Toast Quinton Narkle

[gaz love x]

If a mid is getting 34 touches and continually driving the ball forward, that’s 34 times the opposition isn’t doing it. We accept Danger doing it. Or is only he allowed to do it?

I think that's exactly the point though, Danger and Narkle do have very similar weaknesses so the midfield as a whole has a pretty big weakness if they're both in it. And if you're picking one of them obviously Danger has done a bit more than Narkle at this stage in their careers.

Remember that season where we had Dangerfield, Selwood, Ablett, and Kelly all pulling great numbers through the midfield? And yet we finished 8th because that midfield had next to zero defensive side to it. Next season Ablett moves forward, Selwood's role changes a bit, and the likes of Guthrie and Parfitt come in to add some natural defensive accountability and it looks much better.

There is probably a way to keep Narkle in the side if he keeps playing like the last two weeks but it's definitely harder to do when there is a very similar player in the side. And comparing him to Danger is no knock!

And if anyone wants a comparison it's Charlie Constable. Also has good sides to his game but doesn't fit in our side because he doesn't run. Narkle's positives are better than Constable's at the moment so he's one up in the pecking order. But faces some similar issues.

 

[you pick one]

Narkle also has pretty good disposal unlike Dangerfield. Narkle gets contested ball too. Very rarely is narkle on the end of sideways chip kick Like a Duncan or menegola is. Narkle also can break away from the contest. Narkles strength is not tackling. but does that offset his strenths? Not even remotely. His tackling is not terrible, it’s just not great, and terrible tackling wouldn’t offset those strengths anyway.


the big thing holding narkle back was finding the ball. It does not appear to be holding him back now. Been averaging 13 disposals a half for the past 5 halves of football.

I don't remember Narkle having trouble finding the ball,his disposal particularly by foot was scatter gun,he has rectified that and will play a lot of footy at AFL level from here on in,at what club is up in the air, we might struggle to hold on to him.

 

[Seeds]

I don't remember Narkle having trouble finding the ball,his disposal particularly by foot was scatter gun,he has rectified that and will play a lot of footy at AFL level from here on in,at what club is up in the air, we might struggle to hold on to him.

his disposal count was much lower in 2019 when he played a few games as a mid. Averaged only 14 touches a game. Wasn’t given a lot of opportunity then either. Was by all reports dominating the practise games at the end of the season racking up lots more ball but wasn’t even given a spot in the emergencies to try for the afl side come Finals.

Narkles disposal has always been quite good. I think it’s a strength.

dangers, menegolas, parfitts are all clearly worse then narkles.

 

[Drunkcat]

You are a meathead Seeds

 

[standupand]

his disposal count was much lower in 2019 when he played a few games as a mid. Averaged only 14 touches a game. Wasn’t given a lot of opportunity then either. Was by all reports dominating the practise games at the end of the season racking up lots more ball but wasn’t even given a spot in the emergencies to try for the afl side come Finals.

Narkles disposal has always been quite good. I think it’s a strength.

dangers, menegolas, parfitts are all clearly worse then narkles.

I agree with that assessment. Was also surprised not to see him closer to getting a call up toward the end of last year after he'd recovered from injury. I think the nerve that his omission at the moment is hitting with supporters is that it is very hard to see the reason he's being dropped. It's fine when it's clear that a player needs to go back to vfl to work on this or that. But that's not the case here. We have a player who is starting to show really great signs. Those signs are as much about this year as they are about the long-term future. Players will always have down periods in their careers, but when a young talented player is also at a stage where they're building consistency in their game, it hurts to see them pushed back.

 

[noclashjumpers]

I expect that if Narkle hadn't completely made up his mind as to whether he wanted to leave, it's now set in concrete.

We've seen our 'sell tomorrow for today' philosophy reflected in trade, now we see it playing out during the season at its most stark.

It pains me to say it, but I hope Narkle leaves. Footy careers are short and fickle, so why not play for a club that recognises talent; a club that respects and rewards effort and form. He's young, but you never know when that cliff edge will appear.

The false hope he's been sold will be patently obvious, not only to him, but to every player on the list. The latent message of comfort and immutability is clear for senior players; just as the message that effort and form don't mean anything, is clear to everyone else.

 

[Cattery]

This is embarrassing stuff Seeds.

As well as totally illogical.

 

[Seeds]

As well as totally illogical.

Please explain the poor logic?

 

[Seeds]

I expect that if Narkle hadn't completely made up his mind as to whether he wanted to leave, it's now set in concrete.

We've seen our 'sell tomorrow for today' philosophy reflected in trade, now we see it playing out during the season at its most stark.

It pains me to say it, but I hope Narkle leaves. Footy careers are short and fickle, so why not play for a club that recognises talent; a club that respects and rewards effort and form. He's young, but you never know when that cliff edge will appear.

The false hope he's been sold will be patently obvious, not only to him, but to every player on the list. The latent message of comfort and immutability is clear for senior players; just as the message that effort and form don't mean anything, is clear to everyone else.

It’s not even sell tomorrow for today now. Narkles current form suggests he is in today’s best side let alone tomorrow’s.

this is selling both today and tomorrow.

 

[Seeds]

I expect that if Narkle hadn't completely made up his mind as to whether he wanted to leave, it's now set in concrete.

We've seen our 'sell tomorrow for today' philosophy reflected in trade, now we see it playing out during the season at its most stark.

It pains me to say it, but I hope Narkle leaves. Footy careers are short and fickle, so why not play for a club that recognises talent; a club that respects and rewards effort and form. He's young, but you never know when that cliff edge will appear.

The false hope he's been sold will be patently obvious, not only to him, but to every player on the list. The latent message of comfort and immutability is clear for senior players; just as the message that effort and form don't mean anything, is clear to everyone else.

He has to leave for his career now. This isn’t a case of Ablett choosing 1.6 million a year vs 1 million.

this is now a choice between no career and a career.

 

[Partridge]

no that’s not what I said.

If we start overemphasising minor weaknesses much more then we do for other non indiginous players and do it consistently then we have start asking questions why? Criticise them as any other player when they deserve criticism but criticise them fairly.

the poster I responded to said he is only good at one thing and terrible at everything else. That terrible at everything else is apparently tackles. Tackles being one of 12 features of our game but for narkle this poster dramatically overestimated its role to being equivalent to everything bar one feature of his game. As for what that one feature is Ive got no idea but narkle seems to be very good atleast at 3-4 features of our game.

and on top he claims his tackling is terrible. So terrible he should be dropped for it. It’s frankly not. It’s certainly no strength but it’s not terrible. Again why did no one complain about dalhaus tackling last year? why Is no one complaining about çamerons this year?

Sorry Seeds but if this is what you've think grasping at straws needs a new definition.

Every player on the list gets criticised, and every player gets forensically examined. This boards lives on overemphasising minor weaknesses (for good and bad) - and it's applied to all the players we have, no matter what pigmentation.

this poster is misreporting narkles weakness and dramatically overemphasising the importance of tackling to his game.

this happens far too much for indiginous players at our club.

motlop being a lazy two way runner despite his kms constantly showing he was one of the best runners in the team Even though he had dodgy knees for most of his career.

varcoe copped the same.

supporters constantly talking up the defensive foward pressure efforts of our white players such as Rohan, dalhaus and atkins when the best best defensive foward pressure player in the team was parfitt. Rarely included in the conversation despite being the best of the lot.

christensen also copped the lazy and soft tag Despite his strength being contested ball wins.

cockatoo gets mocked as a dud player despite his career being ruined by injury. No one said that about Paul lynch. We just felt sympathy for his injury plight. Supporters were quick to jump on laziness claims last year for not being selected despite no one seeing the Vfl games. we just assumed he was lazy. Cos well that’s what our biased subconscious tells us.

Could not disagree more. And I'll go through those players one by one:

Motlop - he was a good player, and he could definitely be very lazy on occasion. His bad games were off the scale putrid.
Varcoe - another good player, but got carried in a great team for a long time before producing. It wasn't until 2011 that he actually really contributed in September towards a premiership. Silky talent, but didn't always like it physical. Wasn't the first and won't be the last.
Christensen - can't remember him every being called lazy and soft. He was excellent with us, unfortunately circumstances saw him leave and he never recaptured his best.
Cockatoo - if he's mocked as a dud player it's because he is a dud player. He never came close to justifying the reputation he had on this board. Not remotely. His career was ruined or at the very least curtailed by injury. True. But no more than Vardy, McCarthy, Cowan, Brown off the top of my head. They all copped as much or more s**t than Cockatoo did, even though a couple at least showed way more than he did.

And moving to the current day, there is no way you could say with a straight face that Rohan and Dahlhaus (among others) don't cop major heat on here. Particularly Rohan, and I know because I'm frequently dishing it out. Am I racist against pale white redheads? Kolodjashnij cops s**t all the time, as does Rhys Stanley. What subconscious bias explains that?

indiginous players at our club for too long have been called lazy and poor defensive players even though it doesn’t fit reality whenever we look at stats. And when they happen to be clearly very good at one of these aspects we often ignore it.

i don’t think this is deliberate. It’s almost certainly subconscious. We expect indiginous players to be lazy and poor defensive players so when we do see them put in a weak chasing effort or a soft tackle then we blow it up far too much and think it’s far more representative of their game then it is.

I'd reword it. Lazy and poor defensive players gets criticised or called lazy and poor because they are sometimes - lazy and poor. Dangerfield is a lazy defensive player. Selwood isn't the best. Ablett wasn't in his last couple of years. They can, have been, and were criticised for exactly that.

It's a neat conjuring trick to call it subconscious bias. That way you can never be innocent and you're perpetually guilty. The woke version of original sin. It's complete and total garbage.

 

[Cattery]

You didn’t say it was without evidence. You said it was illogical. Logic doesn’t require evidence. It requires reason. I gave my reason.what was wrong with it?

What was wrong with your reasoning, well just about all of it to be honest. Think Partridge's post sums it up pretty succinctly.

 

[JackFlash]

Anyone who thinks the omission of Narkle is a good thing is off their rocker!

 

[Chocoholic]

There are plenty of sides narkle wouldnt get a game at. Melbourne, port, brisbane, west coast, richmond, probably wouldnt go for him. His your classic good B grade midfielder who is very one dimensional with his game.

Will imagine he is off to a bottok 8 side at end of year like gold coast.

If that is what he wants, club will support him. Was told to look around last year so be happy to do some cheap trade for him.

 

[Sire of Claude]

Just discovered Narkle is out!!!

Appalling decision. I'd far rather watch him play than Dalhouse, just for starters.

The message is that older, mediocre players will be preferred to younger more gifted players.

The bullshit about lack of defensive skills etc is just seeking an explanation after the fact.

 

[patmatcat]

Why bring in so many underdone players at the one time, and dropping players in from, is asking for trouble.

 

[Cursed Cat]

Classic example: everyone remembers Scarlett's toepoke, Ablett's rushed kick, Chapman's goal. How many noticed or celebrated the selfless act of shepherding multiple St Kilda defenders in the goalsquare to set it up?

Varcoe kicking a ‘casual’ goal in the 2011 GF after running the length of the field and impacting 3-4 separate contests..

 

[moond0g]

I understand players play different roles. But surely we could have avoided this. There are plenty of players who have performed more poorly over the past few weeks. and we have plenty of players that can play multiple roles. So the argument that someone like dalhause (or anyone else) plays a different role isn't an entirely good one.

It gives a bad message to young players, not just narkle - If you perform well, we will still drop you.

 

[standupand]

Varcoe kicking a ‘casual’ goal in the 2011 GF after running the length of the field and impacting 3-4 separate contests..

From memory that was the way Anthony Hudson called it on TV wasn't it? It was as though Varcoe had just popped up in the forward line to finish the work, 'casual as you like'.. just happened that most of it was his own work!

 

[thejester]

The message is that older, mediocre players will be preferred to younger more gifted players.

Not sure that explains Sav being kept in and Stanley getting dropped.

 

[Partridge]

Classic example: everyone remembers Scarlett's toepoke, Ablett's rushed kick, Chapman's goal. How many noticed or celebrated the selfless act of shepherding multiple St Kilda defenders in the goalsquare to set it up?

Probably not many. Because the person who actually kicks the goal is more important.

The ball spilt from a pack, Byrnes shovelled it to Varcoe, Varcoe handpassed to Chappy, who kicked the goal. His shepherding was what you would expect for any player, just like Byrnes getting the ball in his direction was. The act that was exceptional was Chapman's goal. That's why - rightly - his act was celebrated more than all the others.

 

[Cursed Cat]

From memory that was the way Anthony Hudson called it on TV wasn't it? It was as though Varcoe had just popped up in the forward line to finish the work, 'casual as you like'.. just happened that most of it was his own work!

yep, terrible call of a classic gut-running GF goal ..

 

[Baudolino]

yep, terrible call of a classic gut-running GF goal ..

So disappointing as IMO it was one of the greatest individual goals in Grand Final history.

 

[caitsith01]

Now when you have a Brownlow winner, Duncan, Guth who is in AA form who can play that role they easily get the spot over him.

People just keep on throwing up this false dichotomy. There are others in the 22 who do not deserve to be there compared to Narkle on exposed form.

 

[Seeds]

yep, terrible call of a classic gut-running GF goal ..

I think the call is one of the reasons it’s not better remembered.

it should be regarded as one of the all time great grand final goals. And the fact it sealed the premiership makes it extra awesome.

but the commentary ruined it.