Review Rd 9 vs North Melbourne: Post game discussion

[whizkizz]

Versus:

Black (2)
Delaney C (4)
Delaney L (15)
MacMillan (22)
Harper (23)
Atley (25)
Garlett (26)
Wright (40)
Cunnington (43)
Bastinac (43)
Greenwood (44)
Ziebell (52)
Adams (53)

Obviously I've chosen the 20 game barrier because it overstates our youth, but we had 8 players with less than 20 games to their 3.

That definitely instils confidence in the future.

 

[weevil]

Obviously I've chosen the 20 game barrier because it overstates our youth, but we had 8 players with less than 20 games to their 3.

That definitely instils confidence in the future.

And if you wanted to rank the quality of performance of that list of our young players I reckon in most cases it almost exactly aligns to the number of games played.

 

[Last of the Roys]

8 players with less than 20 (or 25) games experience is far too many to be carrying in to any one game.

It would be better to keep that figure down to 5 or 6. North had 5 with less than 25 games, I think Geelong even had 5 or 6 when we played them.


As for the melee charges - I can't really believe that Brown was charged. He was absolutely set upon by a group of 3-4 North players and thrown to the ground. What the hell could he have possibly done to avoid a fine in that circumstance?

 

[royboy2]

Had to laugh at the after match function, Shane Woewodin walked past my Grandfather & I and said "G'day Boys" and kept going.

Our conversation went as follows;

Me: That was Shane Woewodin (Captain obvious)
GF: Yeah and..? (clearly not impressed)
Me: Brownlow medalist, gotta give him that.
GF: Yeah, but he played for Collingwood so **** him

Obviously Shane has a little bit to go to win over some lions fans

 

[lions_4_life]

My first car was one of these (though not this one) and it's still very hard to go past the HQ Holden.

It was my bapou's originally and I bought it from my yiayia after he passed away.

It was in mint condition when I got it in 1980 and I had a lot of great times in it.

I'm not the only greek lions supporter that still exists then after all.

 

[lions_4_life]

8 players with less than 20 (or 25) games experience is far too many to be carrying in to any one game.

It would be better to keep that figure down to 5 or 6. North had 5 with less than 25 games, I think Geelong even had 5 or 6 when we played them.


As for the melee charges - I can't really believe that Brown was charged. He was absolutely set upon by a group of 3-4 North players and thrown to the ground. What the hell could he have possibly done to avoid a fine in that circumstance?

its the afl, what do you expect, you can't even fart on an umpire these days without being fined.

 

[MICKYCONLAN]

Also, the decision should have been reversed. Lions should send a "please explain" to the AFL.

 

[Ceebee]

They went for his face too,not nice.

 

[weevil]

8 players with less than 20 (or 25) games experience is far too many to be carrying in to any one game.

It would be better to keep that figure down to 5 or 6. North had 5 with less than 25 games, I think Geelong even had 5 or 6 when we played them.

So what do we do drop some of the kids and play Buchanan, Stiller and Sheldon?

 

[Last of the Roys]

So what do we do drop some of the kids and play Buchanan, Stiller and Sheldon?

I am not talking about individual players, but the general average level of experience necessary to be competitive most of the time. It is obvious to anyone that the more inexpereinced players you have the more likely you are to put in uncompetitive performances (Gold Coast, GWS...). At the same time you are probably also less likely to get the best development out of those inexperienced players when they are playing in an uncompetitive side.

It is no coincidence that the great teams often seem to have great youngsters coming through. It is far easier to fast-track development when you are in a competitive side that has a lot of experience.

So anyway my basic point is that we should be wary of having too many inexperienced players in our side at any one point in time. This is basically coaching common knowledge the likes of which Leigh Matthews espoused.

As for who we would drop and put in, I understand that it is very difficult but that is why we should be managing our selections more closely in the first place - so it is probably not something that you can implement overnight. Some of our recent injuries (Black and Banfield) have obviously made the process even harder.

However, Longer clearly needs to come out at the moment for Hudson. Yeo may have also been a bridge too far even if he showed some great glimpses in his first game.

Stiller and Sheldon and even Hawksley have to be in strong contention for places in the side. Obviously Beams and Polec are good players that would come under consideration as well, but I am just saying we need to be wary about how many youngsters we have in the team if we want to try to be competitive.

Yeah I have probably been a little hypocritical on this issue (who the hell isn't a bit hypocritical when it comes to discussing football). I would like Beams in the side, but who do we take out (perhaps Bewick). I also want Polkinhorne dropped as well to give him a kick up the ass, but you have to weigh up whether you can bring in someone with experience to cover him for the time being (so perhaps Buchanan or Sheldon getting a game is not as out there as it seems.)

 

[LIONHART]

I am not talking about individual players, but the general average level of experience necessary to be competitive most of the time. It is obvious to anyone that the more inexpereinced players you have the more likely you are to put in uncompetitive performances (Gold Coast, GWS...). At the same time you are probably also less likely to get the best development out of those inexperienced players when they are playing in an uncompetitive side.

It is no coincidence that the great teams often seem to have great youngsters coming through. It is far easier to fast-track development when you are in a competitive side that has a lot of experience.

So anyway my basic point is that we should be wary of having too many inexperienced players in our side at any one point in time. This is basically coaching common knowledge the likes of which Leigh Matthews espoused.

As for who we would drop and put in, I understand that it is very difficult but that is why we should be managing our selections more closely in the first place - so it is probably not something that you can implement overnight. Some of our recent injuries (Black and Banfield) have obviously made the process even harder.

However, Longer clearly needs to come out at the moment for Hudson. Yeo may have also been a bridge too far even if he showed some great glimpses in his first game.

Stiller and Sheldon and even Hawksley have to be in strong contention for places in the side. Obviously Beams and Polec are good players that would come under consideration as well, but I am just saying we need to be wary about how many youngsters we have in the team if we want to try to be competitive.

Yeah I have probably been a little hypocritical on this issue (who the hell isn't a bit hypocritical when it comes to discussing football). I would like Beams in the side, but who do we take out (perhaps Bewick). I also want Polkinhorne dropped as well to give him a kick up the ass, but you have to weigh up whether you can bring in someone with experience to cover him for the time being (so perhaps Buchanan or Sheldon getting a game is not as out there as it seems.)

you make some valid points, but it is difficult to get the balancing act right re : experience. which highlights weevils point above.

your intended inclusions, beames & polec fall into the under 20 games category, which again highlights weevils point of who do you bring in if you want a balance btwn experience & youth.

the bottom line is the only way these kids are going to develop is by giving them game time, & if they have what it takes to make it, the game time needs to be at the highest level, not the micky mouse stuff.

 

[Last of the Roys]

I wouldn't be bringing both Beams and Polec in - I just said they would have to come under consideration along with the others mentioned.

This week I would probably do the following:

OUT - Longer, Yeo, Black, (Polkinghorne?)

IN - Hudson, Stiller, Beams, (Hawksley or Sheldon?)

That would reduce us to 7 players with less than 25 games this week.

Obviously it difficult to get the balance right with injuries to experienced players and how inexperienced our list is. Like I said, you can't implement it overnight, but you can definitely keep it as a priority over a season.

Yeah ultimately the only way for players to get the right experience is to play in the seniors - but we shouldn't necessarily rush an all at once approach because: it will continue to makes us uncompetitive most weeks; and it could definitely backfire in terms of player development.

 

[chopperduck]

LOTR is pretty spot on, people know we have a young team, but I don't think many really realize how young and what impact that is having overall. So many young and new players means less fitness to run out games and the season, less experience both as a player and as performing their role in the team. Your list is in shambles, and there is no easy fix, we simply need to do our best and draft and develop players over the next few seasons until we start getting those 4 & 5 year players.

I think we will see some pretty rapid improvement in our list, but more likely in the 2014 season. Barring major injuries, we will start getting the likes of Rich, Redden, Rocky, Bergs all near 100 games, and players like zorko, Polec, beams and a heap of others could be near 50.

 

[dlanod]

LOTR is pretty spot on, people know we have a young team, but I don't think many really realize how young and what impact that is having overall. So many young and new players means less fitness to run out games and the season, less experience both as a player and as performing their role in the team. Your list is in shambles, and there is no easy fix, we simply need to do our best and draft and develop players over the next few seasons until we start getting those 4 & 5 year players.

I think we will see some pretty rapid improvement in our list, but more likely in the 2014 season. Barring major injuries, we will start getting the likes of Rich, Redden, Rocky, Bergs all near 100 games, and players like zorko, Polec, beams and a heap of others could be near 50.

According to Holmes in this article

''On our list, we have only got six players that have played 100 games or more. So we need to keep this younger group together and to keep developing.''

That really brought back the youth of our team to me.

(Sidenote: we actually have 10, but four - Hudson, Staker, Buchanan and Maguire - played the majority of their games elsewhere so I'm guessing he means "played 100 games for the Lions".)
​