Team vs freo

[Thinline]

Yawn.
Imagine how demoralising it must be for the Tommy Walsh's on our list, knowing that no matter how well they play and how much they bust a gut during the year that they'll almost always be overlooked for a safe, tried and true option. Don't imagine it would be too good for morale.

Unless of course it's all part of a greater developmental plan of which we are not aware and which keeps the Walsh's of this world more than happy.

[saint6709]

Late Changes not out of the question...

Would hate to see WALSH turn his back on the club through lack of opportunity..

I've seen him at Sandy half a dozen times - he has earned a chance to show what he can offer at the top level IMO

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Good team. Would have liked Tom Simpkin in or even Warrick Andreoli so it shows RL has guts. By the way how many here see theses seconds players week inand week out? Thanks for answering not at all. I thought so.

If you do, has Blake been ripping it up in the VFL?
You seem to be of the opinion that those in charge of all AFL clubs (or at least ours) are perfect in everything they do because they're "in the inner sanctum", or because they "see every VFL game" and have a whole lot of data, etc. Here's a newsflash for you. They aren't. Some of them actually have weaknesses and make mistakes, in spite of being right in the middle of it all and believe it or not, some of those on the "outside" are actually able to see where those weaknesses are. Maybe you aren't, because you have your head so far up their asses, but please just speak for yourself.

Just one comment. The people in charge of our club make less mistakes than morons on here especially morons who never see these guys play but go by what is written on this site.

I cannot believe some of the crap on here. RL is gutless, know less than people on here. It is too funny.

Again you're misinterpreting and twisting what I'm saying. At least you're consistent. Maybe get someone with a bit more intellect to read it for you and explain it, before you respond.
I said that they're not perfect. Where the f*** did anyone say they know more than Ross Lyon? Or that those in charge of our club make more mistakes than anyone on here? I just pointed out that they may not be PERFECT and that some on the outside may actually be able to spot the areas where their weaknesses/imperfections lie. Maybe you can't spot anything like that, even when you follow the club as closely as you do, but again, please speak for yourself. Again, you don't speak for any of the rest of us, or see what we see. You most certainly don't speak for me. If you think they're perfect in all they do and that they couldn't do anything better then you may have your head even further up their asses than I thought.
You're obviously not familiar with the saying sometimes you don't "see the forest for the trees", or at least that you don't understand what it means. Sometimes those on the "inside" don't see what's going on because they're so caught up in it, or because the pressure gets on top of them, or because they in fact are not perfect, or whatever. That does not mean that someone on the "outside", who has the "overview of the forest" can't see what's going on, or where things are falling down, or not going as well as they could be.
But just because they can spot that one thing doesn't mean that they would do a better job if they were on the "inside", in the heat of battle, as you seem to be suggesting I'm suggesting.
If your theory that only those on the "inside" can get things "right" was correct, then no-one from "outside" would have said that drafting Andrew Lovett, for instance, was a bad idea. But there would have been many (on the "outside") who knew in their guts that it was a bad idea and despite being on the "inside" and meeting him and getting to read all the recommendations, etc, our "insiders" did get it wrong, horribly, I think most would agree. Does that mean I'm suggesting that those who got it "right" would do a better job overall than those on the "inside", if they took over their role. Hell no. It just means that on this occasion they read the situation better and made the better call. I'm sure you'll try to suggest I am, though and bring it up on a regular basis for the next few years.

They see these guys play every week you dont. They see these guys train you dont. They see their attitude you dont.

Yes they do, I'm not disputing that, but my point is that all those things can be true and yet they can still make bad calls, like they did with Lovett, like they seem to have done with Luke Ball, etc, while at the same time there would have been plenty "on the outside" who didn't get all those advantages, who would have said "drafting Lovett is a bad idea" or "play Luke Ball more" (especially in the GF). Sometimes someone can be given all the advantages and still "lose out" in that instance, to someone who has had far less of those advantages. This is where your "logic" doesn't stand up. Sometimes "illogical" things happen. This is something you still don't seem to get.
Many "on the outside" said "don't go near Lovett with a ten foot pole" and they wouldn't have had the equivalent of "seeing these guys play every week", "seeing these guys train" "seeing their attitude", which in this instance would have been meeting him, speaking to those close to him, etc. Those on the "inside" had those advantages and yet made the incorrect call, while there would have been plenty "on the outside" (who you seem to think can never make a better call than those "on the inside") who simply made the correct call, by saying "don't do it". Period. It can happen. It has happened and it will happen again and could just as easily be happening here.
Sometimes you don't see the forest for the trees.

[joffaboy]

Late Changes not out of the question...

Would hate to see WALSH turn his back on the club through lack of opportunity..

I've seen him at Sandy half a dozen times - he has earned a chance to show what he can offer at the top level IMO

In what position?

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Yawn.
Imagine how demoralising it must be for the Tommy Walsh's on our list, knowing that no matter how well they play and how much they bust a gut during the year that they'll almost always be overlooked for a safe, tried and true option. Don't imagine it would be too good for morale.

Unless of course it's all part of a greater developmental plan of which we are not aware and which keeps the Walsh's of this world more than happy.

I bloody hope so.

[plugger66]

Good team. Would have liked Tom Simpkin in or even Warrick Andreoli so it shows RL has guts. By the way how many here see theses seconds players week inand week out? Thanks for answering not at all. I thought so.

If you do, has Blake been ripping it up in the VFL?
You seem to be of the opinion that those in charge of all AFL clubs (or at least ours) are perfect in everything they do because they're "in the inner sanctum", or because they "see every VFL game" and have a whole lot of data, etc. Here's a newsflash for you. They aren't. Some of them actually have weaknesses and make mistakes, in spite of being right in the middle of it all and believe it or not, some of those on the "outside" are actually able to see where those weaknesses are. Maybe you aren't, because you have your head so far up their asses, but please just speak for yourself.

Just one comment. The people in charge of our club make less mistakes than morons on here especially morons who never see these guys play but go by what is written on this site.

I cannot believe some of the crap on here. RL is gutless, know less than people on here. It is too funny.

Again you're misinterpreting and twisting what I'm saying. At least you're consistent. Maybe get someone with a bit more intellect to read it for you and explain it, before you respond.
I said that they're not perfect. Where the f*** did anyone say they know more than Ross Lyon? Or that those in charge of our club make more mistakes than anyone on here? I just pointed out that they may not be PERFECT and that some on the outside may actually be able to spot the areas where their weaknesses/imperfections lie. Maybe you can't spot anything like that, even when you follow the club as closely as you do, but again, please speak for yourself. Again, you don't speak for any of the rest of us, or see what we see. You most certainly don't speak for me. If you think they're perfect in all they do and that they couldn't do anything better then you may have your head even further up their asses than I thought.
You're obviously not familiar with the saying sometimes you don't "see the forest for the trees", or at least that you don't understand what it means. Sometimes those on the "inside" don't see what's going on because they're so caught up in it, or because the pressure gets on top of them, or because they in fact are not perfect, or whatever. That does not mean that someone on the "outside", who has the "overview of the forest" can't see what's going on, or where things are falling down, or not going as well as they could be.
But just because they can spot that one thing doesn't mean that they would do a better job if they were on the "inside", in the heat of battle, as you seem to be suggesting I'm suggesting.
If your theory that only those on the "inside" can get things "right" was correct, then no-one from "outside" would have said that drafting Andrew Lovett, for instance, was a bad idea. But there would have been many (on the "outside") who knew in their guts that it was a bad idea and despite being on the "inside" and meeting him and getting to read all the recommendations, etc, our "insiders" did get it wrong, horribly, I think most would agree. Does that mean I'm suggesting that those who got it "right" would do a better job overall than those on the "inside", if they took over their role. Hell no. It just means that on this occasion they read the situation better and made the better call. I'm sure you'll try to suggest I am, though and bring it up on a regular basis for the next few years.

They see these guys play every week you dont. They see these guys train you dont. They see their attitude you dont.

Yes they do, I'm not disputing that, but my point is that all those things can be true and yet they can still make bad calls, like they did with Lovett, like they seem to have done with Luke Ball, etc. Sometimes someone can be given all the advantages and still "lose out" in that instance, to someone who has had far less of those advantages. This is where your "logic" doesn't stand up. Sometimes "illogical" things happen. This is something you still don't seem to get. Many "on the outside" said "don't go near Lovett with a ten foot pole" and they wouldn't have had the equivalent of "seeing these guys play every week", "seeing these guys train" "seeing their attitude", which in this instance would have been meeting him, speaking to those close to him, etc. Those on the "inside" had those advantages and yet made the incorrect call, while there would have been plenty "on the outside" (who you seem to think can never make a better call than those "on the inside") who simply made the correct call, by saying "don't do it". Period. It can happen. It has happened and it will happen again and could just as easily be happening here.
Sometimes you don't see the forest for the trees.

Yes again I agree they make the wrong calls but what this has to do with Walsh playing is beyond me. Can I ask why your call is the right call. Surely it isnt to show guts. That would be a joke. Like I said they see these guys play weekly and train and everything else. You dont but you argue about Lovett. Dont get it. This is about a player being better for the team for one week. Not a career.

[3rd generation saint]

One of the reasons Jack Stevens is doing so well is because he was held back, given a few games to get a taste for it, but not thrown in the deep end before his body had a chance to mature.
He can now compete with bigger bodied players because he has the body strength to do so.
We have played kids this year, Winmar, Sipposs, Cripps, Ledger, Simpkin, Archer.
All have had a taste, they will be better next year with another full preseason under them and a chance to build up their body strength.
I too am dissappointed Tommy didn't get a game, I am sure he is being encouraged and advised it wont be long, even if it means next season.
After all Blake and few others will probably have retired, so more opportunities will be there and Tommy will have another pre season and a chance to improve his skills and his understanding of the game.

[clarky449]

One of the reasons Jack Stevens is doing so well is because he was held back, given a few games to get a taste for it, but not thrown in the deep end before his body had a chance to mature.
He can now compete with bigger bodied players because he has the body strength to do so.
We have played kids this year, Winmar, Sipposs, Cripps, Ledger, Simpkin, Archer.
All have had a taste, they will be better next year with another full preseason under them and a chance to build up their body strength.
I too am dissappointed Tommy didn't get a game, I am sure he is being encouraged and advised it wont be long, even if it means next season.
After all Blake and few others will probably have retired, so more opportunities will be there and Tommy will have another pre season and a chance to improve his skills and his understanding of the game.

Can you also tell me what would of happened to me if i went and took a right turn on the highway instead of left.

[saint6709]

saint6709 wrote:
Late Changes not out of the question...

Would hate to see WALSH turn his back on the club through lack of opportunity..

I've seen him at Sandy half a dozen times - he has earned a chance to show what he can offer at the top level IMO


In what position?

Seen him play across half forward and half back - why the question?

[Con Gorozidis]

The coach is ultra conservative . He never dared to win a flag. Just tried not to lose one.

[plugger66]

The coach is ultra conservative . He never dared to win a flag. Just tried not to lose one.

If that is the case he should be sacked. Do you think he should be sacked?

[dcstkfc]

The coach is ultra conservative . He never dared to win a flag. Just tried not to lose one.

Please explain.

[To the top]

Wouldn't take much to get into Sandringham's best at present.

They are being smashed every week.

The only player in contention for promotion is Gardiner, who is on a rehabilitation programme aiming at a return to the senior side - aka Keating!

State League football is a different animal from AFL football - they are more physical contests including because of the grounds and the elements especially against Docklands.

AFL is a more possession game revolving around accurate disposal to players making position.

So, leaving aside best players (encouragement awards?), the best you can take from State League games is the appetite for the contest.

Past that there is heavy significance on the training track performance.

So, I, for one, do not think you can read too much into Walsh's performances at VFL - because does he have the skill and ability to make position to receive and then dispose at AFL standard?

The coaching staff will know this from the training track.

As I have said before, I would expect that he will be encouraged by best player mentions at VFL level, emergency namings but bide his time until the 2012 pre-season when he will be given opportunity to cement a spot for the regular season - or at least for the first few games aka Archer.

He is only in his second season of Australian Rules football.

And AFL football is no place for romantics.

[noob]

We've won 5 on the trot. Trust the coach when his on form!

[joffaboy]

saint6709 wrote:
Late Changes not out of the question...

Would hate to see WALSH turn his back on the club through lack of opportunity..

I've seen him at Sandy half a dozen times - he has earned a chance to show what he can offer at the top level IMO


In what position?

Seen him play across half forward and half back - why the question?

Because he has been playing up forward for about four games. he is being groomed as a forward.

Considering Riewoldt is back which other forward would you drop for him, because he is a long way behind Blake as a back.

[MCG-Unit]

The coach is ultra conservative . He never dared to win a flag. Just tried not to lose one.

Still waiting for you to tell who are the 'rubbish players' you referred to a while ago.
Who would they be Gamble, Polo, Clarke, Dempster, Dawson, Gram, Koschitzke, Blake Which of those do you want to tip out?

The coaches are trying to pick a team to win a massive game. It's a good, balanced side.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Double post, deleted.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Yes again I agree they make the wrong calls but what this has to do with Walsh playing is beyond me. Can I ask why your call is the right call. Surely it isnt to show guts. That would be a joke. Like I said they see these guys play weekly and train and everything else. You dont but you argue about Lovett. Dont get it. This is about a player being better for the team for one week. Not a career.

I'm not saying my call (and I'm certainly not Robinson Caruso here and I wouldn't be surprised if at least one on the selection committee would have wanted Tommy in) is definitely the "right" call, but you don't seem to be at all open to the idea that it could be, yet you have said several times that you believe "they (the club) make the wrong calls", yet somehow they can't be making the "wrong call" again here?
It's like when anyone on here says something like "plugger66 is never wrong", sarcastically, and you then answer along the lines of "I'm often wrong" or something like that, yet whenever anyone questions you on a point of view you have at that time, you don't ever seem to be open to the possibility you could in fact be "wrong" on this occasion as well. If you're "often wrong" and you "agree they (the club) make the wrong calls" then when do all these "wrong calls" occur and why can't this be one of those times?
As for "what all this has to do with Tommy" is simple, I believe they're making the "wrong call" on this one (assuming he doesn't play, of course). It's my opinion and I was under the impression this is a forum to express our opinions. So I'm going to give it.
Even if it is for just one game, I believe it could do him (and as a result, us) the world of good (it could show him what he's busting a gut day, after day for, it could let him know what level he needs to be at, it's widely regarded that one game in the AFL can be worth say 5-10 VFL games, in terms of experience, so it could help fast track his development and it would of course show those making the calls exactly what he brings to the table. This is something they'll only be likely to be sure of once he plays at that level. He may step up more than they believed he could, or would. And of course, he could also be the best one for the job. As they say, there's one way to find out. This is where the guts to try something and take a chance comes into it.
We obviously saw something significant in him to go all the way across the world and spend two years trying to entice him here, so how about we actually see what he will do for us at senior AFL level, especially this week, in a game we really ought to win, at a time when he's apparently playing well and could easily be the best one for the job? We seem to have brought plenty into the senior side this year who haven't been setting the world on fire in the VFL, so why the hell not Tommy, who seems to have been doing pretty well, according to those who have seen him. And if we said to him that we were most likely just bringing him in for the one game (until Zac comes back) then I don't believe he'll take getting "dropped" personally, or badly, as he'll most likely understand it's most likely just a one game thing. I expect he'd be much happier to play just the one game than none at all!
As for you "not getting it" with regards to my reference to Lovett, or things I'm saying being "beyond you", as you suggested, I realise some of these things are going over your head, but maybe if you read them a bit more carefully and quieten your mind a little, you'll start to understand. They're not that complicated.

[joffaboy]

The coach is ultra conservative . He never dared to win a flag. Just tried not to lose one.

Please explain.

four goals down at halftime in GF one.

Blake and Kosi into the ruck, Gilbo up forward, great moves, trying to WIN the game.

But alas some people make statments without anything to back it up.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

The coach is ultra conservative . He never dared to win a flag. Just tried not to lose one.

You couldn't possibly know that unless you're on the inside. (Unless of course you have intuition/gut instinct ).

[bozza1980]

I'm really not sure who people would like him to bring in. We are battling for a finals birth and a home final and people expect him to bring in someone who has NEVER played a game.

That's right. It's called having guts.

So hang on a minute, sticking to your game plan and selection philosophy in the face of fans and media demanding otherwise is gutless but picking Tommy Walsh despite the fact you don't believe he is in our best 22 is gutsy??

Really??

We have played more debutants this year than any club other than Gold Coast, we have stuck at it even when the rest of the football world counted us out, we are still pursuing the prize at the end of the road despite the fact that even our own supporters don't believe we can win it.

As Lyon said after the debacle of the GF Replay, we will succeed or die trying, that is exactly what they are doing, perhaps what he should of added was that the will succeed their way or die trying.

[fingers]

I'm really not sure who people would like him to bring in. We are battling for a finals birth and a home final and people expect him to bring in someone who has NEVER played a game.

That's right. It's called having guts.

So now we select players according to which selection takes the most guts??

[saint6709]

saint6709 wrote:
saint6709 wrote:
Late Changes not out of the question...

Would hate to see WALSH turn his back on the club through lack of opportunity..

I've seen him at Sandy half a dozen times - he has earned a chance to show what he can offer at the top level IMO


In what position?

Seen him play across half forward and half back - why the question?


Because he has been playing up forward for about four games. he is being groomed as a forward.

Considering Riewoldt is back which other forward would you drop for him, because he is a long way behind Blake as a back.


I'm not sure he is being groomed as a forward , has spent a lot of time down back - I would personally like to see him up forward though -- I agree blake is a safe bet down back considering loss of gwilt and zac for the week - I would drop Geary ( who i saw play in the sandy practice match against Frankston at frankston before he broke his leg - and thought I'm not sure he'll play again on that form - good luck to him though I hope he can improve and become a solid performer - But I'd play walsh who could go back or forward depending on circumstances

[Thinline]

I'm really not sure who people would like him to bring in. We are battling for a finals birth and a home final and people expect him to bring in someone who has NEVER played a game.

That's right. It's called having guts.

So now we select players according to which selection takes the most guts??

THEN WHY THE f*** AREN'T WE PICKING ANDREOLI AND CURREN?

NO SPINE, OUR COACH.

LILY-LIVERED!

[fingers]

I'm really not sure who people would like him to bring in. We are battling for a finals birth and a home final and people expect him to bring in someone who has NEVER played a game.

That's right. It's called having guts.

So now we select players according to which selection takes the most guts??

THEN WHY THE f*** AREN'T WE PICKING ANDREOLI AND CURREN?

NO SPINE, OUR COACH.

LILY-LIVERED!

Maybe it's actually harder to NOT pick some of these players.