VFL vs Geelong today

[Old Spice]

Jmac hasnt been dropped, he came in against st.kilda round 20 and played untilwe lost the semi. Since he has been injured/recovering

Wellingham i dont remember misisng when he was in fine seniors form. I do remember a poor match against north at telstra dome when he was played as an emergency for davis when he was sadly out of form

That's all incidental to the general point. Stanley has not impressed enough at AFL level to retain a spot - J-Mac and Wellingham have.

But he fulfils a special role as an 'inside' mid, apparently. The problem with this repeated mantra is, a/. he has done nothing at AFL level to justify the accolades and retention in the context of other players, b/. a modern midfield player needs to do more than provide a contest at the bounce, but show vision and skill in the other aspects of the game, and c/. the concept of the 'inside' mid is an abstract and redundant concept.

On point c, as I've said before, the 'special' position of the 'inside' mid is a fantastical and abstract misnomer which doesn't say much. There is no such position as the inside midfielder, so presumably it is meant to represent a role or quality, that of a player who ferrets the ball out.

When the ball is bounced and tapped, the ball can go anywhere. When it lands amongst a pack of players, determination and quick hands are at a premium, and I asume this is where Stanley is meant to excel. The problem for Stanley, and any other would-be 'inside' player, is to be able to handle the ball and make good decisions in the other aspects of the game. It's not gridiron, where players are expected to play a specialised role, but football where you must play a multitude of roles and use a few gears.

Danny has not done it to date in his AFL appearances, so even if he has a 'niche' role which he is being denied, that is not enough to justify a role. Give him a shot, sure, but you tell me who makes way and how Stanle stacks up against that player in general play.

 

[Quicky]

That's all incidental to the general point. Stanley has not impressed enough at AFL level to retain a spot - J-Mac and Wellingham have.

But he fulfils a special role as an 'inside' mid, apparently. The problem with this repeated mantra is, a/. he has done nothing at AFL level to justify the accolades and retention in the context of other players, b/. a modern midfield player needs to do more than provide a contest at the bounce, but show vision and skill in the other aspects of the game, and c/. the concept of the 'inside' mid is an abstract and redundant concept.

On point c, as I've said before, the 'special' position of the 'inside' mid is a fantastical and abstract misnomer which doesn't say much. There is no such position as the inside midfielder, so presumably it is meant to represent a role or quality, that of a player who ferrets the ball out.

When the ball is bounced and tapped, the ball can go anywhere. When it lands amongst a pack of players, determination and quick hands are at a premium, and I asume this is where Stanley is meant to excel. The problem for Stanley, and any other would-be 'inside' player, is to be able to handle the ball and make good decisions in the other aspects of the game. It's not gridiron, where players are expected to play a specialised role, but football where you must play a multitude of roles and use a few gears.

Danny has not done it to date in his AFL appearances, so even if he has a 'niche' role which he is being denied, that is not enough to justify a role. Give him a shot, sure, but you tell me who makes way and how Stanle stacks up against that player in general play.

It's ridiculously unfair to judge Stanley on the majority of his AFL games because he has imroved and developed so much in the last 18 months. In fact the only games that are really relevant to Stanley is last year against Freo and this year in the NAB against WC. Against Freo he did some ordinary things and some good things but our whole team was garbage that day. Fact is he hasn't had the opportunity to settle into the team yet. Against WC he played 1/2 of footy (probably not even 50% TOG) collecting 9 possessions with 100% efficiency. Yes a midfielder needs to do more than just funnell the ball out to other teamates but thats exactly what he is doing atm in the VFL. His clearance work, decision making, skill execution, tackling and involvement in general play have been exceptional. It is only fair that he is given an opportunity. He fills a massive hole in our team and the upside of him performing well at AFL level could be enormous for the team.

 

[mdc]

That's all incidental to the general point. Stanley has not impressed enough at AFL level to retain a spot - J-Mac and Wellingham have.

Wellingham plays 1 good game, sandwiched between 3 rubbish ones. A bit like Goldsack really. Or Rusling. Or the other young players who have quaffed from the chalice of "fair go".

But he fulfils a special role as an 'inside' mid, apparently. The problem with this repeated mantra is, a/. he has done nothing at AFL level to justify the accolades and retention in the context of other players, b/. a modern midfield player needs to do more than provide a contest at the bounce, but show vision and skill in the other aspects of the game, and c/. the concept of the 'inside' mid is an abstract and redundant concept.

a) It'd be a fair trick if he had done anything at AFL level, given he's been played out of position. How did Goldsack go in the 1 game he got as a midfielder? That would have been the Fremantle game last year, where he played the worst non-Danny-Nicholls game we've seen in years. Yet Stanley is somehow expected to succeed as a flanker, or even a deep pocket against Russell Robertson.

b) He does this ok, certainly no worse than half our team. The queries about him are speed and awareness of the opposition.

c) Daniel Cross board. Or, if you like the local cuisine, Shane O'Bree board.

On point c, as I've said before, the 'special' position of the 'inside' mid is a fantastical and abstract misnomer which doesn't say much. There is no such position as the inside midfielder, so presumably it is meant to represent a role or quality, that of a player who ferrets the ball out.

When the ball is bounced and tapped, the ball can go anywhere. When it lands amongst a pack of players, determination and quick hands are at a premium, and I asume this is where Stanley is meant to excel. The problem for Stanley, and any other would-be 'inside' player, is to be able to handle the ball and make good decisions in the other aspects of the game. It's not gridiron, where players are expected to play a specialised role, but football where you must play a multitude of roles and use a few gears.

Semantics much?

You know what is meant by "inside mid". Your line of argument implodes as soon as you realise that we're playing guys like Shane O'Bree in our team, who couldn't more snugly fit the specialist glove.

Danny has not done it to date in his AFL appearances, so even if he has a 'niche' role which he is being denied, that is not enough to justify a role. Give him a shot, sure, but you tell me who makes way and how Stanle stacks up against that player in general play.

Hands down better player than Dick atm. Inside, outside, all around. Better player than Johnson. Won't cover as much ground, but won't hang out waiting for the handball, and then proceed to burn it. Both could easily make way without causing any problems to balance.

Also a better player than Toovey atm, but I think Toovey's been ok, so I won't throw him under the bus here.


I have to say OS, on the topic of a player about whom the only thing we can state conclusively, is that there has been inconclusive evidence, you've applied yourself in the against camp with, dare I say it, almost religious fervour.

 

[Godfrey Jones]

love the bit about danny

as mdc has been saying for so long

give him multiple games in a row in the guts, at senior level, and lets judge him then

thanks pipeline

 

[Old Spice]

A fair point Quicky. If he has improved and continues doing well then why not include him?

What I find irksome though is the idea that Stanley is frozen out of the team due to some personal vendetta against him. No-one says so explicitly, but that is the implication.

It's not Danny versus the apparatus, but Danny versus other players and the role he is expected and capable of playing.

 

[pipeline]

That's all incidental to the general point. Stanley has not impressed enough at AFL level to retain a spot - J-Mac and Wellingham have.

But he fulfils a special role as an 'inside' mid, apparently. The problem with this repeated mantra is, a/. he has done nothing at AFL level to justify the accolades and retention in the context of other players, b/. a modern midfield player needs to do more than provide a contest at the bounce, but show vision and skill in the other aspects of the game, and c/. the concept of the 'inside' mid is an abstract and redundant concept.

On point c, as I've said before, the 'special' position of the 'inside' mid is a fantastical and abstract misnomer which doesn't say much. There is no such position as the inside midfielder, so presumably it is meant to represent a role or quality, that of a player who ferrets the ball out.

When the ball is bounced and tapped, the ball can go anywhere. When it lands amongst a pack of players, determination and quick hands are at a premium, and I asume this is where Stanley is meant to excel. The problem for Stanley, and any other would-be 'inside' player, is to be able to handle the ball and make good decisions in the other aspects of the game. It's not gridiron, where players are expected to play a specialised role, but football where you must play a multitude of roles and use a few gears.

Danny has not done it to date in his AFL appearances, so even if he has a 'niche' role which he is being denied, that is not enough to justify a role. Give him a shot, sure, but you tell me who makes way and how Stanle stacks up against that player in general play.

I know I shouldn't do this, I know I'm being sucked in and I know you're really A J Ayer and you'd like nothing better than to debate the existence of God over sherry and cakes for the next four hundred years but I've wound the clocks back an hour already and it's not that late, so here goes......

Game 1 2007(?) vs Melbourne. Danny debuts on a HBF and is holding Silvia(?) to a couple of kicks and looking right at home. Robbo meanwhile is looking good and already has i on Harry when Harry goes off with a crook shoulder late in the first Q. MM moves Danny to full back. For the nest almost two quarters Robbo gives Danny a torrid time but only scores 2 goals! MM moves Toovey on to Robbo because Danny can't cope. Robbo kicks another 4 on Toovey in a bit over a quarter. Meanwhile Danny goes back and shuts Silvia down again. Dropped.

Game 2 Vs Swans in Sydney(?) 2007(?) Danny plays a very reasonable game in a good win away. MM says he did quite well, played a good shut down role on ??? Dropped.

2008 first game against Blues. Danny makes two howlers by being run down twice by Gibbs, one after a hospital handpass from a senior player who left him hanging out to dry, and one because Gibbs just plain got him. Danny also runs down Gibbs in thr same quarter and the same way but no-one cares. He also takes out O'Halpin with a legit cannonnball bump that sends the huge sook off the ground. Gets dragged and with limited game time thereafter plays a reasonable game. Dropped.

Freo 2008. Whole team plays like crap. Danny takes a brilliant mark (endorsed by Tim Watson) and has horror shot in horror conditions. Plays well for the rest of the game as affirmed by MM. Dropped.

Total game time - about 2 games worth.
Total game time in preferred position - maybe 1 quarter.

Meanwhile other players (no need for names) string game after horrible game together. Meantime too, Danny goes back to the two's and continues to say "Sorry Mick, trying hard here, doing the only thing I can do, which is to dominate at the next level down." He has never been as bad as you and all his other knockers make out and has at least deserved more than one game in a row.

Over to you AJ but I'm out.

 

[pipeline]

Because his performance has been consistently superior? Because his skill-set lies in the one area where we are consistently deplorable? Because rhetorical questions are an effective yet annoying way of getting the message across?

Is this really Funny? Yes it is. Why? because it has a clever double impact of humour and argument. Does it also have a sneaking element of truth to it? Yes it does. Am I really Kevin Rudd? No, but I did nearly get chucked off a domestic flight once.

 

[Snoop Dog]

i think the reality is that Stanners has had chances and hasnt taken them. Frankly he was lucky to stay on the list. Its great to see him go the next level this year and if he sustains it I am sure he will come in. Whoever said about playing him this week was a good idea.....I agree. We got smashed in that NAB Cup GF bc we didnt have bodies over the ball. I hope it was bc the coaching panel didnt want them injuring themselves but I am convinced we dont have the 'mettle' other teams do.

I wouldnt rule out Toovey for Stanley this week. If Shaw goes out as well then I would also be thinking he is a def chance.

JMac I think will come back in when fit.

 

[joefootylover]

The thing that irks me is the people who call for him to be given an "extended" run in the guts, like 4! games as a center square midfeilder, to "see" if he has it in him. When was the last time a player was given a month of AFL footy in a gamebreaking position to "prove" themselves? If he failed he could lose us 4 games in a row! thats 16 premiership points! You just can't play guys in critical positions for multiple non-performing games in this day and age, especially if you think you are a shot for the eight.

I am more than happy, keen even, to give Stanley a game in the guts. Thats 1 game. to see if he can do something in there, but who do you drop? People nominating O'Bree is a sick joke and I will not go into arguments because anyone who wants to make that swap will not understand them. then there is Swan, and then there is Pendles. Fit, all three of them are unlikely to be dropped even for 40 touch VFLers.

And then someone suggests dropping Dick AND Davis for Stanley to preserve balance!?! So dropping two quick, outside, crumbing, silky players for 1 slowish, hard at the ball in and under player is balanced??

if Toovey is dropped, and he should be, he was a hard tag on Bruce up to half time when Bruce had 20! touchs!! then he should make way for Thomas, surely you are not saying that Stanley play ahead of Thomas?

The problem is that some players do dominate at VFL level. Ben Davies (I was a huge fan) routinely dominated in the 2's, he was agressive, he could run, he had good height, and he got the ball out of packs, but it never translated to AFL level (he still had several better games than Stanley has managed at AFL level so far).

I would love to see Stanley make it as an AFL player for us or anyone else, but the fact that he has not grabbed the game by the throught at AFL level yet is a mark against him, and thats what is keeping him out.

 

[mdc]

The thing that irks me is the people who call for him to be given an "extended" run in the guts, like 4! games as a center square midfeilder, to "see" if he has it in him. When was the last time a player was given a month of AFL footy in a gamebreaking position to "prove" themselves? If he failed he could lose us 4 games in a row! thats 16 premiership points! You just can't play guys in critical positions for multiple non-performing games in this day and age, especially if you think you are a shot for the eight.

No-one's suggesting he gets, say, 4 games if his first 3 are shit.

But if he has one good game, then an average game, etc...that's when the extended run applies.

Fit, all three of them are unlikely to be dropped even for 40 touch VFLers.

...except our rotations mean we have more like 8-10 players rotating through there at any time, and not just three.

And then someone suggests dropping Dick AND Davis for Stanley to preserve balance!?! So dropping two quick, outside, crumbing, silky players for 1 slowish, hard at the ball in and under player is balanced??

You misread. I said dropping Dick and moving Davis forward was one way of getting Stanley in the side.

surely you are not saying that Stanley play ahead of Thomas?

No-one is saying that.

The problem is that some players do dominate at VFL level. Ben Davies (I was a huge fan) routinely dominated in the 2's, he was agressive, he could run, he had good height, and he got the ball out of packs, but it never translated to AFL level (he still had several better games than Stanley has managed at AFL level so far).

With all due respect, Ben Davies was an obvious spud. He was basically a linking player who was too slow to be a linking player in the AFL and his skills weren't up to it either.

I would love to see Stanley make it as an AFL player for us or anyone else, but the fact that he has not grabbed the game by the throught at AFL level yet is a mark against him, and thats what is keeping him out.

I have a feeling it's more to do with his apparent lack of "upside".

 

[DNine]

IN: Rocca, Bryan, Thomas
OUT: Brown, Toovey, Pendlebury

Rocca's inclusion will stretch Geelongs defence with Harley and Egan not playing. Scarlett and Harry Taylor are the stronger key defenders, so Cloke and Anthony would be covered there, but who would they put on Rocca, perhaps Mackie, Milburn??

Malthouse said that Fraser wouldn't be doing the ruckwork alone next week, so given Bryan was the better performer yesterday morning, out of him and the ever disappointing Ruck in Wood, suggests that Bryan may come in. Perhaps that bone pointed at Collingwood, was pointed directly at Monkey, and said, NEVER will Collingwood have a dominant ruck again. In saying that, Fraser was awesome yesterday.

Thomas has to come back in as an auto selection, if he is over his sickness, and I expect Pendlebury to miss, given he almost missed yesterday, and ended the game on the bench, with an ice pack on his quad.

Would like to see credit where credit is due, and that is to select Stanley for his first game, but who else could come out. If Rocca, doesn't play, I would still have the same outs, but Stanley in.

Toovey did a Brodie Holland job yesterday, scragging and bumping all day, to hurt Brock McLean and a couple of others. He is determined as a player, but his disposals are terrible under pressure. We didn't see too much of Tooveys brain fades yesterday, because the pressure was poor by Melbourne, but it won't be against Geelong. Stanley would be my choice from the two, because Stanley has showed he is ready to step up, and I reckon put him to the test, but it may be hard if Rocca plays.

Dawes is also in the mix, and probably deserves another chance. Perhaps Cox or I would say Johnson, for the same reasons as Toovey, not up to the grade, when push comes to shove.

 

[Heater39]

I think the games he got early in his career were very ordinary. I have in fact been very critical of Danny on here last year. But I think the thing that really needs to be considered is how much Stanley has improved last year and this year. He has been consistantly dominant in the VFL for about 18 months yet still gets sweet f-all in regards to senior game time. His form and improvement since his initial and rare exposure at AFL level (which is unfair to judge him on because he is a different and improved player since then) demand he get an opportunity. I hope his inclusion as an emergency last week is a good sign for him.

Consistenly dominant yet our full forward who kicks less than 40 goals wins the b&f?

Has Stanley ever picked up over 30 possies?I cant be sure but from what I've seen and heard he rarely does it.

Prismall averaged over 30 possies in the VFL and had games where he picked up well over 40 possies, that's what I'd call dominant.

When you're a slow inside mid who can't play anywhere else I'd suggest you'd have to be picking up 30+ posessions week in week out to get a game.

 

[Snag Breac]

A brilliant report, Pipes - felt like I was there. I'm doing the decades of the rosary to the Goddess - the male gods having proved indifferent to the plights of Rocca and Stanley.

Surely with Pendles and Thomas both uncertain Danny would have a chance of selection?

 

[Dave The Man]

Dawes – DTM can enjoy this. Dave, your manlove played much better today. It wasn't so much his scoring or any skill area; it was his attitude and presentation. On at least one occasion he bullocked his way straight through a Geelong player to take the mark and on couple of occasions he kept contesting hard after the marking contest. He wasn’t outstanding (although he might get in the bests) but it looked like he’s started to address a fundamental flaw in his game – and that’s nothing but good. He also went sideways a few times and despite a turning circle like the Queen Mary, he got himself back in the contest a few times.

Sound Good he played well but Dang I did not go

Sidebottom – Hold the expectations. He looked very small and a little lost today. He got a few possessions and did a couple of nice things but on the whole, he looked a boy amongst men. He’s got the skills but he’s not our in-and-under saviour yet. Unless he gets a bunk up from MM, he’ll have to do his time in the VFL on today’s game.

Sounds like needs some games in the VFL before he comes up but there is nothing wrong with that for a Underage Draftee

 

[MAKESHIFT]

Consistenly dominant yet our full forward who kicks less than 40 goals wins the b&f?

Has Stanley ever picked up over 30 possies?I cant be sure but from what I've seen and heard he rarely does it.

Prismall averaged over 30 possies in the VFL and had games where he picked up well over 40 possies, that's what I'd call dominant.

When you're a slow inside mid who can't play anywhere else I'd suggest you'd have to be picking up 30+ posessions week in week out to get a game.

ANSWER YES When he played against Geelong last year Geelong had him down as 41 possessions we had him as 37.
He only played 10 VFL games last year Caff all of them. Dan and Caff both received 20 votes. Dan reported so it was given to Caff.
Not slow as been discussed before 5th in 2km time trials actually beat Cooky.
Question who consistently gets 30+ possessions week in week out and not playing AFL. So if you call Prismall dominant then same for Stanners. Get your arse down to a VFL game and watch for yourself one day instead of blindly believing everything you hear.You too may be converted !!!!

 

[Quicky]

Consistenly dominant yet our full forward who kicks less than 40 goals wins the b&f?

Has Stanley ever picked up over 30 possies?I cant be sure but from what I've seen and heard he rarely does it.

Prismall averaged over 30 possies in the VFL and had games where he picked up well over 40 possies, that's what I'd call dominant.

When you're a slow inside mid who can't play anywhere else I'd suggest you'd have to be picking up 30+ posessions week in week out to get a game.

I had a look for his VFL statistics but apparently the VFL don't keep and publish these (something they really should look at!!). I do know that he is consistently in the bests and often BOG in match reports, often reaches 30 possessions and I havn't seen his possessions drop below 20 in 2008/09. Thats very good and consistent form. I'm not sure what comparing him to Prismall is supposed to achieve. Prismall was trying to break into the best midfield group in the comp and would likely have gotten a game in any other side. Having a lower output than Prismall is hardly shaming as he was probably the best midfielder in the VFL last year. Stanley would have been up there as well. And again to say he is slow is a myth. He's not lightening but he would be at least as fast as O'Bree and Pendlebury in our team and many other midfielders at other AFL sides as well.

 

[DoubleO7]

Don't compare Stanley to Prismall. Stanley is in and under while Prismall is the polar opposite.

 

[rose jam]

Stanley has jut been deer in the headlights at AFL level. He'll get another chance this year if he keeps his form as players get injured, suspended, or rested, and then we'll finally be able to put a full stop to his spot on the list.

 

[gifted1]

pipeline are you any relation to stanley? because your reports always seem very stanlety orintated, and plus you're always at the vfl so you must have a reason for attending
Just a query anyway? appreciate your reports, heard from a geelong mate that cook was very good, and stanley good as well.
I'd bring cook in this week, perhaps for a run with role on selwood. I'm a bit more up beat on cook than most. I believe stanley will get his chance this year, it's only a matter of time for him, personally i dont know why there is so much love for him because he has definately looked fish out a water at afl level, however i've heard he has improved dramatically and could be a stong bodied mid we crave.
Any reports on keefe, rounds, bennel etc did they play?

 

[Chase the Ace]

No one is asking for "more" preference than other young players - just equality of opportunity.

So in a football team, you want "equality of opportunity"
Yep and if it backfires you would then want Malthouse out for not picking the best team.

Its about selecting the best available, its not some sort of democracy

 

[loki04]

So in a football team, you want "equality of opportunity"
Yep and if it backfires you would then want Malthouse out for not picking the best team.

Its about selecting the best available, its not some sort of democracy

Gee funny that stanley gets in the best each week, half the players who get games have yet to make the best lists at VFL.

Dick came off a knee reco with bugger all form and got a run.

Toovey gets a game despite being the worst disposer on our list and I've never sen him in the bests for VFL.

Johnson didn't have any form yet back in the side he came.

I could go on but cbf.

 

[MAKESHIFT]

pipeline are you any relation to stanley? because your reports always seem very stanlety orintated, and plus you're always at the vfl so you must have a reason for attending

I too go to all games AFL and VFL games and I am no relation either just appreciate good footy and admire good skills.
Everyone has their favourite players so is it a crime to have Stanners as one you support. I enjoy reading Pipelines assessment of the games as he does sound like he knows what he is talking about.
And as you pointed out he isn't exagerating about Stanners. Just ask anyone that went....

 

[Chase the Ace]

Gee funny that stanley gets in the best each week, half the players who get games have yet to make the best lists at VFL.

Dick came off a knee reco with bugger all form and got a run.

Toovey gets a game despite being the worst disposer on our list and I've never sen him in the bests for VFL.

Johnson didn't have any form yet back in the side he came.

I could go on but cbf.

Not funny at all.

The only people that matter, and this may come as a huge shock to you, is the selection committee.

When they start to think like you then Stanley might get a game.

You have an opinion, which you are more than welcome to, but it means diddly to the selection committee.

 

[shawthing09]

You have an opinion, which you are more than welcome to, but it means diddly to the selection committee.

Apparentaly VFL form and center clearances also mean diddly to the selection committee.

 

[MAKESHIFT]

Just been trolling the Geelong website on yesterdays VFL game and I see DTM has been there too checking up on a few of our players. Funny they say exactly the same as Pipeline Stanley and Cooky very lively and very good.
So can we take it that we are not just putting a positive spin on Stanners maybe it is actually true!!!!!.
DTM ...........