Kane Tenace

[catempire]

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

I might add that with Gaz and Varcoe under flu clouds, SJ's dodgy ankle and Bartel's dodgy groin, Tenace would be more like 80-20 to play this week than 50-50 as I said earlier in this thread.

 

[Cattery]

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...

Why is that necessary, it's evident what his role is plus it's been well covered already; I think the more pertinent question would be "is Tenace the player for that role?" and so far the only reasons I've seen given for the affirmative are that he has the "potential" to do it, and "the selectors keep picking him" [ they kept picking Playfair and McCarthy also as I recall ] so neither are very compelling reasons.

 

[CatFan79]

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..

I have talked up positives of Brent Prismall, Josh Hunt and David Johnson with regards to Tenace's selection. Again, you cannot accept that I don't rate Tenace as highly as yourself.

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.

I have made many relevant points regarding what is required to move the ball quickly and effectively. Just because I don't think Tenace is useful to our setup, I know nothing about modern footy? Yeah, whatever.. Again, because I don't agree with you you've cracked it... Your cheap insults do you no justice and will only help others de-value your opinion.

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?

As I said, Tenace might warrant a permanent spot in the future but at the moment he's not up to it...

I graduated Uni with a Bachelor of Computing if you must know but I can't see how my level of education is relevant here.. Resorting to poor attempt at an insult?? hehehe

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?

I have answered this before. But you seem to think that Tenace has some rare irreplaceable talent that cements him a spot in the lineup. Why is this?? He's quick but hey, so was David Clarke..

 

[catempire]

Why is that necessary, it's evident what his role is plus it's been well covered already; I think the more pertinent question would be "is Tenace the player for that role?" and so far the only reasons I've seen given for the affirmative are that he has the "potential" to do it, and "the selectors keep picking him" [ they kept picking Playfair and McCarthy also as I recall ] so neither are very compelling reasons.

Why is what necessary?

Cattery, I'm just putting it out there that one possibility is that Tenace's value to the side is underrated by this board but perfectly clear to the selection committee.

IMO, that is the most likely reason why he keeps getting picked in the team.

"is Tenace the player for that role?" - the club obviously thinks so.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

I have talked up positives of Brent Prismall, Josh Hunt and David Johnson with regards to Tenace's selection. Again, you cannot accept that I don't rate Tenace as highly as yourself.



I have made many relevant points regarding what is required to move the ball quickly and effectively. Just because I don't think Tenace is useful to our setup, I know nothing about modern footy? Yeah, whatever.. Again, because I don't agree with you you've cracked it... Your cheap insults do you no justice and will only help others de-value your opinion.



As I said, Tenace might warrant a permanent spot in the future but at the moment he's not up to it...

I graduated Uni with a Bachelor of Computing if you must know but I can't see how my level of education is relevant here.. Resorting to poor attempt at an insult?? hehehe



I have answered this before. But you seem to think that Tenace has some rare irreplaceable talent that cements him a spot in the lineup. Why is this?? He's quick but hey, so was David Clarke..

Care to answer the question. Who is the 'similar' player replacing Tenace? Great effort to sidetrack a conversation though mate...or just being scared to admit you are wrong perhaps? Practice what you preach hey?

If the cap fits you wear it mate. Saying we have a similar type to replace Tenace after all the reams of posts in this thread... boy if that doesnt suggest you dont know the modern game...then what more proof do you need?

I just call it as I see it mate. If it effects or offends you to the point you have to give me your resume on line...then I must have hit a raw nerve somewhere.

If other people similar to yourself who like bagging other players and posters relentlessly to get your point across then play the victim card and express such dismay when others respond in kind...go seek some help ok..I mean professionally.

So you want to be a victim or answer the question?

 

[CatFan79]

Saying we have a similar type to replace Tenace after all the reams of posts in this thread... boy if that doesnt suggest you dont know the modern game...then what more proof do you need?

At the moment all Tenace has over DJ, Hunt and Prismall is his ability to run quick over distance.

Tenace struggles to use this skill enough due to his short comings in skill, awareness, agility and toughness. On top of that his disposal is often poor.

A combination of the above mentioned attributes is more important to the modern player than just pace.

 

[turtlemanistic]

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...

You're quoting yourself now catempire?

You're just as inflexible as the rest of us, so stop pretending that you're all-righteous. If you've paid attention to this thread, I'm sure you'll notice that of the people who've contributed quite a lot to this thread, have accepted the reasoning behind Tenace's inclusion in the team and as part of a structure - and as other people have replied, this is more of a debate concerning Tenace's ability to fill that role.

We know why he's getting picked - because somebody's obviously hoping that he'll mould into the player they want, yet Tenace's form in this position has been poor and there are others who should at least get a go in trying to fill this position, rather than sticking with a player who is not playing that well when there are others who may be better suited.

 

[catempire]

You're quoting yourself now catempire?

You're just as inflexible as the rest of us, so stop pretending that you're all-righteous.

Turn it up! I asked the question and no one even attempted to answer it. Not surprising really.

If you've paid attention to this thread, I'm sure you'll notice that of the people who've contributed quite a lot to this thread, have accepted the reasoning behind Tenace's inclusion in the team and as part of a structure - and as other people have replied, this is more of a debate concerning Tenace's ability to fill that role.

We know why he's getting picked - because somebody's obviously hoping that he'll mould into the player they want, yet Tenace's form in this position has been poor and there are others who should at least get a go in trying to fill this position, rather than sticking with a player who is not playing that well when there are others who may be better suited.

I’ve paid great attention to this thread. The majority of it has been absolute rubbish of the “Tenace is shit, he can’t kick” variety. Hence my reason for not contributing too much and in the end trying to stimulate something more with my (ultimately unanswered) question.

The two issues – why he’s in the team and whether he can fill the role – are inextricably linked.

The club selects players because it believes they are the best placed to fill certain roles. This is the case with Tenace.

The bottom line for me is that there is an imbalanced view of his value to the side. The views tend to be greatly exaggerated with respect to his woeful kicking (92% on Friday night) and the run he supposedly doesn’t provide.

I think if Tenace was anywhere near as bad as people are making out in this thread he wouldn’t have got a single game this season, let alone been an inclusion on three separate occasions.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

At the moment all Tenace has over DJ, Hunt and Prismall is his ability to run quick over distance.

Tenace struggles to use this skill enough due to his short comings in skill, awareness, agility and toughness. On top of that his disposal is often poor.

A combination of the above mentioned attributes is more important to the modern player than just pace.

Here is the other version of whats to be had in this thread. A couple of people have given good debate and its been appreciated but...

I asked a simple question to this bloke...who is the 'similar' type player he mentioned who was going to replace Tenace...and this is the response?

Just answer the question...if you are wrong get over it. There is no SIMILAR type player to replace him thats the point we have been discussing all this time!

People can talk about whatever they like on here but selectively quoting my words out of context and giving these ridiculous answers that dont get anywhere near the topic is a waste of time. Why bother? If you want to talk about other players go start a thread about other players this one happens to be called Kane Tenace.

Sorry for assuming that might include why he has been getting selected in the side by the selectors as well as what he brings to the side.

Gee how outrageous that one would even consider to think laterally on here. Thinking beyond the obvious has shown to be a waste of time in this thread.

 

[Cattery]

Why is what necessary?

Cattery, I'm just putting it out there that one possibility is that Tenace's value to the side is underrated by this board but perfectly clear to the selection committee.

IMO, that is the most likely reason why he keeps getting picked in the team.

"is Tenace the player for that role?" - the club obviously thinks so.

Just a response to your question ................ "Does anyone else care to provide a better explanation for why he is there?"

I'd say that question would be better addressed by those who seem to support his inclusion in the side, e.g. yourself and WE Are Geelong, and just saying "because the club thinks so" or "because he has the potential" don't seem like very compelling reasons to my way of thinking.
That would certainly kill any debate over a particular players selection at any time, "well he's been selected ergo he's the best" end of conversation.

I'm more interested in getting your own reasons as to why he should be in the side, what particular attributes does he bring, is he better value then x, y or z?

Agreed I don't think he's nearly as bad as he's been painted by some here, and the role he's playing could be a very important one, but I have very serious reservations about him being able to handle it, especially in the heat of a finals campaign; as WE Are Geelong has noted he's being targeted by other sides [ can't say I've noticed it myself ] but if this is the case it could only be because he's perceived to be susceptible to those sort of tactics, something that will be magnified come finals time.

 

[Cattery]

There is no SIMILAR type player to replace him thats the point we have been discussing all this time!

Shannon Byrnes.

 

[Partridge]

Shannon Byrnes.

And you reckon Tenace can't kick???? Compared to Byrnes he looks like Buddha Hocking!

 

[CatFan79]

ust answer the question...if you are wrong get over it. There is no SIMILAR type player to replace him thats the point we have been discussing all this time!

As I have said before, you see Tenace as having some crucial skill that means only someone else with this same skill can take his spot..

I see Tenace as an average wingman with poor skills and awareness, who's spot can be replaced by a few different players.

Did you start this thread? No

Do you have the right to dictate what is discussed? Sorry chump, you don't!

 

[catempire]

Just a response to your question ................ "Does anyone else care to provide a better explanation for why he is there?"

I'd say that question would be better addressed by those who seem to support his inclusion in the side, e.g. yourself and WE Are Geelong, and just saying "because the club thinks so" or "because he has the potential" don't seem like very compelling reasons to my way of thinking.
That would certainly kill any debate over a particular players selection at any time, "well he's been selected ergo he's the best" end of conversation.

I'm more interested in getting your own reasons as to why he should be in the side, what particular attributes does he bring, is he better value then x, y or z?

Agreed I don't think he's nearly as bad as he's been painted by some here, and the role he's playing could be a very important one, but I have very serious reservations about him being able to handle it, especially in the heat of a finals campaign; as WE Are Geelong has noted he's being targeted by other sides [ can't say I've noticed it myself ] but if this is the case it could only be because he's perceived to be susceptible to those sort of tactics, something that will be magnified come finals time.

"Anyone else". WAG has addressed it. He/she has put forward a very reasonable explanation for why the team is persisting with him. I think WAG has got it spot on the money for why, despite clear deficiencies with his game and clear room for significant improvement, the club has in mind that there is a role for him to play and that he is the best placed player on our list (at the moment) to play it.

The logic, in a simplified way, goes: STEP 1: we need a player with pace, who will run the ball off half back, who will use it reasonably well and who will complement the other players we have in the team (who have a tendency to be “same-ish”); STEP 2: who is the player who is best equipped to fill this role? The players who are in good enough form to be in the mix for senior selection are Tenace, Hunt, D Johnson, Prismall (before injury), Byrnes and maybe Gardiner. The obvious choice among that lot to fulfil the role that is required, is Tenace.

The fact that he is being persisted with tells me that the CLUB is of this view. No doubt at selection meetings his name comes up and they discuss the merits of his selection. The reason for the CLUB would be that he has the potential, if not the ability, to play a role that they want played in the side.

Now when it comes to scrutinising Tenace’s form, I believe there is a clear imbalance on this board. For one thing, he is not assessed properly against the role that the club is wanting him to play. Posters tend to magnify his deficiencies and give him no credit for the good things he does (e.g. set up two goals on Friday night).

Now is the time to be trying him out in this role. If he fails in it then he won’t be playing finals anyway and that’s the end of that. But to give up now is to concede that we will have to play games and pick a side that is going to have to play in a less than ideal way. At least by trying this now, it gives the chance that Tenace will grow into the role and be an asset for the rest of the season and the finals.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

As I have said before, you see Tenace as having some crucial skill that means only someone else with this same skill can take his spot..

I see Tenace as an average wingman with poor skills and awareness, who's spot can be replaced by a few different players.

Did you start this thread? No

Do you have the right to dictate what is discussed? Sorry chump, you don't!

I asked you a simple question based on a statement that you made and you cant answer it because it is flat out wrong. It also proves that you havent understood what anyone else has been discussing in this thread...not just me but everyone else too.

That Tenace is a unique player in the squad. Some think he should be picked... others dont...thats cool...but you Einstein suggest...

...he should be replaced with a similar player...

This has got nothing to do with the thread...what my opinion is or anybody else. This is simply about how you havent got a clue.

Name the 'similar' player replacing Tenace?..or admit you are wrong?

Or keep avoiding the question and look like an immature little child..which is it to be?

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Shannon Byrnes.

Why not just audition yourself for saturday night live?..

 

[WE Are Geelong]

"Anyone else". WAG has addressed it. He/she has put forward a very reasonable explanation for why the team is persisting with him. I think WAG has got it spot on the money for why, despite clear deficiencies with his game and clear room for significant improvement, the club has in mind that there is a role for him to play and that he is the best placed player on our list (at the moment) to play it.

The logic, in a simplified way, goes: STEP 1: we need a player with pace, who will run the ball off half back, who will use it reasonably well and who will complement the other players we have in the team (who have a tendency to be “same-ish”); STEP 2: who is the player who is best equipped to fill this role? The players who are in good enough form to be in the mix for senior selection are Tenace, Hunt, D Johnson, Prismall (before injury), Byrnes and maybe Gardiner. The obvious choice among that lot to fulfil the role that is required, is Tenace.

The fact that he is being persisted with tells me that the CLUB is of this view. No doubt at selection meetings his name comes up and they discuss the merits of his selection. The reason for the CLUB would be that he has the potential, if not the ability, to play a role that they want played in the side.

Now when it comes to scrutinising Tenace’s form, I believe there is a clear imbalance on this board. For one thing, he is not assessed properly against the role that the club is wanting him to play. Posters tend to magnify his deficiencies and give him no credit for the good things he does (e.g. set up two goals on Friday night).

Now is the time to be trying him out in this role. If he fails in it then he won’t be playing finals anyway and that’s the end of that. But to give up now is to concede that we will have to play games and pick a side that is going to have to play in a less than ideal way. At least by trying this now, it gives the chance that Tenace will grow into the role and be an asset for the rest of the season and the finals.

That is as succinct as it can be discussed...and correct which is the important bit.

 

[CatFan79]

That Tenace is a unique player in the squad. Some think he should be picked... others dont...thats cool...but you Einstein suggest...

...he should be replaced with a similar player...

This has got nothing to do with the thread...what my opinion is or anybody else. This is simply about how you havent got a clue.

Name the 'similar' player replacing Tenace?..or admit you are wrong?

Or keep avoiding the question and look like an immature little child..which is it to be?

Similar could mean something to you and something totally different to me. I mean, Tenace could be dropped (and has been in the past) for either one of Hunt, DJ or Prismall. They all have different levels of competence and skill in different areas but they can play a SIMILAR role.

Tenace is unique? If you mean his pace, well at the moment its not enough to compensate for the rest of his shortcomings.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Similar could mean something to you and something totally different to me. I mean, Tenace could be dropped (and has been in the past) for either one of Hunt, DJ or Prismall. They all have different levels of competence and skill in different areas but they can play a SIMILAR role.

Tenace is unique? If you mean his pace, well at the moment its not enough to compensate for the rest of his shortcomings.

Similar means similar. When did we start debating what sort of a player Tenace is? We have just been debating whether we need that sort of player? Now you are suggesting there could be a whole range of players the same as him at the club or who could play a similar role as him?

I appreciate that you did make the effort to answer the question but I have to be honest and say to you we are miles apart on what it is we are even discussing here mate and should just forget about continuing it any further...there really isnt any point to it.

 

[Cattery]

Why not just audition yourself for saturday night live?..

Good suggestion, I might actually give it a bash.

Gotta ask though, why is it so, errrr, amusing, you asked for another player on our list "similar" to Tenace and I suggested Byrnes; as I see it they're two peas from the same pod, small, pacy, lacking in certain areas but never the less "very" similar and I see no reason why Byrnes couldn't do the same sort of job that Tenace is doing at the moment.

 

[Asty]

who is the 'similar' type player he mentioned who was going to replace Tenace...and this is the response?

Djerrkura once he gets injury free will be another option with pace off a HB

 

[Ricketts]

Djerrkura once he gets injury free will be another option with pace off a HB

Not this year he won't.

 

[Cattery]

"Anyone else". WAG has addressed it. He/she has put forward a very reasonable explanation for why the team is persisting with him. I think WAG has got it spot on the money for why, despite clear deficiencies with his game and clear room for significant improvement, the club has in mind that there is a role for him to play and that he is the best placed player on our list (at the moment) to play it.

The logic, in a simplified way, goes: STEP 1: we need a player with pace, who will run the ball off half back, who will use it reasonably well and who will complement the other players we have in the team (who have a tendency to be “same-ish”); STEP 2: who is the player who is best equipped to fill this role? The players who are in good enough form to be in the mix for senior selection are Tenace, Hunt, D Johnson, Prismall (before injury), Byrnes and maybe Gardiner. The obvious choice among that lot to fulfil the role that is required, is Tenace.

The fact that he is being persisted with tells me that the CLUB is of this view. No doubt at selection meetings his name comes up and they discuss the merits of his selection. The reason for the CLUB would be that he has the potential, if not the ability, to play a role that they want played in the side.

Now when it comes to scrutinising Tenace’s form, I believe there is a clear imbalance on this board. For one thing, he is not assessed properly against the role that the club is wanting him to play. Posters tend to magnify his deficiencies and give him no credit for the good things he does (e.g. set up two goals on Friday night).

Now is the time to be trying him out in this role. If he fails in it then he won’t be playing finals anyway and that’s the end of that. But to give up now is to concede that we will have to play games and pick a side that is going to have to play in a less than ideal way. At least by trying this now, it gives the chance that Tenace will grow into the role and be an asset for the rest of the season and the finals.

Thanks, good post.
Got to agree with you mostly, possibly the only other one there from those you mention who could fulfill "exactly" the same role would be Byrnes I guess.

Also agree with the club attempting to create a role like this for someone, like I said though I have reservations as to Tenace being up to the task, very one dimensional and have the feeling he could wilt under the pressure of finals footy.

Guess the fact is they're going to have to make up their minds one way or the other pretty quick, no good trialling it for so long and then having to scrap it on the eve of the finals, and my gut feeling [ injuries not withstanding ] is that he won't be in the side come September.

 

[turtlemanistic]

And I agree with all of that regarding why he's in the team.

I’ve paid great attention to this thread. The majority of it has been absolute rubbish of the “Tenace is shit, he can’t kick” variety. Hence my reason for not contributing too much and in the end trying to stimulate something more with my (ultimately unanswered) question.

The two issues – why he’s in the team and whether he can fill the role – are inextricably linked.

The club selects players because it believes they are the best placed to fill certain roles. This is the case with Tenace.

The bottom line for me is that there is an imbalanced view of his value to the side. The views tend to be greatly exaggerated with respect to his woeful kicking (92% on Friday night) and the run he supposedly doesn’t provide.

I think if Tenace was anywhere near as bad as people are making out in this thread he wouldn’t have got a single game this season, let alone been an inclusion on three separate occasions.

However I disagree with this as I feel that whenever Tenace gets the ball, I don't trust what he'll do with it - I don't believe that his disposal skills and decision-making skills are good enough for AFL level, and the reason that he keeps on getting selected is because they're hoping that he'll turn into a better player with some experience - after all, he was a no.7 draft pick - so we'd better get our money's worth, so to speak. So they're giving him every chance to improve to the required level, but after 53 games I think he's had enough attempts so that some other player can have a go.

 

[turtlemanistic]

Good suggestion, I might actually give it a bash.

Gotta ask though, why is it so, errrr, amusing, you asked for another player on our list "similar" to Tenace and I suggested Byrnes; as I see it they're two peas from the same pod, small, pacy, lacking in certain areas but never the less "very" similar and I see no reason why Byrnes couldn't do the same sort of job that Tenace is doing at the moment.

Yep, you did that exactly. So one player that has similar capabilities to Tenace is ... Shannon Byrnes ... and we all know where he is ... so if they both play the same way, both have pace, but both have poor disposal ... shouldn't that mean that Tenace shouldn't be in the firsts? For the same reasons that Byrnes aren't? For having a lot of chances and not doing enough?