Soft players

cleomenes

Club Legend
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Posts
1,442
Likes
1,946
Location
Hobart
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #1
Having watched Brett Lee's brutal rebuttal of Piers Morgan's criticism of the courage of England's batsmen, I am moved to question our right as posters to question the hardness of our AFL players. Morgan showed that he was unwilling to stand and play the bowling he abused the English players of handling badly. (none of them stepped away). Would we be willing to keep our eyes on the ball as Jonathan Brown bore down on us with murder in his eye. Unless we have done it, perhaps we should keep quiet on this matter.
Players like Loney and Didak, heavily criticised on these pages, never backed off, but played to give the team the best use of their skills. This meant keeping their feet. Daicos, who played the same way, if somewhat better, escapes the criticism. I don't believe that there are any soft players taking the field for AFL clubs. Thoughts?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jonbe54

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Posts
14,019
Likes
8,218
Location
Rural paradise
AFL Club
Collingwood
#3
Having watched Brett Lee's brutal rebuttal of Piers Morgan's criticism of the courage of England's batsmen, I am moved to question our right as posters to question the hardness of our AFL players. Morgan showed that he was unwilling to stand and play the bowling he abused the English players of handling badly. (none of them stepped away). Would we be willing to keep our eyes on the ball as Jonathan Brown bore down on us with murder in his eye. Unless we have done it, perhaps we should keep quiet on this matter.
Players like Loney and Didak, heavily criticised on these pages, never backed off, but played to give the team the best use of their skills. This meant keeping their feet. Daicos, who played the same way, if somewhat better, escapes the criticism. I don't believe that there are any soft players taking the field for AFL clubs. Thoughts?
There simply aren't enough 'likes' on the planet for this OP. Well posted !!! Too many armchair heroes on these boards willing to tear into a player whilst hiding behind their keyboard and the comfort of their living rooms.

Let those same hereoes train 4 nights a week after work in the freezing cold or the pitiless sun for years to get a chance at the big time and see how tough they talk, let them run endless patterns all match to give their in and under team mates a worthwhile target for an outlet handpass or chip with only a few stats to show for their exhausting all out efforts.

Better yet let all our keyboard heroes go to the coaching staff and tell them how p1ssweak they believe Joe Bloggs is because he doesn't put his body on the line at every opportunity. They will be laughed off the club precinct - if not knuckled on the spot for their effrontery .
 

Baird

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Posts
9,796
Likes
13,232
AFL Club
West Coast
#4
Jonbe is absolutely right, too many "armchair heroes" who think if you're not a bash and crash mid (Ball, Boyd Sewell etc) then you're soft :rolleyes:
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Posts
2,242
Likes
1,423
AFL Club
Collingwood
#5
It's a bit of a discussion killer to accuse posters in advance of hiding behind their keyboards if they dare to question a player's hardness. Players are quick to let others know if they have shirked a contest on the ground. Why shouldn't posters have the same right to comment on a player who they believe lacks physical commitment at the contest?

As for the argument that players train in the hot sun and freezing cold, let's remember that most are living their dream of playing AFL footy. They are young and fit, earn excellent money and don't have to work a second job anymore. Most of us keyboard experts would gladly swap places with them.

If posters thought that Lonie could have gone harder than he did, so obviously did the club when he was delisted. Didak was criticised more for his lack of defensive pressure rather than lack of courage. As for Daicos, I can't recall anyone calling him soft, except maybe for the OP.

What is the point of initiating threads like this if you kill off discussion by labeling anyone who disagrees with your premise as keyboard heroes, or intimating they'd get a knuckle sandwich if they dared suggest to a coach that a player might not be as courageous as was hoped.
 

Robroy22

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Posts
4,770
Likes
7,630
Location
Jindabyne
AFL Club
Collingwood
#6
This is sweet music to my ears. Let the armchair critics remember these themes before then "pen" their next load of codswallop.
 

Maggie5

Spec Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Posts
35,121
Likes
31,779
Location
Victoria
AFL Club
Collingwood
Moderator #7
Okay here I go,,, they only time I thought a player was "soft" was:
Craig Starcevich. I thought he was very talented but didn't go in hard enough but I almost had to eat my words in the grand final and if he didn't get hit was surely going to win the Norm Smith Medal.
 

jonbe54

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Posts
14,019
Likes
8,218
Location
Rural paradise
AFL Club
Collingwood
#8
It's a bit of a discussion killer to accuse posters in advance of hiding behind their keyboards if they dare to question a player's hardness. Players are quick to let others know if they have shirked a contest on the ground. Why shouldn't posters have the same right to comment on a player who they believe lacks physical commitment at the contest?

As for the argument that players train in the hot sun and freezing cold, let's remember that most are living their dream of playing AFL footy. They are young and fit, earn excellent money and don't have to work a second job anymore. Most of us keyboard experts would gladly swap places with them.

If posters thought that Lonie could have gone harder than he did, so obviously did the club when he was delisted. Didak was criticised more for his lack of defensive pressure rather than lack of courage. As for Daicos, I can't recall anyone calling him soft, accept maybe for the OP.

What is the point of initiating threads like this if you kill off discussion by labeling anyone who disagrees with your premise as keyboard heroes, or intimating they'd get a knuckle sandwich if they dared suggest to a coach that a player might not be as courageous as was hoped.
Do you imagine players are all drafted for their 'courage'?

Some players are drafted specifically because they can stay free of trouble and congestion, they are needed and badly by every footy team at every level otherwise the Luke Balls of this world have their courage wasted though turnovers because some few 'soft' blokes weren't outside the pack running patterns as specifically instructed by coaches.

The days of John Nicholls and his dinoasur like are long past, today's players are athletes and precisionists in comparison to Johno (no disrepect intended). The Luke Balls and Dayne Beams of our team deserve tremendous respect and honour for their commitment to the contested ball to win it out for their team mates - in fact Luke is probably my favourite player in the culb because of this.

BUT

The outside players cop the sharp end of the pineapple here far too regularly and its grossly unfair. They offer the vehicle by which the hard work of the ball winner can come to fruition, but just let them sidestep one contest in order to run a pattern so that their team mates have an option and they are flamed without mercy.

Such unjustified attacks are not what I see as football supporting.

I stand by my opinion without reservation.

And I value your opinion as a fellow supporter.
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Posts
2,242
Likes
1,423
AFL Club
Collingwood
#9
Okay here I go,,, they only time I thought a player was "soft" was:
Craig Starcevich. I thought he was very talented but didn't go in hard enough but I almost had to eat my words in the grand final and if he didn't get hit was surely going to win the Norm Smith Medal.
Craig Starcevich is an excellent example. He was one of our best link players in that match, which explains why he was taken out of play by the opposition. He was probably regarded as 'soft' because his size and height suggested a CHF rather than the flanker that he became.
 

DaVe86

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Posts
9,493
Likes
8,926
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
collingwood
#10
I think any one who plays AFL is pretty courageous. It is a brutal sport and requires absolute committment. You need to be strong, yet an endurance athlete...whilst being vulnerable to a knock from anywhere at any time. You need 360 degrees of peripheral vision.

But there are those that are just tougher and more willing to get their hands dirty. These players will always be the best players in the game. Then there are the softer players who prefer to stay outside and probably wouldn't back into a pack as hard as others.

I don't blame them one bit, but at the end of the day it is a dog eat dog world and there is no where to hide if you shirk a contest.

I do believe there is crazy courage...which just about borderlines on the ridiculous. These sort of players just open themselves up for injury. I think the best players know when to go and when not to go. There are occassions in a game where it is alright to stay out...and there are other times where it is your time and you just have to go. It is the nature of the game.

I don't have that element of courage in me, and that's why I'm not a footballer. But that said I doubt many of the footballers would've coped with 7 years of study and 10+ hours in an office all day. Each field requires different levels of committment, and for footballers it is a requirement to train and play regardless of weather, injury etc. Sure their committment outweighs what I do, but they do get much more than I do as well.

So I don't believe there are any wimps or cowards out there, but the fact is that there are softer players. There is no denying that. A soft footballer is probably tougher than 95% of the population, but on a footy field, level of bravery is at a totally different level.
 

Maggie5

Spec Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Posts
35,121
Likes
31,779
Location
Victoria
AFL Club
Collingwood
Moderator #11
Craig Starcevich is an excellent example. He was one of our best link players in that match, which explains why he was taken out of play by the opposition. He was probably regarded as 'soft' because his size and height suggested a CHF rather than the flanker that he became.
True but on reflection, I think that I had that opinion because my favourite players were/are the Stan Magro, Tony Francis, Tony Shaw, Didak and even Blair type. Very little (no pun intended) in the way of skills and physique but make up for it in mongrel. Maybe I was a bit harsh.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jonbe54

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Posts
14,019
Likes
8,218
Location
Rural paradise
AFL Club
Collingwood
#12
I think any one who plays AFL is pretty courageous. It is a brutal sport and requires absolute committment. You need to be strong, yet an endurance athlete...whilst being vulnerable to a knock from anywhere at any time. You need 360 degrees of peripheral vision.

But there are those that are just tougher and more willing to get their hands dirty. These players will always be the best players in the game. Then there are the softer players who prefer to stay outside and probably wouldn't back into a pack as hard as others.

I don't blame them one bit, but at the end of the day it is a dog eat dog world and there is no where to hide if you shirk a contest.

I do believe there is crazy courage...which just about borderlines on the ridiculous. These sort of players just open themselves up for injury. I think the best players know when to go and when not to go. There are occassions in a game where it is alright to stay out...and there are other times where it is your time and you just have to go. It is the nature of the game.

I don't have that element of courage in me, and that's why I'm not a footballer. But that said I doubt many of the footballers would've coped with 7 years of study and 10+ hours in an office all day. Each field requires different levels of committment, and for footballers it is a requirement to train and play regardless of weather, injury etc. Sure their committment outweighs what I do, but they do get much more than I do as well.

So I don't believe there are any wimps or cowards out there, but the fact is that there are softer players. There is no denying that. A soft footballer is probably tougher than 95% of the population, but on a footy field, level of bravery is at a totally different level.
I don't think anyone with a functioning frontal lobe would deny there are harder and softer players, the key is the context in which the label of soft is applied, is it applied as a description or comparison or is it applied to denigrate and belittle?

That's the key I suppose.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Posts
293
Likes
53
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
#13
I think most would accept your "a mile in their shoes" point and there is definitely merit in a team containing multiple types with various skill sets. Didak always did his best work on the outside and in a similar vein, I would prefer to see Pendlebury - for all his silky ability in congestion - operating a step away from the coal face given his ability to turn a metre of space into a paddock (for himself or a team mate).

At the same time, it is becoming more and more difficult to carry entirely outside players in today's game, owing to how teams push numbers to the contest through the middle and particularly within the defensive half of the ground. Forward pressure is going to remain a big factor, although I do find myself a little torn in this regard since I have felt at times that too much emphasis is placed on what a player does without the ball as opposed to what he can do with it. Ultimately though, space becomes a rare commodity when the whips start cracking so whilst you need outside speed and class, preferably you'll find this in players who will also work hard defensively and go when it is their turn.

In 2010 Didak did his bit defensively. He didn't have to be sticking bone crunching tackles but just through sticking with his man in transition or getting into the opposition's face by way of corralling he played a part in our press. He was never the strongest over the ball, but I think he suffered more from losing a yard or more of pace along with depth in his kicking than anything else.

You'll always need outside types, even the hyper-defensive Ross Lyon squandered a first round selection to bring some speed into the side via Lovett and I suspect is ruing once more lacking a little more class and run on the outside in light of his most recent premiership near miss -- particularly when the game started opening up.

Given how well players are compensated these days, combined with the investment in both money and perhaps more importantly emotion that fans put in, I don't think it is unreasonable for those in the stands to express concern or even frustration at times when players fall short in either work rate or courage. I'm not one to write players off for rare or isolated incidents, but that's not to say that a player lacking something defensively isn't a valid talking point.
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Posts
2,242
Likes
1,423
AFL Club
Collingwood
#14
True but on reflection, I think that I had that opinion because my favourite players were/are the Stan Magro, Tony Francis, Tony Shaw, Didak and even Blair type. Very little (no pun intended) in the way of skills and physique but make up for it in mongrel. Maybe I was a bit harsh.
I appreciated Starcevich for what he was, not what he might have been if he was able to play a key position role. As Jonbe54 and Dave86 said, there are players who are better suited to the hard stuff. Starcevich gained most of his possessions as a mobile flanker. I'd have liked to see him take pack marks, but he played well when it mattered most in a grand final. That is the major memory I have of Craig, along with the really funny Timmy from Thomastown calls in the Coodabeens. If Starcevich had been a tough CHF, Timmy from Thomastown would never have existed.
 

jonbe54

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Posts
14,019
Likes
8,218
Location
Rural paradise
AFL Club
Collingwood
#15
I think most would accept your "a mile in their shoes" point and there is definitely merit in a team containing multiple types with various skill sets. Didak always did his best work on the outside and in a similar vein, I would prefer to see Pendlebury - for all his silky ability in congestion - operating a step away from the coal face given his ability to turn a metre of space into a paddock (for himself or a team mate).

At the same time, it is becoming more and more difficult to carry entirely outside players in today's game, owing to how teams push numbers to the contest through the middle and particularly within the defensive half of the ground. Forward pressure is going to remain a big factor, although I do find myself a little torn in this regard since I have felt at times that too much emphasis is placed on what a player does without the ball as opposed to what he can do with it. Ultimately though, space becomes a rare commodity when the whips start cracking so whilst you need outside speed and class, preferably you'll find this in players who will also work hard defensively and go when it is their turn.

In 2010 Didak did his bit defensively. He didn't have to be sticking bone crunching tackles but just through sticking with his man in transition or getting into the opposition's face by way of corralling he played a part in our press. He was never the strongest over the ball, but I think he suffered more from losing a yard or more of pace along with depth in his kicking than anything else.

You'll always need outside types, even the hyper-defensive Ross Lyon squandered a first round selection to bring some speed into the side via Lovett and I suspect is ruing once more lacking a little more class and run on the outside in light of his most recent premiership near miss -- particularly when the game started opening up.

Given how well players are compensated these days, combined with the investment in both money and perhaps more importantly emotion that fans put in, I don't think it is unreasonable for those in the stands to express concern or even frustration at times when players fall short in either work rate or courage. I'm not one to write players off for rare or isolated incidents, but that's not to say that a player lacking something defensively isn't a valid talking point.
I don't think any player is above criticism for as you point out they are well compensated and have every facility its just the casual 'soft and useless' comments applied to a player who is in the side to provide speed and disposal that make me raise my eyes to heaven and pray for patience and forebearance myself :)
 

legendstatus

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Posts
6,513
Likes
4,947
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Victory
#19
Regardless if they duck away or go head first for the ball, it's a tough game and you need to be brave to play it.

Put yourself in their shoes and see how you react.

One act of ducking away doesn't make you soft.

If you dodge a bullet does this mean you are soft? Would Brown take one in the head because he thinks he needs to? Taking one in the head on the footy field could result in death or as we have seen, permanent damage.

There isn't any soft players out there, just some that are more risk takers than others,


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Posts
293
Likes
53
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
#20
I don't think any player is above criticism for as you point out they are well compensated and have every facility its just the casual 'soft and useless' comments applied to a player who is in the side to provide speed and disposal that make me raise my eyes to heaven and pray for patience and forebearance myself :)

Completely agree with you here, not a fan of that either.
 

MyManLynch

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Posts
7,478
Likes
9,715
Location
Singapore
AFL Club
Collingwood
#21
I don't think any player is above criticism for as you point out they are well compensated and have every facility its just the casual 'soft and useless' comments applied to a player who is in the side to provide speed and disposal that make me raise my eyes to heaven and pray for patience and forebearance myself :)
Agree. I never use the terms 'soft' or 'spud', they are insulting to the player & our game.
 

DWil6

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Posts
6,507
Likes
3,180
Location
Rowville
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Newcastle Premier League
#24
I'm not the type to insult any of our players but I agree with others that the right to claim some players as soft is totally justified. Just as we compare foot skills. "Sinclair is a bad kick". Just as we compare marking skills. "Dawes can't mark above his head". Just as we compare pace "Ball is not fast". We have all heard these claims and the examples go on.
Is this not a forum where people can espouse their opinion? I doubt there is a player going around that is less brave in a contest than I and as such, I have never claimed anyone as soft. But I fail to see the issue with others doing so. If we can't give opinions on players this forum is quickly going to run out of steam.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

jonbe54

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Posts
14,019
Likes
8,218
Location
Rural paradise
AFL Club
Collingwood
#25
I'm not the type to insult any of our players but I agree with others that the right to claim some players as soft is totally justified. Just as we compare foot skills. "Sinclair is a bad kick". Just as we compare marking skills. "Dawes can't mark above his head". Just as we compare pace "Ball is not fast". We have all heard these claims and the examples go on.
Is this not a forum where people can espouse their opinion? I doubt there is a player going around that is less brave in a contest than I and as such, I have never claimed anyone as soft. But I fail to see the issue with others doing so. If we can't give opinions on players this forum is quickly going to run out of steam.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Its not the descriptive 'soft' but the 'soft and uselss' type description that I find totally insupportable DW you can generally tell from the context of the post body or if its a short throw away line unsupported by any factual data or even observed date that the poster is generally one of those who worship head to head battles and despise anyone who doesn't.

I love a tough player myself, the more ordinary skilled ones especially of the type that Tony Shaw exemplified. Even Johnno Brown who has been know to give out quite a few 'cheapies' has always been first to front up and cop it on the chin and I love that in a player.

BUT

No player in our team deserves the belief that they are soft and uselss, some are 'soft' outside players and others are inclined to eschew the contest in favour of providing an option. So long as they support their team mates when required and play to team orders I have no problem with them.
 
Top Bottom