Creative changes for next year

[SJ]

By any reasonable measure AA selection is a fairly dubious bit of evidence and even more so in a position as lightly contested as CHB. What puts Taylor ahead of Lonergan is his disposal and decision making coming out of defence; as actual stoppers I think Lonergan had a better season, more than once he had to be moved onto Taylor's man because Harry wasn't getting the job done. At the very least it's hard to remember games where Lonergan's opponent obviously had the better of him that weren't ridiculously lopsided anyway.

Taylor had an overrated season and Lonergan an underrated season.

I put Taylor's 2009 clearly ahead of his 2010, but his name was in lights following last year's grand final and there were few other centre-half backs of merit this year.

 

[Smarty_]

By any reasonable measure AA selection is a fairly dubious bit of evidence and even more so in a position as lightly contested as CHB. What puts Taylor ahead of Lonergan is his disposal and decision making coming out of defence; as actual stoppers I think Lonergan had a better season, more than once he had to be moved onto Taylor's man because Harry wasn't getting the job done. At the very least it's hard to remember games where Lonergan's opponent obviously had the better of him that weren't ridiculously lopsided anyway.

Yeah, fair point. However, I felt even when Lonners was getting the job done on his direct opponent, when he gathered the ball he consistently made bad decisions that resulted in turnovers and then goals to the opposition.

I definitely agree with you that Lonergan is a better stopper (similar to Presti at Collingwood), but gee he makes me nervous when he actually gets the ball. He seems to put his team mates back there under pressure. I think thats his major problem, but yeah I see what you're saying though

 

[Partridge]

Call me crazy but I think I'm onto something - Hawkins to full-forward.

Way too logical and simple for modern football coaches. You never know though, we live in hope.

 

[Partridge]

What do you think some of the more 'outside the box' changes do you think the coach could look at to improve the side. For me:

Mooney/Hawkins at CHB - I think this could be a good move. IMO both are more talented than Lonergan and I think either could make a positive impact if moved to defense.

Varcoe in a Mcleod role off HB- I know he's been earmarked as our ball carrier but I think he has the potential to do it and do it well. Some of his coast to coast goals that he created last season were sublime.

Taylor Hunt as a tagger- For me the kid has bags of potential and his tackling has a nice hard edge. I want to see him play 15+ games this season and if he develops the aerobic capacity than tagger could be a good role for him.

Not saying these changes are necessarily right but I wouldn't mind seeing them tried maybe in the NAB cup as a plan B perhaps.

Some interesting things have been suggested, but I'll summarise what I think needs to be done (immediately), and what we should avoid at all cost:

1. Mooney / Hawkins to CHB. I mean this in the nicest possible way, but this is insane. Hawkins has nowhere near the endurance or speed required, and based on his most recent form Mooney would be lucky to get a game at all. Mooney is near on 31 (if he isn't already), why would he suddenly get fast enough to play CHB when he can't effectively play CHF? We've already got a CHB in Harry Taylor - a good one too. Why move him?

2. Mooney to the ruck. More insanity. The one season where he did have some impact doing this was 6 years ago. He was a lot younger and much faster. He hasn't got a prayer in the ruck now.

Just in case everyone's forgotten, we have 5 ruckman on our list - Ottens, Blake, West, Simpson and Vardy. Why fool around with part-timers when we've got more than enough full-time ruckmen?

3. Varcoe to a HBF. He's finally improved to the point that he can become a regular onballer, why move him to defence? He's going to be needed through the midfield and up forward next year. Playing off a back flank will only make him pick up unaccountable habits - not what we want.

4. Taylor Hunt into the seniors. The number one change Scott should be making. There's your ready-made half back flanker, last seen displaying very good senior form before being dropped for veterans who can't cut it anymore.

5. Hawkins to full forward. Another mandatory change. Remove the cotton wool, run him into the ground over the pre-season, and find out if he's up to it or not.

6. Play two key forwards and two key defenders. I'm convinced sympathy overtook intelligence in 2010 at the selection table. Three tall forwards were chosen instead of two, and then just as badly three tall defenders instead of two. What was worse was Scarlett was left meandering on a flank because apparently the backline had to be built around Lonergan, which was an appalling decision. Lonergan played good games, but provided zero rebound. Scarlett's previous 10 years of stopping the best defenders while generating tons of drive himself was completely ignored. As a result our backline was slow at ground level and got chopped up in the finals. (Critically, Lonergan didn't play against the Dogs in Round 20 - Taylor Hunt did) At the same time our forward line was too top heavy and got exposed at the same time. Hopefully this fundamental football lesson has been learnt.

Overall, the following players need to face reduced time in the seniors if we are to move forward as a club:

Stokes, Milburn, Mooney, Blake, Corey

These players need more time in the seniors:

Taylor Hunt, Menzel, Duncan, Simpson, West

I get the impression that with certain players like Mooney, people propose playing in the ruck because they don't want to face that maybe he can't play seniors anymore. Well there is another option - it's called retirement. If players are truly going to be chosen on merit (we better pray this happens), then this could be an imminent reality for quite a few of our older guys. Tough.

I'll just remind everyone of the team we put out in Round 20 against the Dogs, and especially the pace and youth that Taylor Hunt and Menzel helped give us. We looked elecrifying that night, so the talent is still there. It's just a matter of weeding out the duds - and be under no illusions, we do have them.

Personally, I would absolutely love to see in Round 1 Milburn, Mooney, Blake, Corey and Stokes fully fit and playing in the seconds, and West, T.Hunt, Menzel, Duncan and Christensen in the seniors. That would mean that Scott has the balls to make tough decisions. It would be a very encouraging first step.

 

[witsend]

Why no love for moons at CHF.
Some stats from 2010
Marks
Goodes..177
Cloke..171
Moons..131
Brown..126
J.Rewalt..123
Roughhead..114
Pavlich..111
Franklin..100
Still pretty handy.

Personally I love Moons and think he is much maligned. I just don't wanna see him anywhere but KPF.

 

[witsend]

Personally, I would absolutely love to see in Round 1 Milburn, Mooney, Blake, Corey and Stokes fully fit and playing in the seconds, and West, T.Hunt, Menzel, Duncan and Christensen in the seniors. That would mean that Scott has the balls to make tough decisions. It would be a very encouraging first step.

I agree in principle, and I believe it will and should happen over the next 6-8 months leading into September 2011, but....

...if 2011 is seen as a genuine Premiership attempt, then Scott has to be cognisant of team morale to "some" degree. Wholesale changes straight-up will destroy his relationship with at least half the list, and upset team balance.
Drip-feed the changes over 3 months with a view to picking a first finals side that includes at least 4-5 new players who have at least 12 games under their belt in 2011 regular season.

 

[you pick one]

WITSEND
I think you have unlocked the key to this whole debate for me,peoples view to do I stick with the same old same old, and just tweak it here and there, or get games in to the kids,and play XY ANDZ IN THE2S will depend on whether or not you believe we could steal another premiership next year.
My opinion have a crack at the flag.
If a kids good enough to replace a regular great, but he must earn it.Hopefully 2 or 3 step up,But lets not go in to full on rebuild just yet.
It may be another 44 years before we have another side as good as the one we have today.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Some interesting things have been suggested, but I'll summarise what I think needs to be done (immediately), and what we should avoid at all cost:

1. Mooney / Hawkins to CHB. I mean this in the nicest possible way, but this is insane. Hawkins has nowhere near the endurance or speed required, and based on his most recent form Mooney would be lucky to get a game at all. Mooney is near on 31 (if he isn't already), why would he suddenly get fast enough to play CHB when he can't effectively play CHF? We've already got a CHB in Harry Taylor - a good one too. Why move him?

2. Mooney to the ruck. More insanity. The one season where he did have some impact doing this was 6 years ago. He was a lot younger and much faster. He hasn't got a prayer in the ruck now.

Just in case everyone's forgotten, we have 5 ruckman on our list - Ottens, Blake, West, Simpson and Vardy. Why fool around with part-timers when we've got more than enough full-time ruckmen?

3. Varcoe to a HBF. He's finally improved to the point that he can become a regular onballer, why move him to defence? He's going to be needed through the midfield and up forward next year. Playing off a back flank will only make him pick up unaccountable habits - not what we want.

4. Taylor Hunt into the seniors. The number one change Scott should be making. There's your ready-made half back flanker, last seen displaying very good senior form before being dropped for veterans who can't cut it anymore.

5. Hawkins to full forward. Another mandatory change. Remove the cotton wool, run him into the ground over the pre-season, and find out if he's up to it or not.

6. Play two key forwards and two key defenders. I'm convinced sympathy overtook intelligence in 2010 at the selection table. Three tall forwards were chosen instead of two, and then just as badly three tall defenders instead of two. What was worse was Scarlett was left meandering on a flank because apparently the backline had to be built around Lonergan, which was an appalling decision. Lonergan played good games, but provided zero rebound. Scarlett's previous 10 years of stopping the best defenders while generating tons of drive himself was completely ignored. As a result our backline was slow at ground level and got chopped up in the finals. (Critically, Lonergan didn't play against the Dogs in Round 20 - Taylor Hunt did) At the same time our forward line was too top heavy and got exposed at the same time. Hopefully this fundamental football lesson has been learnt.

Overall, the following players need to face reduced time in the seniors if we are to move forward as a club:

Stokes, Milburn, Mooney, Blake, Corey

These players need more time in the seniors:

Taylor Hunt, Menzel, Duncan, Simpson, West

I get the impression that with certain players like Mooney, people propose playing in the ruck because they don't want to face that maybe he can't play seniors anymore. Well there is another option - it's called retirement. If players are truly going to be chosen on merit (we better pray this happens), then this could be an imminent reality for quite a few of our older guys. Tough.

I'll just remind everyone of the team we put out in Round 20 against the Dogs, and especially the pace and youth that Taylor Hunt and Menzel helped give us. We looked elecrifying that night, so the talent is still there. It's just a matter of weeding out the duds - and be under no illusions, we do have them.

Personally, I would absolutely love to see in Round 1 Milburn, Mooney, Blake, Corey and Stokes fully fit and playing in the seconds, and West, T.Hunt, Menzel, Duncan and Christensen in the seniors. That would mean that Scott has the balls to make tough decisions. It would be a very encouraging first step.

I completely agree with all of your points.

The Taylor Hunt one I would like to highlight. For sure we need more run off halfback, but moving Varcoe there is probably not the ideal solution (well ideally we need Varcoe everywhere but anyway), Taylor Hunt provides the run that a Varcoe move would, and uses the footy well. Yes he needs to earn his spot and keep it on form, and if he does he should play 22 games...if someone needs to be pushed out, so be it, and Scott should make it perfectly clear to them over summer.

On the bolded stuff I agree, there are guys who are going on (probably because they were too attracted by the prospect of trying to win another flag that they wouldn't hang them up) who shouldn't be, so the real question now is whether Scott and the rest of the MC have the courage to use them as depth players only, ala Collingwood 10. Our season will be much better off for it if we do, as will our future.

The players to come in and out you've highlighted are probably the key ones.

The other ones I'd add as possible are:
Outs:Lonergan, Josh Hunt, Ling (if he runs as crippedly as he did in 10)

Ins: Gillies/Drum, Motlop (a must once he builds up his body), Christensen

Hawkins is also by no means an automatic selection but I agree he needs to be given first crack with Mooney in the VFL, and we should only swap them back the other way if Hawkins breaks his body again, or form becomes woeful.

 

[year of the cat]

Some interesting things have been suggested, but I'll summarise what I think needs to be done (immediately), and what we should avoid at all cost:

1. Mooney / Hawkins to CHB. I mean this in the nicest possible way, but this is insane. Hawkins has nowhere near the endurance or speed required, and based on his most recent form Mooney would be lucky to get a game at all. Mooney is near on 31 (if he isn't already), why would he suddenly get fast enough to play CHB when he can't effectively play CHF? We've already got a CHB in Harry Taylor - a good one too. Why move him?

2. Mooney to the ruck. More insanity. The one season where he did have some impact doing this was 6 years ago. He was a lot younger and much faster. He hasn't got a prayer in the ruck now.

Just in case everyone's forgotten, we have 5 ruckman on our list - Ottens, Blake, West, Simpson and Vardy. Why fool around with part-timers when we've got more than enough full-time ruckmen?

3. Varcoe to a HBF. He's finally improved to the point that he can become a regular onballer, why move him to defence? He's going to be needed through the midfield and up forward next year. Playing off a back flank will only make him pick up unaccountable habits - not what we want.

4. Taylor Hunt into the seniors. The number one change Scott should be making. There's your ready-made half back flanker, last seen displaying very good senior form before being dropped for veterans who can't cut it anymore.

5. Hawkins to full forward. Another mandatory change. Remove the cotton wool, run him into the ground over the pre-season, and find out if he's up to it or not.

6. Play two key forwards and two key defenders. I'm convinced sympathy overtook intelligence in 2010 at the selection table. Three tall forwards were chosen instead of two, and then just as badly three tall defenders instead of two. What was worse was Scarlett was left meandering on a flank because apparently the backline had to be built around Lonergan, which was an appalling decision. Lonergan played good games, but provided zero rebound. Scarlett's previous 10 years of stopping the best defenders while generating tons of drive himself was completely ignored. As a result our backline was slow at ground level and got chopped up in the finals. (Critically, Lonergan didn't play against the Dogs in Round 20 - Taylor Hunt did) At the same time our forward line was too top heavy and got exposed at the same time. Hopefully this fundamental football lesson has been learnt.

Overall, the following players need to face reduced time in the seniors if we are to move forward as a club:

Stokes, Milburn, Mooney, Blake, Corey

These players need more time in the seniors:

Taylor Hunt, Menzel, Duncan, Simpson, West

I get the impression that with certain players like Mooney, people propose playing in the ruck because they don't want to face that maybe he can't play seniors anymore. Well there is another option - it's called retirement. If players are truly going to be chosen on merit (we better pray this happens), then this could be an imminent reality for quite a few of our older guys. Tough.

I'll just remind everyone of the team we put out in Round 20 against the Dogs, and especially the pace and youth that Taylor Hunt and Menzel helped give us. We looked elecrifying that night, so the talent is still there. It's just a matter of weeding out the duds - and be under no illusions, we do have them.

Personally, I would absolutely love to see in Round 1 Milburn, Mooney, Blake, Corey and Stokes fully fit and playing in the seconds, and West, T.Hunt, Menzel, Duncan and Christensen in the seniors. That would mean that Scott has the balls to make tough decisions. It would be a very encouraging first step.

Got to say I agree with just about everything here. I am still filthy that Thompson, after the mauling we gave the bulldogs, proceeded to drop the youngsters after we looked as quick and sharp as we had all year. Why?

We may not have got any further in the finals than we did but we just went back to looking one-paced and stale which was never going to be good enough when we eventually met the pies.

We have to now give these kids extended time in the ones. If the likes of Milburn crack the shits being dropped to the 2's then so be it. As you eluded to he had the option of retiring (which in my opinion he should have) but opted to go on. With that, in my mind, he forfeits any right to an automatic selection in the ones.

I would like to see a team such as:

B: T.Hunt Scarlett Gillies
HB: Enright Taylor Kelly
C: Varcoe Corey Duncan
HF: S.Johnson Hawkins Ling
F: Christensen Mooney Chapman


Foll: Ottens Bartel Selwood


Int: West Mackie Menzel Wojcinski

run out in round one. A nice mix of youth and experience. It would also give a rocket up some of the senior guys that they are on the periphery. It would also give encouragment to the kids that they will get game time in the ones this season. If up to it I wouldn't be ruling out Smedts getting games early in the season as well.

 

[you pick one]

Nick Rewalt will kick 10

 

[Pure_Ownage]

WITSEND
I think you have unlocked the key to this whole debate for me,peoples view to do I stick with the same old same old, and just tweak it here and there, or get games in to the kids,and play XY ANDZ IN THE2S will depend on whether or not you believe we could steal another premiership next year.
My opinion have a crack at the flag.
If a kids good enough to replace a regular great, but he must earn it.Hopefully 2 or 3 step up,But lets not go in to full on rebuild just yet.
It may be another 44 years before we have another side as good as the one we have today.

But that's the point. Kids did earn it, played great games, and were dropped anyway (ala THunt) which never ever should have happened. We shouldn't have youth for the sake of I agree, but we shouldn't stick to this silly mindset that if we are to challenge for a flag we must keep the older blokes...after all if an older bloke ain't performing our flag tilt is actually better served by someone who can. One of the reasons the Pies won the flag is because they replaced great servants like OBree, who were wonderful team blokes but slowing down and no longer up to it, with guys who could give a greater impact. I shake my head everytime I hear supporters say that the best way to try and win a flag is play all the old blokes.

I do agree with witsend that team morale is important, but the most important way to ensure team morale is to have integrity and equality in selection. So we shouldn't put all the old blokes in the VFL round 1 simply for the sake of it, but what we should do, is when there is a bloke in the VFL playing better than the guy above him (this could happen round 2 or whenever) he should come in and the old guy go out, and if he keeps performing, he should stay in. Bomber didn't do this, he used the kids as injury replacements only and chucked them straight back out no matter how they performed. Retirements are sad emotionally but a two tiered selection process has far more negative an impact on team morale IMO than retirements do. So what we should do is operate that policy, and everyone will lift from knowing they are on level pegging, and what they have to do to get games, and the reward they will get if they perform.

If we do that, eventually if some old blokes can't get back in, they will retire on their own. As OBree said today, he knew after about 6 weeks of seeing how well the guys who had taken his spot were playing, that he wouldn't get back in, and he retired on his own.

So yeah, I agree with you and witsend that the changes should happen gradually, but they should happen. Really we don't need to reinvent the wheel or have massive change, the only change we need to have is to pick the team on form every week, and on form alone, not seniority. If we do that, I have faith that our finals side in 2011 will have between 4 and 6 changes from this year's one, as those older blokes decline, the younger ones improve and get the spots and keep them. But we must give that equal opportunity. Ironically enough, for someone who stuffed up selection so regularly, in his final game as coach Bomber got it right by picking the team on form, which meant Mackie missed out. The problem was that he didn't pick the whole team on form (because if he did a couple of other senior players would have been in the stands keeping Mackie company) and that he didn't do that all year, he waited until it was pretty much too late. Here's to a merit selection policy for all of 2011.

 

[David the Cat]

Nick Rewalt will kick 10

Why? He's never kicked 10 on Taylor before..Riewoldt is a great player no doubt, and Harry on his own cant be expected to flog him every time they play on each other.

But Nick knows he has a game on his hands when the Q9 lines up on him.....

 

[David the Cat]

I would like to see a team such as:

B: T.Hunt Scarlett Gillies
HB: Enright Taylor Kelly
C: Varcoe Corey Duncan
HF: S.Johnson Hawkins Ling
F: Christensen Mooney Chapman


Foll: Ottens Bartel Selwood


Int: West Mackie Menzel Wojcinski


Not a bad look YOTC...though I would ave a fit Corey at half back and Varcoe in the middle, and Kelly on a wing. Drum might also be a shot in the backline..not sure if Christenson is ready yet...certainly worth a run, though Motlop is obviously high in the pecking order.

When you look at that its a good side...though Pods might demand a place. Given he kicked 49 goals in his first year, he deserves a go IMO...he will be better for the experience.

 

[you pick one]

We agree on a merit selection policy.In hindsight i think Bomber went on one year to many and some older player benefited at selection from that. T Hunt, Menzel and Duncan could have been given more opportunities.
And I thought Simpson was stiff only getting two games against Cox and Sanderlands.
Hawkins is still the only possibility to replace Moons, I don't want to cover that old ground again.
But I make the point our older blokes won us 17 home and away games this year the same number as the premiers.The cards fell the Pies way in the finals with us ,not them playing the Saints first up.We were closer to another flag than we give the players credit for.
Sorry getting of the track a bit.
Good discussion.Will be an intriguing preseason .

 

[Vdubs]

I would like to see a team such as:

B: T.Hunt Scarlett Gillies
HB: Enright Taylor Kelly
C: Varcoe Corey Duncan
HF: S.Johnson Hawkins Ling
F: Christensen Mooney Chapman


Foll: Ottens Bartel Selwood


Int: West Mackie Menzel Wojcinski


Not a bad look YOTC...though I would ave a fit Corey at half back and Varcoe in the middle, and Kelly on a wing. Drum might also be a shot in the backline..not sure if Christenson is ready yet...certainly worth a run, though Motlop is obviously high in the pecking order.

When you look at that its a good side...though Pods might demand a place. Given he kicked 49 goals in his first year, he deserves a go IMO...he will be better for the experience.

Nice, but I never again want to see Joel Corey play as a HB, as his kicking is always a liability, and as he gets slower, or lacking fitness, this becomes even more obvious.

 

[Vdubs]

Partridge, as usual, your points are superbly presented.

My only reservation is the Dogs game was against a team totally flu-affected, evidently, and it took us a bit of time to get going. And, Laidler played really well. I loved watching T Hunt
show his speed, and the absence of Corey/Ling???was not unhelpful either. The game I keep recalling was our first Pies game. We were quicker and younger that night against fit quality opposition. Great replay. And dare I mention it, but Blake played well too.

 

[Partridge]

On the bolded stuff I agree, there are guys who are going on (probably because they were too attracted by the prospect of trying to win another flag that they wouldn't hang them up) who shouldn't be, so the real question now is whether Scott and the rest of the MC have the courage to use them as depth players only, ala Collingwood 10. Our season will be much better off for it if we do, as will our future.

The players to come in and out you've highlighted are probably the key ones.

The other ones I'd add as possible are:
Outs:Lonergan, Josh Hunt, Ling (if he runs as crippedly as he did in 10)

Ins: Gillies/Drum, Motlop (a must once he builds up his body), Christensen

Hawkins is also by no means an automatic selection but I agree he needs to be given first crack with Mooney in the VFL, and we should only swap them back the other way if Hawkins breaks his body again, or form becomes woeful.

Absolutely. The "merit selection policy" - for want of a better phrase, has to work both ways.

Let's say Mooney plays reserves from Rounds 1-6, kicks around 25 goals, and shows very strong form. Hawkins plays seniors and kicks 7 goals and is woeful. Mooney comes in for Hawkins. The same principle has to apply throughout the team, no matter who it is.

 

[muttonchops]

I think Chris Scott said when he was first appointed that he believed younger players thrive on opportunity. So going by that i think it is safe to say they will get the opportunity. I also think Scott is the sort of guy who will only give that opportunity on merit which is good. But more importantly and as a few posters have mentioned as soon as the injured senior player was ready to come back last year they went straight back in no matter how well Duncan, Hunt, Menzel etc had played. I don't think that will happen anymore. The way i have heard Scott talking is that if you are doing the right things in the team then you will stay in, lets hope this is the case.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Absolutely. The "merit selection policy" - for want of a better phrase, has to work both ways.

Let's say Mooney plays reserves from Rounds 1-6, kicks around 25 goals, and shows very strong form. Hawkins plays seniors and kicks 7 goals and is woeful. Mooney comes in for Hawkins. The same principle has to apply throughout the team, no matter who it is.

Agree completely.

And just to show I believe in it, if he was banging the door down like that, and Podsy wasn't performing (but Hawkins was), I'd support that swap instead.

We certainly shouldn't target to bring in youth and retire old players, we should just drop this notion of hierachy IMO (like Bomber's ideas of who was and was not too good for VFL...very bad for morale IMO) and pick the team on form, structure etc each week, and the rest will take care of itself. I very much doubt Collingwood specifically decided to push older players into retirement, they just determined that they would pick the best team every week on form, regardless of 'names'. Senior players ending up in the VFL, and then retirement, was the result of this policy, that wasn't by design, it just so happened that there was pressure from below, and some of the bolters performed much better than the 'names'.

 

[year of the cat]

With Pods still recovering from injury it may well be him that starts the year in the VFL. Either way Hawkins needs to be given first dibs on a key position forward spot this year. I would hope Brown's form in the pre-season and early VFL may warrant him being given AFL games early in the year as well. With a bit of luck he can bulk up a bit over summer without losing any of his mobility.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Pods and Duncan's hip surgery was minor and if you look at the video they are already back training (albeit modified). He's got 3 months before the first game so he should be right.

I agree, it will be good to see Mitch Brown bulk up a bit and progress.

I agree on Hawkins, though he shouldn't be gifted anything, he's gotta earn it. But if he does, we ought to be prepared to drop someone, as Partridge said, don't do silly things like shift Mooney into the ruck just to cover for the fact that there's no place for a particular player in the team anymore.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Does anyone else think Josh Hunt could play the Max Rooke defensive forward role? He has the ability to lock onto an attacking half back flanker eg Heath Shaw and could really do some damage on the score board.

Also Travie V to sweep off half back and push through midfield.

Trent West to be backed in as our second ruck. The boy can play, ive been backing him for a few years now, and think its time for Scott to say Trent, your playing games 1-10, make this position yours. If this guy gets some confidence, he will stick it up this board.

Agree, I think West should be given the forward/2nd ruck role round 1, partly because he played some great senior games this year (I was really annoyed when he was dropped the week after he played that great game vs North), but also because he's a lot more advanced playing as a forward (in the 2's) than Daws, so West should be given the first 6 weeks at least to partner Ottens while Daws plays largely as a forward in the 2's (and ditto Vardy), and then if West's form isn't good we can make a change.

I agree we need a quick HBF sweeper but I don't really want Trav moved, THunt needs to play 22 games to fill that role.

As per Josh Hunt I'm open to a role change...he excels with his kicking, but as we've seen he still isn't top shelf as a small defender, so a role change might be something to consider.

 

[TMS]

As per Josh Hunt I'm open to a role change...he excels with his kicking, but as we've seen he still isn't top shelf as a small defender, so a role change might be something to consider.

Disclosure: I'm a long-time Josh Hunt fan (I think there's about seven of us in the world).

Personally, other than the QF against St Kilda, I though Josh had a strong return from injury this season. It actually only started to go downhill with the Round 21 Carlton game, where he was (unfairly) suspended for being aggressive in a tackle on Waite (who did the same to Chapman off the ball in the first quarter and got away with it... but I digress). Hunt came straight back into the side after his suspension, but he was so timid by comparison - like he was scared to play his own game.

This time last year, many posters on this board were sharing their excitement about Hunt's return from injury, now they're wanting him gone. Earlier this season he gave Milne a football lesson, but we all seem to forget that so quickly.

I'd like to see Josh have a chance to get his aggression back and remind us of the good things he can do for the team - if that happens to be in a different position on the ground, then so be it. But don't let a handful of bad games convince you that he has no worth to the team.

Apologies for the slight derailment of this thread; carry on.

 

[Cataholic]

Disclosure: I'm a long-time Josh Hunt fan (I think there's about seven of us in the world).

Personally, other than the QF against St Kilda, I though Josh had a strong return from injury this season. It actually only started to go downhill with the Round 21 Carlton game, where he was (unfairly) suspended for being aggressive in a tackle on Waite (who did the same to Chapman off the ball in the first quarter and got away with it... but I digress). Hunt came straight back into the side after his suspension, but he was so timid by comparison - like he was scared to play his own game.

This time last year, many posters on this board were sharing their excitement about Hunt's return from injury, now they're wanting him gone. Earlier this season he gave Milne a football lesson, but we all seem to forget that so quickly.

I'd like to see Josh have a chance to get his aggression back and remind us of the good things he can do for the team - if that happens to be in a different position on the ground, then so be it. But don't let a handful of bad games convince you that he has no worth to the team.

Apologies for the slight derailment of this thread; carry on.

Well said.

I respect the effort he's made to return from a serious knee injury, and the hard work he puts in on the field.

He may not be the best or most gifted player, but I see him as the solid, dependable type player that every side needs.

Like others, I'd like to see him given a run around the half forward line somewhere, in a sort of 'Max Rooke' type role. His kicking is like a scalpel, and if he could find the ball often enough, he could be deadly in getting it to guys like Hawkins, Podsy and Johnson.

 

[proboy]

http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2010/11/24/228395_gfc.html

Look out old boys. Look out everyone.