First 22 in 2023

Remove this Banner Ad

M Malice said:
The coaches play their favourites narrative is a falsehood, although I do think they give credits to proven players who have a down period, which is fair enough IMO. If a newbie has 2-3 down games on the trot they are much more likely to be dropped than a 150+ game player.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Michael Voss had had a massive thing for Sam Sheldon and gifted him games that his form did not warrant.

I do think that coaches play favourites, but it is a bit different to straight out nepotism. Rather, often coaches work out a game plan or have a structure that they believe to be the best available and they stick with it. When that is found wanting or fails, on many occasions coaches will persist out of hubris or a belief that the plan or player will come good. As observers outside this thought and selection process, we supporters are often left perplexed and angry that a player keeps getting selected, especially if we are losing. Some coaches are quicker to change their thinking than others, but on the whole, all coaches are alpha types and they will stick with a decision on structure, game plan and personnel because they don’t want to admit they were wrong. Just look at press conferences after games where losing coaches, who have just seen their team get clearly beaten, will latch on to a statistic or factoid to look for something to reinforce their planning and avoid conceding they got it wrong. For example, your team is ten goals down at half time and loses by eight goals and the coach says, “we outscored them in the second half” as if to imply that if there were 6 “quarters” in a game, we would have won and their planning and team selection would have been vindicated. Better stick with the same players in the same positions attempting to do the same thing next week then. Cue presser, “Well we lost again, but if you look at the numbers, we were plus 10 on contested possessions and plus 8 on back half clearances.” Cue supporters pulling hair out and fast forward a week to coach selecting a player who had 6 disposals and did next to nothing for another game because he is part of the coaches Magical Thinking.

Coaches are human and they don’t like to admit they are wrong with team selection and the players they regularly select over others that many of us believe deserve a game. The proof of this is the fact that you seldom if ever hear a coach say that they got team a selection wrong.
 
Last edited:
3KZ is Football said:
I disagree. Michael Voss had had a massive thing for Sam Sheldon and gifted him games that his form did not warrant.

I do think that coaches play favourites, but it is a bit different to straight out nepotism. Rather, often coaches work out a game plan or have a structure that they believe to be the best available and they stick with it. When that is found wanting or fails, on many occasions coaches will persist out of hubris or a belief that the plan or player will come good. As observers outside this thought and selection process, we supporters are often left perplexed and angry that a player keeps getting selected, especially if we are losing. Some coaches are quicker to change their thinking than others, but on the whole, all coaches are alpha types and they will stick with a decision on structure, game plan and personnel because they don’t want to admit they were wrong. Just look at press conferences after games where losing coaches, who have just seen their team get clearly beaten, will latch on to a statistic or factoid to look for something to reinforce their planning and avoid conceding they got it wrong. For example, your team is ten goals down at half time and loses by eight goals and the coach says, “we outscored them in the second half” as if to imply that if there were 6 “quarters” in a game, we would have won and their planning and team selection would have been vindicated. Better stick with the same players in the same positions attempting to do the same thing next week then. Cue presser, “Well we lost again, but if you look at the numbers, we were plus 10 on contested possessions and plus 8 on back half clearances.” Cue supporters pulling hair out and fast forward a week to coach selecting a player who had 6 disposals and did next to nothing for another game because he is part of the coaches Magical Thinking.

Coaches are human and they don’t like to admit they are wrong with team selection and the players they regularly select over others that many of us believe deserve a game. The proof of this is the fact that you seldom if ever hear a coach say that they got team a selection wrong.
Click to expand...
This is described as the sunken cost fallacy. You keep following a path far beyond a reasonable time. It happens commonly.

Since the meta analysis of lockdowns available at
Studies in Applied Economics A literature and meta analysis of the effects of Lockdowns on Covid 19 Mortality and the recently released Cochrane review of physical strategies (masks and handwashing) no one following data can say anything we did for covid was worth it.

Now the studies were always available but many refused to acknowledge them.

They were 10 goals down at half time. Some of this was the sunken cost fallacy at work.

We all suffer from the sunken cost fallacy. I always though Dan Culter could play but he can't get a spot at Essendon any more!
 
DERRINALPHIL said:
This is described as the sunken cost fallacy. You keep following a path far beyond a reasonable time. It happens commonly.

Since the meta analysis of lockdowns available at
Studies in Applied Economics A literature and meta analysis of the effects of Lockdowns on Covid 19 Mortality and the recently released Cochrane review of physical strategies (masks and handwashing) no one following data can say anything we did for covid was worth it.

Now the studies were always available but many refused to acknowledge them.

They were 10 goals down at half time. Some of this was the sunken cost fallacy at work.

We all suffer from the sunken cost fallacy. I always though Dan Culter could play but he can't get a spot at Essendon any more!
Click to expand...
That's very true Phil.

You see it in business all the time. So much effort, planning and emotional buy in has been put into a strategy that when it's not working CEO's fall back on the litany of excuses available and ultimately the old chestnut , give up never got anywhere , find a few examples of turnaround stories and ignore the 90% of cases where the strategy was wrong and things got worse.

Don't see coaches would be all that different except when losses start mounting up the pressure from supporters and officials can become unbearable to the point where change is forced upon you. Of course the key is go in with different plans and a few players in mind so that you can adapt quickly when something's not working.

But yeah, when you put a lot of time and effort into something you're often invested in it and it's hard to let it go.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

martinson said:
That's very true Phil.

You see it in business all the time. So much effort, planning and emotional buy in has been put into a strategy that when it's not working CEO's fall back on the litany of excuses available and ultimately the old chestnut , give up never got anywhere , find a few examples of turnaround stories and ignore the 90% of cases where the strategy was wrong and things got worse.

Don't see coaches would be all that different except when losses start mounting up the pressure from supporters and officials can become unbearable to the point where change is forced upon you. Of course the key is go in with different plans and a few players in mind so that you can adapt quickly when something's not working.

But yeah, when you put a lot of time and effort into something you're often invested in it and it's hard to let it go.
Click to expand...
We have achieved consensus! KissKiss DERRINALPHIL martinson and 3KZ is Football agree. Coaches might not play ‘favourites’ with players, but they play ‘favourites’ with their ideas about team selection and often preference one idea, even when it is not working, for weeks on end, over other available selection options.

This phenomenon is also present in every pre-match, game and post match thread ever published on our board, because supporters are not immune.

PS I think with injuries to Gardiner and possibly Payne, Lester is a LOCK for Round 1 against Port Adelaide.
 
Last edited:
Rd 1 - Easily the shortest line up I've ever gone with as our best 22 in years:

B: Starcevich, Andrews, Rayner
HB: Coleman, Payne, Rich
C: Prior, McCluggage, Berry
HF: Daniher, Bailey, Hipwood
F: McCarthy, Gunston, Charlie Cameron
Foll: Big O, Dunkley, Neale
Bench: Ashcroft, Zorko, Wilmot, Dev
Sub: McKenna

I've probably forgotten someone obvious, and if Lester had had a full pre-season I'd be inclined to play him in the team instead of either Wilmot or Prior for additional height down back. It leaves either Starce or Rayner to play on Georgiades which given his current lack of form I'm not too concerned by.

I am encouraged by our team defence across two pre-season games and am hoping we'd be able to get away with only 2 key defenders until Dizzy is fit with the possibility of Gunston swinging back behind the ball if we have to.

Som real tough calls on who to leave out - Tunstill has impressed me, JL has obviously been in the team for 4 years and Fort doesn't do much wrong although I still don't think he quite offers as much in the contest as Big O.
 
Tom14 said:
Rd 1 - Easily the shortest line up I've ever gone with as our best 22 in years:

B: Starcevich, Andrews, Rayner
HB: Coleman, Payne, Rich
C: Prior, McCluggage, Berry
HF: Daniher, Bailey, Hipwood
F: McCarthy, Gunston, Charlie Cameron
Foll: Big O, Dunkley, Neale
Bench: Ashcroft, Zorko, Wilmot, Dev
Sub: McKenna

I've probably forgotten someone obvious, and if Lester had had a full pre-season I'd be inclined to play him in the team instead of either Wilmot or Prior for additional height down back. It leaves either Starce or Rayner to play on Georgiades which given his current lack of form I'm not too concerned by.

I am encouraged by our team defence across two pre-season games and am hoping we'd be able to get away with only 2 key defenders until Dizzy is fit with the possibility of Gunston swinging back behind the ball if we have to.

Som real tough calls on who to leave out - Tunstill has impressed me, JL has obviously been in the team for 4 years and Fort doesn't do much wrong although I still don't think he quite offers as much in the contest as Big O.
Click to expand...
Thats pretty close to what it is likely to be.

If both or either of Zorko and Berry don't make R1 then a few selection headaches are avoided.
Let's hope they have a selection headache.
 
3KZ is Football said:
I disagree. Michael Voss had had a massive thing for Sam Sheldon and gifted him games that his form did not warrant.

I do think that coaches play favourites, but it is a bit different to straight out nepotism. Rather, often coaches work out a game plan or have a structure that they believe to be the best available and they stick with it. When that is found wanting or fails, on many occasions coaches will persist out of hubris or a belief that the plan or player will come good. As observers outside this thought and selection process, we supporters are often left perplexed and angry that a player keeps getting selected, especially if we are losing. Some coaches are quicker to change their thinking than others, but on the whole, all coaches are alpha types and they will stick with a decision on structure, game plan and personnel because they don’t want to admit they were wrong. Just look at press conferences after games where losing coaches, who have just seen their team get clearly beaten, will latch on to a statistic or factoid to look for something to reinforce their planning and avoid conceding they got it wrong. For example, your team is ten goals down at half time and loses by eight goals and the coach says, “we outscored them in the second half” as if to imply that if there were 6 “quarters” in a game, we would have won and their planning and team selection would have been vindicated. Better stick with the same players in the same positions attempting to do the same thing next week then. Cue presser, “Well we lost again, but if you look at the numbers, we were plus 10 on contested possessions and plus 8 on back half clearances.” Cue supporters pulling hair out and fast forward a week to coach selecting a player who had 6 disposals and did next to nothing for another game because he is part of the coaches Magical Thinking.

Coaches are human and they don’t like to admit they are wrong with team selection and the players they regularly select over others that many of us believe deserve a game. The proof of this is the fact that you seldom if ever hear a coach say that they got team a selection wrong.
Click to expand...

He did not.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Tom14 said:
Rd 1 - Easily the shortest line up I've ever gone with as our best 22 in years:

B: Starcevich, Andrews, Rayner
HB: Coleman, Payne, Rich
C: Prior, McCluggage, Berry
HF: Daniher, Bailey, Hipwood
F: McCarthy, Gunston, Charlie Cameron
Foll: Big O, Dunkley, Neale
Bench: Ashcroft, Zorko, Wilmot, Dev
Sub: McKenna

I've probably forgotten someone obvious, and if Lester had had a full pre-season I'd be inclined to play him in the team instead of either Wilmot or Prior for additional height down back. It leaves either Starce or Rayner to play on Georgiades which given his current lack of form I'm not too concerned by.

I am encouraged by our team defence across two pre-season games and am hoping we'd be able to get away with only 2 key defenders until Dizzy is fit with the possibility of Gunston swinging back behind the ball if we have to.

Som real tough calls on who to leave out - Tunstill has impressed me, JL has obviously been in the team for 4 years and Fort doesn't do much wrong although I still don't think he quite offers as much in the contest as Big O.
Click to expand...
FWIW I think they’ll have Fort as the strategic sub in R1 just in case Port trouble us with their height. He can play any role and do it well.
 
So post weekend seems Payne is okay.

Leaves us with our best 22 being:

17 locks (i counted them just trust me haha)

Gardiner out.

Berry and Zorko fitness tests.

So between 3-5 spots (plus a sub) up for grabs out of:

Robertson, Prior, McKenna, Tunstill, Fort, Joyce, Answerth, Wilmot.
 
Nunez said:
Starc Andrews Rayner
Rich Payne Coleman
Robertson McCluggage Berry
Oscar Neale Dunkley
McCarthy Hipwood Bailey
Gunston Daniher Cameron
Int: Wilmot Zorko Ashcroft McKenna
Sub Fort

Feels like I'm missing someone...
Click to expand...

Prior, Tunstill and Ah Chee are the obvious ones, along with Gardiner when fit.
 
mpal6 said:
Prior, Tunstill and Ah Chee are the obvious ones, along with Gardiner when fit.
Click to expand...

Ah Chee and Gardiner are in my best 22, but left them out due to injuries.

If they were fit round one, I'd be dropping two of McKenna, Wilmot or Robertson and playing Cal on a wing, Rayner forward and Dizzy down back.
 
Interesting tidbit from Fish here - Zorko expected to be unavailable for round 1:

BRISBANE

B: Darragh Joyce, Harris Andrews, Brandon Starcevich
HB: Daniel Rich, Jack Payne, Keidean Coleman
C: Darcy Wilmot, Josh Dunkley, Jarrod Berry
HF: Lincoln McCarthy, Eric Hipwood, Zac Bailey
F: Charlie Cameron, Joe Daniher, Jack Gunston
Foll: Oscar McInerney, Lachie Neale, Hugh McCluggage
I/C: Conor McKenna, Deven Robertson, Will Ashcroft, Cam Rayner
EMERG: Noah Answerth, Jarryd Lyons, Jaxon Prior, Darcy Fort

NEW: Will Ashcroft, Josh Dunkley, Jack Gunston, Darragh Joyce, Conor McKenna
UNAVAILABLE: Callum Ah Chee (quad), Darcy Gardiner (foot).

NOTES: The main selection dilemma for the Lions comes in defence, with Marcus Adams (concussion) on the inactive list and Gardiner still not quite right. With Port Adelaide sporting three genuine tall targets, Joyce could be called in, as could Ryan Lester. The real swing player is Rayner, who has trained and played in defence all pre-season, but can still be used in any part of the ground. Former skipper Dayne Zorko is unlikely to overcome his hamstring injury, paving the way for Robertson to get a deserved opportunity. – Michael Whiting
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Couple of quick ones, trying to understand 22s better

If no Zorko or Berry, is Lyons any chance or do they need more injuries then that? Heard he was clear BOG in the 2nds on the weekend

Why is Answerth emg/on the outer? Thought he wouldve been ahead of guys like Willmot/Prior for wing. Has he just had an ordinary PS?
 
Wow has Lyons dropped that much. Had a really good year last year and most seem to not have him in the 22. Im a huge fan and i wish we still had him
 
Keystone agony said:
Couple of quick ones, trying to understand 22s better

If no Zorko or Berry, is Lyons any chance or do they need more injuries then that? Heard he was clear BOG in the 2nds on the weekend

Why is Answerth emg/on the outer? Thought he wouldve been ahead of guys like Willmot/Prior for wing. Has he just had an ordinary PS?
Click to expand...


Lyons can't play anywere other than inside mid - if either Dunkley or Neale miss games, he's an easy inclusion. Berry/Zorko tend to be more outside options.

Answerth's come back from injury only recently, and in my opinion has some limitations compared to Wimot/Prior who are better users of the footy.
 
Tom14 said:
Lyons can't play anywere other than inside mid - if either Dunkley or Neale miss games, he's an easy inclusion. Berry/Zorko tend to be more outside options.

Answerth's come back from injury only recently, and in my opinion has some limitations compared to Wimot/Prior who are better users of the footy.
Click to expand...
Usually 4 inside mids required per team.

From what i see would mean a Robertson playing off a wing or high half fwd instead
 
Keystone agony said:
Usually 4 inside mids required per team.

From what i see would mean a Robertson playing off a wing or high half fwd instead
Click to expand...

McCluggage and Ashcroft will play a lot of minutes inside - those are the clear top 4 inside mids. Bailey, Zorko, Berry etc also rotate through there. Do not have a spot for Lyons to play say 30% minutes in the middle and 30% on the bench as he can't really play other roles.
 
Keystone agony said:
Couple of quick ones, trying to understand 22s better

If no Zorko or Berry, is Lyons any chance or do they need more injuries then that? Heard he was clear BOG in the 2nds on the weekend

Why is Answerth emg/on the outer? Thought he wouldve been ahead of guys like Willmot/Prior for wing. Has he just had an ordinary PS?
Click to expand...
crows dude said:
Wow has Lyons dropped that much. Had a really good year last year and most seem to not have him in the 22. Im a huge fan and i wish we still had him
Click to expand...
I have Lyons in my starting 22 round 1, but i am in the very small minority on the BF Lions board

Lyons played quite well up to when he was injured in round 15.
The issue with him was Fagan continued to play him for another 8 rounds when clearly hampered with an OP injury suffered in round 15.
Amazingly he still averaged 20 disposals, 4.4 marks & 4.5 tackles over this period even though he could only manage a fast jog towards the end.
I think people forget how good he is and instead look at his deficiencies that all players have.

Answerth had shoulder surgery in the off season and his recent VFL trial game was his first full contact game to date.
He played well and no report of any shoulder issues.
 
Tom14 said:
Lyons can't play anywere other than inside mid - if either Dunkley or Neale miss games, he's an easy inclusion. Berry/Zorko tend to be more outside options.

Answerth's come back from injury only recently, and in my opinion has some limitations compared to Wimot/Prior who are better users of the footy.
Click to expand...
Hes quite capable rotating at half forward and inside mid.
 
Nathan Barley said:
Neale, Dunkley, McCluggage and Ashcroft
Click to expand...
Certainly Mcluggage and Ashcroft can play elsewhere

No doubt the question at some point could be do we get more from Lyons onball, With Hugh half wing and half onball vs say an Answerth/Willmot/Prior on a wing and Hugh onball

Majority clearly against playing him here unless Dunks or Neale are out which is fair to. Just seeing if there is a world that he plays whilst there still in the side

If it was me coaching id have a good look at a 60% TOG role (Subbed earlier if no injuries), purely onball with the other 240% going to Neale 75, Dunks 70, Hugh 45, Ashcroft 50%

and the concern of Dunks, Lyons, Neale all at CBA (the most open play on field) is slow and that would be a part of the reasoning along with a few other factors but i feel as long as one of an Ashcroft, Hugh are atleast in there then it could potentially work
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ZoBlitz
  • Poll
Review Round 22, 2023 - Brisbane Lions vs. Adelaide
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
319
Views
12K
KissKiss
KissKiss
ZoBlitz
  • Locked
Game Day Round 22, 2023 - Brisbane Lions vs. Adelaide
16 17 18 19 20
Replies
482
Views
8K
Jivlain
Jivlain
P
First 23 in 2024
2 3 4 5
Replies
120
Views
9K
NotQuiteJezza
N
AllHart
AFL Grand Final Brisbane players in the 2023 Grand Final Parade:
Replies
1
Views
1K
PowerfulPies2023
PowerfulPies2023
Elixuh
  • Locked
Preview Round 22 - Brisbane Lions vs Adelaide Crows • Saturday 12 August 2023 • 4:35 PM • The Gabba
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
173
Views
8K
ZoBlitz
ZoBlitz
rye
Toast All-Australian Lions in 2023
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
157
Views
6K
HereIGoAgain
H
dlanod
AFLW Player Indiana Williams (2023-)
Replies
0
Views
378
dlanod
dlanod

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top