Positives from Round 1 ?

[Cap]

Hey guys great to be back from easter break - 4 days on a houseboat in perfect weather only to be ruined by our ******** poor finishing

I have read most of the posts on this thread and it annoys me that Ben Hart comes up as a positive - we are looking forward to getting new players in and its a positive that one of our oldest defenders was out best ? personally i am so dissapionted at this i would have loved it if he had of been on the bench for most of the game.

2nd doughty was great against the coasters - I'll go out on a limb and say barring injury he will play all games this year !

Our midfiled really lacked another attacking player - If S Thompson is this type of player he needs to be put in against the pies because we really need an attacking midfilder who peppers the goalfront.

Other Positives for me would be Mattner - he seems to be turning into a player who loves to run with the ball - admittaly he stuffs it up sometimes but when he gets it right it nearly always comes off with us going forward quicker.

I though Reilly showed a bit not enough but showed that its there he just needs to improve

I alos saw glimpses of a change it attitude going forward however under pressure we go really wide.

Negatives for me
Mcleod- just didnt get into it
Mcgregor - damn his slowness
Welsh - how many points ? (ok not heaps negative but annoying all the same)
Perrie - see mcleod


hopefully it was just 1st round jitters but losing at home always hurts

 

[drakeyv2]

Positives?

I wont mention Edwards because we all know what he can do.

Mattner was good for a 1/2, Burton looked good when he ran hard & straight & kicked long.

Reily & Rutten were not disgraced.

That's it.

The sooner we bring in Watts, Meesen, VB, Maric & the rest the better. Ready or not they may be good enough. Many of the players we put on the park on Sunday are simply not good enough. We will not move forward as a club until we accept that.

 

[Mad Dog]

keeping an honest, realistic perspective, short of personal bias is.

mindless assessments, without due reference to performance is not helping our future.

credit where credit is due.

mindless assessments - well I'll be sure to check in with your raving style if I need any coaching in that area....

happy for you to disagree - but don't ********ing attack me and judge my opinions as mindless ravings without provocation.......

yeah Crow-mosone - credit where credit is due - his job on Judd on the weekend was good....there you go credit for the game against West Coast on the weekend because it's due.

now - how about fair critical analysis - or "credit where credit is due" to use the buzz words here - of the balance of his career.....

5 years for 51 games.....this is his 6th year........is credit due here ????

Our mission for the next few years is to lift the calibre of our weaker links on the list. My comments about whether Shirley should be in the 22 are about that task - not his performance on Judd which was good.
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 ???

Sure - Shirley is a good depth player - but I refuse to blow sunshine up his arse because he can tag............fact is - the game has moved on these days and taggers need to get a bit of the ball themselves - like Stenglien and Cornes. For 4 qtrs Shirley did not lay 1 tackle !

let me put this in simpler terms - 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???????

 

[Mad Dog]

Chris McDermott was saying yesterday morning that even though Ladhams is a talented crumber who can kick goals and Adelaide are desperate for exactly that, he would be about the 38th, 39th or 40th player that Craig would consider for selection.

He went on to say that he doesn't expect him to get much opportunity, if any, this year and will be very lucky not to be delisted at year end.

There's a bit more than laziness to this IMO, as he would be invaluable around goal.

I've heard certain lifestyle rumours. Has anybody got anything concrete to add here?

....yep ....- but I'm not comfortable posting them here......suffice to say - I'm surprised he still has an association with either AFC or NAFC

 

[dA Crow]

Hmm positives from round 1.... Was happy enough with Hart, McGregor and Bassett down back, all 3 where pretty solid. For once I was actually fairly impressed with Skipworth, pretty much stuck to his job all game. Edwards was up to his normal high standard. Hentschel and Johncock showed us in patches what they can do, we just need them to produce this more during games. Mattner proves he is an excellent half a game player, someone needs to explain to him that he needs to contribute in all four quaters. Burton, got alot of the ball, burnt alot of the ball, his decision making at times is terrible; a prime example of this was his sucessful (in the end) attempt to run the ball out from fullback in the 3rd Quater (My wife even swore at him at that stage !*!*!*!). And good to see Clarke maintain his 1 mark a game stat .
For a first games , against a side this is touted as a premiership favorite I reckon we did okey, what we learn from this game will show where we are going, if anywhere.

 

[Wood_Duck]

worth some thought - he might actually get taken to where the ball is

Are Stiffy or Bode options to tag?

 

[Mad Dog]

Are Stiffy or Bode options to tag?

Stiffy doesn't have the motor - and I'm not sure about Bode...

 

[mymansyd]

Stiffy doesn't have the motor - and I'm not sure about Bode...

Agree.

I think Stiffy is at his best off half-back and as a pinch-hitter in attack.

Bode doesn't have the body strength or discipline to tag IMO. Van Berlo is the one we should be grooming.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Agree.

I think Stiffy is at his best off half-back and as a pinch-hitter in attack.

Bode doesn't have the body strength or discipline to tag IMO. Van Berlo is the one we should be grooming.

Its a tough one because the best taggers in the business are usually in the top 4 or 5 in the clubs B&F (eg Kirk, Stinger). It could be the making of a player that otherwise is one of the last players picked each week.

 

[Wood_Duck]

mindless assessments - well I'll be sure to check in with your raving style if I need any coaching in that area....

happy for you to disagree - but don't ********ing attack me and judge my opinions as mindless ravings without provocation.......

yeah Crow-mosone - credit where credit is due - his job on Judd on the weekend was good....there you go credit for the game against West Coast on the weekend because it's due.

now - how about fair critical analysis - or "credit where credit is due" to use the buzz words here - of the balance of his career.....

5 years for 51 games.....this is his 6th year........is credit due here ????

Our mission for the next few years is to lift the calibre of our weaker links on the list. My comments about whether Shirley should be in the 22 are about that task - not his performance on Judd which was good.
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 ???

Sure - Shirley is a good depth player - but I refuse to blow sunshine up his arse because he can tag............fact is - the game has moved on these days and taggers need to get a bit of the ball themselves - like Stenglien and Cornes. For 4 qtrs Shirley did not lay 1 tackle !

let me put this in simpler terms - 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???????

As I've said elsewhere, a decent tagger will push for B&F votes on a weekly basis. Have to agree with MD on this one.

 

[Mad Dog]

Its a tough one because the best taggers in the business are usually in the top 4 or 5 in the clubs B&F (eg Kirk, Stinger). It could be the making of a player that otherwise is one of the last players picked each week.

Good point there Wood Duck........I would go futher and say that being in the top 4 or 5 in the B&F actually comes before being a decent tagger - not as a result of it........

 

[Crow-mosone]

mindless assessments - well I'll be sure to check in with your raving style if I need any coaching in that area....

happy for you to disagree - but don't ********ing attack me and judge my opinions as mindless ravings without provocation.......

yeah Crow-mosone - credit where credit is due - his job on Judd on the weekend was good....there you go credit for the game against West Coast on the weekend because it's due.

now - how about fair critical analysis - or "credit where credit is due" to use the buzz words here - of the balance of his career.....

5 years for 51 games.....this is his 6th year........is credit due here ????

Our mission for the next few years is to lift the calibre of our weaker links on the list. My comments about whether Shirley should be in the 22 are about that task - not his performance on Judd which was good.
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 ???

Sure - Shirley is a good depth player - but I refuse to blow sunshine up his arse because he can tag............fact is - the game has moved on these days and taggers need to get a bit of the ball themselves - like Stenglien and Cornes. For 4 qtrs Shirley did not lay 1 tackle !

let me put this in simpler terms - 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???????

mad dog, you proved my point 110%
you don't care what he did on the weekend, you only care about your already preconceived opinions. that's mindless assessment.

are you able to explain what the relevance of any other game is, on the positives for round one? - you know the topic of this thread?

Bias - look it up.

.

 

[Crow-mosone]

Good point there Wood Duck........I would go futher and say that being in the top 4 or 5 in the B&F actually comes before being a decent tagger - not as a result of it........

problem is that these are run with players, not taggers.

apples with apples?

 

[Crow-mosone]

Mad dog,

as an aside, if you don't care want to select a player based on historical performance - does that mean the reverse is true? that a player should get a game based on past performance and not current form?

 

[Mad Dog]

mad dog, you proved my point 110%
you don't care what he did on the weekend, you only care about your already preconceived opinions. that's mindless assessment.

are you able to explain what the relevance of any other game is, on the positives for round one? - you know the topic of this thread?

Bias - look it up.

.

as usual Crow-mosone there is no point in trying to talk facts with you. Based on your logic of judging an entire players career on one game, do you expect that Roo and McLeod will be dropped this week ???.........or would you also think that we might just factor in our preconceived ideas about the sort of players Roo and Macca have been over the last few years.....?
Mindless assessments- you're standing in a puddle of it.....

 

[Mad Dog]

problem is that these are run with players, not taggers.

apples with apples?

now you're really starting to be amusing..........so for the record, which are Kirk, Stenglien, and Cornes ????

 

[Wood_Duck]

Good point there Wood Duck........I would go futher and say that being in the top 4 or 5 in the B&F actually comes before being a decent tagger - not as a result of it........

......which is why you don't use a dud player to do the job. It has to be a player that can make the 22 on his own merits rather than just an ability to play ultra defensive football.

 

[Cap]

surely we should be using VB as a tagger ? give the guy a chance to follow the best and see what they do - the only problem i see doing this is if he doesn't do well we leave ourselves open - we can't carry VB and Shirley in the same team !

i would also like to see Kruger played instead of biglands if we are going to use tall forwards - what the point of holding back krugeur we should just see if he is any good

playing an under strength collingwood is going to help him atleast get a step chance

 

[Crow-mosone]

now you're really starting to be amusing..........so for the record, which are Kirk, Stenglien, and Cornes ????

now you're wriggling with soapy platitudes.
all 3 have been run with players. each and every one.

though Kirk & Cornes are moving towards being intiators these days.

 

[Crow-mosone]

as usual Crow-mosone there is no point in trying to talk facts with you. Based on your logic of judging an entire players career on one game, do you expect that Roo and McLeod will be dropped this week ???.........or would you also think that we might just factor in our preconceived ideas about the sort of players Roo and Macca have been over the last few years.....?
Mindless assessments- you're standing in a puddle of it.....

where should we send your ball, to same address as the dummy?

I see you refuse to address the question or the issue, I will take that as an admission that you can't.

this is about the positives, as has been said this is a positive step forward for Shirley. You are only as good as your last game, and his last game gets him another one to build one. Regardless of any petty prejudice. If he fails to build on this positive, then by all means, stone him for all I care. However his performance was a significant positive to be taken from round 1.
the topic, maybe you have heard of it?

A continued reference to your previous dislike for the player is an iron clad admission of bias, why you can't see this I don't know.

introducing roo and macca is an utter relevancy, why don't you just call nazi and make a complete farce of your argument.

whether VB would make a better option, I am not sure. maybe he would, and when he gets his chance if does a better job then let him have the spot. Though I might remind you, Judd would not have a brownlow medal if many people reduced him to that level. At the moment this role is Shirley's to lose.

let's break this down specifically o fact master: let's see:

1) Was he given a job to do? - I say yes.
2) Did he succeed? - Again I say yes
3) Would the coach have been pleased with his game - Again, another certain yes
4)would have polled B&F votes - maybe, given his strict execution of the coaches instructions he must be thereabouts.
5) given the above, what's not to like? FFS. at least answer this one.

 

[Crow-mosone]

......which is why you don't use a dud player to do the job. It has to be a player that can make the 22 on his own merits rather than just an ability to play ultra defensive football.

as has already been explained earlier in this thread, consider it like this:

if Worsfold and Craig were given the chance to remove one player from each side, and play the game with 21 guys only:
Craig naturally chooses Judd to sit out, and if Worsfold said he doesn't want Shirely to play - to quote: that is pants down, laps around the table time.

IF shirley can affect that outcome, he makes the 22 in his own right. every week. and he would for any team in the league.

 

[mymansyd]

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.

 

[Mad Dog]

surely we should be using VB as a tagger ? give the guy a chance to follow the best and see what they do - the only problem i see doing this is if he doesn't do well we leave ourselves open - we can't carry VB and Shirley in the same team !

i would also like to see Kruger played instead of biglands if we are going to use tall forwards - what the point of holding back krugeur we should just see if he is any good

playing an under strength collingwood is going to help him atleast get a step chance

yep - fair enough point Cap......except that Kroogs withdrew from the Glenelg side at the weekend with a back injury....

 

[Mad Dog]

where should we send your ball, to same address as the dummy?
.

...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.

I see you refuse to address the question or the issue, I will take that as an admission that you can't. .

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.

A continued reference to your previous dislike for the player is an iron clad admission of bias, why you can't see this I don't know. .

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

introducing roo and macca is an utter relevancy, .

yes it is isn't it !....

Though I might remind you, Judd would not have a brownlow medal if many people reduced him to that level. .

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

let's break this down specifically o fact master: let's see:

1) Was he given a job to do? - I say yes.
2) Did he succeed? - Again I say yes
3) Would the coach have been pleased with his game - Again, another certain yes
4)would have polled B&F votes - maybe, given his strict execution of the coaches instructions he must be thereabouts.
5) given the above, what's not to like? FFS. at least answer this one.

1)yes
2)yes
3)yes
4)yes
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???????

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 reserve my right to express my opinions on this and other matters, and respect your right to offer an alternative view...AS MANY HAVE. But I do not expect to be labelled as mindless and attacked without provocation for merely stating my view on Shirley's career.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Chris McDermott was saying yesterday morning that even though Ladhams is a talented crumber who can kick goals and Adelaide are desperate for exactly that, he would be about the 38th, 39th or 40th player that Craig would consider for selection.

He went on to say that he doesn't expect him to get much opportunity, if any, this year and will be very lucky not to be delisted at year end.

There's a bit more than laziness to this IMO, as he would be invaluable around goal.

I've heard certain lifestyle rumours. Has anybody got anything concrete to add here?

I have seen him quite a few times out on the turps and acting like top ********. Apart from that I don't have anything more.