Game Day Official Practice Match - Carlton v Sydney Game Day

[Callipygian]

Hayward is guy we really need but he is a pipe dream now he’s in their leadership group so I’d definitely be looking at McInerney or even Cuningham.

I’d also be looking at Melican to replace Plowman when we delist him at the end of the year and possibly have to make a call on the always injured Marchbank and Gov.

The Swans have so much good depth - look at how good Hewett and Newman have been for us - it’s a testament to their development program.

Thanks, appreciate the respect for our development program. Personally I think our development of players gets undervalued even among our own supporters, who tend to give all the kudos to our recruiters.

I wouldn't give up on McInerney if you think you're a chance to get him but I'd be very disappointed if he left us. He's got style and class; and we picked him from obscurity and have stuck phat ever since (even through a bit of down year last year compared to 2021).

Cunningham and Melican on the other hand are quite gettable and, unfortunately for us, would come cheap. I can imagine we would trade either of them for a packet of chips. Apparently we do this as a way of showing our players that we are treating them well. It happens too often for my liking.

Cunningham is an absolutely top bloke and also a really, good versatile player. Sadly for him, thanks to the strength of our list currently, he finds himself on the fringes of our 22. He would be ideal for a younger team because I think he offers a bit in the way of leadership and setting an example of the right way to go about things. I hope he stays with us and I think he will.

Melican is a pretty decent player. His best is good but he's a bit inconsistent. Stronger as a lockdown defender than as an interceptor/rebounder. He deserves more opportunities than he is getting or likely to get with us. For his own benefit I hope that another club does poach him. I'm very happy having him on our list as depth but he has been overtaken and is not best 22 for us.

 

[TENACIOUS]

IMO, from this and Collingwood games the biggest

Positives
Cincotta, Cowan and Hollands... All put their case forward for round 1...

Negatives
Dow, Plowman, Carroll, Honey & Owies... Were the opposite, all have had multiple opportunities over the years and haven't taken them, yet...

 

[passmark]

Why is Ed Curnow playing?

 

[Kiama Chris]

Thanks, appreciate the respect for our development program. Personally I think our development of players gets undervalued even among our own supporters, who tend to give all the kudos to our recruiters.

I wouldn't give up on McInerney if you think you're a chance to get him but I'd be very disappointed if he left us. He's got style and class; and we picked him from obscurity and have stuck phat ever since (even through a bit of down year last year compared to 2021).

Cunningham and Melican on the other hand are quite gettable and, unfortunately for us, would come cheap. I can imagine we would trade either of them for a packet of chips. Apparently we do this as a way of showing our players that we are treating them well. It happens too often for my liking.

Cunningham is an absolutely top bloke and also a really, good versatile player. Sadly for him, thanks to the strength of our list currently, he finds himself on the fringes of our 22. He would be ideal for a younger team because I think he offers a bit in the way of leadership and setting an example of the right way to go about things. I hope he stays with us and I think he will.

Melican is a pretty decent player. His best is good but he's a bit inconsistent. Stronger as a lockdown defender than as an interceptor/rebounder. He deserves more opportunities than he is getting or likely to get with us. For his own benefit I hope that another club does poach him. I'm very happy having him on our list as depth but he has been overtaken and is not best 22 for us.

Spot on about both players but I doubt that Harry is gettable. Lewis is a RFA at the end of the season and I think will be allowed to walk. He's a big, strong general defender rather than a KPD and would be best 22 in some clubs. Good clubman. At worst very serviceable depth.

 

[Arr0w]

He would be. But we won't be letting him go.

You just never know, might be part of players switching clubs

 

[azlou]

You just never know, might be part of players switching clubs

TDK?

 

[Burgers45]

IMO, from this and Collingwood games the biggest

Positives
Cincotta, Cowan and Hollands... All put their case forward for round 1...

Negatives
Dow, Plowman, Carroll, Honey & Owies... Were the opposite, all have had multiple opportunities over the years and haven't taken them, yet...

Of the above negatives, I still think Carroll (needs to build up his body more) and Honey (had injury issues last year). Both have shown signs they are comfortable at the higher level, imo they need more time and should be persisted with.

 

[btdg]

IMO, from this and Collingwood games the biggest

Positives
Cincotta, Cowan and Hollands... All put their case forward for round 1...

Negatives
Dow, Plowman, Carroll, Honey & Owies... Were the opposite, all have had multiple opportunities over the years and haven't taken them, yet...

Ahead of what i think is going to be a disappointing start to the year...

If the players on the disappointing list are the guys who are 16-22 on the depth chart, the problem is coaching and team structure, not the players. The young blokes who haven't played a game often outperform them because they just play a bit more on instinct, put in triple the effort out of excitement, etc. IMO it is a huge worry if the debatants look decent and the fringe guys suck...

Those fringe types are by definition going to have some weaknesses. It's up to the coaching staff to put together a structure that hides them - puts them in spots where they can succeed, makes sure the ball ends up with the 'right' players at the right time, makes their role and positioning clear.

We do NOT have that in place. Now, this was a practice game, with key parts of the team rested and new things being tried, so hopefully it just reflects that. I'm very worried about Voss though (his record at Brisbane was very unimpressive after year 1) and this sort of thing is a huge alarm bell for me.

 

[JJBagger]

Ahead of what i think is going to be a disappointing start to the year...

If the players on the disappointing list are the guys who are 16-22 on the depth chart, the problem is coaching and team structure, not the players. The young blokes who haven't played a game often outperform them because they just play a bit more on instinct, put in triple the effort out of excitement, etc. IMO it is a huge worry if the debatants look decent and the fringe guys suck...

Those fringe types are by definition going to have some weaknesses. It's up to the coaching staff to put together a structure that hides them - puts them in spots where they can succeed, makes sure the ball ends up with the 'right' players at the right time, makes their role and positioning clear.

We do NOT have that in place. Now, this was a practice game, with key parts of the team rested and new things being tried, so hopefully it just reflects that. I'm very worried about Voss though (his record at Brisbane was very unimpressive after year 1) and this sort of thing is a huge alarm bell for me.

What do you mean we don’t have that in place? I imagine a key reasom that some of our 16-22 players often didn’t perform very well every week is cause most of those guys were in the 30-40 bracket in the depth chart, and we’re playing out of necessity through injury. Guys like Cottrell, O’Brien, Plowman, Owies etc were more than serviceable when they played. That’s something we hadnt had in years, depth players that did their job every week.

Voss’ record after his first year dipped due to the age and the make up of the list, as well his less than desirable assistants at the time, more so than his actual coaching ability. Also it was almost 15 years ago, and he’s clearly developed a lot as a coach

 

[Gethelred]

Doc should have handball thee

Ask not for whom the handball comes, it comes for thee...

 

[Gethelred]

Raking left footers.

Are there any raking right footers?

Think if you rake from the right, it's called scything.

 

[thylacine60]

I want what gathorade had for brekky......

 

[Accidental genius]

I want what gathorade had for brekky......

Some type of mushroom perhaps…

 

[Gethelred]

Some type of mushroom perhaps…

 

[Callipygian]

You just never know, might be part of players switching clubs

Interesting but I'm not in favour of us getting TDK, and I can't imagine you're referring to anyone else? TDK would complement our list nicely but from what you read I think he would cost more than he's worth. I'm in favour of us chasing someone like Himmelberg or Todd Marshall or even just switching Paddy McCartin forward. Even Esava Ratugolea. Those are all good options that would cost less ($$ and picks). Save the giant $$ for a real superstar.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

Why is Ed Curnow playing?

I think with our midfield stack and Ed knowing opportunities are limited there Ed is trying to reinvent himself as a half forward, with Jack Martin out perhaps an opportunity opened up and we know that Ed would have put in a monster pre season so coach gave him a crack... What is obvious is that it didn't work.. Ed is a hard working defensive midfielder, I am not sure he has any other strings to his bow. Give him a playing assistant coach role in the VFL and let him develop himself that way, if there is an opportunity for a send off game at seasons end he has deserved that but I am sure even he knows opportunities are limited.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

IMO, from this and Collingwood games the biggest

Positives
Cincotta, Cowan and Hollands... All put their case forward for round 1...

Negatives
Dow, Plowman, Carroll, Honey & Owies... Were the opposite, all have had multiple opportunities over the years and haven't taken them, yet...

I think LOB is the most disappointing, he was given the wing spot with an opportunity to grab it, but he has allowed a first year player in Hollands to waltz straight past him and I doubt LOB will be selected against Richmond.

 

[Stamos]

I think LOB is the most disappointing, he was given the wing spot with an opportunity to grab it, but he has allowed a first year player in Hollands to waltz straight past him and I doubt LOB will be selected against Richmond.

LOB was very good against the Pies though. I reckon that might count for more than the Swans game.

 

[thylacine60]

Ahead of what i think is going to be a disappointing start to the year...

If the players on the disappointing list are the guys who are 16-22 on the depth chart, the problem is coaching and team structure, not the players. The young blokes who haven't played a game often outperform them because they just play a bit more on instinct, put in triple the effort out of excitement, etc. IMO it is a huge worry if the debatants look decent and the fringe guys suck...

Those fringe types are by definition going to have some weaknesses. It's up to the coaching staff to put together a structure that hides them - puts them in spots where they can succeed, makes sure the ball ends up with the 'right' players at the right time, makes their role and positioning clear.

We do NOT have that in place. Now, this was a practice game, with key parts of the team rested and new things being tried, so hopefully it just reflects that. I'm very worried about Voss though (his record at Brisbane was very unimpressive after year 1) and this sort of thing is a huge alarm bell for me.

his record at brisbane? 09-13? then 7 years assistant at port? seriously?

 

[Les Grossman playaaaa]

Ahead of what i think is going to be a disappointing start to the year...

If the players on the disappointing list are the guys who are 16-22 on the depth chart, the problem is coaching and team structure, not the players. The young blokes who haven't played a game often outperform them because they just play a bit more on instinct, put in triple the effort out of excitement, etc. IMO it is a huge worry if the debatants look decent and the fringe guys suck...

Those fringe types are by definition going to have some weaknesses. It's up to the coaching staff to put together a structure that hides them - puts them in spots where they can succeed, makes sure the ball ends up with the 'right' players at the right time, makes their role and positioning clear.

We do NOT have that in place. Now, this was a practice game, with key parts of the team rested and new things being tried, so hopefully it just reflects that. I'm very worried about Voss though (his record at Brisbane was very unimpressive after year 1) and this sort of thing is a huge alarm bell for me.

 

[FRUMPY]

LOB was very good against the Pies though. I reckon that might count for more than the Swans game.

I would presume all of Acres, Lob and Hollands play round 1

 

[Stamos]

I would presume all of Acres, Lob and Hollands play round 1

Yeah, good chance I reckon

 

[Burgers45]

LOB was very good against the Pies though. I reckon that might count for more than the Swans game.

As stated, was ok against Pies previous week. I would prefer LOB's experience before a sellout 80+ thou crowd. A debutant like Hollands might be a bit too nervous and overawed. Prior experience in front of a sellout crowd should prevail.

 

[Dunna Heartknee]

As stated, was ok against Pies previous week. I would prefer LOB's experience before a sellout 80+ thou crowd. A debutant like Hollands might be a bit too nervous and overawed. Prior experience in front of a sellout crowd should prevail.

Could there be a chance they both play, Hollands playing Cottrells role.

 

[Gethelred]

I think LOB is the most disappointing, he was given the wing spot with an opportunity to grab it, but he has allowed a first year player in Hollands to waltz straight past him and I doubt LOB will be selected against Richmond.

I have a question: how the utter * is that disappointing?

At no point prior to last season has LOB had any selection pressure. He had Newnes, then bunk; Setterfield wasn't a wing, Cottrell (who I have hopes for, but would take a decent amount of improvement for him to come one) and no-one else on the list except Walsh could play the role.

If the idea is that we want good performance on the wing, it really shouldn't matter whether it's LOB or Hollands providing it so long as someone is performing at a decent level. Hollands putting his best foot forwards isn't even terribly surprising; it was in his predraft notes that he was nearly AFL ready in terms of competitiveness, running, disposal; it was noted that other clubs were surprised no-one took him before us; a great many draft watchers had him as the best prospect to play wing at AFL level in the draft.

The idea that Player X failing to capitalize on an opportunity in a preseason scratch match is disappointing is kind of silly in only the way that sports fans can be silly. The reason why we have practice matches is to see how players are tracking, not only for selection purposes but preparation. If a player is not performing they can check out why, try and work through it.

But no, gotta leave it all out on the park, pride in the jumper, hard nosed, squared jawed, socks pulled up, mud on the shorts otherwise you don't look like you got your hands dirty performative stuff.