Positives from Round 1 ?

[Stiffy_18]

straight over you head. he is in a defensive role, who gives 2 flying **** how much of the ball he got. he took Judd out of the game, that is a massive result for us, and you're not happy with that.

would you be happier if he stood off judd, got 15 touches himself and Judd had 30?

if he can do that every week, he'll not only be in our best 22, he'll go close to AA as the best defensive player in the comp.
Now I am not saying he can or will, but how ludicrous is it to have a go at a guy after one of his most decisive efforts.

people talk about Stinger towelling McLeod, but you're not happy because he only shut out the reigning brownlow medallist?????????????

If I ever need a lawyer can you represent me because that was a game, set match type argument

 

[johnnypanther]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Dog

"In summary Crow-mosone - Shirley did a great job on the weekend - however his inclusion in our best 22 is a commentary on where our squad is at the moment. I do not believe we can win a flag while a player of this calibre is receiving B&F votes to use your analogy. Yes, he will continue to get games for the AFC - but only until we can refresh our list to a greater extent"


i fully concur Mad Dog
IMO we wont be a premiership contender whilst the likes of Shirley & co are running around in our 1st team - what an indictment of our playing list!
Shirley & co would not even get on most clubs lists
Sure these blokes have the odd good performance but if thats how we judge talent then our club is doomed to mediocrity by retaining all these blokes on our list
If we want to win a premiership we need to make the hard calls and rebuild our team and rebuild a legitimate 2nd tier from the youngsters not by rehashing the tried and failed 3rd tier players who have let us down for the last few years

as i've said before i would try Van Berlo as a tagger and even Jericho

 

[macca23]

Fellas, all I can say is that if you're gunning for Shirley after a first class effort on the Brownlow Medallist - and will be high in the club's votes for best players for the game - god help the poor bastard when he plays a poor one.

 

[Crow-mosone]

I think what we are all trying to say is that...

Based on his last game, Shirley is a pretty decent tagger. And, will retain his spot for this week.
Based on his entire 52 games, he's a pretty ordinary AFL player. And, will likely be omitted at some point during this season.

that's probably pretty close.

He played a fine game for us, and it was encouraging enough to earn the right to have another go.
what happens then, is yet to be seen. If he carries on, great, if not someone else will get a chance.

 

[Crow-mosone]

...or perhaps to where-ever your reading and comprehension grade came from in Grade 2..........read my posts ....this is not specifically about Robert Shirley........this is about whether we can aford the luxury of a hack in our first 22 because he can tag.

there you go again. you call him a hack who can tag, I call it a guy with a defensive assignment who follows the coaches instructions to a T. how can we afford, on that display, not to have him in the 22?

I do agree on one level, this is not about Robert Shirley. This is about all the plonkers who pick the players who in their estimation aren't good enough, and ride them regardless of what happens on the park. this is fingers in the ears stuff, la la la la.

don't assume anything I choose to post here as a sign of anything. I have tried to put my point of view - I'm done with trying to put it in simple enough terms for you to understand.

the point is you could have mailed in your thoughts "shirley hack, talk to the hand". what does this have to do with a very encouraging display?
nothing. where would players like Hentschel/Rutten/Mattner etc be, if all the response they ever got was: me and my mates down the pub don't rate you, so it doesn't matter how you play, or what improvements you make, we don't ever intend to change our mind - even if you deserve it.

NB. my argument centres around IF. he deserves his next chance, IF he takes it fantastic. Most players don't have the mental discipline to apply themselves like that, and maybe that will be his edge.

yes I have 52 games and 5 years worth of bias.......not difficult to admit even though it excites you.

except another flawed presumption is that every one of those 52 games has been rubbish, that's not the way I remember it at all.

Better check Judd's preseason preparation before you hang your arguement on his 2004 credentials

I call Bullsh*t on this one. utter bunkem.

5)at least have the decency to answer my questions Crow-mosone

1) 5 years for 51 games.....this is his 6th year........is credit due here ????
2) Tell me Crow-mosone, as part of our list renewal over the next few years, would you expect to see Shirley's AFL career stretch to 9 years ????? - or do you think he is in that catagory that could be "refreshed" during that time ???
3) do you think we can be a Grand Finalist with Shirley in our best 22 ?......what would that say about our 23rd player.......? - and therefore our depth?????........would that be good enough to win a flag???????

sure.

Shirley is no world beater on his own, but with instruction, and a tightly defined role he can be valuable player. Because he is limited, he needs a coach that uses that role. an ultra defensive stopper. I have to say I am surprised that NC is the one to do that, but if your coach doesn't want to use a guy like that, in that role, he won't get a game. If Terry Wallet was coach I guarantee he would be one of the first picked.

His 52 odd games have not been all bad, he had a very good 2003 for us if I recall. he played 15 games for us last year also. So that sounds to me, like your dated bias is a little out of date.

do I think he could be in our best 22 for a grand final - absolutely. more so, than now. A grand final is exactly when you want an ultra shut down job done on someone, much more so than in round one.

In summary Crow-mosone - Shirley did a great job on the weekend - however his inclusion in our best 22 is a commentary on where our squad is at the moment.

no it's not. it's a commentary on the assignment given, and how he executed it.

I do not believe we can win a flag while a player of this calibre is receiving B&F votes to use your analogy.

I do not believe we will have a chance at a flag, unless we have more players capable of playing clearly defined roles, following team orders, and doing the selfless stuff for the good of team. His attitude is what gets him a game, and if our more talented guys had this attitude we would be much closer to where we want to be.

But I do not expect to be labelled as mindless and attacked without provocation for merely stating my view on Shirley's career.

this is why it was mindless: This was not a dialogue on his career, but on the positive signs from round one. this is a case of you answering a question that wasn't asked with a predetermined answer. that's hardly a considered view.

 

[Mad Dog]

there you go again. you call him a hack who can tag, I call it a guy with a defensive assignment who follows the coaches instructions to a T. how can we afford, on that display, not to have him in the 22?

I do agree on one level, this is not about Robert Shirley. This is about all the plonkers who pick the players who in their estimation aren't good enough, and ride them regardless of what happens on the park. this is fingers in the ears stuff, la la la la.



the point is you could have mailed in your thoughts "shirley hack, talk to the hand". what does this have to do with a very encouraging display?
nothing. where would players like Hentschel/Rutten/Mattner etc be, if all the response they ever got was: me and my mates down the pub don't rate you, so it doesn't matter how you play, or what improvements you make, we don't ever intend to change our mind - even if you deserve it.

NB. my argument centres around IF. he deserves his next chance, IF he takes it fantastic. Most players don't have the mental discipline to apply themselves like that, and maybe that will be his edge.



except another flawed presumption is that every one of those 52 games has been rubbish, that's not the way I remember it at all.




I call Bullsh*t on this one. utter bunkem.



sure.

Shirley is no world beater on his own, but with instruction, and a tightly defined role he can be valuable player. Because he is limited, he needs a coach that uses that role. an ultra defensive stopper. I have to say I am surprised that NC is the one to do that, but if your coach doesn't want to use a guy like that, in that role, he won't get a game. If Terry Wallet was coach I guarantee he would be one of the first picked.

His 52 odd games have not been all bad, he had a very good 2003 for us if I recall. he played 15 games for us last year also. So that sounds to me, like your dated bias is a little out of date.

do I think he could be in our best 22 for a grand final - absolutely. more so, than now. A grand final is exactly when you want an ultra shut down job done on someone, much more so than in round one.



no it's not. it's a commentary on the assignment given, and how he executed it.



I do not believe we will have a chance at a flag, unless we have more players capable of playing clearly defined roles, following team orders, and doing the selfless stuff for the good of team. His attitude is what gets him a game, and if our more talented guys had this attitude we would be much closer to where we want to be.



this is why it was mindless: This was not a dialogue on his career, but on the positive signs from round one. this is a case of you answering a question that wasn't asked with a predetermined answer. that's hardly a considered view.

Plonker now????....do you abuse everyone with an alternate opinion to yours....??.......

your Barr-Smith Discussion Room logic is very tired......you did not answer all my questions........as I said, reading and comprehension is obviously not a strong point.

 

[beartoo]

Gentlemen, please agree to disagree and cease the personal abuse.

 

[Crow-mosone]

Plonker now????....do you abuse everyone with an alternate opinion to yours....??.......

your Barr-Smith Discussion Room logic is very tired......you did not answer all my questions........as I said, reading and comprehension is obviously not a strong point.

Barr-Smith discussion room? is that a reference to the real world being you and your mates with a few pints in you? Perhaps you feel threatened by a reasoned and intelligent point of view? Shame, I had thought more of you.
Mind you I hadn't thought you'd be the type to cling so tightly to such bitter and blinkered views, and react so childishly when on the backfoot.

I thought I'd answered everyone one of your queries, please feel free to tell me what I have missed? or is that just semantics?

Ps. here's a poser, how did I get into the Barr-Smith with poor reading and comprehension skills?

 

[Mad Dog]

Barr-Smith discussion room? is that a reference to the real world being you and your mates with a few pints in you? Perhaps you feel threatened by a reasoned and intelligent point of view? Shame, I had thought more of you.
Mind you I hadn't thought you'd be the type to cling so tightly to such bitter and blinkered views, and react so childishly when on the backfoot.

I thought I'd answered everyone one of your queries, please feel free to tell me what I have missed? or is that just semantics?

Ps. here's a poser, how did I get into the Barr-Smith with poor reading and comprehension skills?

same way we all did sunshine.......it's just that some of us have greater delusions of self importance than others
Crow-mo.......you are a deadset tosser......am I on the backfoot....??? - am I threatened by intelligent points of view ???...I think your flattering yourself just a tad.....
You are the one that hopped into me first....remember ??? ....but then again it was probably just my turn.....as we've all observed these kinds of episodes between you and most on this board.
anyway...I think we've both wasted enough time on this.

 

[Crow-mosone]

same way we all did sunshine.......it's just that some of us have greater delusions of self importance than others
Crow-mo.......you are a deadset tosser......am I on the backfoot....??? - am I threatened by intelligent points of view ???...I think your flattering yourself just a tad.....
You are the one that hopped into me first....remember ??? ....but then again it was probably just my turn.....as we've all observed these kinds of episodes between you and most on this board.
anyway...I think we've both wasted enough time on this.

Mad dog,

lay off the booze.