Robert Shirley

[macca23]

He isn't in great form but he has been solid.

I think the club wants him to get his touch back and get some solid match fitness under his belt before they bring him back in. IMO when the club brings Stevo back in they don't want to drop him again.

I think he will play for us eventually but I doubt it will be this week.

I see it the same way Stiffy.

I have to say though, he's only a patch of the old Stevo at the moment.

You'd have to think this is his last year.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I see it the same way Stiffy.

I have to say though, he's only a patch of the old Stevo at the moment.

You'd have to think this is his last year.

Your sure your not related

 

[Crow-mosone]

Oh Joy

are you sure you're not just trying to distance yourself from your illegitimate lovechild?

 

[Stiffy_18]

are you sure you're not just trying to distance yourself from your illegitimate lovechild?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

are you sure you're not just trying to distance yourself from your illegitimate lovechild?

 

[marvin]

Do you think that West would have had close to 40 possesions tonight if Shirley was taggin him? I sure as hell don't. Had Shirley played tonight West wouldn't have had the influence he did and the outcome of the game might have been different. In 3rd quarter alone West had 17 possesions and ********loads of clearences. Stop West and Darcy doesn't get easy goals.

The last time the Crows played the Bulldogs (Round 13 2004), West got 33 touches with 11 marks and 8 clearances, and snaffled a Brownlow vote. Funnily enough, Shirley played.

As good as Shirley has been in the first 4 games this season, you can't say based on past performances that he would have shut West out of the game.

 

[Jars458]

The last time the Crows played the Bulldogs (Round 13 2004), West got 33 touches with 11 marks and 8 clearances, and snaffled a Brownlow vote. Funnily enough, Shirley played.

As good as Shirley has been in the first 4 games this season, you can't say based on past performances that he would have shut West out of the game.

West is always a good player against us. Not sure whether we have tagged him in the past though. Pretty sure we usually let Roo Goody and Macca go head to head.

 

[marvin]

West is always a good player against us. Not sure whether we have tagged him in the past though. Pretty sure we usually let Roo Goody and Macca go head to head.

I agree that West always has a good game against us.

Given that both Stenglein and Shirley played in that game, you'd have to hope that someone was getting tagged, and West would be the most likely candidate, ahead of Smith and Johnson.

 

[Crow-mosone]

The last time the Crows played the Bulldogs (Round 13 2004), West got 33 touches with 11 marks and 8 clearances, and snaffled a Brownlow vote. Funnily enough, Shirley played.

As good as Shirley has been in the first 4 games this season, you can't say based on past performances that he would have shut West out of the game.

Marvin,

I hear what your saying, but really at the moment that's a meaningless statistic. all we know is that we had 2 potential defensive stoppers in the team, and nothing else. we don't who played on who etc.
the inference is invalid without more information.

 

[marvin]

Marvin,

I hear what your saying, but really at the moment that's a meaningless statistic. all we know is that we had 2 potential defensive stoppers in the team, and nothing else. we don't who played on who etc.
the inference is invalid without more information.

I accept that I don't know for certain who Shirley was playing on in Round 13 last year. However, he has one string to his bow - he's a midfield tagger. It's not a ridiculous inference to assume that he was in the team to tag a midfielder, and the match report, statistics and Brownlow voting show that the one who needed tagging in Round 13 2004 was Scott West.

Obviously every match is different, but based purely on history, Scott West plays well against us (and against most teams for that matter) irrespective of the presence or otherwise of Robert Shirley on the field. To infer that had Shirley played on Saturday night, West wouldn't have had the influence he did (which is what I commented on in the first place) is big leap of faith.

 

[Jars458]

I However, he has one string to his bow

Not true. He is a very handy half back flanker and can play as a normal midfielder as he is hard at it, in and under.

 

[Fergus]

I accept that I don't know for certain who Shirley was playing on in Round 13 last year. However, he has one string to his bow - he's a midfield tagger. It's not a ridiculous inference to assume that he was in the team to tag a midfielder, and the match report, statistics and Brownlow voting show that the one who needed tagging in Round 13 2004 was Scott West.

Obviously every match is different, but based purely on history, Scott West plays well against us (and against most teams for that matter) irrespective of the presence or otherwise of Robert Shirley on the field. To infer that had Shirley played on Saturday night, West wouldn't have had the influence he did (which is what I commented on in the first place) is big leap of faith.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying:

Robert Shirley played last year against the Bulldogs when Scott West played, therefore you can infer that Shirley was in the team to tag a midfielder which was likely to be West given that his statistics show he was a good player for the Bulldogs, despite the fact that Stenglein, our number one tagger at the time, also played.

However, despite the fact that Shirley has minimised the influence of the midfielders he has tagged this year, it's a big leap of faith to infer that had Robert Shirley played against the Bulldogs on Saturday West's influence would have been reduced.

Hmmm - interesting logic.

 

[marvin]

Let me see if I understand what you are saying:

Robert Shirley played last year against the Bulldogs when Scott West played, therefore you can infer that Shirley was in the team to tag a midfielder which was likely to be West given that his statistics show he was a good player for the Bulldogs, despite the fact that Stenglein, our number one tagger at the time, also played.

Two facts are indisputable.

1 - Scott West had a blinder last time out.
2 - My memory is not good enough to remember exactly who played on who last time round.

I speculate that:

3 - if a player from the opposition was having a blinder, and Stenglein as our number one tagger was on him and copping a bath, a coach, even as one as unimaginative as Gary Ayres was at times, would have put the number two tagger on him at some stage. The fact that Stinger only got 5 touches himself, his lowest tally for all of last season, suggests he spent a portion of the match on the bench.

Unless someone with better recollection than me can remember what role Shirley played that day, and that he didn't get a shot at West, I stand by the speculation.

However, despite the fact that Shirley has minimised the influence of the midfielders he has tagged this year, it's a big leap of faith to infer that had Robert Shirley played against the Bulldogs on Saturday West's influence would have been reduced.

Yep.

Duncan Kellaway used to give Nathan Buckley kittens, but struggled with Andrew McLeod.
Tyson Stenglein could never keep Ben Cousins quiet.
Brett Kirk seems to do consistently well on Mark Ricciuto.
Robert Shirley is Chris Judd's Daddy and has done a number on Camporeale a few times.

Some people just match up well, and some don't.

Assuming that Shirley has no track record of playing on West, all we can do is draw a line through recent form. Apart from Judd, Shirley has played on Burns (who's struggling), Francou (who's not up to the pace at the moment) and Maxfield (who's going worse than Burns) in 2005. Good scalps, not great.

I'd be much happier to project that he would have done well against Scott West had his form line read Judd-Licuria-K Cornes-Kirk rather than Judd-Burns-Francou-Maxfield.

He's our best tagger, but that doesn't make him a great tagger, and I've got no basis for confidence that he would have had any significant impact on West last week.

 

[beartoo]

The jury is still out on Shirley. He's looked good when he's played this year, and I'm hoping he continues with his current form.
Good on him and more power to his boot if he can.

 

[Crow-mosone]

I accept that I don't know for certain who Shirley was playing on in Round 13 last year. However, he has one string to his bow - he's a midfield tagger. It's not a ridiculous inference to assume that he was in the team to tag a midfielder, and the match report, statistics and Brownlow voting show that the one who needed tagging in Round 13 2004 was Scott West.

Obviously every match is different, but based purely on history, Scott West plays well against us (and against most teams for that matter) irrespective of the presence or otherwise of Robert Shirley on the field. To infer that had Shirley played on Saturday night, West wouldn't have had the influence he did (which is what I commented on in the first place) is big leap of faith.

no marvin, sorry you're dealing in fantasy land.
NO inference can be made based on this earlier game.
if you don't the matchups, you don't know anything about this game - end of.

 

[Crow-mosone]

Two facts are indisputable.

1 - Scott West had a blinder last time out.
2 - My memory is not good enough to remember exactly who played on who last time round.

I speculate that:

3 - if a player from the opposition was having a blinder, and Stenglein as our number one tagger was on him and copping a bath, a coach, even as one as unimaginative as Gary Ayres was at times, would have put the number two tagger on him at some stage. The fact that Stinger only got 5 touches himself, his lowest tally for all of last season, suggests he spent a portion of the match on the bench.

Unless someone with better recollection than me can remember what role Shirley played that day, and that he didn't get a shot at West, I stand by the speculation.



Yep.

Duncan Kellaway used to give Nathan Buckley kittens, but struggled with Andrew McLeod.
Tyson Stenglein could never keep Ben Cousins quiet.
Brett Kirk seems to do consistently well on Mark Ricciuto.
Robert Shirley is Chris Judd's Daddy and has done a number on Camporeale a few times.

Some people just match up well, and some don't.

Assuming that Shirley has no track record of playing on West, all we can do is draw a line through recent form. Apart from Judd, Shirley has played on Burns (who's struggling), Francou (who's not up to the pace at the moment) and Maxfield (who's going worse than Burns) in 2005. Good scalps, not great.

I'd be much happier to project that he would have done well against Scott West had his form line read Judd-Licuria-K Cornes-Kirk rather than Judd-Burns-Francou-Maxfield.

He's our best tagger, but that doesn't make him a great tagger, and I've got no basis for confidence that he would have had any significant impact on West last week.

Marvin,
quit while you're behind. you are making stuff up, and trying to imply logically off the back of that. Just accept you do not have the imformation to make the point you desperately want to make. Sorry, that's the way it is. If you don't know, guess what? you don't know.

 

[just maybe]

Duncan Kellaway used to give Nathan Buckley kittens, but struggled with Andrew McLeod.
Tyson Stenglein could never keep Ben Cousins quiet.
Brett Kirk seems to do consistently well on Mark Ricciuto.
Robert Shirley is Chris Judd's Daddy and has done a number on Camporeale a few times.

Some people just match up well, and some don't.

Assuming that Shirley has no track record of playing on West, all we can do is draw a line through recent form. Apart from Judd, Shirley has played on Burns (who's struggling), Francou (who's not up to the pace at the moment) and Maxfield (who's going worse than Burns) in 2005. Good scalps, not great.

Funny you use a double standard there. Talking about how some people match up well, you should note that Scott Burns has regularly been a thorn in the side of the Crows even when in bad form - he usually plays well against us.

So for him to have no impact is a credit to Shirley.

The argument works both ways.

 

[macca23]

Two facts are indisputable.

1 - Scott West had a blinder last time out.
2 - My memory is not good enough to remember exactly who played on who last time round.

I speculate that:

3 - if a player from the opposition was having a blinder, and Stenglein as our number one tagger was on him and copping a bath, a coach, even as one as unimaginative as Gary Ayres was at times, would have put the number two tagger on him at some stage. The fact that Stinger only got 5 touches himself, his lowest tally for all of last season, suggests he spent a portion of the match on the bench.

Unless someone with better recollection than me can remember what role Shirley played that day, and that he didn't get a shot at West, I stand by the speculation.



Yep.

Duncan Kellaway used to give Nathan Buckley kittens, but struggled with Andrew McLeod.
Tyson Stenglein could never keep Ben Cousins quiet.
Brett Kirk seems to do consistently well on Mark Ricciuto.
Robert Shirley is Chris Judd's Daddy and has done a number on Camporeale a few times.

Some people just match up well, and some don't.

Assuming that Shirley has no track record of playing on West, all we can do is draw a line through recent form. Apart from Judd, Shirley has played on Burns (who's struggling), Francou (who's not up to the pace at the moment) and Maxfield (who's going worse than Burns) in 2005. Good scalps, not great.

I'd be much happier to project that he would have done well against Scott West had his form line read Judd-Licuria-K Cornes-Kirk rather than Judd-Burns-Francou-Maxfield.

He's our best tagger, but that doesn't make him a great tagger, and I've got no basis for confidence that he would have had any significant impact on West last week.

The only facts in this presentation are highlighted above.

The rest of it is reads like a Rucci article.