Unfortunately this is the most likely scenario. We will jag a couple of wins late and maybe even beat a top 8 side, which will give Trigg and the board enough ammunition to keep the status quo (Craigy) for as far as they eye can see!
Preview Wooden spoon
- Thread starter rayven
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Unfortunately this is the most likely scenario. We will jag a couple of wins late and maybe even beat a top 8 side, which will give Trigg and the board enough ammunition to keep the status quo (Craigy) for as far as they eye can see!
And Vader, before you say that he's in the same boat as Schmidt etc, Petrenko has a contract for 2012, we cannot go delisting too many contracted players because in these expansion years you get nothing for them.
There is absolutely no good, logical reason why the selectors should choose to do so.
It didn't stop us with McGregor, Obst and one or two others. Once the decision's been made, the club almost always bit the bullet and cop the salary cap implications. Given that the replacement will be a 3rd or 4th round draftee on minimum salary, the salary cap implications aren't all that bad.
Because his form was good before Craigy ****ed with it, an he's contracted for 2012???
SANFL form != AFL form - just ask Taylor Walker, or any other player who's struggled to make the transition (under any of our 5 coaches).
Petrenko has never shown good form at AFL level, so I don't know what you're talking about. I doubt Petrenko's contract will save him - only the weak & compromised draft can do that. With Moran, Cook, Armstrong, Symes & Craig all on the "must delist" pile, plus the retirements of Doughty & Stevens, the club may well decide that there's nothing to be gained by sacking Petrenko & replacing him with a 6th round draftee.
why the Doughty hate? Hell atleast he is trying and he is doing the team stuff.
Vader, that is utter garbage. If the player isn't selected for AFL then what ****ing form do you propose we pick them on? Training form is known only by the club, and Petrenko's was obviously good enough to get him selected a few times, no matter how much you try to spruik the idea that we're scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Stevens, Cook, Doughty, Symes, Moran, Armstrong and maybe Maric are all gone. Adding to the spots that we need to fill via the draft will cause significant pain, Rendell said this last year and the same applies this year.
Stevens, Cook, Doughty, Symes, Moran, Armstrong and maybe Maric are all gone. Adding to the spots that we need to fill via the draft will cause significant pain, Rendell said this last year and the same applies this year.
You're the one who's trying to suggest that Petrenko should replace Doughty for the duration of the 2011 season. Good SANFL form (which in Petrenko's case has never translated to good AFL form) is not a justification for dropping a player who is performing well at AFL level, particularly when Petrenko's own AFL career life expectancy is only marginally greater than Doughty's.
Which is the point I made in the 2nd paragraph..
My fingers are crossed for the wooden spoon
Nice to see Vader and others coming around to the realist view that there is no point finishing with a mid table ladder position, poorer draft and trading positioning, and less subsequent improvement to our list with the net result we are no closer to a premiership.
Craigy is a master at the useless late season surge, all to come to nothing, only for people to say he did such a wonderful job with the list he had. How about some forward planning though i know it's against his 'best 22 every week' philosophy.
I don't care what the terminology is for this approach (tanking or otherwise) but we should realise we are 2 years off at least; proceed to immediately discard anyone who is a confirmed B/C grader with no future upside or anyone who wont be there at the start of 2013 (I'd start with Craigy but they wont do that!); with vacant positions give anyone who is ready for AFL a chance to get experience; with these future selections we then go hell for leather to try to win every game.
Nice to see Vader and others coming around to the realist view that there is no point finishing with a mid table ladder position, poorer draft and trading positioning, and less subsequent improvement to our list with the net result we are no closer to a premiership.
Craigy is a master at the useless late season surge, all to come to nothing, only for people to say he did such a wonderful job with the list he had. How about some forward planning though i know it's against his 'best 22 every week' philosophy.
I don't care what the terminology is for this approach (tanking or otherwise) but we should realise we are 2 years off at least; proceed to immediately discard anyone who is a confirmed B/C grader with no future upside or anyone who wont be there at the start of 2013 (I'd start with Craigy but they wont do that!); with vacant positions give anyone who is ready for AFL a chance to get experience; with these future selections we then go hell for leather to try to win every game.
Doughty is a B grade veteran who wont be part of our next premiership...give him a farewell game and move on.
There are a gazillion footballers who have failed to be decent forward pockets in the AFL but can play other positions to a high level...
Has Petrenko ever been given a full game in a defensive/midfield rotation position?
How about even 3 games in a row so he actually feels a smidgen of support from the coaching staff to go out and attack in his preferred role?
How the hell did Cook get so many games in his preferred spot over the years when he is clearly crap, yet Petrenko gets nothing?
And what was Jaensch's translation of SANFL to AFL form like before we moved him to defence? You also had him on the scrap heap and yet since being played in a more suitable position he's been one of our shining lights this year.
If Doughty is gone at the end of the season and we're going to lose every game regardless of whether or not he plays, then there is no harm in finding out if it's actually worth tearing up Petrenko's contract - that's due diligence.
- Moderator
- #63
I dont agree Vader, I honestly believe that Patrenko has been a victim of a lack of AFL development time. He has only had minimal chances at AFL level and when he has come in it has only ever been used as a depth player to cover injury which left him at the mercy of being dropped within a week or two to make way for returning players.
This could have been the year that the club gave him a chance to prove himself at half back, but they went out and recruiting Tamlbing instead.
So while he is in the gun to be delisted, I would argue that he development has been poorly managed and potentially has been wasted by the club
This could have been the year that the club gave him a chance to prove himself at half back, but they went out and recruiting Tamlbing instead.
So while he is in the gun to be delisted, I would argue that he development has been poorly managed and potentially has been wasted by the club
What's the point? Right now, the likely replacements for Doughty would be Symes, Petrenko or Schmidt. I'll take Doughty every single day of the week. I'd have a different attitude if Otten were next in line, but the 3 jokers currently at the head of the pack do not inspire me at all.
No.. because we have better players already in those positions. I'll take Doughty, Johncock & Jaensch over Petrenko any day of the week - and twice on game days.
Most of Cook's games (9 of 15) came at the start of the 2010 season, when our injury list was well & truly into double digits. He was dropped the instant Rory Sloane became available and we didn't see him again until we reached the bottom of the barrel again this year.
Petrenko played the first 12 games of 2010 and the first 8 in 2009. How can you possibly argue that he's had less opportunities than Cook?
Jaensch has definitely surprised me this year - in a good way. He put in a lot of work over the pre-season and it's paying dividends. Kudos to him.
Where's the relevance to Petrenko's situation?
I've already made up my mind that he's not worth persisting with. He'll probably be retained, due to the shitty nature of this year's draft, but he'll be one of the first on the chopping block in 2012. Why give repeated opportunities to players once you've seen enough to make your decision? That just looks weak and indecisive.
He played 12 games in a row in 2010 and 8 games in a row in 2009. That's not what I would call "minimal chances at AFL level". That's what I call repeated opportunities which he has failed to grasp.
Tambling has more talent in his pinky finger than Petrenko does in his whole body. Tambling's problems are all in his head - fix these and discussions about Petrenko vs Tambling will seem like a really, really dumb idea.
He's had his chances and he hasn't done anything with them. He's just another player who played well at SANFL level but couldn't make the transition.
Lets put this into perspective. Many people on this board want Douglas, Reilly, VB & Knights all binned. They can't believe that these players have been given the opportunities that they have - yet all of these players are 10x better than Petrenko. What benefit is there to retaining Petrenko, who would just add to our list of B- to C grade players, of whom we already have far too many?
Quite simply we disagree re the relative merits of Doughty and Petrenko...I think Petrenko has a future as a small defender and therefore should get games when we are rabble. Has Doughty ever laced out a guy 50m up field leading to goals? (not suggesting Petrenko is a great kick btw but at least the thought process is to actually go forwards...clearly he struggling with the Crows game plan thus sitting out the 2nd half).
Symes gone.
Schmidt is a midfielder who could pinch hit elsewhere but much like I'd ditch Doughty for Petrenko for the next few games, I'd also ditch Reilly for Schmidt...then we can make a decision.
If you read my comment re Cook v Petrenko opportunities, i clearly stipulated in their 'preferred spot'. While Cook was stinking up the wing/midfield with low possession counts and repeated blunders, Petrenko was left to wither in the FP during his games.
You can't say that we need to look to 2012 and beyond in one breath, then in another suggest that you'd flat out refuse to play Petrenko ahead of Doughty when the opportunity is there to do so.
Failed to grasp chances in a FP? Much like Jaensch...yeah, can't see any similarlities there...I mean it's not like in the limited opportunities in defence that Petrenko has shown anything
Agree Tambling has more talent but why haven't his head problems been fixed? Been plenty of years now. The mental aspect of a footballer is a massive component...just ask Maric. You can't always fix these players. Hopefully we can with Tambling, maybe we shouldn't publically berate him for actually being a leader for weak Crows and slightly overstepping the mark.
Ummm...are you freakin kidding me??? Last year he was selected on SANFL form where he played through defence and midfield rotation. We played him as a small forward where apart from one or two games (just like Petrenko) he did not look up to AFL standard.
Fast forward to 2011 and, once again he was selected on SANFL form where he played defence/midfield and, **** me drunk, we actually played him in defence, where he looks elite.
Any further explanation required?
Only when Doughty was injured. We should not have to wait until he's injured again for someone else to get the chance because a) he doesn't factor into plans for 2012 and beyond; and b) he isn't actually playing very good football.
How, precisely was he selected on SANFL form, given that he played R1-12 and wasn't sighted again thereafter? Let's not forget that our injury list at the time was well into double digits, so most of those games were gifted to him due to a lack of better alternatives anyway.
Yes, we played him as small forward - because we have an abundance of players who are capable of playing his preferred position (HBF) and most of them are better than he is.
Elite? Maybe by SANFL standards. Certainly not by AFC standards, let alone AFL standards.
He wasn't selected on great SANFL form in 2011 either.. he was selected as the least worst option that the selectors had available to them at that particular time. The fact that he's been selected as substitute is a pretty good indicator of that, given that the AFC policy seems to be that the sub is the last player selected that week.
How about justifying why our 7th best HBF should be gifted a position at the queue, based not on performance (he's never performed at AFL level), just because he's a BigFooty fan favourite player?
Jaensch was selected on SANFL form, not Petrenko. Read before rant.
On the flip side, how often is being played as a small forward referred to as being a death sentence? For someone who isn't a natural forward, our forward line in the last couple of years must be like death by 1000 needles!
I won't even bother - I know that I'm discussing this matter with someone who has already formed a steadfast opinion based on what they believe is a comprehensive base of information. Nothing I say is going to change that, just like nothing you say is going to convince me that you really have considered all of the factors in play to form that opinion.
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Moderator
- May 24, 2006
- 77,401
- 152,156
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Redbacks, Sturt, Liverpool, Arizona
- Moderator
- #75
