Really irked by having Farren Ray as the sub on the weekend! I mean strewth, if we are not going to be bold with selecting our 22 each week by injecting some more youth, which has been debated ad nauseum on here, the least we can do is use the Sub position to get game time/experience into a wider spread of our future...ie young guns.
I have yet to see a 'sub' ever come in and completely change a game, for better or worse. I watch a fair bit of footy on the TV probably 3-4 afl games a week, and just don't see the sub as being match winning hardly ever...so why we would select a proven B grade vet, who rarely hits the scoreboard and probably plays his best footy by accumlating low impact possessions over 4 quarters as the sub just leaves me dumbfounded.
Why we couldn't have selected an Eli Temptleton, a Minch, Saunders...anyone under the age of 23!! I just dont get it! Ray was never going to be the difference between winning and losing, and no offence to him, he's a proven AFL player, but if he was warranted on form to go out of the starting 22, surely with our charter of rebuilding, he just goes back to Sandy and a young gun can get a quarter of experience.
If the arguement about potential injury and risking playing a rookie for 3+ quarters is used...don't think it cuts it...think we need to be bolder in pushing experience into youth and the sub is a great way to do that even if the rule itself stinks and will likely be gone by next year...FWIW, just IMO.
No more vets as the Sub Please!!
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
Saint wagga
- Club Player
- Posts: 1081
- Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 7:44pm
- Been thanked: 52 times
Re: No more vets as the Sub Please!!
Maybe the older player as sub makes more sense especially if they only going to play 30 minutes. And if Ray was in the 22 anyway its better the young kid starts and gets about 3 quarters. Also the young player who replaces ray maybe better to have a whole game at Sandy that 30 minutes in the seniors. Anyway that maybe the way the coaches see it. Sort of makes sense.
-
saynta
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23144
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9087 times
- Been thanked: 3945 times
Re: No more vets as the Sub Please!!
Yes it does, surprisingly.plugger66 wrote:Maybe the older player as sub makes more sense especially if they only going to play 30 minutes. And if Ray was in the 22 anyway its better the young kid starts and gets about 3 quarters. Also the young player who replaces ray maybe better to have a whole game at Sandy that 30 minutes in the seniors. Anyway that maybe the way the coaches see it. Sort of makes sense.
Re: No more vets as the Sub Please!!
saynta wrote:Yes it does, surprisingly.plugger66 wrote:Maybe the older player as sub makes more sense especially if they only going to play 30 minutes. And if Ray was in the 22 anyway its better the young kid starts and gets about 3 quarters. Also the young player who replaces ray maybe better to have a whole game at Sandy that 30 minutes in the seniors. Anyway that maybe the way the coaches see it. Sort of makes sense.
Interesting.
Re: No more vets as the Sub Please!!
30 mins is better than being an emergency and not playing sandy at allplugger66 wrote:Maybe the older player as sub makes more sense especially if they only going to play 30 minutes. And if Ray was in the 22 anyway its better the young kid starts and gets about 3 quarters. Also the young player who replaces ray maybe better to have a whole game at Sandy that 30 minutes in the seniors. Anyway that maybe the way the coaches see it. Sort of makes sense.
"Heroes are never forgotten, but legends never die"
-
Saint wagga
- Club Player
- Posts: 1081
- Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 7:44pm
- Been thanked: 52 times
Re: No more vets as the Sub Please!!
Your points are valid P66, and obviously that is how the coaches are seeing at present. But the lack of boldness at selection and forward thinking is becoming irksome to me and more than just a few on here going by the 'dad's army' type threads. I wonder if perhaps Richo after such a shocking year last year is just wantingt o shore up his own stocks by putting out more competitive teams in the short term whilst losing some of that 'short term pain for long term gain' mentality. If Ray was demoted to be the sub which it surely is seen as, then for mine, he just goes back to Sandy. Given we are chock full of experienced players already in the starting side, due to lack of injury, and we are needing to rotate our younger players thru the dev squad, I would rather we give a taste of senior experience to a broader range of our future. I think because of abnormally low injury toll, we have the luxury of using that sub role to spread the senior experience without losing match fitness in players too much.
Re: No more vets as the Sub Please!!
S.A Saint wrote:30 mins is better than being an emergency and not playing sandy at allplugger66 wrote:Maybe the older player as sub makes more sense especially if they only going to play 30 minutes. And if Ray was in the 22 anyway its better the young kid starts and gets about 3 quarters. Also the young player who replaces ray maybe better to have a whole game at Sandy that 30 minutes in the seniors. Anyway that maybe the way the coaches see it. Sort of makes sense.
It is and that's why I didn't mention that. But again there could be even a reason for them resting in a game.
-
saynta
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23144
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9087 times
- Been thanked: 3945 times
Re: No more vets as the Sub Please!!
saynta wrote:I'd give Rooy the vest against the Tigers
Why would you do that? If he is injured he doesn't play and if he is fit he plays as per normal. This isn't local footy whatever the game.