Preview R10: Changes vs. North Melbourne - Match of the Round

[Bearded Clam]

The Bash Bros playing in the same forward line ?
Interesting

With fog in too.. wouldn't want to be a norf defender tomorrow..

 

[Daniel6]

I thought the club statement said, they would announce his replacement tomorrow at 11:30 am

 

[Peter Doherty]

Didn't Murray train down back today?

Surely we'd have known Thilthorpe wasn't playing by then and who'd come in. Only one light training so who cares but strange

This report says all 3 emergencies trained, Murray trained down back.

They could just be playing funny buggers

We'll find out tomorrow.

 

[Greenfinger]

Our lineup is next level crazy. Nick Murray isn’t a forward. We have such a tall team and the forecast is wet ….. I’m so sick of the stupidity at selection

 

[the big lebowski]

With fog in too.. wouldn't want to be a norf defender tomorrow..

Other than Comben and Parker feel free to smash them all

 

[cmndstab]

Didn't Murray train down back today?

Surely we'd have known Thilthorpe wasn't playing by then and who'd come in. Only one light training so who cares but strange

Extremely strange. Nicks comes out and publicly says that they want to try Murray up forward but that it's tough to do so in the AFL side, so they're going to drop him to the SANFL for his own benefit. Then they train him in defence, before recalling him to the AFL side as a forward.

He's just a simple country boy guys, you're confusing the big lug!

 

[Gtowncrow]

The AFL website has Murray in for him

I can see the big picture of trying to give Nick another string to his bow but given the cupboard being so bare, with 44 players on the list, is this the best option for the team this week?

Should have been a debut or at least Finbarr.

 

[Mattrox]

Players develop at different rates.
Your theory totally disregards this.
How many games did we give to McAndrew and Cook last year ?

You cant say these guys didn't have the talent last year but all of a sudden, do this year.

You are putting blind faith in the coaches ability to project talent when they have shown that it's one of their weak points

How have they shown it's one of their weak points?

When players can handle a lot of games in a row they get played lots of games in a row. Soligo, Michalanney, and Rachele had a lot of games in a row. They developed fine.

Worrell had application concerns but his second crack at it he had 9 games in a row. Then he had injuries keeping him out. Now he's developed just fine.

Each player is unique. The coaches also see the younger players who rack it up in the SANFL play against the others in our side in match sims.

Symes was delisted from us then won a Magarey. People put way too much emphasis on SANFL. It's like the pirate's code, more of a guideline than a rule.

Every single year since I have joined I have heard Player X is going to be asked to be traded and we'll miss out. It virtually never happens. More often the player is delisted and not re-drafted.

Cook always had class and poise. He just didn't get the ball. Obviously the coaches had faith and now he can be in a position to win the ball or recieve the ball he is excelling. Him flourishing now is more of an indication that the way he was developed was the right way. The result's speak for themselves. You cannot say he was developed poorly and the evidence is that he his playing well now. WTF?

Jack Watts was developed poorly.

 

[Southerntakeover]

How have they shown it's one of their weak points?

When players can handle a lot of games in a row they get played lots of games in a row. Soligo, Michalanney, and Rachele had a lot of games in a row. They developed fine.

Worrell had application concerns but his second crack at it he had 9 games in a row. Then he had injuries keeping him out. Now he's developed just fine.

Each player is unique. The coaches also see the younger players who rack it up in the SANFL play against the others in our side in match sims.

Symes was delisted from us then won a Magarey. People put way too much emphasis on SANFL. It's like the pirate's code, more of a guideline than a rule.

Every single year since I have joined I have heard Player X is going to be asked to be traded and we'll miss out. It virtually never happens. More often the player is delisted and not re-drafted.

Cook always had class and poise. He just didn't get the ball. Obviously the coaches had faith and now he can be in a position to win the ball or recieve the ball he is excelling. Him flourishing now is more of an indication that the way he was developed was the right way. The result's speak for themselves. You cannot say he was developed poorly and the evidence is that he his playing well now. WTF?

Jack Watts was developed poorly.

So, the abridged version is: if a player makes it, its because the coaches were exactly right. If a player doesn't make it its because the coaches were exactly right.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Jack Watts was developed poorly.

And you know this how?

Every single year since I have joined I have heard Player X is going to be asked to be traded and we'll miss out. It virtually never happens. More often the player is delisted and not re-drafted.

This is also a falsehood. Players get asked all the time whether they are open to trades as clubs prepare for the offseason. There is also the fact some players privately ask but either they are contracted or out of contract but no club is willing to bite.

 

[Southerntakeover]

In the last 13 years there has been one Crow that we've drafted and turned into an All Australian, and we still have people acting like you can't question our development.

 

[adelaidecrows]

In the last 13 years there has been one Crow that we've drafted and turned into an All Australian, and we still have people acting like you can't question our development.

100%

 

[crows dude]

How have they shown it's one of their weak points?

When players can handle a lot of games in a row they get played lots of games in a row. Soligo, Michalanney, and Rachele had a lot of games in a row. They developed fine.

Worrell had application concerns but his second crack at it he had 9 games in a row. Then he had injuries keeping him out. Now he's developed just fine.

Each player is unique. The coaches also see the younger players who rack it up in the SANFL play against the others in our side in match sims.

Symes was delisted from us then won a Magarey. People put way too much emphasis on SANFL. It's like the pirate's code, more of a guideline than a rule.

Every single year since I have joined I have heard Player X is going to be asked to be traded and we'll miss out. It virtually never happens. More often the player is delisted and not re-drafted.

Cook always had class and poise. He just didn't get the ball. Obviously the coaches had faith and now he can be in a position to win the ball or recieve the ball he is excelling. Him flourishing now is more of an indication that the way he was developed was the right way. The result's speak for themselves. You cannot say he was developed poorly and the evidence is that he his playing well now. WTF?

Jack Watts was developed poorly.

Symes actually won the Magarey in 2012. He was on the AFL list that year. Delisted then won magarey the same week.

 

[Samcro24]

In the last 13 years there has been one Crow that we've drafted and turned into an All Australian, and we still have people acting like you can't question our development.

Hey, not every player you draft is going to be AA

 

[maxlilly]

How have they shown it's one of their weak points?

When players can handle a lot of games in a row they get played lots of games in a row. Soligo, Michalanney, and Rachele had a lot of games in a row. They developed fine.

Worrell had application concerns but his second crack at it he had 9 games in a row. Then he had injuries keeping him out. Now he's developed just fine.

Each player is unique. The coaches also see the younger players who rack it up in the SANFL play against the others in our side in match sims.

Symes was delisted from us then won a Magarey. People put way too much emphasis on SANFL. It's like the pirate's code, more of a guideline than a rule.

Every single year since I have joined I have heard Player X is going to be asked to be traded and we'll miss out. It virtually never happens. More often the player is delisted and not re-drafted.

Cook always had class and poise. He just didn't get the ball. Obviously the coaches had faith and now he can be in a position to win the ball or recieve the ball he is excelling. Him flourishing now is more of an indication that the way he was developed was the right way. The result's speak for themselves. You cannot say he was developed poorly and the evidence is that he his playing well now. WTF?

Jack Watts was developed poorly.

It's a weak point because our coaches selection policy has not been very good.
We continually back in under performing senior players and resist the opportunity to give promising performing young guys a go

How is Soligo and Michalanney development going this year ?
I'm not sure you can use these guys as examples of our development going 'fine'

How's Rachele going in the midfield this year ?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

100%

Thilthorpe i assume.

Walker, Laird, M Crouch... all have been AA in the past decade, but gather they were all recruited more than 13 years ago?

Worrell was robbed last season.

 

[cleanhands]

Hey, not every player you draft is going to be AA

Poor drafting

 

[Southerntakeover]

Thilthorpe i assume.

Walker, Laird, M Crouch... all have been AA in the past decade, but gather they were all recruited more than 13 years ago?

Worrell was robbed last season.

Yes.

Dawson an AA, but developed by Sydney.

Most critically, we've developed no All Australian calibre midfielders in over a decade. Not one. Not even a squadded. Are we really confident that we've not drafted anyone capable in that entire extremely long time?

Do we really think that none of our early draft picks just might have taken another step at the Geelong, Brisbane, Collingwood, Hawthorns of the world? What does Fogarty look like at one of those clubs? Does Rash need five years to get back to being the sort of player he looked like in his very first game?

Are we really so confident we're getting everything right? If so, why? What's the proof of concept?

 

[crowholder]

Nank In for Nick Murray as a late change.

 

[Golumless]

Players develop at different rates.
Your theory totally disregards this.
How many games did we give to McAndrew and Cook last year ?

You cant say these guys didn't have the talent last year but all of a sudden, do this year.

You are putting blind faith in the coaches ability to project talent when they have shown that it's one of their weak points

Yup. It simply doesn't care that players develop at different rates, good or bad. It just plays the hand that's dealt. Fundamentally, you cannot predict how someone develops, so the best course of action is to simply disregard it and let it sort itself out. After all, it's just as likely you destroy a career by playing someone who isn't ready (this is mainly towards players who are not natural hardworkers) as you are to ignore them. It is also a theory that values adversity as it treats the single most important aspect to development is what is done off field. After all, most of these kids have all played 200+ games by the time they enter AFL and nearly to a man they've shown an affinity to the game not possessed by many.

Take Cook for example. The different between now is night and day compared to 2024 where calling him a fringe footballer is being way too kind. You can also tell this improvement comes from his off field work. He's confident enough to crack in when it's his turn, he's fit enough to run the extra km required without being blown up by fatigue etc. At no point could we predict this, and seeing the player he was in 2024, rewarding that lack of effort likely results in a guy who's still a 10 disposal a game winger (as we saw last year, despite some mental improvements). Some kids simply need a firm hand for them to work out if they truly want a career. Some like Rachele don't. They standout from day one and you can see they match it with the drive to get everything right. These are the guys destined to lead clubs and so need the games pumped into them. McAndrew is a guy who's benefitted from circumstance out of his control. These are the guys you just play by ear because the circumstances that make them can also break them if things change.

I say something different about talent. I say I don't particualrly care if they do or dont. I care what they are doing with it. Hence the "are they solving problems". This is a game that is fundamentally about results. Those who do solve problems and actively help on field are worth investing in. Those who don't, aren't at that point.

We really don't get that many calls wrong when it comes to judging players, like how most clubs don't get that many calls wrong. The one worry in this space is if a system/coaching group has formed that can't develop players regularly, but there is scant evidence of that being the case here. In part because fringe players haven't left though? so I don't say this as purely a good thing, just because a smoking gun doesn't exist doesn't mean it can't.

Heck I can only really think of two egregiously wrong calls, getting tunneled visioned on Draper as an inside mid last year; in part because how puss our half forwards were, though even then, our social media footballer in Pedlar got 3 in a final and dropping Thilthorpe in 2022.