthrie, but he's been down for a while and a straight swap for Thurlow (first round draft pick remember) could be good too.

If he were to start doing things like that, a lot of frustrations will be removed instantly.

Very sensible recommendations.
Again, the wisdom of the coach and MC, along with their intimate knowledge of each players' training and daily wellness far exceeds our reactive "knowledge"

 

[Partridge]

It's a bit hard to take your claims if promoting a meritocracy seriously when you suggest bringing in Thurlow now. I wouldn't mind him getting a game based on ability but he's done nothing recently to deserve it. It makes it hard to take your criticism of Scott playing favourites seriously. At best it's rank hypocrisy.

That's a fair comment, my point in that instance is more a mature body over an underdeveloped one. Poorly worded on my part.

If Thurlow's form isn't good enough then fair enough, he doesn't come in.

 

[Partridge]

Richmond played Grigg as #2 ruck last year. Imagine the melts if Scott did the same with someone like Menegola.

Depends. If we stormed through September the way they did I suspect people could handle it.

 

[cynical]

Nonsense. 46 players for 22 senior team spots.

Constantly waffle on about players retained too long. Waffle on about wasting really late picks. Waffle on about retaining players we aren’t using. Well basics maths tells you we use less than half the list weekly.

It isn’t surprising that players aren’t used, it’s actually mathematically more likely than not for a player to miss the senior side. George is no different to the other 24 not being used, he’s there as back up. His age or games experience is irrelevant to that, as long as he’s deemed in the 46 best players for the list who cares about any other factors than that? Surely only that matters?

Most who arent used should be developing players or genuine contingencies like a ruck or KPP. Don't really need extra mids or smalls as contingencies because kids can fill those roles.

Having players like GHS, Black, Crameri etc are just wasted list spots.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Most who arent used should be developing players or genuine contingencies like a ruck or KPP. Don't really need extra mids or smalls as contingencies because kids can fill those roles.

Having players like GHS, Black, Crameri etc are just wasted list spots.

Not really. Crameri will play this season, when fit.

 

[cynical]

3. He does and has.
4. What form does Thurlow have to warrant a game over anyone? Note: I am bringing him in for C.Guthrie but that’s not the same as what you’re saying? Gregson was good last week. Parsons should be dropped granted, although I have Murdoch in regardless for Cockatoo.

Examples of players being dropped? when were C Guthrie, Motlop and Blicavs dropped last year for poor form?

Thurlows 2nd JLT game was better than all the kids have shown so far, even if he has been mediocre in the VFL his kicking alone is good enough to get him in the team, especially with Duncan out