Iles and Egan to be chopped?

[Bloben]

I've always been convinced that Pendles IS Ben Davies. Nothing here has changed my mind!

He isn't Ben Davies but definitely is one of the wittiest dry humour posters on BigFooty!!! When I first joined BigFooty everyone was convinced he was a little NQR because of all of his rantings on Ben Davies and how every decision was Racial!!

 

[Optimax]

He isn't Ben Davies but definitely is one of the wittiest dry humour posters on BigFooty!!! When I first joined BigFooty everyone was convinced he was a little NQR because of all of his rantings on Ben Davies and how every decision was Racial!!

Remeber the Mick Malthouse is a murderer posts after Davies was traded.

 

[Bloben]

Remeber the Mick Malthouse is a murderer posts after Davies was traded.

That cracked me up

 

[Mr Cannons]

why would we chop iles b4 we chop danny stanley?
stanely and rhyce shaw are the worst players in the league.

 

[Optimax]

why would we chop iles b4 we chop danny stanley?
stanely and rhyce shaw are the worst players in the league.

Danny is a hard bodied Mid which especially now burns has gone we need desperately.

iles is more outisde that in but can do it effectively enough but stanley has more natural ability at it, Stanners is also the better mark and kick as well can play other positions.

you are being overly harsh here on both Rhyce and Stanners, also there is nothing to suggest one or even both will be delisted or traded before final list lodgment

 

[shawthing09]

why would we chop iles b4 we chop danny stanley?
stanely and rhyce shaw are the worst players in the league.

Watch much VFL Cannons. Seen much of Iles ever? Seen the two play in the same side.

Stanley is a better fit to our need as he is a very hard inside player.

Stanley gets the ball as much as Iles if not more and uses the ball much better then Iles. If your critical of Stanley because of his usage of the ball its is clearly a being rushed thing Iles is far worse at this at VFL level and there is no way he is going to get more time at AFL level.

 

[Mr Cannons]

I admit i dont watch alot of vfl footy, but lets look at the AFL games they have played, Iles has done good things in his AFL games while stanley is absolutely horrendous when playing at the AFL level.

 

[Mr Cannons]

Danny is a hard bodied Mid which especially now burns has gone we need desperately.

iles is more outisde that in but can do it effectively enough but stanley has more natural ability at it, Stanners is also the better mark and kick as well can play other positions.

you are being overly harsh here on both Rhyce and Stanners, also there is nothing to suggest one or even both will be delisted or traded before final list lodgment

I dont think im being harsh on shaw, hes been in the business for nearly 10 years now and he is the worst decision maker in our team and 80% of the time he coughs the ball up, I hold my breath every time he gets the ball just waiting for him to cough it up.

 

[shawthing09]

I admit i dont watch alot of vfl footy, but lets look at the AFL games they have played, Iles has done good things in his AFL games while stanley is absolutely horrendous when playing at the AFL level.

I can't agree with you on that. I think they have played similar games and shown similar limitations. I.E they both look rushed at AFL level. That is about adapting to the tempo. If your getting as much ball at VFL level where you have time as these two boys do there is of course going to be a adapting period coming up. Iles is probably a bit more versatile and can play a flank role as he is more outside. Stanley's strengths revolve around clearances. That said judging off 3 games is ridiculous.

Stanley is clearly the better player of the two.

 

[Camo1902]

I'm not suprised at either.

Iles was a hard worker but i just don't think he ever had that extra something to step up and play consistent AFL footy. He dominated in the VFL but struggled when he came into the side.

Egan is a disappointment. I really thought he would be something special when he started, but he was always to concerned with trying to look flashy instead of doing the basics well. He'd jump and try make simple chest marks look flashy and end up stuffing it up. He was extremely soft too.

 

[pipeline]

gota get rid of stanley as well good vfl player but cant take the next step captain turnover

One thing Stanley is NOT is a turnover merchant! His disposal is excellent. He's made a couple of glaring mistakes in 2 games but hasn't played really badly in any. Bigfooty myth.

 

[Mr Cannons]

One thing Stanley is NOT is a turnover merchant! His disposal is excellent. He's made a couple of glaring mistakes in 2 games but hasn't played really badly in any. Bigfooty myth.

Watch the game against freo again, one of the worst set shots i have seen.
AFL level is too fast for him, hes a battler that gives it his all, we have far too many of them in our team already.

 

[Kirby]

One thing Stanley is NOT is a turnover merchant! His disposal is excellent. He's made a couple of glaring mistakes in 2 games but hasn't played really badly in any. Bigfooty myth.

This site is full of people who reach conclusions based on a very small sample and upon the errant rantings of other people that post crap without having seen the player actually play.

I'm confident that Stanners is a good kick after seeing him at least 10 times this year and I have no doubt that he will show it at the top level once he is given a few games to string together.

I like the fact that in the pre-season games next year that he will be given a good run in the middle which will help him to adjust.

 

[Kirby]

Watch the game against freo again, one of the worst set shots i have seen.
AFL level is too fast for him, hes a battler that gives it his all, we have far too many of them in our team already.

Crap. That set shot had nothing to do with the speed of the game. How could it? It was nerves that got him.

 

[Vampire013]

I hope you are right. I have seen Stanley in VFL Games and he looks bloody good. In AFL Games he has butchered it badly and has looked too slow.
Maybe with a few more opportunities and game time he will adjust to AFL speed of the game.
We all would love him to be a gun.

 

[pipeline]

Watch the game against freo again, one of the worst set shots i have seen.
AFL level is too fast for him, hes a battler that gives it his all, we have far too many of them in our team already.

As Kirby said, what's a set shot got to do with the speed of the game? And if I took your advice and watched the replay, this is what I'd see.

Just prior to that mangled kick, he took a great mark, coming accross the front of the pack with superior judgement or "awareness". I would then hear Tim Watson saying something like "That's the mark of a very talented player. He's been impressive tonight." OK, then he shanked it. Well given the conditions and the fact that history tells him he's on the knife edge of selection all the time, nerves kick in - what was Leons excuse for his 5 or so our of bounds on the full or Clokes half dozen misses?

A bit later he kicked into a Freo player. He controlled the ball, decided to switch to his left foot and hit the guy. Just bad luck the Freo player was in the right place, but in any case how many on our list can actually make the decision to use their non-preferred?

I'd also see him in a fantastic contest ripping the ball off a Freo player with sheer strength and persistance and setting up a play that gets us a goal. Later in the game I'd see him save a certain goal taking on 3 Freo players in their goalsquare and threading it out somehow to our advantage.

So yes, I might watch again and what I'll see is two mistakes on a night when his elders and betters made many more, and a fretty fair game overall with some really nice touches.

And as a matter of interest, battlers don't get 30+ touches a game consistently and don't get 38 against Geelong seconds.

 

[Mr Cannons]

As Kirby said, what's a set shot got to do with the speed of the game? And if I took your advice and watched the replay, this is what I'd see.

Just prior to that mangled kick, he took a great mark, coming accross the front of the pack with superior judgement or "awareness". I would then hear Tim Watson saying something like "That's the mark of a very talented player. He's been impressive tonight." OK, then he shanked it. Well given the conditions and the fact that history tells him he's on the knife edge of selection all the time, nerves kick in - what was Leons excuse for his 5 or so our of bounds on the full or Clokes half dozen misses?

A bit later he kicked into a Freo player. He controlled the ball, decided to switch to his left foot and hit the guy. Just bad luck the Freo player was in the right place, but in any case how many on our list can actually make the decision to use their non-preferred?

I'd also see him in a fantastic contest ripping the ball off a Freo player with sheer strength and persistance and setting up a play that gets us a goal. Later in the game I'd see him save a certain goal taking on 3 Freo players in their goalsquare and threading it out somehow to our advantage.

So yes, I might watch again and what I'll see is two mistakes on a night when his elders and betters made many more, and a fretty fair game overall with some really nice touches.

And as a matter of interest, battlers don't get 30+ touches a game consistently and don't get 38 against Geelong seconds.

Thats very nice, when you watch it again came back and write down all the things he stuffed up, theres no excuse for leon or clokes mistakes but like ive been saying we have to many players that butcher the ball we dont need anymore.

 

[shawthing09]

This site is full of people who reach conclusions based on a very small sample and upon the errant rantings of other people that post crap without having seen the player actually play.

I'm confident that Stanners is a good kick after seeing him at least 10 times this year and I have no doubt that he will show it at the top level once he is given a few games to string together.

I like the fact that in the pre-season games next year that he will be given a good run in the middle which will help him to adjust.

Agree with all of that mate.

 

[Lensen]

Unbelievable. We keep Stanley, Cook and Toovey - all of which will be mid-range depth players at best, who have shown about 3/5ths of **** all at AFL level - and get rid of Egan.

As FIGJAM said, his worst is absolutely putrid. But his best is a hell of a lot more AFL standard than the other three spuds. He's coming of a knee which 90% of players take 18 months plus to recover from to a comparable standard to pre-injury, yet we're going to bin him based on poor returns this year.

Of course there's a chance he may not make it. But there's also a chance he will, and will to a very high standard. But no, lets keep three spuds who will not ever be anything more than servicable occasionally and will, in all likelihood, be delisted at end 09.

And don't even think of bringing up Swan into this argument - he'd always shown a bit of flair and game-winning potential, even if rarely. Look at the Lions game in 04. The other three - there's nothing at AFL level, with the exception of the worst three goal game ever by Toovs on debut.

 

[shawthing09]

Lenny in Cook's case I think he has showed a bit in the EF final against Adeliade.

In Stanley's case he is yet to be given a chance to show anything. 4 games out of position in one game bursts is not giving him a chance it's giving him a game.

and in Toov's case he has done some very nice stopping jobs all be it in between some horrendous performances.

It's also a case of need. We don't need a soft half foward flanker we have plenty of flankers. We need a small defender tagger and clearance mid.

 

[Optimax]

Unbelievable. We keep Stanley, Cook and Toovey - all of which will be mid-range depth players at best, who have shown about 3/5ths of **** all at AFL level - and get rid of Egan.

As FIGJAM said, his worst is absolutely putrid. But his best is a hell of a lot more AFL standard than the other three spuds. He's coming of a knee which 90% of players take 18 months plus to recover from to a comparable standard to pre-injury, yet we're going to bin him based on poor returns this year.

Of course there's a chance he may not make it. But there's also a chance he will, and will to a very high standard. But no, lets keep three spuds who will not ever be anything more than servicable occasionally and will, in all likelihood, be delisted at end 09.

And don't even think of bringing up Swan into this argument - he'd always shown a bit of flair and game-winning potential, even if rarely. Look at the Lions game in 04. The other three - there's nothing at AFL level, with the exception of the worst three goal game ever by Toovs on debut.

Egans best comes arpound barely once a season and for the rest of the time we may as well be a man down.

At least with stanley, toovey and cook we know they will give a red hot go at all times.

want to feel bad for someone delisted think of brodie and remeber the injuries that have crippled him

 

[Lensen]

Lenny in Cook's case I think he has showed a bit in the EF final against Adeliade.

In Stanley's case he is yet to be given a chance to show anything. 4 games out of position in one game bursts is not giving him a chance it's giving him a game.

and in Toov's case he has done some very nice stopping jobs all be it in between some horrendous performances.

It's also a case of need. We don't need a soft half foward flanker we have plenty of flankers. We need a small defender tagger and clearance mid.

The only thing Cook showed in the EF is he can take Rhyce's spot of getting lots of the footy and butchering it. ANd I'm not just talking about the set shot - look at the times where the ball goes in the right direction but drops three metres short or go half a metre over the player's head.

I'm not saying chop all three because I'm well aware that not every player in a 22 is going to be a star. I'm saying why keep three with minimum upside and get rid of the bloke with the maximum upside, when they're all probably equally likely to make the grade and equally likely to be chopped at end 2009? It doesn't make sense.

I personally reckon anyone who's shown anything pre-ACL needs to be given two years minimum from that point on. Egan showed in glimpses he belonged at AFL level.

I hope we rookie him.

 

[HFF]

The only thing Cook showed in the EF is he can take Rhyce's spot of getting lots of the footy and butchering it. ANd I'm not just talking about the set shot - look at the times where the ball goes in the right direction but drops three metres short or go half a metre over the player's head.

I'm not saying chop all three because I'm well aware that not every player in a 22 is going to be a star. I'm saying why keep three with minimum upside and get rid of the bloke with the maximum upside, when they're all probably equally likely to make the grade and equally likely to be chopped at end 2009? It doesn't make sense.

I personally reckon anyone who's shown anything pre-ACL needs to be given two years minimum from that point on. Egan showed in glimpses he belonged at AFL level.

I hope we rookie him.

It was PCL not ACL.

Also, Cook will be the best of the lot you named.

However, I am disappointed to let Egan go especially ahead of Toovey.

 

[Lensen]

Egans best comes arpound barely once a season and for the rest of the time we may as well be a man down.

At least with stanley, toovey and cook we know they will give a red hot go at all times.

want to feel bad for someone delisted think of brodie and remeber the injuries that have crippled him

He had a good stretch up until the Port game last year where he got dropped, for reasons that were no one's other than his. I get that. But then he did a knee and suddenly that's forgotten?

We stick with Leon for 8 years - which I didn't have a problem with at all, because he had the same it that Egan does - when he'd shown no more than Egan at the same stage of his career.

It'd be like keeping Lokan and McGough and getting rid of a Davis or Swan or Lonie at the end of 05/06/whenever it was we got rid of them.

 

[Optimax]

He had a good stretch up until the Port game last year where he got dropped, for reasons that were no one's other than his. I get that. But then he did a knee and suddenly that's forgotten?

We stick with Leon for 8 years - which I didn't have a problem with at all, because he had the same it that Egan does - when he'd shown no more than Egan at the same stage of his career.

It'd be like keeping Lokan and McGough and getting rid of a Davis or Swan or Lonie at the end of 05/06/whenever it was we got rid of them.

Yoave your facts wrong on egan here.

he played 1 or 2 games last year and wasnt dropped after his last game against adelaide instead suspended along with shannon cox, and leon davis for breaking team rules and leaving the hotel.

There was no good stretch last year his senior games were servicable and his reserve games ok, and he also didnt do his knee he tore his pcl similar to Fraser he never needed or recieved a full knee reco he was in fact fit enough for full training late last year.

Egan getting delisted is no major news he was always going to be if he couldnt crack a seniors spot by year end