Remove this Banner Ad

Marty Mattner?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

strauchanie59

strauchanie59

BigFooty Mitchy Morton
Veteran Fall Guys Winner
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Posts
5,158
Reaction score
5,168
AFL Club
Sydney
I know I may cop a bit of curry for this but DELIST OR TRADE Marty Mattner. Slow decison making and poor skills. In the 3rd quarter when we were trying to get the momentum back, he's at 50 and gets run down by Murphy. On replays he wasn't even sprinting even though there was no one in front of him. He must be one of Roosy's favourites
 
J_Moore said:
Doesn't have eyes in the back of his head. Need a bit more talk, I think.
Click to expand...

More talk definately. But he needs awareness as well. Too many times this year has he tryed to turn the attackers inside out and got caught or stuffs up the kick which leads to goals. His first year was amazing but has dropped since then. Should we try him in the forwards if he is retained?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Get rid of him, each time he gets the ball I immediately think he is going to get run down!
 
I don't think he will be in our best 22 for the start of next season so maybe we can try to see if he has any trade value.....Vossy may be interested....
 
Mattner has not had a great year but not for being run down in the third term.

That was at the stage of the game we were shot, no one was moving forward, no one was running forward and Mattner was devoid of options and in the third term Mattner kept running out of defense to find nobody. He went to a lot of of one on two's last night and so did Smith but part of that was after half time the Sans were not moving.

I've been a supporter of Mattner as he takes the game on where his mistakes are made but as well as that he is intense with his tackling 08-09... it was missing this year. If he can recapture his 08 form or at least his 09 intensity he could be a perfect half forward flanker getting the ball in off the left and attacking the play running out. But 2010 was not a great year for Marty.
 
Mattner and Malceski get run down heaps, but at least Malceski is an awesome player.

He does get a lot of clearances. I don't know. He's close, but I wouldn't drop him just yet. He's better than Ted Richards. However Nick Smith, with age, could contest his spot.
 
NobleBlood said:
Mattner and Malceski get run down heaps, but at least Malceski is an awesome player.

He does get a lot of clearances. I don't know. He's close, but I wouldn't drop him just yet. He's better than Ted Richards. However Nick Smith, with age, could contest his spot.
Click to expand...

I thought Ted's second half on Hall was one of his best games in some time.
 
Aus eBloke said:
wonder why Adelaide traded him
Click to expand...

lack of awareness was the key issue with Marty, he had the habbit of looking at the ground when he runs and carries the ball and hence was a serial offender in get caught holding the ball
 

Remove this Banner Ad

i think he might struggle to hold down his spot in the 22 next year. Don't think he would have any trade value and will most likely be kept as a depth player anyway
 
He hasn't had a great year, but at his best he's in our top 10 players. He's a tough, experienced, bread and butter player, the sort of player you need. We have a few of his type, so putting him up for trade is an option. However, if we did, we definitely shouldn't accept peanuts (we gave a mid-second rounder for him when he was an outer fringe player at Adelaide, and he's a weekly starter with us now, so he has increased in value as far as I'm concerned), and delisting him would be absolute lunacy.
 
bloodstainedangel5 said:
He hasn't had a great year, but at his best he's in our top 10 players. He's a tough, experienced, bread and butter player, the sort of player you need. We have a few of his type, so putting him up for trade is an option. However, if we did, we definitely shouldn't accept peanuts (we gave a mid-second rounder for him when he was an outer fringe player at Adelaide, and he's a weekly starter with us now, so he has increased in value as far as I'm concerned), and delisting him would be absolute lunacy.
Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of what you post, but not that, not at all.

Mattner is fringe best 22 as far as I see it, and he's that high because he is tough, I'll give you that. But top 10? No chance.

Just quickly, here's some more likely top-10 types, and I'm not really even thinking too deeply.

Goodes, Jack, Mumford, C Bolton, Bradshaw, Kennedy, Malceski, ROK, McGlynn, Kennelly. That's 10. Hannebery would be next, and maybe higher if I did think about it. Shaw finished the season well ahead of Mattner. Seaby, arguably, but it's hard to measure on s6-8 weeks in a Swans jumper. LRT if fit, Grundy at his best 2010 form and Bird fully fit would all be ahead of Mattner.
 
disgruntled goat said:
I agree with a lot of what you post, but not that, not at all.

Mattner is fringe best 22 as far as I see it, and he's that high because he is tough, I'll give you that. But top 10? No chance.

Just quickly, here's some more likely top-10 types, and I'm not really even thinking too deeply.

Goodes, Jack, Mumford, C Bolton, Bradshaw, Kennedy, Malceski, ROK, McGlynn, Kennelly. That's 10. Hannebery would be next, and maybe higher if I did think about it. Shaw finished the season well ahead of Mattner. Seaby, arguably, but it's hard to measure on s6-8 weeks in a Swans jumper. LRT if fit, Grundy at his best 2010 form and Bird fully fit would all be ahead of Mattner.
Click to expand...

I said "at his best". For example, his 2008 season was fantastic. He was certainly in our top 10 players that year. Now, I don't expect that output year by year, and this year he has certainly drifted back to being a fringe 22 player, though I'd say he's closer to "in" than "out". You have Mattner playing like he was in 08, and I'd have him ahead of Hanners, Shaw, LRT, Grundy, Bird, Kennelly, and Kennedy. He's not playing like that, so he drops back.

Now, you could say that's all academic, and you'd be right. The point I was trying to make by saying it was to put things in perspective; Mattner has had a poor year this year, it's true, but he has also played some fantastic footy for us in the past. It would be ridiculous to delist him, or trade him away for peanuts.
 
Ohh my god!

Mattner now?

The guy is an attacking half back flanker that has been told to run the lines & take the game on....as is Malceski & Shaw. These blokes WILL make mistakes. But they also get the game rolling our way.

Don't blame Mattner for last night.
The sequence of events that can be blamed for last night are

a) Jude Bolton getting crunched by Cross.
b) Mumford hurting his 'good' knee.
c) Grundy dropping a crucial mark for a goal.
d) Malceski unnecessarily hanging onto Hooper for a soft free & goal.
e) The half time siren because we have only won 7 of 24 3rd Qs for the year.
f)Moore getting towelled up by Harbrow in the 3rd.
g)Bradshaw hit the post ....RIGHT in front.
h)We played guys that weren't fully fit in a crucial final....O'Keefe, Mumford, Bradshaw, ...................when Bevo & White would have done no worse a job.

Although I don't wish to hang these blokes, the last person that should take any blame is Mattner because the guy is an absolute hard worker & doesn't bludge. They all make errors though & we certainly aint going to trade Grundy. That dropped mark will burn in his gut for years but will be what takes him to the next step.

Cheers!
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Aus eBloke said:
hence the reason why it was good to not face the saints with those injured players, humiliation and our pants would have been pulled down
Click to expand...

Tedeski said:
Correct Aus eBloke!

We bowed out with our never say die reutation intact.

May get ugly for the Dogs this week.
Click to expand...


I cannot - and will not subscribe to this un-Swan defeatism. We have matched and pushed the Aints to the limit of late. A win is most certainly to be had and a huge opportunity has been blown. The advantage gained in the players prominent injuries would be for first time in this finals series, a fit not fv<ked player would have stood the field. Alot to be said of this outcome.
 
barry fu said:
I cannot - and will not subscribe to this un-Swan defeatism. We have matched and pushed the Aints to the limit of late. A win is most certainly to be had and a huge opportunity has been blown. The advantage gained in the players prominent injuries would be for first time in this finals series, a fit not fv<ked player would have stood the field. Alot to be said of this outcome.
Click to expand...

Sorry to dampen your well meaning spirit here Barry but....................from what I can remember the other night at the game, we got ourselves to a match winning lead of 30 points with a reasonably fit team, only to watch it unravel in 5 minutes of game time right before our eyes against a team that has been at it's lowest point for a few years now..

Should we have won that, it would have covered up a problem we had the previous week against Carlton where a similar thing happened, only we were fresher & at home.

A return trip against a team that is well rested & at full strength, St Kilda, would have been a tad embarrassing should a similar pattern have taken place with our "drop in concentration" as was described by Goodesy yesterday.

30 points up & on fire with afew minutes to go until half time.........................6 or 7 unanswered opposition goals in a hurry ...............scratching & clawing our way back from a 13 point deficit with 5 minutes to go until games end............2 weeks in a row!

No thanks! I'm too frightened to look at what might have been next week!

Let's just get the guys fit & start again next year full of confidence.

We'll let the Doggies supporters think that they have a chance against the Saints.:rolleyes:
 
Tedeski said:
Ohh my god!

Mattner now?

The guy is an attacking half back flanker that has been told to run the lines & take the game on....as is Malceski & Shaw. These blokes WILL make mistakes. But they also get the game rolling our way.

Don't blame Mattner for last night.
The sequence of events that can be blamed for last night are

a) Jude Bolton getting crunched by Cross.
b) Mumford hurting his 'good' knee.
c) Grundy dropping a crucial mark for a goal.
d) Malceski unnecessarily hanging onto Hooper for a soft free & goal.
e) The half time siren because we have only won 7 of 24 3rd Qs for the year.
f)Moore getting towelled up by Harbrow in the 3rd.
g)Bradshaw hit the post ....RIGHT in front.
h)We played guys that weren't fully fit in a crucial final....O'Keefe, Mumford, Bradshaw, ...................when Bevo & White would have done no worse a job.

Although I don't wish to hang these blokes, the last person that should take any blame is Mattner because the guy is an absolute hard worker & doesn't bludge. They all make errors though & we certainly aint going to trade Grundy. That dropped mark will burn in his gut for years but will be what takes him to the next step.

Cheers!
Click to expand...
All of the above points contributed to the loss but Grundy and Malceski's errors were crucial to the result as they handed the Dogs the most powerful force in football. MOMENTUM !!!!!!!
 
If Rok, Bradshaw and Mummy were fit from the first minute mark - I'll eat my hat, your hat and Bert Newtons hair hat. Bradshaw could not convert after halftime. Mummy did not even kick the fv<king thing at any stage at all. As for ROK someone told him after 10years, your a right footer son - and so he believed it! I think not.

What the Dogs dish up next week will have no bearing on us, or our output.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom