TOMMY WALSH MUST PLAY THIS WEEK

[skeptic]

Why? Do you know more than the selectors and the two head coaches (at Sandy and St.Kilda)?

So we're not allowed to have opinions your mightyness?

Disagreeing with RL automatically means your wrong... glad we made that call on Lovett then

And for the record, I don't mind the selections

[joffaboy]

Why? Do you know more than the selectors and the two head coaches (at Sandy and St.Kilda)?

So we're not allowed to have opinions your mightyness?

Disagreeing with RL automatically means your wrong... glad we made that call on Lovett then

And for the record, I don't mind the selections

Where did I say you cant have an opinion skeptic?

Where did I say Lyon disagreeing with Lyon means you are automatically wrong?

Of course you can have an opinion. All i asked was a simple question from the people stating opinion as fact such as "Walsh should have been playing since Round 8"

Now that is a statement. All I asked for was what the statement was based on and if the person making it had seen Walsh play.

I cant see why such a simple question would cause such angst. if you have an opinion you usually have some facts to back it up thats all.

Look I want to see Walsh play and succeed as much as the next supporter. My opinion (if I am allowed to have one of course ) is that, on the balance of probabilities, the two head coaches of Sandy and St.Kilda and the selection committee would know more about the selection or non selection of a player than anybody making wild supposition and dressing it up as facts.

Wow - some people are touchy

[joffaboy]

You see, you may very well be right, that T.Walsh is an AFL player and is our best 22, and I really hope you are. I have nothing but hope for T.Walsh, but I have seen him play quite a few times in the last 2 years and thought he still had quite a way to go.

So I simply ask again, have you seen T.Walsh play over the past year to make your judgement on? Really it is a simple question.

Oh and BTW, when T.Walsh get s a go i hope he absolutely rips it apart.

By the look of it you're missing my point once again.. and you continue to misrepresent me.
I've never , ever said that T Walsh is an AFL player ... I am not sure if he is or not... or ever will be.
So if he plays well - he wont be proving me right - because I'm not sure if he can cope at AFL level.

But the point is - let's all see (me included) if he has the right stuff... we should at least give the man a chance. He deserves one doesn't he ?
Is that overly generous ?

Considering that Lynch has been given 5 chances this season and seems to struggle for pace (at AFL level) and the fact that our side needs pace - why didn't Walsh get 1 chance.

Why are we all left guessing ?

Why are we even arguing over giving the guy 1 chance !

He's played a few reasonable games at VFL level .. let's now see if he can make the transition - I'm not sure he will, but let's find out.

See this is where you seem very confused over this issue.

You dont seem to know if Walsh is an AFL player or not, but advocate for him to be selected.

I ask. On what basis do you advocate, but people who actually know the ins and outs of the club dont feel the time is right to select him?

As for misrepresenting you. Surely if you advocate for a players selection, you MUST believe he is an AFL player otherwise why keep complaining when he isn't selected.

Surely it is common sense to believe a player capable of playing AFL before you keep pressing his claims.

Otherwise you are wanting the team to be not up to AFl standard

Very strange

[samoht]

I only advocate an equal chance - maybe one of Lynch's 5 chances could have gone his way ?

I have a feeling that for Walsh the transition to AFL will be easier (than Lynch) .. due to the fact that he's not slow.

But ,, we're left guessing... and anyway why are we/you trusting the selector's judgment... after all they got it wrong with Lynch 4 times out of 5 - he had one reasonable game if I recall.

If Walsh had 5 chances he might have had 3 good games and be more comfortable with the pace .. who knows ?
Well at least he's not slow.,, and we don't need to try him out 5 times to determine that.

[gringo]

i remember a similar situation with milney when he was on the rookie list and kicking goals each week in the ressies.....many on here were making calls similar to those now being made on tommy......we were all told that the club knew best...that milney wasn't ready....that we were only armchair experts.....that there was no certainty that he was even up to it..


...in the end the club relented...promoted him to he seniors and gave him a run...the rest is history as they say.....


give the boy a chance ross...ffs.....

Far out you must have been on the commodore 64 back in those days! I have been on here a few years and are becoming more jaded and cynical by the post. No wonder half the old buggers on here are cranky.

[Mr Magic]

I only advocate an equal chance - maybe one of Lynch's 5 chances could have gone his way ?

I have a feeling that for Walsh the transition to AFL will be easier (than Lynch) .. due to the fact that he's not slow.

But ,, we're left guessing... and anyway why are we/you trusting the selector's judgment... after all they got it wrong with Lynch 4 times out of 5 - he had one reasonable game if I recall.

If Walsh had 5 chances he might have had 3 good games and be more comfortable with the pace .. who knows ?
Well at least he's not slow.,, and we don't need to try him out 5 times to determine that.

Why start your post with the premise that those in charge of selecting our team don't know what they're doing?

How would you, I or anybody else on here know whether Walsh is 'ready' to play AFL yet?
Maybe he wasn't selected for any of those 5 games because:-
He wasn't ready
He couldn't play the role Lynch was selected to play
or any other reson we have absolutely zero knowledge about.

Has anybody on her who is stridently calling for his inclusion any knowledge as to how the team is selected?
What criteria is used?
What roles are earmarked for any/all players?
The fitness level of all players
Those that are/aren't available to play
What matchups have been decided
etc.
etc.
And yet without a skerrick of knowledge there are many who feel they 'know better'.

And as for those stating that Walsh will leave/go home if he's not given a game, who has told them that?
Somebody who might actually know, or just pure speculation?

Everybody is entitles to voice an opinion on her - it's a fan forum.
But sheesh, sometimes the strident demands from some on here seem way over the top and seem to belittle those who actually are paid to make the decisions at our Club.

Seemingly some of the armchair experts on here have forgotten that they are only that - armchair experts and not real experts.

[samoht]

I'm not demanding anything .. we're just discussing things here... and I'm just asking why/how come .. that's all... and looking/hoping for a fair and even playing field... but how unreasonable of me.

If we're going to use the word demanding - I'd be using it in the context that providing a solitary chance to one particular player seems to be extremely and curiously demanding for our selectors.

I'd be also using demanding - in the context of our selectors keep curiously promoting a slow player who keeps struggling - when he obviously finds the pace of AFL too demanding.

Also .. it could be argued the selectors placed too much demand on young player bodies like Siposs, Ledger, Winmar, Cripps - they could have given them one less game let's say and promoted Walsh (given the guy 1 chance at least .. glory be !!!) whose body is at least ready for the rough and tumble of AFL.

Perhaps the selectors find their job too demanding.

It's not my sherrick of knowledge that you should be concerned about here.

[barks4eva]

Seemingly some of the armchair experts on here have forgotten that they are only that - armchair experts and not real experts.

Yeah, like the real experts always make the right calls and never get it wrong!


FAIR DINKUM

[Mr Magic]

I'm not demanding anything .. we're just discussing things here... and I'm just asking why/how come .. that's all... and looking/hoping for a fair even playing field. How unreasonable of me.

If we're going to use the word demanding - I'd be using it in the context that providing a solitary chance to one particular player seems to be extremely and curiously demanding for our selectors.

I'd be also using demanding - in the context of our selectors keep curiously promoting a slow player who keeps struggling - when he obviously finds the pace of AFL too demanding.

Also .. it could be argued the selectors placed too much demand on young player bodies like Siposs, Ledger, Winmar, Cripps - they could have given them one less game let's say and promoted Walsh (given the guy 1 chance .. glory be !!!) whose body is at least ready for the rough and tumble of AFL.

Perhaps the selectors find their job too demanding.

It's not my sherrick of knowledge that you should be concerned about here.

Just your premise that the selectors are wrong?

Because that's seemingly the basis of your whole pov.

How about you look at the situation from the premise that the selectors know what they're doing?
Maybe there's valid reasons why some players are selected in certain situations and others aren't? (I know it's a stretch but just try thinking about that?)

I certainly don't presume to have any knowledge as to why some are selected and others not.
Whilst it might seem perplexing to some of us on the outside, I have faith that we haven't ewmployed a whole village full of idiots for that role and that they do know what they're doing.

Of course I may be competely wrong and those in power at our 40+ million dollar turnover per year Club have just gone out and hired any fool they could find to act as selectors.

Maybe some on here should offer themselves to the Board as they think they can do a superior job to the incumbent fools we have?

[desertsaint]

most of us on here saw our cloud's silver lining this season was the chance to blood and improve some of our younger players. our situation demanded it. it started to happen, the inclusion of youngsters seemed to invigorate the club and the supporters. then suddenly a finals spot became a real possibility and ross bottled it.
he is too intent on not losing, rather than winning. it's why he would rather take mature bodies and minds in the draft - less of a gamble. unfortunately also less of an upside.
2012 could be a last shot at a flag for this group, walsh has also done enough to suggest he deserves a chance. especially given our lack of talent or form in the forward line.
happy for ross to leave at the end of his contract unless he reinvents himself.
fortune favours the brave. ross is astute, but lacks the balls of a champ.

[samoht]

Let's look at your .. so called Premise Mr Magic..that the selectors know best... that they know what they're doing. Let's marvel at them.

Premise 1
Selectors kept promoting then dropping a slow player (5 times) that struggles (pace-wise).
How many times did they get that wrong ? .. after 4 failures couldn't Walsh have been given 1 run ? How unreasonable right ?

Premise 2
The selectors put Cripps, Siposs, Ledger Winmar's young/fragile bodies through the AFL wringer 1 times too many (they haven't been right since). ,,had Walsh been given a game (just 1) could that have helped their young bodies ?

Premise 3 - I'm being Sarcastic here for effect.
Walsh does not deserve a game let's prejudge him and rule him out .. the others (Lynch) are faster , Cripps, Siposs, Winmar and Ledger are physically more developed .. he's never made the best players at VFL level... he's sacrificed family and homeland and come thousands of miles. He shouldn't be encouraged /affirmed not even 1 single time - why would you promote someone like that ?

Premise 4
The selectors have been correct .. always made the right choices with the young players and Lynch .. so they must also be right about Walsh (who needs a tall quick physically mature/robust player anyway - when they can wisely promote and drop Lynch again or batter young 19 year old bodies).
Let's leave it to the experts !

[Mr Magic]

Well it's pretty hard to discuss any alternate view with you if you've got no real desire to accept that you're
1. prejudiced with a preconceived pov before the discussion even starts
2. not willing to even countenance the possibility that other povs may have any currency at all.

So, by all means keep promoting your view that you know better than the selectors. (which is obvious from the tone of your posts on this matter)

I'm happy to stick with those who actually have knowledge about the real situation rather than those who think they know what should be done based on zero knowledge or understanding.

Your perspective in this is like me watching a junior football game on a Sunday, and complaining loudly from behind the fence that 'Jimmy' should be on the field playing instead of 'Billy'.
And that 'Sammy' should be at CHB instead of 'Wally'

The Coach of that team, having trained them and coached them obviously has less of an idea as to who should be playing where. He's also obviously just picking and playing his 'favourites' rather than those who deserve it.

I on the other hand, having never seen any of them play/train have a better idea on who should be playing where.

[samoht]

A POV that deprives a deserving player 1 solitary chance (I'm not even hoping for an equal chance) .. it does not sit right with me.
Were the other players more deserving of their multiple promotions and chances ?
If so I'd accept the situation.

I'm not saying i know better than the selectors .. but I know better than to trust them (their judgment) given their record.

[joffaboy]

A POV that deprives a deserving player 1 solitary chance (I'm not even hoping for an equal chance) .. it does not sit right with me.

But how do you know he is deserving?

Were the other players more deserving of their multiple promotions and chances ?

Matter of opinion only. At the time of their selection the people in the know though they were not only more deserving, but a better fit for team balance.

I'm not saying i know better than the selectors .. but I know better than to trust them (their judgment) given their record.

You mean three grand finals in two years?

Did that all happen in spite of the terrible selections of in your PoV "undeserving' players.

Love to know your criteria of deserving or not.

[Mr Magic]

A POV that deprives a deserving player 1 solitary chance (I'm not even hoping for an equal chance) .. it does not sit right with me.
Were the other players more deserving of their multiple promotions and chances ?
If so I'd accept the situation.

I'm not saying i know better than the selectors .. but I know better than to trust them (their judgment) given their record.

But how do you KNOW he deserved a chance up until now?

That's my point.
Your taking your opinion and assuming it as a fact.

You may be right/wrong.
I don't know.
All I'm saying is that you have no factual basis to claim he did/didn't deserve an opportunity up to now.

Only those at the Club who know his current status and what is required in the team can make that call, with knowledge.

How do you know he 'deserves' to be in the team more than
Smith
Cahill
Archer
Gardiner
or anybody else on our list?

You're basing your opinion on statements made by other posters who most probably have no real knowledge of what has/hasn't transpired either.


I'm not trying to argue with you just for the hell of it.

I just get tired of reading post after hysterical post 'demanding' (yes that word but not coloured!) some particular thing be done when they have little or zero knowledge of the circumstances surrounding why certain decisons are made.

[samoht]

I've had my last post on the subject .. let's stick to our opposite POV's and respect each other as fellow sainters.
I'm happy to leave it at that .. or we'll just keep going around in circles.

For the record I haven't demanded anything .. just hoped.

Talking about circles the sun is shining outside...

[Wrote for Luck]

if you list a player as an emergency it means he must be ready for AFL (sorry for repeating this) football.

having seen Walsh play a few times this year and especially last weekend he definitely deserves to play tonight.

hasn't Walsh played against AFL bodies in Ireland?

but to the contrary it's not that Walsh isn't physically ready it's more technically prepared to defend himself (which is why they wait) - but he should go out there tonight imo

[joffaboy]

I've had my last post on the subject .. let's stick to our opposite POV's and respect each other as fellow sainters.
I'm happy to leave it at that .. or we'll just keep going around in circles.

For the record I haven't demanded anything .. just hoped.

Talking about circles the sun is shining outside...

Fair enough and lets hope Tommy gets a game soon and rips it to shreds.

We could all come on here and tell each other I told you - and we would ALL be correct

[barks4eva]

We could all come on here and tell each other I told you - and we would ALL be correct

Absolute rubbish, YOU and the rest of you apologist crapsters would be wrong!

A season gone to waste when Walsh almost 24yo should have been playing since round 8.

[Buckets]

We could all come on here and tell each other I told you - and we would ALL be correct

Absolute rubbish, YOU and the rest of you apologist crapsters would be wrong!

A season gone to waste when Walsh almost 24yo should have been playing since round 8.

How the F*** is it a season gone to waste???


God the messiah complex we place on players who haven't played is astounding!!!


Like joffaboy I hope that the boy rips the game to shreds when he is finally selected to play! But until that happens Ross and coaching committee have my support considering they have seen more of Walsh than anyone on here! Hell the boy has played 2 seasons of VFL footy!


FAIR DINKIM!

[matrix]

[joffaboy]

We could all come on here and tell each other I told you - and we would ALL be correct

Absolute rubbish, YOU and the rest of you apologist crapsters would be wrong!

A season gone to waste when Walsh almost 24yo should have been playing since round 8.

RIX

credibility -------------------> window

FOREVER

[joffaboy]

We could all come on here and tell each other I told you - and we would ALL be correct

Absolute rubbish, YOU and the rest of you apologist crapsters would be wrong!

A season gone to waste when Walsh almost 24yo should have been playing since round 8.

RIX

credibility -------------------> window

FOREVER

[gringo]

I think most people would agree that when there was a spot open he could play he was injured and or out of form. Now we have settled a line up he is playing some good footy. He has less games of footy in his whole career playing Aussie rules than some of the junior kids in under 10s. He will get a chance at some point, it is exciting to have him but there is no conspiracy to hold back a talented player. Just take a deep breath and enjoy the ride, he will be a special player, just maybe not this year.

[saintspremiers]

Hello Tommy Lovers.

He kicked 3 goals and had 18 touches today for the Sandy Magoos

So who should we drop to play him, considering we only kicked 19 goals yesterday??