Roast Vent Here

[E Shed]

I think we'd actually be more than ok if we'd done the first part, and still got Jackson.

Given the age profile of our list there's no way we should be under cap pressure

Yeah that works too. I just love the idea of having our first pick to use this year on a Rachelle/Elliot/whatever absolutely gun small or medium forward. Just one elite player for the forward half to come up under Walters cause we got nothing since Sturt is obviously not rated.

Amiss looks good, Freddy continues to improve, Shultz is ok, Treacy unknown really, Switta more a mid-forward and then a whole bunch of meh.

It’s not even close to a forward setup that can do damage in September & I’m not sure Jackson is the answer.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

Bell is an issue, but recruiting is not in my opinion, not in the drafting we do anyway.

The Jackson trade will pay off, I couldn't be surer of that. The price we paid, according to those in the game doing it for a living, was fair. The unders Bell got on Acres, Tucker and logue is the issue from last year, not what we paid for Jackson. If we had a coach who could use the list the angst about the pick we gave for Jackson would not be an issue.

This week yet another prime example of a coach who has no clue on the team he needs to execute a game plane. His clear lack of regard towards Sturt and Treacy and his ridiculous hanging on to Banfield is now just plain disgusting.

Yes I know Treacy is playing this week, that's good. But he's in as a big, in a f***king rainstorm with high winds. Great call JL2. Really giving the kid a chance. EShed and I (amongst others) predicted Banfield staying and Sturt going and it came off. Bringing in Treacy now is something to enjoy but I will bet my favourite Dockers beanie on the fact that he will struggle in the conditions and the gameplan and get tossed next week. At which point Corbett will likely come in and Sturt and Treacy will be back in the 2's.

Also to toss a big body in Brodie out in the expected conditions beggars belief.

Our coach clearly has an ego and/or footy IQ issue when it comes to selections. It's no longer opinion, history and performance have made those opinions facts and the fact Longmuir is ignoring them is a weak willed adherence to a failed idea that his favourite binky adds to our performance.

Rant over and I won't choke up the other threads with it.

Enjoy the game folks, hopefully we go well and I look like an idiot this time next week.

 

[Dockeroo]

We will probably beat a tanking hawks and Banfield will kick a few Joe the goose goals in a victory and that’s it - he’s there for a month then no matter how horrible he plays against Geelong or Sydney or any of those other actual decent sides in the following weeks.

Meanwhile sturt will probably pick up a niggly injury down at peel in that same timeframe.

Wtf is Fyfe doing as the sub too? What are we going to do - bring him on for Amiss and Treacy at 3QT? Laughable.

Get stuffed JL

 

[wakojako]

We will probably beat a tanking hawks and Banfield will kick a few Joe the goose goals in a victory and that’s it - he’s there for a month then no matter how horrible he plays against Geelong or Sydney or any of those other actual decent sides in the following weeks.

Meanwhile sturt will probably pick up a niggly injury down at peel in that same timeframe.

Wtf is Fyfe doing as the sub too? What are we going to do - bring him on for Amiss and Treacy at 3QT? Laughable.

Get stuffed JL

When his son wins a brownlow in purple, I expect an apology letter to JLo.

 

[Footskill]

We will probably beat a tanking hawks and Banfield will kick a few Joe the goose goals in a victory and that’s it - he’s there for a month then no matter how horrible he plays against Geelong or Sydney or any of those other actual decent sides in the following weeks.

Meanwhile sturt will probably pick up a niggly injury down at peel in that same timeframe.

Wtf is Fyfe doing as the sub too? What are we going to do - bring him on for Amiss and Treacy at 3QT? Laughable.

Get stuffed JL

Sturt is injury prone. Can't wrap him up in cotton wool if he isn't playing for Freo lol

 

[King Huskii]

In hindsight the last trade period is looking like a complete screwup.
We were a better team last year. If we’d kept Logue & Acres and paid them with what we’re giving Jackson plus kept the draft picks we’d actually be in a much better position to fill out our list build in this draft.
Should have passed on O’Meara too.
As it is we have big holes in our list & very little capital to fill them.
We desperately need some quality in the forward half & at least one more elite running/kicking wing.

We'd have a top 4 pick this year

 

[Patty_Moz]

We are a GC level feeder club combined with the dumbest f***ing list management team in the league.

Rebuild has already been botched, the players left on our list are very average. They aren’t just going to be a premiership side once they get 100 games under the belt.

F*** me Jackson is a useless football player. We will lose more players this year. I really am at a low point with this club and that’s saying a bit.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

We are a GC level feeder club combined with the dumbest f***ing list management team in the league.

Rebuild has already been botched, the players left on our list are very average. They aren’t just going to be a premiership side once they get 100 games under the belt.

F*** me Jackson is a useless football player. We will lose more players this year. I really am at a low point with this club and that’s saying a bit.

Quality melt

 

[Fyfster]

In hindsight the last trade period is looking like a complete screwup.
We were a better team last year. If we’d kept Logue & Acres and paid them with what we’re giving Jackson plus kept the draft picks we’d actually be in a much better position to fill out our list build in this draft.
Should have passed on O’Meara too.
As it is we have big holes in our list & very little capital to fill them.
We desperately need some quality in the forward half & at least one more elite running/kicking wing.

Elite running Wing ? going to watch a pretty good one play for Carlton in about 20 minutes.(his kicking looked pretty good last week as well)

 

[DQ 4EVER]

We will probably beat a tanking hawks and Banfield will kick a few Joe the goose goals in a victory and that’s it - he’s there for a month then no matter how horrible he plays against Geelong or Sydney or any of those other actual decent sides in the following weeks.

Meanwhile sturt will probably pick up a niggly injury down at peel in that same timeframe.

Wtf is Fyfe doing as the sub too? What are we going to do - bring him on for Amiss and Treacy at 3QT? Laughable.

Get stuffed JL[emoji35]

This!!!!!
Could not agree more

Sent from my SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Vintage]

Sturt isn’t playing because Sturt isn’t that good. It’s quite simple, and I really don’t understand why people have so much trouble accepting that.

I want him to be good too, and maybe he can still improve, but at this stage he isn’t going to make it.

glad treacy’s back though.

 

[Fat Nyfe]

Sturt isn’t playing because Sturt isn’t that good. It’s quite simple, and I really don’t understand why people have so much trouble accepting that.

I want him to be good too, and maybe he can still improve, but at this stage he isn’t going to make it.

glad treacy’s back though.

It’s because we’ve had 1 ****ing forward in our 28 year history (tiny exaggeration maybe I know we’ve had medhurst, farmer, ballas, Walters) so literally anyone who gets drafted with “Fwd” listed as their position is a unicorn to Freo fans, until they prove without shadow of a doubt at AFL level that they are a spud. Sturt hasn’t had enough time to prove that to fans. And as always it’s completely slim pickings for early pick forwards over the years so he’s built up mythical status among the fans.

 

[E Shed]

Sturt isn’t playing because Sturt isn’t that good. It’s quite simple, and I really don’t understand why people have so much trouble accepting that.

I want him to be good too, and maybe he can still improve, but at this stage he isn’t going to make it.

glad treacy’s back though.

There isn’t enough data to make this conclusion. Sturt isn’t playing because JL doesn’t like him in the team.

Compare the number of consecutive games the likes of Shultz, Switta & particularly Banfield have played when they have all, at times looked like they weren’t going to make it. Shultz was utterly awful for most of his first couple of years, Switta couldn’t get near it & couldn’t hit the side of a barn near goal on the rare occasion he did.

Every time Sturt plays he does one or two things that suggest he’s capable of having decent scoreboard impact with minimal touches as well as create play & hold formations, lead into space etc.
but does he get a chance to settle into the team & create some synergy with his teammates?
No. He gets one game, kicks 2 goals, next game, like most of the rest he’s not doing much but still creates 2 shots on goal but gets dragged before Banfield & Shultz who was playing one of the worst games of his career.

Next week dropped.

So how will we ever know if he’s a good player?
That’s the point that’s been made over & over.

No one. Literally no one has tried to assert he’s a star. Just that he shows elite qualities at times but appears to be treated unfairly in comparison to other players who seem to get a free ride, week after week.

 

[Vintage]

There isn’t enough data to make this conclusion. Sturt isn’t playing because JL doesn’t like him in the team.

Compare the number of consecutive games the likes of Shultz, Switta & particularly Banfield have played when they have all, at times looked like they weren’t going to make it. Shultz was utterly awful for most of his first couple of years, Switta couldn’t get near it & couldn’t hit the side of a barn near goal on the rare occasion he did.

Every time Sturt plays he does one or two things that suggest he’s capable of having decent scoreboard impact with minimal touches as well as create play & hold formations, lead into space etc.
but does he get a chance to settle into the team & create some synergy with his teammates?
No. He gets one game, kicks 2 goals, next game, like most of the rest he’s not doing much but still creates 2 shots on goal but gets dragged before Banfield & Shultz who was playing one of the worst games of his career.

Next week dropped.

So how will we ever know if he’s a good player?
That’s the point that’s been made over & over.

No one. Literally no one has tried to assert he’s a star. Just that he shows elite qualities at times but appears to be treated unfairly in comparison to other players who seem to get a free ride, week after week.

You’re right. Selection committee and coach obviously don’t watch the game as closely as some of us fans.

oh, they don’t really care about winning that much either. It’s a shame we can’t have some sort of contract that incentivises coaches to want the team to win

 

[BeinPurplenGreen]

Sturt isn’t playing because Sturt isn’t that good. It’s quite simple, and I really don’t understand why people have so much trouble accepting that.

I want him to be good too, and maybe he can still improve, but at this stage he isn’t going to make it.

glad treacy’s back though.

This is just total crap.

The young man has shown more than enough compared to JOM, Banfield, Hughes and Brodie, yet after 7 (SEVEN) games he is just not good enough and gets dropped, despite suspensions and poor form across the board.

Sturt's tank has been more than good enough, he has competed and tackled more than hard enough, and never once argued with his teamates, refused to chase or left his man unmarked. He has multiple score involvements and goal assists every game, even when we are well beaten, and kicks instead of engaging in dumb pointless handball circle work jerk off turnover fests.

 

[s_wd6]

If Sturt was good enough he would be playing games. I have no problem with him being dropped. I have a problem with Banfield being played over him, but I would replace Banfield with Corbett anyway.

Apart from a two minute patch against bulldogs he has shown nothing.

 

[hoss]

Sturt isn’t playing because Sturt isn’t that good. It’s quite simple, and I really don’t understand why people have so much trouble accepting that.

I want him to be good too, and maybe he can still improve, but at this stage he isn’t going to make it.

glad treacy’s back though.

Hate to break it to you but I'm not sure Treacy is that good either. I hope he will be but not seeing it yet.

On Pixel 4a using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[BeinPurplenGreen]

If Sturt was good enough he would be playing games. I have no problem with him being dropped. I have a problem with Banfield being played over him, but I would replace Banfield with Corbett anyway.

Apart from a two minute patch against bulldogs he has shown nothing.

This is just rubbish.

Watch the games and follow his involvement in multiple passaages of play.
I also won't bother to highlight the multiple tim,es both Sturt and Walters were just ignored in the game on the weekend, it was as if they had Brisbane jumpers on.

The new found Sturt hate just doesn't match his actual impact, if you applied the same standard to Fyfe, Pav or Clive none of them would have ever played 10 games for us.

 

[E Shed]

You’re right. Selection committee and coach obviously don’t watch the game as closely as some of us fans.

oh, they don’t really care about winning that much either. It’s a shame we can’t have some sort of contract that incentivises coaches to want the team to win

Thanks for your well reasoned & logically argued response.

See? Sarcasm isn’t hard to do but it’s not a discussion. This is a discussion board last time I checked.

But you do you.

 

[s_wd6]

This is just rubbish.

Watch the games and follow his involvement in multiple passaages of play.
I also won't bother to highlight the multiple tim,es both Sturt and Walters were just ignored in the game on the weekend, it was as if they had Brisbane jumpers on.

The new found Sturt hate just doesn't match his actual impact, if you applied the same standard to Fyfe, Pav or Clive none of them would have ever played 10 games for us.

Guys been on our list for four years. I know a lot of them he was injured but he had all of last year to show SOMETHING and he didn't. If the coaches can't see him doing what they're asking of him then I see no problem with him getting dropped. If his movement and involvement in multiple passages of play were that good then he would not be dropped.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

You’re right. Selection committee and coach obviously don’t watch the game as closely as some of us fans.

oh, they don’t really care about winning that much either. It’s a shame we can’t have some sort of contract that incentivises coaches to want the team to win

This sort of reaction is just silly. Professionals make mistakes ALL the time. Some of them are even not good at their job. To suggest a human being may be mistaken or have a blind spot on n something obvious to those outside is not silly. To blindly say they have the job so therefore they must be getting it right is much dumber.

The list of coaches in any sport over the years who have proven to be wrong about what they were doing or their philosophy is actually much, much longer than those who’ve proven to be shrewd and capable.

Attacking a post because it questions a notion that is actually backed by pretty solid evidence is actually the eye rolling move.

 

[Scham]

Thanks for your well reasoned & logically argued response.

See? Sarcasm isn’t hard to do but it’s not a discussion. This is a discussion board last time I checked.

But you do you.

It was a good point very poorly made. The coaches mostly know what they're doing. Over the years I've seen posters including myself whinge and complain about a player not getting a fair go only for that player to be delisted or traded and actually not go on to be any good. The coaches know much more than us to start with but also have the advantage of knowing the player and having witnesses every minute of every game they've played, and every training session they've done.

And, I also dispute your call about there not being enough data for anyone to make the call on Sturt. He's played a heap of games since being with us and sometimes data isn't needed, it's a gut feel from just watching those games. It's an opinion rarely made on data or stats, both rating a player good or bad. You yourself are rating him good enough to be playing more league games.

 

[Dockeroo]

It was a good point very poorly made. The coaches mostly know what they're doing. Over the years I've seen posters including myself whinge and complain about a player not getting a fair go only for that player to be delisted or traded and actually not go on to be any good. The coaches know much more than us.

And, I also dispute your call about there not being enough data for anyone to make the call on Sturt. He's played a heap of games since being with us and sometimes data isn't needed, it's a gut feel from just watching those games. It's an opinion rarely made on data or stats, both rating a player good or bad.

The problem is Sturt doesn’t have to be “good”.
He just has to be better than Bailey Banfield.

And seven games is nothing to judge a player on. Banfield has played 68. SIXTY EIGHT - I’m not joking! I think at this stage we all know whether he’s up to it or not.
A half a entire career of absolutely driving freo fans crazy in frustration.
I’m so tired of watching players like Hughes and Banfield in my team. I just want them out, I never want to see them play football again for Freo. They will never ever be good enough to play in a flag side (and everyone knows this) so WTF are the doing in this team then.

It’s the double standards of having to prove yourself at peel too that kills me.
Hughes did nothing at peel all last year to suggest he was anything other than an average WAFL player yet here is in 2023, playing every minute as if he’s the next Brad Hill or Ed Langdon.

Banfield is the only player in the list that gets dropped for poor form but doesn’t have to go back to peel to prove himself. He just comes straight back in to the AFL team a week or two later.

But Sturt, Treacy, Brodie??
Nah you boys aren’t getting anywhere near the AFL side unless you go back and DOMINATE at peel.

Surely you agree the double standards there are weird?

 

[poshman]

It was a good point very poorly made. The coaches mostly know what they're doing. Over the years I've seen posters including myself whinge and complain about a player not getting a fair go only for that player to be delisted or traded and actually not go on to be any good. The coaches know much more than us to start with but also have the advantage of knowing the player and having witnesses every minute of every game they've played, and every training session they've done.

And, I also dispute your call about there not being enough data for anyone to make the call on Sturt. He's played a heap of games since being with us and sometimes data isn't needed, it's a gut feel from just watching those games. It's an opinion rarely made on data or stats, both rating a player good or bad. You yourself are rating him good enough to be playing more league games.

A heap of games?

Are you including WAFL?

Otherwise Ras and Johnson have three to four more games before we can make a call.

 

[Scham]

The problem is Sturt doesn’t have to be “good”.
He just has to be better than Bailey Banfield.

And seven games is nothing to judge a player on. Banfield has played 68. SIXTY EIGHT - I’m not joking! I think at this stage we all know whether he’s up to it or not.
A half a entire career of absolutely driving freo fans crazy in frustration.
I’m so tired of watching players like Hughes and Banfield in my team. I just want them out, I never want to see them play football again for Freo. They will never ever be good enough to play in a flag side (and everyone knows this) so WTF are the doing in this team then.

It’s the double standards of having to prove yourself at peel too that kills me.
Hughes did nothing at peel all last year to suggest he was anything other than an average WAFL player yet here is in 2023, playing every minute as if he’s the next Brad Hill or Ed Langdon.

Banfield is the only player in the list that gets dropped for poor form but doesn’t have to go back to peel to prove himself. He just comes straight back in to the AFL team a week or two later.

But Sturt, Treacy, Brodie??
Nah you boys aren’t getting anywhere near the AFL side unless you go back and DOMINATE at peel.

Surely you agree the double standards there are weird?

I feel your frustrations with Hughes and Banfield - they're not at a suitable level to be best 22 in a top 8 team, but that's just it, we're not a top 8 team so it makes sense that they are playing as the coaches must think they're the best for their role and position. Sturt is in the same boat except he's young enough in experience that he can still be developed, whereas we all know that Banfield and Hughes are at their ceiling. That's the only explanation I can come up with on what the coaches are thinking and as I said, we need to accept that they are much, much better than us to make these calls.
The ball is once again in Sturts court, he needs to go back to Peel and make himself a best 22 player.
One thing that Banfield and Hughes are is good clubmen. They get involved in club causes, they are active in training showing determination and leadership and they're getting the absolute best out of their ability. Not sure the same can be said for Sturt.