Lenny didn't get in... WGAF? Move on...

older saint · Tue 14 Sep 2010 9:56am

AA Team:
IN : Hayes, Thomas
OUT: Judd Johnson or Jamar

JUdd - Look at Selection committee - Walls (Carlton), Healy ( Love child) AD( wanted him at Carlton and ignored Visy deal) Hird(Loves Judd)

Champion player but not an AA this year

Moods · Post: # 987374Post **Moods** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 10:00am

plugger66 wrote:
Moods wrote:Funny how it appears to be just the selectors that don't think he deserved to get in isn't it? On just about all the footy shows last night the one thing they were unanimous about was that Lenny should have been in. Wasn't even up for debate. The footy show which didn't discuss the actual team b/c it hadn't been announced at that point was On The Couch. They had Sheahan's team up where he had Lenny in the guts and captain.

Of course I sound biased b/c I'm a saints supporter, but I reckon it's more than luck, It's just wrong.
So what are you actually saying? Surely it is bad luck and nothing else. I would have had him in for sure but I wouldnt have had Joey in. Doesnt matter what I think or anyone but the selectors though.

I reckon Joey's position was debateable. Lenny's wasn't. That's my point. There were about 1/2 a dozen positions that were debateable. Lenny's wasn't (in my opinion) I know it's an opinion game and I'm typing a losing argument, but I won't accept the 'who cares, it's the flag that matters' argument either. Two different things as far as I'm concerned.

Beej · Post: # 987402Post **Beej** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 11:25am

older saint wrote:AA Team:
IN : Hayes, Thomas
OUT: Judd Johnson or Jamar

JUdd - Look at Selection committee - Walls (Carlton), Healy ( Love child) AD( wanted him at Carlton and ignored Visy deal) Hird(Loves Judd)

Champion player but not an AA this year

Not sure Dale Thomas should be in the side ahead of Johnson. Johnson's had his best goal-kicking year ever.

Jamar has had a good season for his standards but he's also had a lot of poor games. Is he an A-grader? I don't think so. He's in the side for the sake of having a second ruckman. He should've made way if it meant freeing up space for Lenny Hayes.

Selectors needed to ask themselves, "has Hayes had a better year as a midfielder than Jamar had as a ruckman?"

Of course he did.

Slow, ugly, gangly, un-coorindated, dumb dinosaurs who can't kick, useless once the ball hits the ground, more concerned with locking arms than going for the footy, jumping two centimetres off the ground and then tapping it to nobody.

Stuff the second ruckman.

Beej · Post: # 987404Post **Beej** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 11:29am

Moods wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Moods wrote:Funny how it appears to be just the selectors that don't think he deserved to get in isn't it? On just about all the footy shows last night the one thing they were unanimous about was that Lenny should have been in. Wasn't even up for debate. The footy show which didn't discuss the actual team b/c it hadn't been announced at that point was On The Couch. They had Sheahan's team up where he had Lenny in the guts and captain.

Of course I sound biased b/c I'm a saints supporter, but I reckon it's more than luck, It's just wrong.
So what are you actually saying? Surely it is bad luck and nothing else. I would have had him in for sure but I wouldnt have had Joey in. Doesnt matter what I think or anyone but the selectors though.
I reckon Joey's position was debateable. Lenny's wasn't. That's my point. There were about 1/2 a dozen positions that were debateable. Lenny's wasn't (in my opinion) I know it's an opinion game and I'm typing a losing argument, but I won't accept the 'who cares, it's the flag that matters' argument either. Two different things as far as I'm concerned.

Joey had to be there IMO. Super consistent including a couple of brilliant 40(ish)-touch five-goal games which were as good as you will ever see from a creative, goal-scoring mid.

AlpineStars · Tue 14 Sep 2010 11:49am

In Hayes
Out Judd

Joey Bench, Lenny on gound.

SydneySainter · Tue 14 Sep 2010 11:53am

I know I have to move on, but I think Hayes was plain cheated.

Despite how everyone says that Hayes is one of the most respected players in the comp, I still think he is a little under-rated.

noob · Post: # 987414Post **noob** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 12:03pm

In my eyes Lenny, you would be the first picked to take me out on to the footy field. You show them mate !

joffaboy · Post: # 987418Post **joffaboy** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 12:06pm

got six AA last year and we didn't win a flag.

Lenny not top five in AFLPA indiv awards.

Apparently all the winner of the Coll v Geel PF has to do is turn up on GF day to be premier.

Keep underestimating us.

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Tue 14 Sep 2010 12:46pm

Anyone who still feels strongly about it can vent here, for the next little while, after clicking on the box: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/l ... 5922130262

bigred · Post: # 987433Post **bigred** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 12:57pm

joffaboy wrote:got six AA last year and we didn't win a flag.

Lenny not top five in AFLPA indiv awards.

Apparently all the winner of the Coll v Geel PF has to do is turn up on GF day to be premier.

Keep underestimating us.

THIS.

Thinline · Post: # 987434Post **Thinline** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 1:00pm

The thing that irks me (and I have said in another thread) is that it seems Hayes has been put head to head with Selwood.

1. Both should probably be in, but if not

2. Selwood, arguably, flirts with the rules to help exert influence. Lendog on the other hand just barrels in fairly and squarely week in week out. So if one had to be chosen over the other, I say Hayes prevails on moral grounds!

SainterK · Post: # 987439Post **SainterK** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 1:24pm

I've been thinking, I believe the roles and structure at St Kilda probably contributed to his omission.

Lenny is the engine room, his role is to win first possession, win clearances, and tackle.

I'd rather his stats better St Kilda, than appeal to AA selectors.

The Sainter · Tue 14 Sep 2010 5:29pm

Name one football writer or any TV football program that did not have Hayes in it. Let's not forget that one of the selectors was that dill Anderson who never played one game of AFL or VFL football in his life. It is a great honor to be selected and yes he should have also been the captain.

HSVKing · Post: # 987645Post **HSVKing** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 5:36pm

The Sainter wrote:Name one football writer or any TV football program that did not have Hayes in it.

Tony Shaw.

But that's understandable.

Thinline · Post: # 987654Post **Thinline** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 5:48pm

HSVKing wrote:
The Sainter wrote:Name one football writer or any TV football program that did not have Hayes in it.
Tony Shaw.

But that's understandable.

Would struggle to get his own name right on his tax return...

HSVKing · Post: # 987658Post **HSVKing** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 5:51pm

Thinline wrote:
HSVKing wrote:
The Sainter wrote:Name one football writer or any TV football program that did not have Hayes in it.
Tony Shaw.

But that's understandable.
Would struggle to get his own name right on his tax return...

He has a sign above his bed for when he wakes up in the morning. It reads...

BREATHE!

AlpineStars · Tue 14 Sep 2010 6:22pm

Thinline wrote:The thing that irks me (and I have said in another thread) is that it seems Hayes has been put head to head with Selwood.

1. Both should probably be in, but if not

2. Selwood, arguably, flirts with the rules to help exert influence. Lendog on the other hand just barrels in fairly and squarely week in week out. So if one had to be chosen over the other, I say Hayes prevails on moral grounds!

Lenny and Selwood went head to head a fortnight ago and one of them had to be moved at half time because he forgot what the football looked like

stinger · Post: # 987706Post **stinger** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 7:25pm

plugger66 wrote:
matrix wrote:no ones doubting that and its more than likely correct

what we are saying is he really should of get a gig
robed? yes

matter? not really when he wins the norm smith and has a premiership medal around his neck to go with it
He was unlucky no doubt but it isnt as if he would be unnoticed by the selectors. He has got in 3 times before. I suppose it is democratic vote and he unluckily missed out. If it was me i would have had Joey out and Lenny in.

that would be right....

Leigh Montagna, St Kilda.
Previously selected 2009. 22 games in 2010. 378 kicks (second in the AFL), 103 marks, 275 handballs, averaging 17.2 kicks, 4.7 marks, 12.5 handballs. 17 goals. 102 clearances, 112 inside 50m (first in the AFL), 36 rebound 50m

plugger66 · Post: # 987707Post **plugger66** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 7:29pm

stinger wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
matrix wrote:no ones doubting that and its more than likely correct

what we are saying is he really should of get a gig
robed? yes

matter? not really when he wins the norm smith and has a premiership medal around his neck to go with it
He was unlucky no doubt but it isnt as if he would be unnoticed by the selectors. He has got in 3 times before. I suppose it is democratic vote and he unluckily missed out. If it was me i would have had Joey out and Lenny in.

that would be right....

Leigh Montagna, St Kilda.
Previously selected 2009. 22 games in 2010. 378 kicks (second in the AFL), 103 marks, 275 handballs, averaging 17.2 kicks, 4.7 marks, 12.5 handballs. 17 goals. 102 clearances, 112 inside 50m (first in the AFL), 36 rebound 50m

I am fascinated with your fascination with my posts. Hope you are learning something because you have plenty to learn. I should have embarrassed you with the we will play WB thread but I dont need to. You do it well enough yourself.

Bookmarked. What ever that means.

Just looked it up. It means a cleaner of tennis courts who knows nothing about footy who is very old.

matrix · Post: # 987708Post **matrix** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 7:34pm

and....

Nicky Winmore · Tue 14 Sep 2010 9:48pm

Lenny missing out on AA will have an equal benefit. It will fire him up even more ( not that he needs it) to prove the selectors wrong.

SainterK · Post: # 987859Post **SainterK** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 11:22pm

I think he is OK about it all

stinger · Post: # 987863Post **stinger** » Tue 14 Sep 2010 11:24pm

matrix wrote:and....

nah...albert's not worth it...the guys a fool...

matrix · Post: # 987928Post **matrix** » Wed 15 Sep 2010 7:38am

oh come on
you two love going back and forth like an old married couple

and we all like watching it and having a laugh and shaking our heads

we all know this to be true

plugger66 · Post: # 987931Post **plugger66** » Wed 15 Sep 2010 8:03am

matrix wrote:oh come on
you two love going back and forth like an old married couple

and we all like watching it and having a laugh and shaking our heads

we all know this to be true

I do love him in a funny sort of way. Just like I love Sadie.