Rocca breaks down again

[the_fresh]

If we were last with no hope of playing finals then maybe yes give him a send off game but with us playing for a spot in the top 4 then NO WAY IN HELL!
We have to pick our best 22 players everyweek, not the best 21 and someone playing out their days. Sometimes you have to wonder weather you guys are taking the piss with what you come up with

 

[crazy_ahqmed]

I'm a bit puzzled: I thought he got re-injured before the VFL game on the weekend, hence he didn't play at all, yet Walsh's comments suggest he got hurt during the game. It doesn't make any difference I suppose, but I would like this clarified.

There's a chance I could be completely wrong. My boss was telling me off for something whilst I was trying to listen to Walshy. I missed half of what he said.

 

[Lockyer24]

I wouldn't have picked him in the team regardless, however this it for sure now. Thanks and good luck to the big fella, NFL ?

 

[Col Davies]

his finshed will never play for collingwood again thank god

That's odd Walsh said exactly the opposite today

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I hope he gets back into shape for a farewell game later in the season.

 

[rose jam]

Geoff Walsh explanied on SEN this morning that they deliberately overloaded his achilles knowing that it would get sore for a few weeks. Apparently the plan is to overload his body in the expectation that it will recover from higher efforts so he won't keep getting sore from lesser efforts.
Unfortunately I just get the impression that all those hard years of footy have just hit him. Been a super player for Collingwood, unbelievably exciting player, we should never forget that.

 

[FuManchu]

That's odd Walsh said exactly the opposite today

Thats right, and clubs never go down the path of telling lies. Its a bt like all those fluff pieces from all the players extolling the virtues of all and sundry and how anyone mentioned deserves a place in the team. Problem is, going by those fluff pieces, 38 players would be playing seniors every week.

But, I reckon you'd actually believe what the club told you. Because thats your lot in life.

 

[Krueger]

his finshed will never play for collingwood again thank god

I take the 69 represents your year of birth? Comments like that are made by 10 year olds and not 40 year olds. If your a Collingwood supporter you should hang your head in shame, if not (as I suspect) piss off from our board you troll.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

if he can get fit by the end of the year could be the difference between making up the numbers or being a contender

Rubbish. Years ago yes. But you're kidding yourself if you still think Ant is a big threatening premier forward in the game.

 

[Bloben]

Rubbish. Years ago yes. But you're kidding yourself if you still think Ant is a big threatening premier forward in the game.

I never said he would be a premier forward now. He will never again be able to command a forward line like he used to, being double tagged and still busting packs, taking marks and kicking 80m goals.

Saying that, if he can get fit and string some games together in the VFL he could definitely play an important part alongside our other forwards. He still will demand respect and as I said, he hasn't shrunk at all.

I also said the odds are against him to get fit and prove that he deserves his spot however if his ankles can handle it and he can come in and play a role in September, you would be kidding yourself if you think that wouldn't be a great advantage to us.

 

[FuManchu]

I never said he would be a premier forward now. He will never again be able to command a forward line like he used to, being double tagged and still busting packs, taking marks and kicking 80m goals.

Saying that, if he can get fit and string some games together in the VFL he could definitely play an important part alongside our other forwards. He still will demand respect and as I said, he hasn't shrunk at all.

I also said the odds are against him to get fit and prove that he deserves his spot however if his ankles can handle it and he can come in and play a role in September, you would be kidding yourself if you think that wouldn't be a great advantage to us.

If he has played in the ones this year then the assumption he is fit. The fact that he played a few games, and had little or no impact leads me to believe the game has passed him by.

If MM played him and he wasnt 100% fit, then you would have to question the selection criteria that would see a 32 yo, injury prone player, with little game time and little form in the last 18 months get selected.

So either he was fit for those games, or he wasnt and the selction criteria is seriously flawed.

 

[Bloben]

If he has played in the ones this year then the assumption he is fit. The fact that he played a few games, and had little or no impact leads me to believe the game has passed him by.

If MM played him and he wasnt 100% fit, then you would have to question the selection criteria that would see a 32 yo, injury prone player, with little game time and little form in the last 18 months get selected.

So either he was fit for those games, or he wasnt and the selction criteria is seriously flawed.

This is only my opinion however I honestly believe he wasn't fit and should have played a few games in the VFL first.

IIRC, in 2008 Rocca played round one after having played zero practice matches and dominated with 6 goals. I think that Mick thought Pebbles can handle coming straight into the side without going through the VFL. That was a mistake and I think they realised that which is why he had played recently in the VFL.

Look I'm not stupidly optimistic over Rocca. More than likely we will never see him play in the firsts again which is a sad thing. But I honestly believe that if he can get fit then it won't be for sentiment sake that he would be picked, but due to the fact that he has the physical size and ability to still be a secret weapon in September, not as the sole forward but as an important cog.

 

[FuManchu]

This is only my opinion however I honestly believe he wasn't fit and should have played a few games in the VFL first.

He did play in the VFL before playing seniors, 2 matches IIRC and the second of those he kicked one goal and had 6 kicks, so not exactly setting the world on fire at such a substandard level. Yet he gets a senior gig the following week. You have to question that for starters.

IIRC, in 2008 Rocca played round one after having played zero practice matches and dominated with 6 goals. I think that Mick thought Pebbles can handle coming straight into the side without going through the VFL. That was a mistake and I think they realised that which is why he had played recently in the VFL.

He kicked either 5 or 6 against Freo, but in reality, was that such an achievement? Lets look at him since 2007, 11 games, 73 kicks, 18 goals. He has been out injured or playing at the lower level for near on 30 games. You really have to question his retention last year when he was the top money earner and one of the least performing players, who hadnt produced for a year. Its not like he was 26, he was 31 with a history of soft tisue injuries and given his weight and lack of ability to train at the standard to bring his fitness up, then he was always going to be a liability over being an asset.

Someone stuffed that assesment up. They should have been ruthless, seen that he wasnt going to be what we wanted him to be, or what he once was and made the harsh cut.

Look I'm not stupidly optimistic over Rocca. More than likely we will never see him play in the firsts again which is a sad thing. But I honestly believe that if he can get fit then it won't be for sentiment sake that he would be picked, but due to the fact that he has the physical size and ability to still be a secret weapon in September, not as the sole forward but as an important cog.

I mourned his loss last year, this year I have to endure his never ending quest to struggle at VFL level. I only have so much mourning capacity. I spent his quota a long time ago. Its no good theorising about his potential impact if all things went right. They havent gone right for him for a season and a half.

 

[Pie Legend]

Could be a blessing in disguise, i'm not sure Rocca has a place in the AFL anymore (I would love him to prove me wrong though)

Now the match committee don't feel obligated to bring him in.

 

[twoforjoy]

that's bad news for the big fella. he looks about done and dusted . i think if we make top 4 there is no reason to bring him in - we got there without him. sad though he has been a long time favourite.

 

[mwalker]

That's odd Walsh said exactly the opposite today

He also said Rocca got injured playing in the reserves and I thought he didn;t play last week. I could be wrong though.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Someone stuffed that assesment up. They should have been ruthless, seen that he wasnt going to be what we wanted him to be, or what he once was and made the harsh cut.



I mourned his loss last year, this year I have to endure his never ending quest to struggle at VFL level. I only have so much mourning capacity. I spent his quota a long time ago. Its no good theorising about his potential impact if all things went right. They havent gone right for him for a season and a half.

All your arguments, while valid at face value, could also have equally applied to Simon Prestigiacomo. Or Nathan Buckley in his final year, who came back and made a valuable contribution at the pointy end of the season.

The club did the right thing keeping both Rocca and Presti on the list this year. It hasnt worked with Rocca and probably wont, but it was worth the punt. It wasnt as if he was keeping a youngster out of the list of 38, our list is already very young.

 

[Kirby]

With the injuries he has had I can't possibly see him getting anywhere near fit enough to force his way back in the side barring major injuries to our key forwards.

He was injured all last year (practically) and didn't have a proper pre-season this year and has missed tonnes of games through injury.

He has looked to me to be moving terribly in every game I have seen him in this year and it's only his big heart that keeps him going.

He has been a fantatic player for the club over many years but i just can't see him being in a position to make any meaningful contribution this year. The club is doing the right thing by him by talking him up but in reality I doubt that they think he will play ones again.

It would be an insult to the big man to gift him a game later in the year and a very weak decision by the club if it happens. He has to earn his spot back.

 

[FuManchu]

All your arguments, while valid at face value, could also have equally applied to Simon Prestigiacomo. Or Nathan Buckley in his final year, who came back and made a valuable contribution at the pointy end of the season.

The club did the right thing keeping both Rocca and Presti on the list this year. It hasnt worked with Rocca and probably wont, but it was worth the punt. It wasnt as if he was keeping a youngster out of the list of 38, our list is already very young.

The 600 large he gets could have been used to lure an out of contract player from another club, someone much younger, someone with a more recent history of performance and less prone to on field indiscretions as well.

These decisions have to be made in this day and age of football.

Rocca at age 32 has been the most injury prone player we have had in the senior ranks for some time ( 2004 onwards). I could see the sense in offloading both of them at the end of last year, glad we kept Presti of course, time and time again he proves to be a resiliant underestimated player. But Rocca, his size and career long fitness issues were considerations that the coaching panel gambled on and lost. They didnt have that history of issues with Presti.

At 600 large, I might have taken a more ruthless approach to his tenure.

 

[Bloben]

Don't forget that Rocca is on the veterans list.

Only half of his salary is coming out of our cap and he is only taking up the spot of a rookie.

 

[FuManchu]

Don't forget that Rocca is on the veterans list.

Only half of his salary is coming out of our cap and he is only taking up the spot of a rookie.

Its still 300 that could have been used elsewhere. I know supporters like to hold fond memories of players and shield them from the business like approach that clubs take. But he has had 2 good seasons in the last 5 and I dont think he would be seen as value for money especially given that last year was an indication that his body was going to have ongoing issues. If he had a shoulder injury or an upper body issue, then it wouldnt have been so bad.

But to have a foot injury at his age and his weight and with all the work he , more than most, would have to put in to get back to AFL fitness, placing even more strain on an injured foot, then even blind freddy could see that he was going to be behind the 8 ball in terms of getting right.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

The 600 large he gets could have been used to lure an out of contract player from another club, someone much younger, someone with a more recent history of performance and less prone to on field indiscretions as well.

These decisions have to be made in this day and age of football.

Rocca at age 32 has been the most injury prone player we have had in the senior ranks for some time ( 2004 onwards). I could see the sense in offloading both of them at the end of last year, glad we kept Presti of course, time and time again he proves to be a resiliant underestimated player. But Rocca, his size and career long fitness issues were considerations that the coaching panel gambled on and lost. They didnt have that history of issues with Presti.

Games played in the last 3 years to end of 2008....

Rocca 54
Presti 35

In the last five years

Rocca 72
Presti 67


Career games......

Rocca 241
Presti 208

Sorry, person I dont know who gets offended by the generic term "mate", the numbers dont stack up to your claim. Apart from 2008 where Rocca missed most of the year he barely missed a game in the previous two seasons.

You would have thrown the baby out with the bathwater last year because there were a lot more reasons to delist Presti rather than Rocca.

 

[FuManchu]

Games played in the last 3 years to end of 2008....

Rocca 54
Presti 35

In the last five years

Rocca 72
Presti 67


Career games......

Rocca 241
Presti 208

Sorry mate, the numbers dont stack up to your claim. Apart from 2008 where Rocca missed most of the year he barely missed a game in the previous two seasons.

You would have thrown the baby out with the bathwater last year because there were a lot more reasons to delist Presti rather than Rocca.

Firstly, I am not your mate.

Secondly, Presti has been a better contributor in the last 5 years than Rocca has. Rocca at times thru his injuries and onfield indiscretions has let the team down far more than Presti ever cold have. The structure of the backline was also a lot more stable with the likes of Clement, and Wakes donw there to cover Presti. Rocca was pretty much it for quite a while in terms of forward line structure, given that Tarrant roamed far and wide to get kicksmand Cloke did/does too. Every time Rocca couldnt play, it created far more structural problems.

If you got to the end of 2008, saw that he had 7 out of 8 very average games, he had injury concerns, he always had fitness issues and he wasnt getting any younger, and he was costing a lot of money to produce very little, I reckon it would have been quite an easy decision to cut him.

Presti, at least probably costs less, when he does play is very very consistant.

But it matters little, Rocca most probably will be gone years end and hopefully Presti can get a few more seasons.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

You're right on the first point. Edited.

If you can refer to any quotes you may have made last October that we should definitely keep Presti and definitely delist Rocca I'll concede that you are a good judge.

If not, you're just using hindsight to justify your opinions. Anybody can do that.

The salary is irrelevant, BTW. We have to pay somebody. Whether we pay a veteran too much in his last year or a kid too much before he's achieved anything doesnt affect the list one bit.

And the point about Rocca being more important than Presti because we had more options in defence and less up forward.....what point does that prove??? That we need Rocca?????? That Presti is more dispensable???

 

[MarkT]

Not looking good for Anthony at all. He can’t get fit. He looked very ordinary in the VFL televised game a week or two back. He played a couple of effective games early last year but not many in the last few years. Every set back is a step closer to the door. Not sure what his contract status is. Personally I think we have enough players that will never be better than fringe players in a premiership list to cull first but if Rocca can’t get fit he is a waste of a list spot and a salary. I hope we see a comeback and some form by the end of the H&A season. It would be tough to risk him in the finals without senior lead in matches and that would make it more difficult to keep him on the list in 2010.

After reading a few of the above posts re a Presti comparison I would just add that we never had options for a retired Presti like we do to cover Rocca. We were lost down back last year with out Presti. With a few players back we look more able to cover for Rocca’s absence. Same could be said Rusling.

Rusling is younger but he is also unproven.