With what was a perfect day, I was disappointed to turn up and watch a spectacle which would have made the VFL look classy. Both sides were Richo-esque in their goal shooting and both sides' delivery by foot to teammates was generally pathetic.
The Concessions had plenty of kids playing, but they still felt like they had a relatively decent core, compared to us effectively not having our regular spine.
As with the WCE game, I chose to admit to us probably losing out and hunted for positives from individuals. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. Leon: This is probably the first time since he kicked 5 goals against Port in 2002, where I was actually happy with him. Seemed to fight for the ball for a change, instead of waiting it to fall for him or have it be handed to him. I still think his only position should be as a leading small forward, but our coaching staff seemingly don't consider this as an option, so maybe I should just shut up on the issue.
3. Lonie: Average at best. No real glimpses of anything exciting. Fingers crossed he's in first gear!
4. Didak: Good. His fight for the footy has picked up tremendously. It did last year, but I don't think it received enough credit, just critics unfairly demanding him to "do more". It's hard to "do more" when you're on the bench! HE Had Kenelly or someone else up his clacker all day and he managed to get plenty of it and use it well. Like Bucks I feel a certain clam when he gets or nears a ball.
5. Bucks: Typical Alph!
6. Holland: In great nick. I hope he's not playing full throttle and has some more upside in reserve. Happy at this stage.
8. Clement: Conversely to Holland, I hope he's playing at 70%. Seemed to lack a yard of pace, miss read the pace of the game or was simply getting a hit out. I think it's the latter.
9. Freeborn: His number seems to have been retired. Why??
11. O'Bree: He's a funny player. Hope he's saving his pace and kicking for the season proper. Finding the ball OK, which is fine.
12. Syunner: Attended.
15. Nixon: I like him. His kicking is in my mind his only major flaw and I consider that the times he makes his kicking mistakes when on the run and especially when he needs to move it quickly. I think with experience, this will die down a little. Good frame and contests well. Runs hard.
16. Davidson: Was shorter than I expected, as it was actually Zaney Leonard. If you asked me after the first half what I though of him, I'd have said he looks like quite an athlete...but then so soes Tex. But he got some good touches in the second stazsa, so some hope was rejuvinated.
17. Carpet: I saw him warming up and then I didn't see him for the rest of the arvo. Find out later something that I didn't want to find out.
21. Stretch: The key question is "Is Stretch better than Stunner?". As a ruckman the answer is yes. Around the ground the answer is no. I like his left boot. His decision making however has plenty to go and I'm not sure how good he is/will be at following the oppo ruckman around. Still, I'd select Stretch early on in the season, simply because he a better proposition than Stunner.
25. Rogan: I think he's just getting some good solid game time and has plenty of skill and heart in reserve. Good enough for this time of the year.
27. McGough: Was actually Maxwell. Did nuffin of note that I saw, but I'm becoming short sighted and will be happy to reneg on this statement if someone can advise otherwise.
28. Kinnear: What a waste of space. Having met him, I know he's a good bloke, but fair suck of the sav, he's barely a VFL level player!
29. Lokan: You can't spell Lokan without OK, which is what he was.
31. Shakleton: I'm thinking you're either a fan of MCG or Shak (for the cynics, I suppose you can pick 'neither'). I am a McGough man through and through. I see nothing in Shakleton, at least at AFL level. Even if he comes on and gets 20 posessions at AFL level, it's what he does with them that concerns me. He's fairly slow. Whilst some might say my critisisms apply equally to MCG, MCG at least has his handball, which is one of the best in the competition and his innate ability to grab a game by the balls and win it. Shak dun have this and he never will.
32. King: I was hoping that the WCE game was an abberation, but unfortunately he appears to have gone backwards. I can only express to AB, that he was significantly more impressive last year. I hope "near GF selection" (which we know was all rubbish) didn't get to his head over summer. Disappointing.
33. Cam Cloke: Wasn't as impressed as some. He's trying hard, but I expect an AFL level player to take more marks and for an AFL CHF, to take contested marks. He took a couple and presented firly well, but has some way to go. Would help him if he had Messers Roacca and Tarrant to take some pressure off him. Still, a good learning experience for Jnr.
34. J Clo: I agreed with everything Ugle (from EB&W) said in his J Clo rant on Friday, yet I still think he's a good player...go figure!!
35. Presti: Typical Presti. So inconspicuous, you'd almost think he didn't play. Oh wait...
36. Swan: Fair. I expect more from him. He's got good poise, which I like and uses it fairly well. More please Swanny!
38. Tex: If our treatment of tall atheletes is anything to go by, Walker and Kinnear will be suing us for long service leave in the not too distant future. Why is anyone's guess! Fact remains is that neither of them is a footballer's arse and whilst I'm willing to cut Walker more slack than BK, I'm pretty confident that he'll never make it.
39. Heaffy: Yes! A true positive from the day. Without going overboard, he's a tidy player, with enough guts, poise and skill to make it. He outshone most of the Class of '02. I'm reservedly happy.
41. Rowe: Played the day before and got about 3.5 minutes game time on Saturday. Made one error, which appeared to be following team rules by pulling it back inside when there's no forward option, but completely made a meal of it. Got a decent kick a few minutes later. I saw him at the intra club match and I like him very much. He's thin, but puts his body on the line and whilst not especially good with the left, he's got good skills.
So again, it was a day full of stuff ups. The Swans should be just as disappointed as us with their form.
The highlight of the day was when we got the four goals in succession. For me, the key factor in getting those goals, was NOT trying to hit a leading forward and just kicking the ball randomly into the forward line and allowing our onballers to contest the ball at ground level and kick the goal. As stoopid as it sounds, that's what our best avenue to goal was. when we reverted back to trying to hit leading forwards, we were invariably spoiled and the ball was comfortably moved out by the hard-running defence of the Swans.
Outside of Burnsy, I have no massive concerns at this stage, but I hope that MM starts aiming to win again sometime soon. I hate losing. I especially hate losing to Sydney!
The Concessions had plenty of kids playing, but they still felt like they had a relatively decent core, compared to us effectively not having our regular spine.
As with the WCE game, I chose to admit to us probably losing out and hunted for positives from individuals. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. Leon: This is probably the first time since he kicked 5 goals against Port in 2002, where I was actually happy with him. Seemed to fight for the ball for a change, instead of waiting it to fall for him or have it be handed to him. I still think his only position should be as a leading small forward, but our coaching staff seemingly don't consider this as an option, so maybe I should just shut up on the issue.
3. Lonie: Average at best. No real glimpses of anything exciting. Fingers crossed he's in first gear!
4. Didak: Good. His fight for the footy has picked up tremendously. It did last year, but I don't think it received enough credit, just critics unfairly demanding him to "do more". It's hard to "do more" when you're on the bench! HE Had Kenelly or someone else up his clacker all day and he managed to get plenty of it and use it well. Like Bucks I feel a certain clam when he gets or nears a ball.
5. Bucks: Typical Alph!
6. Holland: In great nick. I hope he's not playing full throttle and has some more upside in reserve. Happy at this stage.
8. Clement: Conversely to Holland, I hope he's playing at 70%. Seemed to lack a yard of pace, miss read the pace of the game or was simply getting a hit out. I think it's the latter.
9. Freeborn: His number seems to have been retired. Why??
11. O'Bree: He's a funny player. Hope he's saving his pace and kicking for the season proper. Finding the ball OK, which is fine.
12. Syunner: Attended.
15. Nixon: I like him. His kicking is in my mind his only major flaw and I consider that the times he makes his kicking mistakes when on the run and especially when he needs to move it quickly. I think with experience, this will die down a little. Good frame and contests well. Runs hard.
16. Davidson: Was shorter than I expected, as it was actually Zaney Leonard. If you asked me after the first half what I though of him, I'd have said he looks like quite an athlete...but then so soes Tex. But he got some good touches in the second stazsa, so some hope was rejuvinated.
17. Carpet: I saw him warming up and then I didn't see him for the rest of the arvo. Find out later something that I didn't want to find out.
21. Stretch: The key question is "Is Stretch better than Stunner?". As a ruckman the answer is yes. Around the ground the answer is no. I like his left boot. His decision making however has plenty to go and I'm not sure how good he is/will be at following the oppo ruckman around. Still, I'd select Stretch early on in the season, simply because he a better proposition than Stunner.
25. Rogan: I think he's just getting some good solid game time and has plenty of skill and heart in reserve. Good enough for this time of the year.
27. McGough: Was actually Maxwell. Did nuffin of note that I saw, but I'm becoming short sighted and will be happy to reneg on this statement if someone can advise otherwise.
28. Kinnear: What a waste of space. Having met him, I know he's a good bloke, but fair suck of the sav, he's barely a VFL level player!
29. Lokan: You can't spell Lokan without OK, which is what he was.
31. Shakleton: I'm thinking you're either a fan of MCG or Shak (for the cynics, I suppose you can pick 'neither'). I am a McGough man through and through. I see nothing in Shakleton, at least at AFL level. Even if he comes on and gets 20 posessions at AFL level, it's what he does with them that concerns me. He's fairly slow. Whilst some might say my critisisms apply equally to MCG, MCG at least has his handball, which is one of the best in the competition and his innate ability to grab a game by the balls and win it. Shak dun have this and he never will.
32. King: I was hoping that the WCE game was an abberation, but unfortunately he appears to have gone backwards. I can only express to AB, that he was significantly more impressive last year. I hope "near GF selection" (which we know was all rubbish) didn't get to his head over summer. Disappointing.
33. Cam Cloke: Wasn't as impressed as some. He's trying hard, but I expect an AFL level player to take more marks and for an AFL CHF, to take contested marks. He took a couple and presented firly well, but has some way to go. Would help him if he had Messers Roacca and Tarrant to take some pressure off him. Still, a good learning experience for Jnr.
34. J Clo: I agreed with everything Ugle (from EB&W) said in his J Clo rant on Friday, yet I still think he's a good player...go figure!!
35. Presti: Typical Presti. So inconspicuous, you'd almost think he didn't play. Oh wait...
36. Swan: Fair. I expect more from him. He's got good poise, which I like and uses it fairly well. More please Swanny!
38. Tex: If our treatment of tall atheletes is anything to go by, Walker and Kinnear will be suing us for long service leave in the not too distant future. Why is anyone's guess! Fact remains is that neither of them is a footballer's arse and whilst I'm willing to cut Walker more slack than BK, I'm pretty confident that he'll never make it.
39. Heaffy: Yes! A true positive from the day. Without going overboard, he's a tidy player, with enough guts, poise and skill to make it. He outshone most of the Class of '02. I'm reservedly happy.
41. Rowe: Played the day before and got about 3.5 minutes game time on Saturday. Made one error, which appeared to be following team rules by pulling it back inside when there's no forward option, but completely made a meal of it. Got a decent kick a few minutes later. I saw him at the intra club match and I like him very much. He's thin, but puts his body on the line and whilst not especially good with the left, he's got good skills.
So again, it was a day full of stuff ups. The Swans should be just as disappointed as us with their form.
The highlight of the day was when we got the four goals in succession. For me, the key factor in getting those goals, was NOT trying to hit a leading forward and just kicking the ball randomly into the forward line and allowing our onballers to contest the ball at ground level and kick the goal. As stoopid as it sounds, that's what our best avenue to goal was. when we reverted back to trying to hit leading forwards, we were invariably spoiled and the ball was comfortably moved out by the hard-running defence of the Swans.
Outside of Burnsy, I have no massive concerns at this stage, but I hope that MM starts aiming to win again sometime soon. I hate losing. I especially hate losing to Sydney!
