Preview R16: Changes vs. Richmond Tigers (after the bye)

[Syd Crow]

It should be Draper as this isn't a particularly relevant position in our lineup (outside of some defensive pressure), and it's also got a low-bar for success. Taylor had his opportunity and failed miserably (to the point he got overtaken twice) last time round.

That said, odds on the merry-go-round continues again next week and we continue to flick through Taylor/Pedlar/Murphy as the year comes to a close.

Taylor obviously not good enough after 16 games huh?

 

[PeterSalt]

I'd expect more rain .. the cloud and rain over the Geelong in the SE corner are heading pretty much straight towards Melbourne




radiojake

http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDR024.loop.shtml#skip

 

[FR0GGY]

I'd expect more rain .. the cloud and rain over the Geelong in the SE corner are heading pretty much straight towards Melbourne

View attachment 2355011

That’s why we’re going in with 3 talls

 

[Golumless]

Any of Draper, Taylor or Dowling would offer more & each can have useful stints in the midfield too.

Taylor this year has already showed he can ably play this role.

Offering midfield stints means nothing in this role. Versatility is a poor substitute for player quality, especially as we have already settled on a 5-man midfield (and potentially, we should be lowering it to a four man unit).

Taylor showed the exact opposite - he couldn't play this role well. If he showed he could, he would still be in the best 22 instead of being displaced by Pedlar and eventually Murphy. As said, he'll likely get another chance, but all it is doing is us replacing a player who is struggling at AFL level with another struggler.

Taylor obviously not good enough after 16 games huh?

Correct, the game count means nothing. Once you are selected, you have to be good enough to hold your role. Taylor failed miserably last time around to the point he got overtaken twice.

If Taylor was good enough, no one would be angry about Murphy being selected in the last three weeks, because Murphy would have never got the chance.

Until we're willing to put Draper here and signal we don't care about performance out of our last selected forward, this position is just going to be shuffling through players who aren't going to be on our list in 2-3 years as we desperately try to get anything out of it.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Offering midfield stints means nothing in this role. Versatility is a poor substitute for player quality.

Taylor showed the exact opposite - he couldn't play this role well. If he showed he could, he would still be in the best 22 instead of being displaced by Pedlar and eventually Murphy. As said, he'll likely get another chance, but all it is doing is us replacing a player who is struggling at AFL level with another struggler.


Correct, the game count means nothing. Once you are selected, you have to be good enough to hold your role. Taylor failed miserably last time around to the point he got overtaken twice.

If Taylor was good enough, no one would be angry about Murphy being selected in the last three weeks, because Murphy would have never got the chance.

Until we're willing to put Draper here and signal we don't care about performance out of our last selected forward, this position is just going to be shuffling through players who aren't going to be on our list in 2-3 years as we desperately try to get anything out of it.

What?

Taylor in his short career has already had better games than Murphy.

Young players tend to be inconsistent though... which is why need to get them to 50 games if they have the talent.

 

[Syd Crow]

Offering midfield stints means nothing in this role. Versatility is a poor substitute for player quality, especially as we have already settled on a 5-man midfield (and potentially, we should be lowering it to a four man unit).

Taylor showed the exact opposite - he couldn't play this role well. If he showed he could, he would still be in the best 22 instead of being displaced by Pedlar and eventually Murphy. As said, he'll likely get another chance, but all it is doing is us replacing a player who is struggling at AFL level with another struggler.


Correct, the game count means nothing. Once you are selected, you have to be good enough to hold your role. Taylor failed miserably last time around to the point he got overtaken twice.

If Taylor was good enough, no one would be angry about Murphy being selected in the last three weeks, because Murphy would have never got the chance.

Until we're willing to put Draper here and signal we don't care about performance out of our last selected forward, this position is just going to be shuffling through players who aren't going to be on our list in 2-3 years as we desperately try to get anything out of it.

Can't take your comments seriously if you think game count means nothing.

 

[GreyCrow]

Taylor is no chance if we think Max forward is a better option

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

It's harsh on these players but most of that cohort have contributed much of the past 5 years at the bottom of the ladder. Our maturing youth is the future. It's time to tear the band aid off and pass the batton.

100 percent

Lachy Murphy playing 100 AFL games sums up why we were down the bottom for so long, not a knock on him, he works his arse off and its a credit to him for getting on a list from where he was but he shouldnt be near our side now.

 

[Scorpus]

The idea Murphy overtook Taylor based on AFL form is laughable

 

[Redline]

100 percent

Lachy Murphy playing 100 AFL games sums up why we were down the bottom for so long, not a knock on him, he works his arse off and its a credit to him for getting on a list from where he was but he shouldnt be near our side now.

I had hoped we would have moved past Murphy.

If you go back 12 months most of us thought to move up the ladder we needed to move on from Jones, Scholl and Murphy. Given the stage of their careers also Crouch and Smith.

We are nearly there. I just don't see any justification to keep playing Lachie.