Universal Love David Teague

[Donnini]

There's more to it than getting stats

Will they get pushed off the ball too easily and cause turn overs?
Will they be able to stick their tackles?
Will they be able to stay in "the moment" when the game is tight and follow game plan?

I think our youngsters are developing nicely and should be no rush. Give them every opportunity to keep their spot when promoted otherwise dont promote them at all.

 

[Stig O'Hara]

Boy, I miss the days when you'd go and watch the ressies before the seniors. Watch players like Fraser Brown, Ang Christou, Kouta, etc. tear it up for almost a season - sometimes longer - wondering what they were going to do when they were ready to break into the senior side and knowing that they weren't rushed before their time. I miss seeing how much more complete they were as footballers when the club gave them the go ahead to play.

Stan Gilday & Phil Poursanidis.

 

[Red Bull]

Stan Gilday & Phil Poursanidis.❤❤

 

[Wickzki]

Stan Gilday & Phil Poursanidis.❤❤

You made me watch this again!

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Why are you so against kids getting a game?

Ramsey (7 VFL games) Averages
21 Disposals
3.86 Marks
3.86 Tackles

Honey (8 VFL games) Averages
12.13 Disposals
4.13 Marks
3.5 Tackles
1.75 Goals

Pretty good signs for me

I'm not. I advocate for kids getting a game all the time. What I don't agree with is that the club is somehow in the wrong for not playing every player to see what they can do. Some, I believe, should have been played earlier. Some can benefit from more development. For every young guy you bring in, another player has to be taken out. So you do it because it benefits the side, not just to see how they go.

 

[TENACIOUS]

I'm not. I advocate for kids getting a game all the time. What I don't agree with is that the club is somehow in the wrong for not playing every player to see what they can do. Some, I believe, should have been played earlier. Some can benefit from more development. For every young guy you bring in, another player has to be taken out. So you do it because it benefits the side, not just to see how they go.

Geez...
Where did I say the club was in the wrong?
Why is this such a big issue?

All I said, "I'm an advocate of rewarding consistent performers from the Reserves"..
From the outside, Ramsey and Honey are consistent performers, hence why I believe they deserve an opportunity this year..

Their numbers show that they deserve an opportunity..
Their numbers are better than those who have gone up before them..

Ramsey (7 VFL games) Averages
21 Disposals
3.86 Marks
3.86 Tackles

Honey (8 VFL games) Averages
12.13 Disposals
4.13 Marks
3.5 Tackles
1.75 Goals

If they don't play this year that's ok, but it doesn't mean they don't deserve an opportunity..

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Geez...
Where did I say the club was in the wrong?
Why is this such a big issue?

All I said, "I'm an advocate of rewarding consistent performers from the Reserves"..

Actually you asked me why I am so against kids getting a game.

I was trying to work out your debating style. You put words into people's mouths, then act like you've been attacked when they tell you that's not what they said.

That's gaslighting 101.

You really need to do better.

 

[Coona Blues]

I’d have Carroll at the front, like him.

Ramsay, he’s tiny, next year.

Honey, got a load of tricks but no defensive game & does go missing for long periods.

Still cannot understand why our club hasn’t given him a block of games at half back, development 101.

We have Eddie, Owies, Fogarty, Martin, Gibbons, Fisher, Murphy, resting followers and a couple of others rotating through our small/medium forward ranks to close out the season. A couple of those auditioning for 2022 list spots, Honey looks likely to be a part of the future and virtually commands being maintained on the rookie list. Develop him, don’t have him run out the season doing same old, same old. Wing, HBF, centre square all options.

 

[TENACIOUS]

Actually you asked me why I am so against kids getting a game.

I was trying to work out your debating style. You put words into people's mouths, then act like you've been attacked when they tell you that's not what they said.

That's gaslighting 101.

You really need to do better.

WTH are you talking about... How dare you call me an emotional abuser...

You said "What I don't agree with is that the club is somehow in the wrong for not playing every player"
I never said this at all... All I said, "I'm an advocate of rewarding consistent performers from the Reserves"..
Nothing to do with the club being in the wrong..

Then asked what is issue, with me having this opinion...

Obviously you have a chip on your shoulder about something
I think you need to apologise for your out of line comment, which is distasteful and quite frankly absurd..

 

[Donnini]

Youngsters should absolutely be rewarded for good performances but Stocker hasn't done too badly developing his craft for two years as first round pick
Cripps was also first round pick and practically played full season in the VFL in his first year.

There's more than meets the eye than playing a handful of above average games and quite possibly development coaches are working on some aspects to their game that feeds data to the coaching group responsible for the AFL side.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

WTH are you talking about... How dare you call me an emotional abuser...

You said "What I don't agree with is that the club is somehow in the wrong for not playing every player"
I never said this at all... All I said, "I'm an advocate of rewarding consistent performers from the Reserves"..
Nothing to do with the club being in the wrong..

Then asked what is issue, with me having this opinion...

Obviously you have a chip on your shoulder about something
I think you need to apologise for your out of line comment, which is distasteful and quite frankly absurd..

I said you were gaslighting. That's exactly what you did. Gaslighting is not only applicable to emotional abuse. It is also about trying to make someone question their reality.

You keep putting mayo on things.

Request denied.

 

[SurreyBlue]

Youngsters should absolutely be rewarded for good performances but Stocker hasn't done too badly developing his craft for two years as first round pick
Cripps was also first round pick and practically played full season in the VFL in his first year.

There's more than meets the eye than playing a handful of above average games and quite possibly development coaches are working on some aspects to their game that feeds data to the coaching group responsible for the AFL side.

I'm all for developing youngsters in the VFL. I do however believe someone like O'Brien has been harshly treated.
For instance, one game against Richmond round 1 and never to be seen again, even though doing very well in the VFL earlier on. I cannot agree with some others getting games before him currently. IMO

 

[TENACIOUS]

I said you were gaslighting. That's exactly what you did. Gaslighting is not only applicable to emotional abuse. It is also about trying to make someone question their reality.

You keep putting mayo on things.

Request denied.

If me advocating for rewarding consistent performers from the Reserves, makes you question your reality then maybe you need some help..

I don't put words in anyone's mouth or put put mayo on anything, I reply to what is written to me..
All are the words from your own fingers..

Again..
I like to give you another opportunity to apologise for your out of line comment, which is distasteful and quite frankly absurd..

 

[chunkylover53]

gaslighting is the word of 2021 imo.

 

[El Topo]

Person with whom I have no personal relationship disagrees with me on the internet? You better believe that's gaslighting.

 

[SurreyBlue]

You made me watch this again!

Porsa still dirty that the club recruited Sticks and his opportunities were lost.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

We've rewarded VFL form before.

Belongs in the rumour thread.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

If me advocating for rewarding consistent performers from the Reserves, makes you question your reality then maybe you need some help..

I don't put words in anyone's mouth or put put mayo on anything, I reply to what is written to me..
All are the words from your own fingers..

Again..
I like to give you another opportunity to apologise for your out of line comment, which is distasteful and quite frankly absurd..
View attachment 1184298

Nope. That's one definition. It's not the only one.

I posted something to which you asked me why I'm against playing kids.

I never implied, indicated, stated in any way I was against playing kids. In fact, I stated the opposite. All I did was give reasons why we haven't played them, and cautioned patience for them.

You like to twist things and then play the victim and I've been watching it unfold.

Be offended all you like.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Nobody is against giving kids a game, they are encouraging signs for sure. Go read the coaches reports from the VFL and they explain what they are currently working on, They aren't considered to be ready yet. Why the hurry?

I get that players have things to work on, but what about Cottrell? He has plenty to work on. I'm sure we all love his work ethic and tireless running, but I don't think anyone would agree that he's an AFL ready player and doesn't have things to work on. His disposal isn't great. His decision making isn't great. His positioning isn't great. He doesn't find enough of the ball for a wingman.
Where it gets to a bit of a double standard for mine, is that Cotters is allowed to work on his deficiencies at AFL level, while the others supposedly have to do it at VFL level with no leeway to have a crack at the seniors.
We hear about players needing a 'body of work', before earning a game, but then see Cottrell get dropped, play below the level of some of these other players, then come straight back in again. And see others that you can clearly say HAVE got a body of work together, but don't get a crack.
There's no reason why a Honey, Ramsay or LOB can't be rewarded for a bit of effort and allowed to work on their craft at AFL level for a few games, like Cottrell is afforded.

 

[gab213]

I get that players have things to work on, but what about Cottrell? He has plenty to work on. I'm sure we all love his work ethic and tireless running, but I don't think anyone would agree that he's an AFL ready player and doesn't have things to work on. His disposal isn't great. His decision making isn't great. His positioning isn't great. He doesn't find enough of the ball for a wingman.
Where it gets to a bit of a double standard for mine, is that Cotters is allowed to work on his deficiencies at AFL level, while the others supposedly have to do it at VFL level with no leeway to have a crack at the seniors.
We hear about players needing a 'body of work', before earning a game, but then see Cottrell get dropped, play below the level of some of these other players, then come straight back in again. And see others that you can clearly say HAVE got a body of work together, but don't get a crack.
There's no reason why a Honey, Ramsay or LOB can't be rewarded for a bit of effort and allowed to work on their craft at AFL level for a few games, like Cottrell is afforded.

Maybe they are looking at some players with a longer term view than others? I have no issue with what they are doing in developing players atm and if they see Cottrell as someone who can hold down a position for now at a reasonable level it's fine. He's certainly not going to be pushed off the ball as easily as the others you've mentioned. He is also guaranteed to give 100% and go hard.

I'm totally comfortable with those other players being developed further in the reserves, there's no rush at all to have them in the team yet. I'm seeing proper development, I have no issue with that at all.


Edit to add. Looks like Cottrell may be out of the team, which is fine too. Doesn't look like any of the others you mentioned will come into the side, so it's not like they are competing for the same position anyway. Whatever suits the balance of the team on the day, I'm good with, not really fussed over one player being selected over others.

 

[TENACIOUS]

Nope. That's one definition. It's not the only one.

I posted something to which you asked me why I'm against playing kids.

I never implied, indicated, stated in any way I was against playing kids. In fact, I stated the opposite. All I did was give reasons why we haven't played them, and cautioned patience for them.

You like to twist things and then play the victim and I've been watching it unfold.

Be offended all you like.

Incorrect... That is the only definition ODN...

Find it sad that you're hiding behind your moderator badge taking swings and missing...
We've interacted in 5 posts and you believe I have emotionally abused you and manipulated your and others minds to question your own sanity, yeah right...

If you took umbrage that I asked are you against playing them the kids? then fair enough..
I took umbrage that you said I thought the club is in the wrong, so I asked..

Then you made a distasteful comment that I find highly offensive and asked you to apologise, but you try and twist it to be my fault.
You made the comment and your suppose to be a moderator..

For the third and final time can you please apologise for your out of line defamatory comment and delete it...

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Incorrect... That is the only definition ODN...

Find it sad that you're hiding behind your moderator badge taking swings and missing...
We've interacted in 5 posts and you believe I have emotionally abused you and manipulated your and others minds to question your own sanity, yeah right...

If you took umbrage that I asked are you against playing them the kids? then fair enough..
I took umbrage that you said I thought the club is in the wrong, so I asked..

Then you made a distasteful comment that I find highly offensive and asked you to apologise, but you try and twist it to be my fault.
You made the comment and your suppose to be a moderator..

For the third and final time can you please apologise for your out of line defamatory comment and delete it...

Nope

 

[gunslingr]

Incorrect... That is the only definition ODN...

Using the first google result is hardly a 'case closed' moment...

From wikipedia:

Gaslighting is a colloquialism for a specific type of manipulation where the manipulator is successful in having the target (a person or a group of people) question their own reality, memory or perceptions. There is often a power dynamic in gaslighting where the target is vulnerable because they are fearful of losses associated with challenging the manipulator. Gaslighting is not necessarily malicious or intentional, although in some cases it is

(wikipedia is also often a shaky source, fair enough, but this seems pretty on the money)

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

If me advocating for rewarding consistent performers from the Reserves, makes you question your reality then maybe you need some help.

No, it was you saying I had said things I hadn't said ... twice.

Then you round it out by suggesting I need help for questioning what had transpired. Did you want to check to see where suggesting others have mental health issues for questioning you fits into gaslighting definitions? I mean, you do it while arguing that you don't do it.

I don't put words in anyone's mouth or put put mayo on anything, I reply to what is written to me..
All are the words from your own fingers..

Clearly the words weren't from my own fingers as I never said what you attributed directly to me. Furthermore, I never said you had blamed the club for anything. I said 'I don't agree with blaming the club', which multiple people have done while protesting the non-inclusion of Honey and others.

So I get asked why I am against playing kids, and then I get an argument because I attributed something to you that I didn't attribute to you.

I had to go back and read what I said because I was sure I hadn't said those things or intended those things. Yes, I actually doubted myself and had to check before responding.

 

[Wickzki]

From where I sit, The Old Dark Navy's has never said that they don't want the club to play the kids but rather that they want the club to play the kid's when they're considered ready (not when TODN considers them ready but the selection committee). This is what I've read in this thread. I believe this is a position many of us have and I know it's one that I share.

Examples of this:

Stocker smashed it in the reserves. Was selected. Has retained his place ever since.

Kennedy, Dow, SPS, all dropped back to the reserves. Worked on their game. Ticked the boxes the coaches set for them. Got selected. Thus far have retained their place in the team meritoriously.

I believe Honey, Kemp, etc. will gain selection when they tick similar, individualized, boxes. I don't see them being held out "because they're kids." I see them being held out because they either haven't ticked all the boxes or those currently in the 22 who play the role that they would be playing haven't unticked enough boxes for the selection committee to drop them. Both have to happen for any player to displace anyone in the 22 (or injury/suspension).

We want a best 22 based on merit. When we get it, which we have been, we can't cry foul.