Roast Inner Feral Fan Unleashed - Warning - Unbridled, passionate, and objectionable opinions within

[VainGlorious]

Wow.

ODN, can you threadban me from this thread please?!

 

[BeijingBlue]

Post of the year so far. Nailed it.

 

[btdg]

if he does not come good this season then yes, he might grind out an AFL career but unless we see a massive upswingin output then she will never be the player we had hoped when we drafted him with pick 3, a head of Adam Cerra and Jaidyn Stephenson..

Dow has real issues imo. There are generally 4 clear paths to being a really good AFL footballer. Path 1: get lots of the footy. Path 2: have amazing disposal (and usually speed as well). Path 3: hit the scoreboard. Path 4: stop the opposition, either as a tagger/lockdown defender, or intercept marking. I can’t really think of a 200 gamer that doesn’t fit any of those categories, certainly not one who was part of premierships

Dow’s problem is that he has bad disposal at AFL level and doesn’t hit the scoreboard.Which leaves path 1 - get the footy. Except he has really struggled at that too (hence the commentary team’s incessant nattering about him getting 20 touches).

So what is his path? He’s not shown that he is a tagger/defender, tackling and running capacity not there. Either he drastically improves his disposal, he starts getting the ball a LOT more, or he’s going to be a bust.

The same applies to far too many of our guys IMO:
McGovern - low possession, average disposal, path 3 the closest but less than 1.5 goals per game for a guy in his prime is very weak. Should be a backup at best.

Setterfield: average in every category, not really looking elite in any path. Not a recipe for success

Marchbank -doesn’t lock down opponents enough, weak in all 3 other areas. Weitering is better but not elite in all 4 areas, but still aquestion mark imo (needs to lift in at least 1 area)

Fisher - no clear path, closest is path 1 (but not consistent)
JSOS - no clear path, has shown glimpses of path 3 and 4, but needs to step up with 1

etc.

Then the guys I’m most sold on:
- Walsh - clear path 1; has deficiencies, but undeniably gets the footy every week
- Charlie - path 3. Capable of kicking big bags of goals. Same with Harry (lots of shots last year with goalkicking yips is still scoreboard inpact)
- SPS - path 2; disposal is good
- O’Brien - has a path 2 in front of him

 

[GoBlues!]

McGovern will be fine in a strong side if we ever get a strong side. Not a coincidence his best year came when the Crows were absolutely firing nor the fact that he was one of the first to run away with his tail between his legs when they fell apart. He will never, ever, be the one who leads from the front. There's no doubt in my mind that SOS understood this when recruiting him and brought him in as the cream to Charlie and Harry.

I think you’re right about McGov unfortunately. Still waiting for him to show something, but if he’s relying on two younger players in Charlie and Harry to lead then that’s disappointing.

Conversely my respect for Levi and what he’s done over the last couple of years has increased enormously. Maybe Levi could mentor McGov!

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

I think you’re right about McGov unfortunately. Still for him to show something, but if he’s relying on two younger players in Charlie and Harry to lead then that’s disappointing.

Conversely my respect for Levi and what he’s done over the last couple of years and increased enormously. Maybe Levi could mentor McGov!

Not sure it’s fair for Levi to have to mentor a bloke earning 3 x his salary, especially if mentoring him well probably means Levi loses his spot in the side..

 

[ShanDog]

Don't know if we were happy just trying stuff out in the game against the Lions (and I hope we weren't, given it's the final practice match), but we have to sort out the midfield ASAP. With a depleted forward line until everyone gets back, we can't be dominated at centre bounce clearances, nor can we afford horrible entry into F50

 

[Gethelred]

Thread lacks anguish, and is entirely too reasonable about how it's putting forth its arguments.

 

[thylacine60]

agree - where's the shots of the sky lying dead and brown on the ground? lift you invertebrate mollusks..........

 

[Tony Lynn 15]

Hi di ho good feralrinos.

I remember years ago, there was a column in Inside Football where a feral fan and a positive fan would trade opinions about team's performances.

It got me thinking about our rules about player abuse and persistent negative agendas and how we moderate them to keep discussions enjoyable for the majority.

My solution is to have a dedicated feral fan thread where Carlton supporters can post with spur of the moment passion and frustration, without the moderation and without the arguments and calling out that dominates our match threads and so forth.

I'm not saying that anybody that posts in here is a feral fan, but might just had trouble containing themselves in the heat of the moment. In saying that, since this thread exists, there is no excuse to drag down the tone of the match threads any longer.

Win/Win for everyone and an opportunity to not alienate those who get a bit carried away (in the minds of some) on occasion.

Mods are not excluded from this. Can see Chism giving it a workout if things go pear-shaped this season.

For everyone else, if you don't like reading the content in here ... don't come in here. It's like the opposition banter thread for all intents and purposes.

Finally. So this is home.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

Over understand on pages in the thread by seasons end +/- 500

 

[1981]

It's going to be a long year.

We still don't have a big body who can help Cripps win clearances, and we still don't have a quality small defender.

At least we have our first rounder this year. We could be looking at another top 3-4 pick in the draft. Almost surely that will be offered for a quality, experienced midfielder.

 

[Jabba73]

We have been mediocre for so long we have forgotten how to be successful. Not sure we have enough internal want and fortitude to drag our sorry asses out of the depths of the ladder on a semipermanent basis.

If we don’t win 3 of the first 5 games, we will finish bottom 6.

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

TAB Sportsbet have Carlton at $11 for the most losses in 2020...pretty attractive odds I reckon....we lose our first couple of games and see those odds plummet...

The five clubs they have surrounding us just above and below are GCS, Adelaide, Freo, Port and Swans....all teams that have home state/ground advantages which should win them a few games in itself.

Not a bad bet....

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

TAB Sportsbet have Carlton at $11 for the most losses in 2020...pretty attractive odds I reckon....we lose our first couple of games and see those odds plummet...

The five clubs they have surrounding us just above and below are GCS, Adelaide, Freo, Port and Swans....all teams that have home state/ground advantages which should win them a few games in itself.

Not a bad bet....

If this happens the Teague won’t see our the year and you can pretty much guarantee we will appoint Ross Lyon..

 

[Opine]

This has to be MK’s final year; surely. It’s time for him to hang em up. He was virtually useless against Lions. We need a decent tap ruckman who can fairdinkum tap to advantage.

 

[Gethelred]

This has to be MK’s final year; surely. It’s time for him to hang em up. He was virtually useless against Lions. We need a decent tap ruckman who can fairdinkum tap to advantage.

I'd settle for a ruckman who can jump.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

This has to be MK’s final year; surely. It’s time for him to hang em up. He was virtually useless against Lions. We need a decent tap ruckman who can fairdinkum tap to advantage.

I think any signs MK’s body is cooked Teague will quickly move towards Pittonet and TDK.. We need to find a long term replacement for Kruezar and may as well give these younger guys a go..

 

[Opine]

It’s right about now, that it’s pretty darn clear we stuffed up selecting MK ahead of Cotchin. I’m not a huge fan of the post match janitor, but, he’d be a handy addition in our 2020 CS setup..

 

[Gethelred]

Seeing as you brought it up (and this is the appropriate thread for it) I do not like hybrid tall/small players, of which Kruezer is one.

Roughhead, in his era as a ruckman - because, for a season or so in there, he couldn't kick a goal to save himself - was being lauded as almost an extra mid; Tomlinson playing off the wing; Richo, Waite, you get it. These players are both KPP and smalls; problem is, even at their very best, while their versatility allows for plurality in their use, they're not as good at either as a specialist would be. Would Richmond have had Richo on the wing if they had a Josh Kelly/Andrew Gaff to run between the arcs? If Hawthorn or Sydney had a Gawn/Goldstein/Nankervis ruckman, would they have spent so many years finding a position for Roughhead and Tippett, and instead just played an extra contested midfielder? Would you prefer Roughhead or Priddis/Cunnington? I know who I'm picking.

Talls aren't as agile as smalls, and while they can have impressive straight line top speed they usually don't have the best acceleration; so, when people say they're 'almost an extra midfielder', what they mean is they're a C+/B+ contested midfielder with the turning circle of the spirit of tasmania and the acceleration of a three cylender mitsubishi mirage. Footy's as much about repeat efforts as anything else, so the inability to turn or to catch up to the contest makes these players substandard compared to their specialist alternatives.

So, talls who can play smalls are out; what about smalls that play tall? Jamie Elliot, Cam Rainer, even Eddie a bit; Jeremy Howe is a medium who plays taller; Matt Kennedy, Mitch McGovern. The latter three at least have the benefit of playing as mediums with a big leap or a decent set of hands; they're strong, so they're able to mark over another medium size player, and they're a fair chance of being too fast for a tall to man them. But, again, why would you select Matt Kennedy or Billy Gowers when you've got Charlie Curnow, Harry McKay, or if you're extrapolating to other clubs why not Josh Kennedy, Nick Riewoldt? Why have a little bloke who can play as a tall and risk them getting done by the right matchup - Stratton used to live in Eddie's head, before he took to pinching people - when you can have a tall do it and be better at it in every single way?

Versatility is overrated. Let the mids mid, the forwards kick goals, and the defenders give their men the shits.

 

[Opine]

Seeing as you brought it up (and this is the appropriate thread for it) I do not like hybrid tall/small players, of which Kruezer is one.

Roughhead, in his era as a ruckman - because, for a season or so in there, he couldn't kick a goal to save himself - was being lauded as almost an extra mid; Tomlinson playing off the wing; Richo, Waite, you get it. These players are both KPP and smalls; problem is, even at their very best, while their versatility allows for plurality in their use, they're not as good at either as a specialist would be. Would Richmond have had Richo on the wing if they had a Josh Kelly/Andrew Gaff to run between the arcs? If Hawthorn or Sydney had a Gawn/Goldstein/Nankervis ruckman, would they have spent so many years finding a position for Roughhead and Tippett, and instead just played an extra contested midfielder? Would you prefer Roughhead or Priddis/Cunnington? I know who I'm picking.

Talls aren't as agile as smalls, and while they can have impressive straight line top speed they usually don't have the best acceleration; so, when people say they're 'almost an extra midfielder', what they mean is they're a C+/B+ contested midfielder with the turning circle of the spirit of tasmania and the acceleration of a three cylender mitsubishi mirage. Footy's as much about repeat efforts as anything else, so the inability to turn or to catch up to the contest makes these players substandard compared to their specialist alternatives.

So, talls who can play smalls are out; what about smalls that play tall? Jamie Elliot, Cam Rainer, even Eddie a bit; Jeremy Howe is a medium who plays taller; Matt Kennedy, Mitch McGovern. The latter three at least have the benefit of playing as mediums with a big leap or a decent set of hands; they're strong, so they're able to mark over another medium size player, and they're a fair chance of being too fast for a tall to man them. But, again, why would you select Matt Kennedy or Billy Gowers when you've got Charlie Curnow, Harry McKay, or if you're extrapolating to other clubs why not Josh Kennedy, Nick Riewoldt? Why have a little bloke who can play as a tall and risk them getting done by the right matchup - Stratton used to live in Eddie's head, before he took to pinching people - when you can have a tall do it and be better at it in every single way?

Versatility is overrated. Let the mids mid, the forwards kick goals, and the defenders give their men the shits.

That’s an interesting point you make. I think MK would’ve been a champion, if he’d played three or more decades earlier; when, by today’s standards, being tall and mobile seemed a more effective combo to have. However, this is probably because talls weren’t as tall as they are today, and mobiles weren’t as mobile as they are today.

 

[JustaBattler]

Seeing as you brought it up (and this is the appropriate thread for it) I do not like hybrid tall/small players, of which Kruezer is one.

Roughhead, in his era as a ruckman - because, for a season or so in there, he couldn't kick a goal to save himself - was being lauded as almost an extra mid; Tomlinson playing off the wing; Richo, Waite, you get it. These players are both KPP and smalls; problem is, even at their very best, while their versatility allows for plurality in their use, they're not as good at either as a specialist would be. Would Richmond have had Richo on the wing if they had a Josh Kelly/Andrew Gaff to run between the arcs? If Hawthorn or Sydney had a Gawn/Goldstein/Nankervis ruckman, would they have spent so many years finding a position for Roughhead and Tippett, and instead just played an extra contested midfielder? Would you prefer Roughhead or Priddis/Cunnington? I know who I'm picking.

Talls aren't as agile as smalls, and while they can have impressive straight line top speed they usually don't have the best acceleration; so, when people say they're 'almost an extra midfielder', what they mean is they're a C+/B+ contested midfielder with the turning circle of the spirit of tasmania and the acceleration of a three cylender mitsubishi mirage. Footy's as much about repeat efforts as anything else, so the inability to turn or to catch up to the contest makes these players substandard compared to their specialist alternatives.

So, talls who can play smalls are out; what about smalls that play tall? Jamie Elliot, Cam Rainer, even Eddie a bit; Jeremy Howe is a medium who plays taller; Matt Kennedy, Mitch McGovern. The latter three at least have the benefit of playing as mediums with a big leap or a decent set of hands; they're strong, so they're able to mark over another medium size player, and they're a fair chance of being too fast for a tall to man them. But, again, why would you select Matt Kennedy or Billy Gowers when you've got Charlie Curnow, Harry McKay, or if you're extrapolating to other clubs why not Josh Kennedy, Nick Riewoldt? Why have a little bloke who can play as a tall and risk them getting done by the right matchup - Stratton used to live in Eddie's head, before he took to pinching people - when you can have a tall do it and be better at it in every single way?

Versatility is overrated. Let the mids mid, the forwards kick goals, and the defenders give their men the shits.

It was interesting to hear Zorko comment on the practis egame at half time - where he declared " Carlton were 300 meters ahead of us in meters gained and 10 in contested possessions - so the coach asked us to lift intensity"

the running power of today's footballers is markedly superior to that of ten years ago and the required KPI's seem to be morphing into a territorial game - so the zone has been replaced by a press...and contested ball wins outshone by repeat turnovers in preferred field position...[I don't doubt that a few teams don't mind losing the so called contested possession only to pick the ball up in a turnover....watch teh doggies and Richmond midfielders set up around and outside the contest instead of the schoolby nonsense at Carlton going all in and having nowhere to go...]

re field position, not surprised since these are the same performance expectations seen in most football codes these days..

I think this means that versatility in players is a sought after attribute - the kick and chase game is now pretty much the dominant game style having replaced the kick to kick and high possession game of a few years ago...I think ability to play forward and between the arcs as a midfielder in terms of chase/tackle and kick are sought after attributes - making it easier to implement the territorial game, covering for during game injury and providing in theory mor ematch up options...

Carlton seems to have gone against the general trend in its rebuild - stocking up on talls at both ends of the ground before starting to consider midfield - and it has cost in the short term - also note that Charlie/Harry/Williamson/McCreadie/TDK/Marchbank are very mobile talls....
still you need a few hard bodied hard nuts who don't mind the old fashioned to actually execute the get ball part of the equation, either through contested first hands or tackles causing turnovers....- this is where Carlton has consistently gotten it wrong - choosing runty runners in an out of proportion manner as far as midfield goes...most sides look bigger bodied than we do - not all - just most ....but that is another story for another time - again in my mind a pointer to why we are unlikely to trouble the better teams.

I think coaching and strategy has been the weak link in the rebuild - and I hope Teague has more respect for opposition plans than Bolton or Malthouse did.

 

[JustaBattler]

That’s an interesting point you make. I think MK would’ve been a champion, if he’d played three or more decades earlier; when, by today’s standards, being tall and mobile seemed a more effective general trait to have. However, this is probably because talls weren’t as tall as they are today, and mobiles weren’t as mobile as they are today.

Kreuzer was a very mobile ruck when picked up by us - and played liek a midfielder - Gibbs was quoted as saying Kreuzer was faster than him over 30 meters....I think the ACl wrecked him - lost his leap/marking ability and kicking ability.

 

[happydude]

It was interesting to hear Zorko comment on the practis egame at half time - where he declared " Carlton were 300 meters ahead of us in meters gained and 10 in contested possessions - so the coach asked us to lift intensity"

the running power of today's footballers is markedly superior to that of ten years ago and the required KPI's seem to be morphing into a territorial game - so the zone has been replaced by a press...and contested ball wins outshone by repeat turnovers in preferred field position...[I don't doubt that a few teams don't mind losing the so called contested possession only to pick the ball up in a turnover....watch teh doggies and Richmond midfielders set up around and outside the contest instead of the schoolby nonsense at Carlton going all in and having nowhere to go...]

re field position, not surprised since these are the same performance expectations seen in most football codes these days..

I think this means that versatility in players is a sought after attribute - the kick and chase game is now pretty much the dominant game style having replaced the kick to kick and high possession game of a few years ago...I think ability to play forward and between the arcs as a midfielder in terms of chase/tackle and kick are sought after attributes - making it easier to implement the territorial game, covering for during game injury and providing in theory mor ematch up options...

Carlton seems to have gone against the general trend in its rebuild - stocking up on talls at both ends of the ground before starting to consider midfield - and it has cost in the short term - also note that Charlie/Harry/Williamson/McCreadie/TDK/Marchbank are very mobile talls....
still you need a few hard bodied hard nuts who don't mind the old fashioned to actually execute the get ball part of the equation, either through contested first hands or tackles causing turnovers....- this is where Carlton has consistently gotten it wrong - choosing runty runners in an out of proportion manner as far as midfield goes...most sides look bigger bodied than we do - not all - just most ....but that is another story for another time - again in my mind a pointer to why we are unlikely to trouble the better teams.

I think coaching and strategy has been the weak link in the rebuild - and I hope Teague has more respect for opposition plans than Bolton or Malthouse did.

It's been better to get KPPs in before really stocking up the mid as KPPs take a few years to have a decent impac where is if you get the mix right of maturity in the mid it's a fast build.

You can have most of your players 'peak' at the same time by grabbing some KPP's then kids around the ground as the mature ones start to taper off...
See Hawks, Geelong, Collingwood, WCE

 

[JustaBattler]

It's been better to get KPPs in before really stocking up the mid as KPPs take a few years to have a decent impac where is if you get the mix right of maturity in the mid it's a fast build.

You can have most of your players 'peak' at the same time by grabbing some KPP's then kids around the ground as the mature ones start to taper off...
See Hawks, Geelong, Collingwood, WCE

Yep that is one correct way - Collingwood did the opposite and stacked their list with midfielders and are now looking for talls....this allowed them the luxury of being more competitive and not bottoming out....Richmond did much the same - went for runners and were happy to play with one tall in Riewoldt...
You know how long I've been going on about our runty midfield - since when we were doing teh podcasts....how many years ago was that?

Anyway if these kids we do have develop over the next couple of years - we are set....but I would have gone hard for Ollie Wines ( since we missed Coniglio) if the rumours were true- as in real hard...

 

[jooce8891]

Yep that is one correct way - Collingwood did the opposite and stacked their list with midfielders and are now looking for talls....this allowed them the luxury of being more competitive and not bottoming out....Richmond did much the same - went for runners and were happy to play with one tall in Riewoldt...
You know how long I've been going on about our runty midfield - since when we were doing teh podcasts....how many years ago was that?

Anyway if these kids we do have develop over the next couple of years - we are set....but I would have gone hard for Ollie Wines ( since we missed Coniglio) if the rumours were true- as in real hard...

but why we have kennedy