Kane Tenace

[DanA]

Once again you dont adopt the main premise of my argument...you just discuss things in a way that suits you...and is limited to your understanding of the game.

You think its about whether he is in our best 22..I am saying its about the type of game plan we are trying to play. You talk about whether the game plan is built around him..why?..he is just a part of that game plan like any other player.

Tenace has more potential to carry out that game plan according to not just me but the Geelong selectors. Rooke is simply an exceptional player and we have had a great run with injuries this year. It's not that surprising a guy in his 4th year like Mackie was last season who is still finding his feet is in and out of a strong side. Whats the big deal about that?

GFs are won by tight, contested, skilful footy....your words...someone could have written that 50 years ago and it would have made sense too...so in other words what you are saying is completely generic. So whats changed in the game mate? I have discussed the modern game....you havent brought it up yet. My concern is you dont even know the difference between rhetoric and whats actually going on.

my quote...competitive hard running relentless rebound footy you need to play come finals if you are serious about winning it....the difference is it incorporates rebound footy which all starts in defense these days particularly off the half back line. If you watch the last two Gfs they are played between the two half back lines...you havent mentioned this once so my assumption is you simply just dont realise this.

Guys who can run fast when they find space arent important come finals time you say..?...Have you actually watched the last 2 Gfs?...I feel I need to ask you this because I get the sense you havent.

You have an opinion about something great...but you either cant get it down on paper...or wait for it...drum roll...you dont know what you are talking about with regards to the finer points of modern footy.

This argument isnt about Tenace anymore...its about adopting a proven game plan that works in finals...hard running rebound footy off the half back line with fast (yes thats leg speed too) players running the ball out... so we need to try find the right sort of people to play in those positions...its just logical to try a guy with real speed first before anyone else and that is exactly what they are trying first.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Here are some stats for you to munch on:

* In 2006 The Eagles had the lowest rebound rate in the top 8.
* They were ranked 13th in kickins that resulted in a goal.

However they were ranked no.1 in hitouts at 44% and 2nd in clearances winning 44%. They were the only team to have 3 players in the top 20 for clerances and scored 15% of the time from stopages (by far the highest in the league).

In 2006 Sydney was the best performing team at stoppages clearing 4 more stopages per game than the opposition. They out scored there opposition by 261 points from stoppages in the home & away season (ranked no.1).

Scoring from stoppages is the only thing Sydney & Westcoast had in common. Sydney were Defensive while Westcoast attacking. It had bugger all to do with rebounding the footy whcih was dominated by the Western Bulldogs.

This year Geelong are doing it differently though. They are rebounding like the dogs. putting forwardline pressure on like Adelaide, Scoring from stopages more effeciently than Westcoast were and are doing very well in hitouts as well.

Running off half back is just a small part of it.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Here are some stats for you to munch on:

* In 2006 The Eagles had the lowest rebound rate in the top 8.
* They were ranked 13th in kickins that resulted in a goal.

However they were ranked no.1 in hitouts at 44% and 2nd in clearances winning 44%. They were the only team to have 3 players in the top 20 for clerances and scored 15% of the time from stopages (by far the highest in the league).

In 2006 Sydney was the best performing team at stoppages clearing 4 more stopages per game than the opposition. They out scored there opposition by 261 points from stoppages in the home & away season (ranked no.1).

Scoring from stoppages is the only thing Sydney & Westcoast had in common. Sydney were Defensive while Westcoast attacking. It had bugger all to do with rebounding the footy whcih was dominated by the Western Bulldogs.

This year Geelong are doing it differently though. They are rebounding like the dogs. putting forwardline pressure on like Adelaide, Scoring from stopages more effeciently than Westcoast were and are doing very well in hitouts as well.

Running off half back is just a small part of it.

I think this is a clear example of not being able to read english. See this is where you think I am being rude but...Didnt I just mention finals matches between Sydney and WC...that being the grand finals? I am talking finals and what Geelong seem to be trying out with regards to preparing for them.

Do you think Home and away is the same as finals footy? Why are you quoting me these stats? I talked about two relentless games of footy that were largely played between the two half back lines...what would round 8 or round 13 of 2006 have to do with a game like that?

Does it ever occur to you you now at all when you read something like this...that yeah..I didnt really read his post and talked about something that wasnt relevant to his argument. Can you be honest with yourself?

To answer other people who want to lighten their own intellectual loads by not reading my long posts...if I was able to just discuss what was relevant..that would make things so much easier.

Since I have been asked to write shorter posts...I would expressly ask that anyone who quotes me in future for it to be actually relevant to my original post that they are quoting.

Is that too much to ask? Thanks for the post and all the lovely stats...but similar to alot of what I have read from others in this thread its ...better not say...

 

[Cattery]

Ok... it does come off rude sometimes in an internet forum. Quite often even when I am animated its all fairly tongue in cheek really...just cant convey the body language on line so what do you do?

Why would I suggest in the first place some people lack footy knowledge?...well because what you are conveying right now as to what my opinion is after all that verbosity of mine isnt really correct? So I am wondering what's the point right now to be honest.

Most people want this to be a Tenace vs Hunt, DJ, Prismall thread....or just cos Tenace is quick why select him? I would prefer this to be about the reality of what Geelong is building for come finals.

I prefer to look at this as being a thread about the big picture. Why was Tenace ear marked for senior selection so early on in the pre season? What is the game plan surrounding him being selected which I agree isnt always automatic but its more regular than not at the moment. Is Geelong trying to imitate the fast running half back lines of successful opposition sides of the past two seasons? How far advanced are they or will they revert back to a slower back line come September if it's deemed not to have worked?

Personally I want to see the Tenace experiment continue. For one thing he has played in a high percentage of winning matches this season. It if aint broke..dont fix it. He is fast...but in a different way to Wojo. He gets to important loose footy that has spilled from stoppages or clangers and this puts alot of pressure on opposition defences because they have just cleared the ball and its coming back all too quickly. Because Geelong is always on the attack these days we are wearing sides out and often outscoring them in the last 5 minutes of quarters convincingly....this usually wins you games of footy statistics suggest. Tenace cuts off 50/50 contests before they happen at an important part of the ground. He creates pressure on leading forwards because he can stay with them...one on one he got found out but that doesnt surprise me as he has little exposure to that sort of play.

On the personal side with Tenace I believe he can turn the corner with kicking and decision making. I think one on one marking could be a weak point always. Mackie was in a similar boat exactly this time last year....you really questioned if he would make it or not...you just need to persist. Mackie is a great example of how that persistance pays off. I think Tenace has similar potential.

Overall its about having a purpose. I think Geelong has a purpose with playing Tenace ahead of other guys. Some seem to see it on here..most dont. I am trying to get people to see this could be significant for us moving forwards to finals. That Geelong wants to really look at the finer points of success in the modern game of football and really try competing on all those levels...and one of thos areas is certainly having fast players rebounding and picking up loose football off your half back line.

Because it isnt working perfectly isnt a reason to drop it 2 months out from finals. Going back to the slower style of play resigns you to this without the option of going the more attacking way. I more so suggest...get it right...and this really could be a season to remember...

I prefer the latter scenario and this all being a stepping stone to playing the right type of competitive hard running relentless rebound footy you need to play come finals if you are serious about winning it.

Just a few quick points; Believe what I said about your opinion "of Tenace" as a player was largely correct e.g. he has fairly serious deficiencies in a number of areas as pointed out by yourself, and this is basically all I was commenting on.
The "big picture" of what Geelong are trying to achieve in this area is another matter entirely, one quite removed from Tenace's ability, or lack thereof.

It's evident what that plan is, heck most teams try having a quick rebound player or two off half back, but you can't divorce the overall plan from the player chosen to implement it.
Most of those mentioned on here who play a similar role have far more strings to their bow then Tenace possesses I would suggest.

So yes, I see what his role in the side is [ be hard not to actually ] but this doesn't answer the question of whether or not he's good enough to carry it out successfully, or even if it's critical to ultimate success.

Ultimately we have to ask, if we have the luxury of a full list to choose from will he even get a game, and if so at whose expense, Varcoe? Stokes? Selwood?

Fair enough trialling this type of role, very risky though entrusting it to a player who's borderline at best and who has already been dropped on a couple of occasions.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Dude, why are your posts always so freaking long. Do you think that by typing big walls of waffle, that people will cave in and submit just because they can't be ****ed reading it? Call us stupid all you want for not analysing every point of every one of your year 9 essays on the state of the GFC, but personally, I don't have the time.

It would be much better for arguments sake if you could keep it short and simple. Make your point and move on. Don't make the same point over and over and over and over and over, then roll it on its side and do it over and over and over and over and over again.

I admire your dedication to these forums, but seriously... You have some good things to say, but please do so in a less waffle like way.

No worries mate I'll give it a go...

 

[Cattery]

This year Geelong are doing it differently though. They are rebounding like the dogs. putting forwardline pressure on like Adelaide, Scoring from stopages more effeciently than Westcoast were and are doing very well in hitouts as well.

Leaping lizards, going by that I reckon I should start ordering in the crates of Champagne right now, looks like we're over the line.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Just a few quick points; Believe what I said about your opinion "of Tenace" as a player was largely correct e.g. he has fairly serious deficiencies in a number of areas as pointed out by yourself, and this is basically all I was commenting on.
The "big picture" of what Geelong are trying to achieve in this area is another matter entirely, one quite removed from Tenace's ability, or lack thereof.

It's evident what that plan is, heck most teams try having a quick rebound player or two off half back, but you can't divorce the overall plan from the player chosen to implement it.
Most of those mentioned on here who play a similar role have far more strings to their bow then Tenace possesses I would suggest.

So yes, I see what his role in the side is [ be hard not to actually ] but this doesn't answer the question of whether or not he's good enough to carry it out successfully, or even if it's critical to ultimate success.

Ultimately we have to ask, if we have the luxury of a full list to choose from will he even get a game, and if so at whose expense, Varcoe? Stokes? Selwood?

Fair enough trialling this type of role, very risky though entrusting it to a player who's borderline at best and who has already been dropped on a couple of occasions.

Well my opinion is tenace does have the potential to fulfill the role required. Similar to mackie this time last year he isnt there yet but I think he will get there.

Thats why I think they should pick him...because I want to see them develop this style of play as we head towards finals. Its up to you to use words like essential and critical...I just think its a game plan and the one they should adopt...no need for adjectives really.

 

[Cattery]

Well my opinion is tenace does have the potential to fulfill the role required. Similar to mackie this time last year he isnt there yet but I think he will get there.

Thats why I think they should pick him...because I want to see them develop this style of play as we head towards finals. Its up to you to use words like essential and critical...I just think its a game plan and the one they should adopt...no need for adjectives really.

Sorry, I'll be more careful choosing my words in future, don't wanna go using controversial ones like critical and essential [ not that I did use the latter ]

Anyway I agree with half of what you say, that is trying to develop the style of game we're aiming for, have very serious doubts about Tenace being the player to carry it out though; you mention potential quite often but eight weeks out from a hard finals campaign I think you need a heck of a lot more then potential.

 

[My5t3r10u5]

Some comments relating to Kane:

1) He's still young and developing. There are plenty of things he needs to work on but there are also enough attributes that he displays to suggest he will be a good player for us. At the moment he's a borderline selection evidenced by him being in and out of the team.

2) People on this forum tend to exaggerate their assessment of players one way or the other. They are either brilliant (try criticizing Gary Ablett's kicking - which I think is pretty average - and see the reaction you get) or shocking (eg: David Mensch). This tends to be based on focusing on particular aspects of a players capabilities and ignoring others. Anyone who thinks Tenace is not at least a serious contender for selection this year with something to offer the team is kidding themselves IMHO.

3) Just because a player is selected in the 22 doesn't mean this was a clear cut selection by the match committee. I am sure there have been some long long discussions about the relative merits of selecting Tenace vs Hunt vs D. Johnson vs... The last selections in a team are also usually around that phrase - "team balance" - and this is where I suspect WAG has a point about Tenace's selection, ie. he offers something a bit different to the other contenders.

Most of the discussions on this thread seem to imply that Tenace's selection in or ommission from the team is obvious. Well, maybe if you take a step back and listen to those who have an opposite opinion to you, you would begin to see IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE PEOPLE!

 

[turtlemanistic]

Footy is played at such a fast pace anyone who regularly gets to loose football is a very fast player...so thats pace being used to effect surely?

Actually I think that players getting to loose balls have very little to do with pace - about 50% of it is positioning, awareness and reading of the play, 35% luck (being at the right place at the right time), and then finally 15% for pace, when it's down to a last race between two people - it is very rare that pace is used to gather loose balls and rather is for the defensive aspects of pressure and chasing down, and breaking lines with the ball.

Consequently the premise of Tenace being in the team is sound, but I don't think that he has fitted into the role that the team wants him to play, as he doesn't seem to show pace, so we should try a different approach that doesn't require the sort of role that they are trying to get Tenace to play.

 

[DanA]

I think this is a clear example of not being able to read english. See this is where you think I am being rude but...Didnt I just mention finals matches between Sydney and WC...that being the grand finals? I am talking finals and what Geelong seem to be trying out with regards to preparing for them.

Do you think Home and away is the same as finals footy? Why are you quoting me these stats? I talked about two relentless games of footy that were largely played between the two half back lines...what would round 8 or round 13 of 2006 have to do with a game like that?

Does it ever occur to you you now at all when you read something like this...that yeah..I didnt really read his post and talked about something that wasnt relevant to his argument. Can you be honest with yourself?

To answer other people who want to lighten their own intellectual loads by not reading my long posts...if I was able to just discuss what was relevant..that would make things so much easier.

Since I have been asked to write shorter posts...I would expressly ask that anyone who quotes me in future for it to be actually relevant to my original post that they are quoting.

Is that too much to ask? Thanks for the post and all the lovely stats...but similar to alot of what I have read from others in this thread its ...better not say...

Blah blah blah.....Yes I read your post, yeah you were talking about the finals and particularly the Grandfinal, my post is still completely relevant!

I did however make an assumption. My assumption was that Westcoast and Sydney did not change there style of play for the finals. To me that doesn't seem a contentious issue. In fact it is YOU that is arguing Tenace should stay in the team so Geelong can get its teams style/strucutre right for the finals!

Our perhaps Geelong will change it all come finals time?

You contradict yourself.

For what it is worth I think the style in a home and away season is a an exceptionally accurate reflection of the style teams play in the finals. I consider it completely illigociall to suggest that Sydney & Westcoast change there style upon entering finals footy. Surely teams have the same strengths and weaknesses in the home and aways season that they have in the finals.

Sure players natural lift a little come finals time. They are more motivated, there adrenalin is pumping, they are better preperation in the finals. Ultimately though it is the same game.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Blah blah blah.....Yes I read your post, yeah you were talking about the finals and particularly the Grandfinal, my post is still completely relevant!

I did however make an assumption. My assumption was that Westcoast and Sydney did not change there style of play for the finals. To me that doesn't seem a contentious issue. In fact it is YOU that is arguing Tenace should stay in the team so Geelong can get its teams style/strucutre right for the finals!

Our perhaps Geelong will change it all come finals time?

You contradict yourself.

For what it is worth I think the style in a home and away season is a an exceptionally accurate reflection of the style teams play in the finals. I consider it completely illigociall to suggest that Sydney & Westcoast change there style upon entering finals footy. Surely teams have the same strengths and weaknesses in the home and aways season that they have in the finals.

Sure players natural lift a little come finals time. They are more motivated, there adrenalin is pumping, they are better preperation in the finals. Ultimately though it is the same game.

Usually you make alot of sense mate, so no need to get sensitive about it all...except when you become defensive I find...and you start posting like this.

There is a certain dynamic between Sydney and West Coast when they play, finals especially...low scoring, relentless hard running rebound footy. Thats the last two GFs too...You make the ridiculous assertion you are assuming something to be the case...well stop assuming for starters and chat about things you know or dont know. In low scoring matches on dry days on a big ground...arent those sort of games played between the two half back lines? If I have said anything wrong...please point it out...otherwise stop assuming things when you get defensive? Footy is a dynamic between two opposing sides...not just one side and what they do best.

When Geelong played Hawthorn this year..what happened? Bomber predicted it and couldnt stop it. If one side goes ultra defensive its hard to counter that. So what WC plays during the season, that has to change when they play Sydney and always you have to cater to your opponent. WC made the big mistake this week of giving the impression to the Lions we dont respect you and this just a training drill for our game plan this week ...and look what happened...so that shoots your theory out of the water right there. Geelong are a big scoring side...but if someone goes defensive will we win because we are big scoring.

Tenace is being looked at as a fast running half back. Why?...because in tight hard running contests like finals this has been shown to be an effective weapon against flooding and other defensive tactics.

Thats it...so simple...no big dramas.

I never said we were imitating anyone's game plan?...just looking at a fast running back line. Tenace might get dropped this week for team balance and I could understand it...but I would be disappointed if we didnt keep our nerve and play a quicker type option at the MCG in particular...

 

[DanA]

Usually you make alot of sense mate, so no need to get sensitive about it all...except when you become defensive I find...and you start posting like this.

There is a certain dynamic between Sydney and West Coast when they play, finals especially...low scoring, relentless hard running rebound footy. Thats the last two GFs too...You make the ridiculous assertion you are assuming something to be the case...well stop assuming for starters and chat about things you know or dont know. In low scoring matches on dry days on a big ground...arent those sort of games played between the two half back lines? If I have said anything wrong...please point it out...otherwise stop assuming things when you get defensive? Footy is a dynamic between two opposing sides...not just one side and what they do best.

When Geelong played Hawthorn this year..what happened? Bomber predicted it and couldnt stop it. If one side goes ultra defensive its hard to counter that. So what WC plays during the season, that has to change when they play Sydney and always you have to cater to your opponent. WC made the big mistake this week of giving the impression to the Lions we dont respect you and this just a training drill for our game plan this week ...and look what happened...so that shoots your theory out of the water right there. Geelong are a big scoring side...but if someone goes defensive will we win because we are big scoring.

Tenace is being looked at as a fast running half back. Why?...because in tight hard running contests like finals this has been shown to be an effective weapon against flooding and other defensive tactics.

Thats it...so simple...no big dramas.

I never said we were imitating anyone's game plan?...just looking at a fast running back line. Tenace might get dropped this week for team balance and I could understand it...but I would be disappointed if we didnt keep our nerve and play a quicker type option at the MCG in particular...

I don't feel I am being defensive, maybe it is comming out that way on the internet but it is not how I feel. I think you have skerted around my comments though.

Your comments:
"There is a certain dynamic between Sydney and West Coast when they play, finals especially...low scoring, relentless hard running rebound footy."

I don't agree. Westcoast play a hard running high possession risky style of footy, playing for open space, but it doesn't come from the half backline and its hardly rebound football. It comes from the midfeild, they with Sydney are the top clearance teams in the league!

Sydney on the other hand play for stoppages and choke there opponents out of the game definately not on the rebound. The grandfinal and all Sydney/Westcoast games for that matter are a constant strugglee of who can dictate the tempo of the game. Sydney trying to slow it down and create stoppages while Westcoast try to open it up.

Neither Sydney nor Westcoast changed there style of play in the finals nor the grandfinal.

What has a windy game in tasmania got to do with this discussion and how does one loss against Brisbane shoot my argument out of the water?

You really are not making a lot of sense. My whole point is you are focussing on this halfbackline run too much. Tenace is not nearly as important as you are making out.

 

[Cattery]

What has a windy game in tasmania got to do with this discussion and how does one loss against Brisbane shoot my argument out of the water?

Must say I was asking myself the same question mate, those comments did seem to come from left field and have no relevance to the discussion.

 

[catempire]

So far, and I stand to be corrected, but WAG seems to be the only poster who has attempted to explain WHY Tenace IS in the team. Plenty have given their opinion on why he SHOULD NOT be.

Does anyone else care to provide a better explanation for why he is there?

 

[DanA]

So far, and I stand to be corrected, but WAG seems to be the only poster who has attempted to explain WHY Tenace IS in the team. Plenty have given their opinion on why he SHOULD NOT be.

Does anyone else care to provide a better explanation for why he is there?

I don't think there is any argument over why he is in the team, that we agree on. It is just his importance to the team that we have a difference in an opinion over.

 

[catempire]

I don't think there is any argument over why he is in the team, that we agree on. It is just his importance to the team that we have a difference in an opinion over.

But by the way many are carrying on in this thread (you excluded) there'd be no way that the club would pick such a player.

I think the question of why he is in the team is THE question to answer.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Must say I was asking myself the same question mate, those comments did seem to come from left field and have no relevance to the discussion.

Its pretty simple really. Every side has a game plan. DanA thinks the game plan looks the same way and gets played the same way against every side you play...ok so if we are a high scoring side why do we score less when an opposition team plays a defensive style of footy? Why cant we just play our normal game plan?

If thats out of left field...I think I'd prefer to go play in the left field..

And DanA...mate this isnt personal by the way as I think you are a good poster...but you are still just talking theories when it comes to those WC and Syndey finals. In reality they got played alot between the half back lines...and in a war of attrition as finals often are...you find the same thing. I feel Geelong will be looking for ways to get an edge in this area so they are trying things out.

As Catempire mentioned quite relevantly...I am trying to discuss what Tenace IS doing in the side...rather than as to why he should be dropped. Why are they picking him?

That is the point and no one here expect me and him and maybe 1 or 2 others have really addressed that at any stage. Care to stick to the point anyone?

 

[Hood007]

I don't think there is any argument over why he is in the team, that we agree on. It is just his importance to the team that we have a difference in an opinion over.

Exactly.
You would think majority rules on this matter though.
But useless facts and long pointless posts do make for good arguments...

 

[CatFan79]

As Catempire mentioned quite relevantly...I am trying to discuss what Tenace IS doing in the side...rather than as to why he should be dropped. Why are they picking him?

Last time I checked the thread title didn't specify what Tenace does for the side, or why he is in the side..

Maybe you should look at the reason why this thread is so long, its because the majority of people on here question what Tenace brings to the side.

Accept that not everyone shares your view about how valuable his run is to the team and that he is crucial to our team's makeup. Have you ever considered that YOU might be wrong?

You justify his value to the team by saying he "keeps getting picked." But he also "keeps getting dropped" doesn't he....

Obviously Tenace was a high draft pick because Thompson and co. saw potential, clearly he has not delivered on this yet.. How long will Thompson persist with him? Thats only his call, but Tenace is not that young anymore and should have delivered more than what he has by now...

 

[DanA]

Its pretty simple really. Every side has a game plan. DanA thinks the game plan looks the same way and gets played the same way against every side you play...ok so if we are a high scoring side why do we score less when an opposition team plays a defensive style of footy? Why cant we just play our normal game plan?

If thats out of left field...I think I'd prefer to go play in the left field..

And DanA...mate this isnt personal by the way as I think you are a good poster...but you are still just talking theories when it comes to those WC and Syndey finals. In reality they got played alot between the half back lines...and in a war of attrition as finals often are...you find the same thing. I feel Geelong will be looking for ways to get an edge in this area so they are trying things out.

As Catempire mentioned quite relevantly...I am trying to discuss what Tenace IS doing in the side...rather than as to why he should be dropped. Why are they picking him?

That is the point and no one here expect me and him and maybe 1 or 2 others have really addressed that at any stage. Care to stick to the point anyone?

I find this far more interesting then day time TV (I have the flu) and certainly am not offended.

By and large I don't think teams change there style week in week out. I will conceed that weather will effect the team plan but not that significantly. I also watched the GF and did not see it as a game between two half backlines but we will leave that alone as it doesn't involve Geelong.

What I think is more interesting and at falls in line with your arguement for Tenace is highlighting what I see as the development of Geelong's style over the last 8 rounds. Against North and Hawhorn; King, Hawkins, Byrnes, Hunt, D.J and Prismall all played at least one of those games. Corey was also playing in the backline.

By the time we reached Westcoast we had lost an inside mid (Prismall), and were giving Corey and Selwood more time in the middle to cover his workload. Tenace came into the side for Prismall taking over Corey's backline work while also reduced our reliance on Wojak (who was starting to get tagged).

Steve Johnson replaced Tom Hawkins which made our forwardline a bit more dynamic and unpredictable. Ottens came in improving on Kings ruckwork while also offering an option up forward ocassionally which was handy with Hawkins gone. In particular Ottens ruckwork in our forwarline was very good.

Varcoe replaced Byrnes which increased the forwardline pressure and gave us a more accurate goal kicking (he's kicked 14.5 to Byrnes 14.32 for his career!). That meant that Stokes had to cover Byrnes' role around the ground which stokes seems to be coping with quite well.

All these have definately been improvements. I was a big fan of Tenace getting an extended run in the team. I just think it is time to give Hunt a shot while Tenace works on some glaring weaknesses. It will mean Enright will have to cover a bit for Tenace and slightly less run off HB but we will get more accountability and Hunts delivery into the forwardline should be better.

That is how I see it, I think that you would agree with 90% of that as well WAG. We are arguing over the 10% though which is the importance of Tenace and whether or not Hunt is a viable alternative.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

I find this far more interesting then day time TV (I have the flu) and certainly am not offended.

By and large I don't think teams change there style week in week out. I will conceed that weather will effect the team plan but not that significantly. I also watched the GF and did not see it as a game between two half backlines but we will leave that alone as it doesn't involve Geelong.

What I think is more interesting and at falls in line with your arguement for Tenace is highlighting what I see as the development of Geelong's style over the last 8 rounds. Against North and Hawhorn; King, Hawkins, Byrnes, Hunt, D.J and Prismall all played at least one of those games. Corey was also playing in the backline.

By the time we reached Westcoast we had lost an inside mid (Prismall), and were giving Corey and Selwood more time in the middle to cover his workload. Tenace came into the side for Prismall taking over Corey's backline work while also reduced our reliance on Wojak (who was starting to get tagged).

Steve Johnson replaced Tom Hawkins which made our forwardline a bit more dynamic and unpredictable. Ottens came in improving on Kings ruckwork while also offering an option up forward ocassionally which was handy with Hawkins gone. In particular Ottens ruckwork in our forwarline was very good.

Varcoe replaced Byrnes which increased the forwardline pressure and gave us a more accurate goal kicking (he's kicked 14.5 to Byrnes 14.32 for his career!). That meant that Stokes had to cover Byrnes' role around the ground which stokes seems to be coping with quite well.

All these have definately been improvements. I was a big fan of Tenace getting an extended run in the team. I just think it is time to give Hunt a shot while Tenace works on some glaring weaknesses. It will mean Enright will have to cover a bit for Tenace and slightly less run off HB but we will get more accountability and Hunts delivery into the forwardline should be better.

That is how I see it, I think that you would agree with 90% of that as well WAG. We are arguing over the 10% though which is the importance of Tenace and whether or not Hunt is a viable alternative.[/quote]

I do agree with at least 90% of that post...its well written. For the record I think Hunt has been unlucky to be out of the side all this time...but they are trying new things and thats why it's happened.

CatFan79...I have admitted when I am wrong before on this board so I dont have an issue with it at all as history speaks for itself. I dont have an issue with you disagreeing with me either...but your histrionics relating to 'because I disagree with you that must mean I am wrong?'...kind of sounds childish to me. The other problem with chatting to you about Tenace is that you just want to talk about whether a fringe player gets a game or not...its like a revolving door mate where does the discussion end? More productively I have tried to expand the argument.

Instead of having an issue with me expanding the argument to include what our game plan might be heading forward and why Tenace might be getting picked...why not just leave it alone as two people who disagree? You just keep quoting me yet try to make out I am the protagonist in all this?

If I am not expressly discussing the argument in the same manner as you..whats it to you in the first place...and secondly mind your own business. Why keep quoting me if we are talking about this in very different ways? We will never agree on the issue and as far as I can see we are a long way off from knowing whether anyone is right about it or not...so steady on and just get a grip of yourself...you are losing it on this one mate.

 

[CatFan79]

'because I disagree with you that must mean I am wrong?'...kind of sounds childish to me.

I didn't say that, I said consider you might be wrong.

The other problem with chatting to you about Tenace is that you just want to talk about whether a fringe player gets a game or not...

Whether you agree or not, Tenace is a fringe player because he has not proven otherwise. If he was worthy, he'd get permanent game. If someone else is performing better than he is that plays a similar role, Tenace should and will be dropped.

Instead of having an issue with me expanding the argument to include what our game plan might be heading forward and why Tenace might be getting picked...why not just leave it alone as two people who disagree? You just keep quoting me yet try to make out I am the protagonist in all this?

I think everyone else has said enough about your essays that lead nowhere..

whats it to you in the first place...and secondly mind your own business.

Hehehehe these are the sort of comments that give me my dose of humour for the day!!

 

[catempire]

Does anyone else care to provide a better explanation for why he is there?

Nope, didn't think so.

Far easier just to say "Tenace is shit", "Tenace can't kick", etc.

I guess the Geelong selection committee are just out of their minds then...

 

[WE Are Geelong]

I didn't say that, I said consider you might be wrong.



Whether you agree or not, Tenace is a fringe player because he has not proven otherwise. If he was worthy, he'd get permanent game. If someone else is performing better than he is that plays a similar role, Tenace should and will be dropped.



I think everyone else has said enough about your essays that lead nowhere..



Hehehehe these are the sort of comments that give me my dose of humour for the day!!

Well I'll put it to you this way...because you just proved it. You thrive on talking up the negatives. Thats what you excel at. As I mentioned much earlier in this thread any idiot can talk up the negatives..you will find that people who just get on here bagging players and other posters dont have the ability to talk about anything else so they revert to their comfort zone which is just to try bag anything and anyone that moves outside what they understand as beer and meat pie footy.

In a nutshell you havent discussed one relevant issue that relates to modern football. Why not? I dont think you know anything about modern footy...I think you lack the intelligence basically.

Otherwise why not discuss something relevant other than he's useless...you're wrong/I'm right. Sounds like primary school to me...did you graduate by the way?

Answer this easy question then...who waiting to come in will play a similar role to Tenace? Then you get to explain the reasons too. Should be interesting and why it's similar to Tenace as you mention in your post 'someone similar' to replace him...really?

 

[MmkMrMackie]

Everything that could possibly be said about the prospect of Tenace playing has already been said...