Ian Perrie, support needed

[bus24]

Perrie is a footy player, not a bloody lighthouse

lmao

 

[maccas_no1]

It's a simple thing called "form"

Form being the key word here, so after Perrie's dismal performance last week why is he in the side?????? What form is Bode being jugded on??? Why keep what you had the week before that you know didnt work, and then not think well maybe we need to add something else to make it better??? Has the AFC coaching/selection committee sat down and assesed where the problems were???

I ask all these questions because if they have decided to go in with the same side as last week, to me they havent looked closely enough to where the problems are from last week, to me the AFC have gone well we will see how it goes again this week and then if the issues are still there then we will fix it............and we throw away another game

 

[tribey]

Hird and Dean Cox wern't standouts and there are countless examples of excellent current day players who benefitted from opportunity.

I understand the overall point you're making, but Hird is a poor example.

In the seminal hit and miss days of the National Draft scouting networks and player knowledge was practically non-existant. Clubs practically shot an arrow into the air with their selections and that's why there are a parade of what we'd call busts today in the early selections of most drafts prior to 1995.

Essendon was the only club to have a man in Canberra and as such knew about the massive potential of Hird where others didn't. Unless one of the other 13 clubs were doing their selections by throwing a dart at the list of nominees there was no way anyone else would trump Sheedy and co. There was no need to drop a high pick when there were players from the TFL, WAFL, SANFL and country Victoria to fight for.

It's the same level of overall scouting knowledge which saw Chris Grant picked up by Footscray at 120-odd in his year, or Greg Miller famously take John Longmire and Wayne Carey off Sydney's hands for half a slab of VB.

Individual clubs had niche markets and canny individuals, but in the main talent identification in the early days was disgraceful.

 

[Stiffy_18]

If your talking about Judd, Reidwoldt ....then your talking about the peek of the pyramid.

However that's not the majority of star players in the AFL which is why talent identification and draft is such a difficult science.

You talk about demanding an opprtunity ......I agree that performances in the feeder league should be a priority MOST of the time but there are examples where it hasn't necessarily been the best solution.

Certainly do not think that Goodwin, Edwards, Modra and Rehn demanded their position or that their star talent was obvious.
In fact they were given opportunities because a) the team was travelling poorly and the club decided to do away with the tried and tested and b) injuries within the club.

Hird and Dean Cox wern't standouts and there are countless examples of excellent current day players who benefitted from opportunity.

Griffin this year in the AFL could be the makings of him BUT that's only because of opportunity otherwise he could have still be playing some reserves SANFL this season.

Look both of you posters are right in your arguments ......when the teams travelling OK and the seasons not a right-off certainly you have to demand a game and not expect freebies ......on the other hand if we're languishing in 13th or 14th position IMO it's time to blood youngsters even though they haven't demanded their games.

If we hadn't would we have uncovered Modra, Edwards and Goodwin

He is the one that brought up those names and they all had one thing in common. They had immidiate impact in their AFL careers because they demanded to be played.

When I say they demanded to be played it doesn't neccessarily mean by playing well in local competitions. What I mean is they demanded to be picked based on their showing during the pre-season training.

I mentioned Kerr who was pick 18 in the draft. He came in straight away and had a fantastic year, winning rising star award. Now there were allegations that WC had stashed him away from everyone else but the kid had to do the hard yards during the PS and he got picked and never looked back.

Hird was a late selection for a number of reasons. At the time NSW/ACT was not scouted as thoroughly as it is nowdays. In fact no competition was scouted as thoroughly as it is these days. He also had a broken leg in the draft year which was also the reason why he was picked where he was.

Anyway, what I am getting at here is that talented players that are ready to offer something at AFL in their first year have demanded to be picked one way or another irrespective of their draft position. Van Berlo was pick 24 but he demanded he play some AFL games due to his exceptional commitment of the track and solid SANFL form. Graham Johncock was pick 67 and was on the verge of getting at AFL game in his first year until an injury cost him pretty much entire season. He did come back from it but needed to regain the match fitness in order to get his debut. He got it next year and played every game because he showed what he could do and demanded to be picked.

I do agree with you that if the season is going up the proverbial creek then its time to give these youngsters freebie games which is pretty much what we did in 2004 at some point of the year.

What I am against is giving these kids games just because

a) they are young
b) we have favourites to get bagged (ie Perrie, Shirley etc)
c) they have more potential that player X and as such should play regardless of the form.

These kids will get a game when they deserve it but when I read the crap like, drop Perrie and bring in Tippett because he gives us more, that just is absolute CRAP.

What people fail to realise here is that AFC hierarchy see all of their players every day. They know who is ready to take the next step and who is not and they have shown that they are not afraid to show someone else the door when they feel like they have a young player that is ready to take the step. They showed the door to Matthew Clarke because they felt like Maric is ready to take the next step. This is despite the fact that Ben Hudson is coming back from knee reco and we already knew Biglands was out for the year. For them to do that, they must have felt comfortable that we have players in the ruck capable of stepping up (Maric, Griffin, Meesen).

There were also people crying out during the trading period that AFC shoudl go after proven ruckmen such as Everitt and Gardiner but the club wouldn't have a bar of it. Its not like they don't want to play the kids. They do but when the time is right.

They also showed the door to club champion Ben Hart and did it rather ruthlessly. This is despite some pretty reasonable supporter backlash and Ben Hart not wanting to retire. They had the balls to make a call because they wanted to promote some youth into the side.

I am not against playing kids but what I am against is bringing in kids just for the sake of change which is what most of this board is suggesting.

If Tippett was ready for AFL action he wouldn't have been named in Westies reserves only to be called up to seniors after some senior players broke some team rules.

By all means play them but not because of their age but because what they can REALLY offer to us both at present and in the future.

 

[fightingdreamer88]

Oh my! You are more deluded than I thought

How about facing some facts. We DO NOT have Judd, Kerr, Brown type talent on our list and before you spout off crap like "how do you know if you don't play them", lets look at some facts for a change.

These player came into their respective clubs and made immidiate impact. Not because they were given the opportunity but because they DEMANDED an opportunity. Judd came in straight away and played like a veterean. Kerr came in and pisses in the rising star award averaging 18 odd touched in his rookie season. Brown came in and made an immidiate impact as a key forward.

That talent doesn't grow on trees and that talent is not unidentifiable if you don't see them play. That talent sticks out like a sore thumb. That talent has put their hand up over pre-season and DEMANDED that they get picked in the best 18-22 week in week out. Not having good enough form to be picked but DEMAND to be picked. Just like players like Goodwin, McLeod et al demand to be picked, that what these youngsters did in their first year.

If we had that talent, believe me they would be playing week in week out. I think our recruting, scouting and coaching staff are smart enough to see that sort of talent and if they did see it they would recognise it straight away, rather than giving them a game to see what they can do.

Oh and there are MANY MANY ways to develop youngsters. Giving them freebie games is just one, not so good way. Just because a player is not playing AFL football it doesn't mean they are not developing behind the scenes.

We do know that Porplyzia, Vince, Douglas, Knights or who ever of the world have some talent to be good AFL players. But we also know that these players do not have the natural ability nor football brains of a Kerr or a Judd. I have hope than in time they will all develop into good AFL players but if you think any of them will reach the level that Judd is currently at by the end of their careers, you are absolutely kidding yourself. Firstly, they don't have the attributes that Judd has. You won't Porplyzia use his equisite pace to break away from the pack. And you won't see Vince being belted around the ears in the pack only to break out of it without flinching and using his great pace to break away from the pack to kick a goal.

Those players have the potential to be good AFL player but for starters they don't have the attributes that are requirted to reach the level that Judd is at. Never have and never will.

We have a good bunch of kids but FFS stop making them out to be future champions.

How about directly responding instead of arguing about how good our unproven youngsters are?? You want to persist with Perrie? You want to persist with Welsh?? Hmm?

I'm not being deluded at all and you know it. Not all superstar players develop overnight and you know this!! You're just taking the exact player examples I used instead of responding to the overall message!! You're ignoring the message altogether! I could go ahead and name 50 superstars of the competition that didn't explode onto the scene straight away, but that would waste all our time as we KNOW that not all super players have walked straight in and dominated, but many can improve over a few years to match those that have, as they HAVE in the past. Just face up to it!

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

By all means play them but not because of their age but because what they can REALLY offer to us both at present and in the future.

But that's the hard bit. No one knows what they will produce in the future. Coaches/selectors can make educated, informed guesses but it is still a risk and a venture into the unknown. We thought Angwin and Watts would be 10 year KPI's for our club. We delisted Porplyzia. We didn't think that Mattner, Goodwin or Rutten were worth taking in the National Draft.

Brent Williams and Kane Johnson were seen as equally talented prospects at one stage. Both had opportunities at senior level. One grasped those opportunities and played in two premierships.

I understand the point you are making about young players having to demand their place in the team and not being handed it on a platter. But last season when our depth was at its strongest we had 25-27 players most weeks who could claim that their form and performance warranted selection. 27 in to 22 doesn't go and it was always the younger players who missed out, van Berlo aside.

There has been some criticism of Douglas after last weeks game, with people saying that he didn't provide the bite around goals or defensive pressure that Bode would have. I think this criticism is missing the point. Picking Douglas (or Knights, or Maric, or whoever) will make us a worse team in the short term. But the difference is that Douglas will improve on what he showed last week. Bode has peaked as a player. If Douglas is as talented as many believe it won't take long for his output to warrant selection ahead of some of our mid-range players.

Those of us who have been calling for some more opportunities for our younger players are not expecting them to come in and outperform their more experienced team mates straight away. Brisbane's youngsters have had plenty of opportunities over the last two seasons with retirements, injuries and the team not pushing for finals. And we are seeing that it doesn't take long for talented youngsters to find their feet and produce decent football. But they need to play.

 

[macca23]

What people fail to realise here is that AFC hierarchy see all of their players every day. They know who is ready to take the next step and who is not and they have shown that they are not afraid to show someone else the door when they feel like they have a young player that is ready to take the step.

The part above from your quote really says it all Stiffmeister!!

While all clubs will make the occasional error they are simply better informed than we are.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I understand the overall point you're making, but Hird is a poor example.

In the seminal hit and miss days of the National Draft scouting networks and player knowledge was practically non-existant. Clubs practically shot an arrow into the air with their selections and that's why there are a parade of what we'd call busts today in the early selections of most drafts prior to 1995.

Essendon was the only club to have a man in Canberra and as such knew about the massive potential of Hird where others didn't. Unless one of the other 13 clubs were doing their selections by throwing a dart at the list of nominees there was no way anyone else would trump Sheedy and co. There was no need to drop a high pick when there were players from the TFL, WAFL, SANFL and country Victoria to fight for.

It's the same level of overall scouting knowledge which saw Chris Grant picked up by Footscray at 120-odd in his year, or Greg Miller famously take John Longmire and Wayne Carey off Sydney's hands for half a slab of VB.

Individual clubs had niche markets and canny individuals, but in the main talent identification in the early days was disgraceful.

Your point is well made and I agree with the advantages each teams coaching networks can give a club ......but if that is the case and Essendon rated Hird so highly ....why then was he picked ion the 70's ....still seems to me a speculative pick

 

[WaynesWorld19]

The part above from your quote really says it all Stiffmeister!!

While all clubs will make the occasional error they are simply better informed than we are.

Absolutely correct ....we can judge by what we see on the field ....but it's what we don't see that affects the clubs decision making process and we just are not privy to that amount of information.

 

[Crow-mo]

You know I'm right. I'm tiring of this. The man is a waste of time, he's been on our list for years and just doesn't cut the mustard.



Please, list my unsubstantiated claims! Precisely what are they?

oh the irony.
my god the irony.

just look at your first paragraph. FFS

 

[Crow-mo]

You have no idea if we have a couple of future stars like them sitting on our list. We've got to try them, and when you've got players giving you nothing but inconsistency for years and years like Perrie and Welsh, why the hell would you NOT want to try the kids? This shows how short-sighted you are....the faraway tree? What you are implying is that we must stick with Welsh and Perrie (and others) because we haven't got players of the calibre of Kerr or Judd ready to come in. WHY NOT DEVELOP SOME INSTEAD OF STICKING WITH THESE INCONSISTENT BUFFOONS???

after this ludicrous piece of fantasy. I think we can see who is a hot air buffon.

all your argument, and I hesitate to call it that, states is that we must rely on blind luck. frankly, if that's all your arguing for - randomness of luck, then you've copped no less stick than such ideas call for.

You have to admit this, you have to admit that in saying what you're saying you are effectively accepting the mediocrity we have to cop every week from these waste-of-time players (who have been proven wastes of time over many years).

righto genius, and you want to know where your unsubstantiated statements are? lets start there.

or are you deliberately trying to be a clown?

I would MUCH rather search our list out for the next Judd or Kerr or Johnathon Brown than sit here watching guys like Welsh and Perrie deny our kids opportunities.

no, you want to randomly guess your way through. but then you have this idea in your head, that these guys just happen to lurk in the reaches of our list.

enough said.

Oh, and btw, you can sit there and say that I'm jumping on them after only one game, but it's been going on for years. YEARS. And you know this!! I'm tired of supporters like you just taking it as a given that we are to persist with inconsistent players. We may not KNOW if Porplyzia or Vince or Douglas or Knights or whoever can become as good as the Judds or Kerrs of the footy world, but we KNOW, after YEARS OF TRYING, that Welsh and Perrie are not good enough. So give the kids a chance. You know I'm right, stop accepting this mediocre crap!!

ah, ok, now it makes sense. big night out huh?

 

[tribey]

Your point is well made and I agree with the advantages each teams coaching networks can give a club ......but if that is the case and Essendon rated Hird so highly ....why then was he picked ion the 70's ....still seems to me a speculative pick

He was a 16 year old kid from Canberra that only they knew about - there was zero chance they'd be trumped.

You've also got to keep in mind that in 1989 the National Draft wasn't seen primarily as an opportunity to take the country's best kids as it is now, as the VFL clubs had Under-19 and Reserves tiers in place.

As such, kids tended to be signed with the brown paper bag full of money, zoned or invited down to train and then be picked up - it was more the potential saviours from interstate and rough diamonds from the country that were taken in the draft.

Incidentally, Essendon's picks prior to him were:

13. Todd Ridley, Claremont (WAFL)
24. John Fidge, Glenelg (SANFL)
37. Glen Hofman, Jeparit (Vic Country)
65. Stephen Fry, Clarence (TFL)

Pretty much to be expected given the draft habits at the time - but make no mistake, they rated James' **** off from the get-go.

 

[fightingdreamer88]

after this ludicrous piece of fantasy. I think we can see who is a hot air buffon.

all your argument, and I hesitate to call it that, states is that we must rely on blind luck. frankly, if that's all your arguing for - randomness of luck, then you've copped no less stick than such ideas call for.




righto genius, and you want to know where your unsubstantiated statements are? lets start there.

or are you deliberately trying to be a clown?




no, you want to randomly guess your way through. but then you have this idea in your head, that these guys just happen to lurk in the reaches of our list.

enough said.





ah, ok, now it makes sense. big night out huh?

I have this idea in my head that we've got some talented players on the list, and we've also got mediocre performers who get games week in, week out. Gimme a break, again you've given us nothing Crow-Mo, just idle chat that is not at all constructive. You just prance around the issue and sooner have a crack at the poster than address the football issues. You want to know random luck is? Giving Perrie and Welsh games, because they're so inconsistent that you can rely on them about as much as you can on getting something good out of a lucky dip. I.e. we wouldn't lose anything by trying some of our promising kids instead (the ones that are ready of course). So come on then Crow-Mo, instead of creating a post about nothing, give us some substance.

What is YOUR solution?

 

[fightingdreamer88]

Err...... because we don't have anyone better. You can't drive a BMW when all you have is an old Torana parked in the garage.

Anyone is better than Perrie tbqh ieo.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Anyone is better than Perrie tbqh ieo.

Evidence please!

 

[rowdy37]

Anyone is better than Perrie tbqh ieo.

You even edited it and you still forgot about the last 2 words?

 

[RoosterLad]

They are words?

 

[King Elvis]

I like Perrie.

He tries his heart out.

But that doesn't change the fact that he isn't good enough or consistent enough to be a matchwinning Forward in a top 4 team.

 

[Southerntakeover]

But that doesn't change the fact that he isn't good enough or consistent enough to be a matchwinning Forward in a top 4 team.

He already has been...

 

[King Elvis]

He already has been...

He's won games for us against top 4 sides on a consistent basis?

He played a blinder in the Preliminary last year and was let down by the rest of the team?

 

[Southerntakeover]

He's won games for us against top 4 sides on a consistent basis?

He played a blinder in the Preliminary last year and was let down by the rest of the team?

You're changing the terms. You never said anything about needing to be a match winner, and you said top 4, not top 2.

He contribued to many wins in 2005 when he last played a full season. We finished top 4.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

He already has been...

You said it...

Just kidding. I know how important Perrie is to us this season. No Hentschel, McGregor injured, Tippett and Sellar developing in the SANFL. A lot rests on his shoulders, I hope he can find a way to make an impact.

 

[Southerntakeover]

You said it...

Well, it beats most people on here saying he never was...


Ill take it.

 

[crows4always]

I am getting sick of all the so called Crows fans bagging Perrie. We all know he has his limtations, but remember

he tries 100%

In 2005 he played an excellent year, 38 goals. He plays his best football working up the ground and therfore needs to be fit, recent injuries have made that more difficult.

Sunday if he had kicked the 2 goals in front (and he should have) his game would have been ok. We are thin on marking forwards and he should be supported, not bagged. His perfomance was far better than Scotty Welsh who looked awful on the weekend and is only in the team through injury. In fact unless Scotty can lift (hope he can, he is one of our few natural goalkickers) his AFL career will end when Roo returns

Suporting a team means support when things are going well and when they are not. Lay off Perrie

I agree fully Sarge is the best we have at present, so we need to get right behind him. One needs to just remember back to last season the way he was playing before he injured his knee, for those that forget he was in top form covering a lot of ground that he needs to work in.

 

[Jerome]

from The Australian 7/4/07

Crows set targets for Perrie
By Andrew McGarry
April 07, 2007

ADELAIDE Crows assistant coach David Noble has defended tall forward Ian Perrie after his below-par performance against Essendon last weekend.
However, the forward coach admitted Perrie was in danger of being dropped if he wasn't able to start kicking goals from set shots.

The West Australian forward, who has struggled over several seasons to cement a place in the Crows' side, kicked one goal but missed several easy shots and appeared lacking in confidence against the Bombers, leading to calls for him to be dropped.

Adelaide has kept faith, naming Perrie in the forward line to face Western Bulldogs at the MCG tomorrow, along with Scott Welsh, who was criticised for his one-mark, no-goal performance against Essendon.

Noble acknowledged that Perrie's lack of production in front of goal was frustrating.

"He (Perrie) is very much aware of that, he can totally understand the frustration," Noble said. "However, last year when he got injured the general thought was we're not going to do too well without him in terms of having a big strong body (in the forward line)."

Noble said there was a bigger picture to look at than simply goals scored.

"Obviously he needs to kick the goals we need him to kick, the 30-metre out corridor goals need to be kicked.

"But you have to understand where he fits in our system, his ability to draw big defenders out of a space, and if he isn't our best he's in our top two (forwards) in terms of defensive pressure.

"Having said that, if you don't kick those goals, you run the risk of not being selected."

Noble said there was concern among the coaching staff at the lack of cohesion in Adelaide's forward play last week.

"We have done a lot of work in this area ... (but) I think it was a combination of poor ball movement, poor decision-making when we got the ball (inside 50) and poor conversion."

Adelaide managed just 10 goals from 49 inside 50s in round one, as the Crows kicked 10.14 against the Bombers' 16.9.

Noble said Adelaide had enough possession in the right area of the ground but had not made use of its chances.

Adelaide will test Simon Goodwin (thigh), Andrew McLeod (arm) and Brett Burton (knee) today at training before deciding on the final line-up.

Matthew Bode and Jason Porplyzia are among the emergencies and could provide options in the forward line.

Noble said he didn't expect the Bulldogs to play much differently to the way they had against Geelong in their opening round match.