Geary needs to have a big year

[Bluthy]

I don't think Geary needs to do too much more than play with intensity and help teach the kids to play with a zealous devotion to the game. He isn't a bad influence around a bunch of young kids.

See I find this attitude really patronising toward Jarryn. There is this sense that this is his best and he's a great tryer and should be applauded for it. Why can't he aim higher? We are always putting the heat of Steven and Armo that they are now in the their prime and will they be elite or A-grade or b-grade and questioning their kicking and decision making. And yet Geary who's just hit 100 games and is one of the few players we have in his prime, somehow goes under the radar and if you dare question his skill set or his future then somehow you're being mean to good honest tryer. Its very patronising.

I guarantee you what I'm saying is the exact conversation Richo and the coaches will be having with Gears. They won't want him resting on his laurels. They'll want him to go to another level and pushing him to work on his weakness and develop into a weapon. There are half-back players on our list, and more coming in each year, who will be getting lots of games under their belts and will get up to the same experience level that Geary has in a few seasons and a lot of them will have better disposal skills. And then Geary may very well find himself superseded. And its great that Geary is a leader and a fantastic clubman and teacher but there will be more players taking on those roles as they get a few seasons under their belts. His experience is extremely valuable now but maybe not so much in a few seasons with the likes of Dustan, Billing, Ross, Newnes, Weller getting up to the 100 game mark themselves.

Oh and the "Highly rated internally" thing is pretty close to meaningless. Richo said numerous times that Stanley was "a vital part of this clubs future" before he was traded out shortly after. AFL is a ruthless business and you need to keep sharpening your edges to show you are a weapon for the club.

[gringo]

I don't think Geary needs to do too much more than play with intensity and help teach the kids to play with a zealous devotion to the game. He isn't a bad influence around a bunch of young kids.

See I find this attitude really patronising toward Jarryn. There is this sense that this is his best and he's a great tryer and should be applauded for it. Why can't he aim higher? We are always putting the heat of Steven and Armo that they are now in the their prime and will they be elite or A-grade or b-grade and questioning their kicking and decision making. And yet Geary who's just hit 100 games and is one of the few players we have in his prime, somehow goes under the radar and if you dare question his skill set or his future then somehow you're being mean to good honest tryer. Its very patronising.

I guarantee you what I'm saying is the exact conversation Richo and the coaches will be having with Gears. They won't want him resting on his laurels. They'll want him to go to another level and pushing him to work on his weakness and develop into a weapon. There are half-back players on our list, and more coming in each year, who will be getting lots of games under their belts and will get up to the same experience level that Geary has in a few seasons and a lot of them will have better disposal skills. And then Geary may very well find himself superseded. And its great that Geary is a leader and a fantastic clubman and teacher but there will be more players taking on those roles as they get a few seasons under their belts. His experience is extremely valuable now but maybe not so much in a few seasons with the likes of Dustan, Billing, Ross, Newnes, Weller getting up to the 100 game mark themselves.

Oh and the "Highly rated internally" thing is pretty close to meaningless. Richo said numerous times that Stanley was "a vital part of this clubs future" before he was traded out shortly after. AFL is a ruthless business and you need to keep sharpening your edges to show you are a weapon for the club.

I don't buy Steven getting much criticism anywhere. He would walk into any team. Gears should keep striving to get better but if he plays like he did on the weekend he will not only hold his place, he will finish high in the B&F. Stanley was all potential Jarryn is actually high output. If it turns out that all the guys you mentioned get to be better players than him would be fantastic but unlikely. You don't need 22 Gary Abblett's to win a premiership- even the Hawks had guys like Johnny Simpkin in their side. I just think his disposal was ordinary early on but has got better and now isn't as rushed. It's a bit like looking for the issues that aren't there. He's more motivated than guys like Joey who look as if he is struggling to find the passion. i know who I would rather have along side me.

[dragit]

Would you like to actually address the OP's question?

Okay

Geary really needs to try and go up a cog this year and become a really damaging player.

Why? Because we are so s*** that we are suddenly expecting a back/pocket utility with average footskills who came off the rookie list to become Luke Hodge? If anyone thinks Geary is going to suddenly become damaging (by foot) like a brownlow medalist/premiership captain they need a check-up.

He one of our few players hitting their prime at the 100 game mark.

Can't argue with this bit, but this list situation is not his making.

He works hard defensively and is damn tough.

Agree

But he needs to start be really damaging going the other way and setting up forwards.
He gives some good run from the back but his disposal has lacked penetration and vision.

I imagine that his skills are at about the highest level that they will ever get to... he is already trying harder than most blokes out there - how does he improve vision and penetration now after a decade in the AFL system?

He needs to be really proactive and driving the team now taking over from the likes of Fisher and Dempster.

He is in the leadership group - tick.

Raising the coaches votes is 100% irrelevant unless you actually know what the coach awarded them for

It's actually 100% relevant when you are suggesting that he has failed in his role & the very people that hand out these roles have rated him as equal second best on the ground.

Geary is a battler, but for many reasons will most likely be in our top 10 B&F this year. But I think if there was one player on the list who probably won't go up a cog it's this guy - as he is already getting every last drop out of himself.

He's not Luke Hodge and won't become Luke Hodge by trying harder.

[Bluthy]

I imagine that his skills are at about the highest level that they will ever get to... he is already trying harder than most blokes out there - how does he improve vision and penetration now after a decade in the AFL system?

I don't know how this has swung around to me defending Gears and you absolutely bagging the sweet jesus out of him Dragit. Remember how Jones became the best shut down player in the comp for a couple of years and was an integral part of our flag tilts? Geary has got that 100 game base under him now. A lot of players actually take that long to start to develop composure out there in the hurly burly. It can be surpising the quantum leaps players can make with just an extra preaseason or another year of expirence under their belt or it just dawns on them "Hey I've been doing this a while - maybe I'm good at it!". I'd like to see Geary flatten out his kicking and at least try to be more penetrating. Unlike you I haven't written him off. As Gringo points out even Hawks have some less that super skilled players being important cogs. But players need the confidence and even arrogance to try and step up and not be limited by your sort of small minded attitude putting players in a box.

[dragit]

I imagine that his skills are at about the highest level that they will ever get to... he is already trying harder than most blokes out there - how does he improve vision and penetration now after a decade in the AFL system?

I don't know how this has swung around to me defending Gears and you absolutely bagging the sweet jesus out of him Dragit. Remember how Jones became the best shut down player in the comp for a couple of years and was an integral part of our flag tilts? Geary has got that 100 game base under him now. A lot of players actually take that long to start to develop composure out there in the hurly burly. It can be surpising the quantum leaps players can make with just an extra preaseason or another year of expirence under their belt or it just dawns on them "Hey I've been doing this a while - maybe I'm good at it!". I'd like to see Geary flatten out his kicking and at least try to be more penetrating. Unlike you I haven't written him off. As Gringo points out even Hawks have some less that super skilled players being important cogs. But players need the confidence and even arrogance to try and step up and not be limited by your sort of small minded attitude putting players in a box.

Bluth, I'll ignore your personal insult.
I can't see how you can interpret my posts as bagging Geary at all, in fact I have been defending him on here for years, I rate the guy.
I think he's a good player, he's always had deficiencies around kicking the ball, but also has plenty of positive traits which have allowed him to forge a decent AFL career so far.
While I'm not doubting he can still improve his football, what I find insulting is couch-potatoes suggesting that all he needs to do is try a little harder and he'll suddenly have amazing kicking skills and vision, it really shows a poor understanding of how hard guys like this work to get to the level they are.
Vision and spacial awareness are pretty innate qualities, while they can be improved, the best players are born with it.

[saintsRrising]

.
, what I find insulting is couch-potatoes suggesting that all he needs to do is try a little harder and he'll suddenly have amazing kicking skills and vision, it really shows a poor understanding of how hard guys like this work to get to the level they are.
Vision and spacial awareness are pretty innate qualities, while they can be improved, the best players are born with it.

Sorry who said that?

Just because a player's deficiency is identified as being desirable to improve it does not mean that he can. I like many in this thread have commented on players who work their buts off but who have particular flaws.

ie CJ.

I used Loewe as an example of a player who worked very very hard to improve his once dreadful kicking on goal. and I can assure you when he was playing that his kicking was keenly discussed by many a St Kilda fan

Some players can improve their flaws. It has nothing to do with "coach potatatoes" as you wish to denegrate forumites for discussing it. I would be amazed if both Geary and the coaches have not discussed his need to improve this aspect of his game.

The OP was about an aspect of Geary's game for discussion.

If you start a thread about which players are the hardest working at the club, best clubmen etc then I am sure that Geary would rate highly in such a thread. siposs for example would be the reverse. A player with good kicking skills who does not work hard enough about getting involved in the game.

Is Geary a 'sacred cow" that cannot be discussed unless you fawn favourably over every aspect of his game? Am I a "couch potatoe" if I observe for example that Saad needs to find the ball more?

Again I rate him highly for many aspects of his game. However setting up forwards well is an area that he needs to work on.

[dragit]

.
, what I find insulting is couch-potatoes suggesting that all he needs to do is try a little harder and he'll suddenly have amazing kicking skills and vision, it really shows a poor understanding of how hard guys like this work to get to the level they are.
Vision and spacial awareness are pretty innate qualities, while they can be improved, the best players are born with it.

Sorry who said that?

Just because a player's deficiency is identified as being desirable to improve it does not mean that he can. I like many in this thread have commented on players who work their buts off but who have particular flaws.

ie CJ.

I used Loewe as an example of a player who worked very very hard to improve his once dreadful kicking on goal. and I can assure you when he was playing that his kicking was keenly discussed by many a St Kilda fan

Some players can improve their flaws. It has nothing to do with "coach potatatoes" as you wish to denegrate forumites for discussing it. I would be amazed if both Geary and the coaches have not discussed his need to improve this aspect of his game.

The OP was about an aspect of Geary's game for discussion.

If you start a thread about which players are the hardest working at the club, best clubmen etc then I am sure that Geary would rate highly in such a thread. siposs for example would be the reverse. A player with good kicking skills who does not work hard enough about getting involved in the game.

Is Geary a 'sacred cow" that cannot be discussed unless you fawn favourably over every aspect of his game? Am I a "couch potatoe" if I observe for example that Saad needs to find the ball more?

Again I rate him highly for many aspects of his game. However setting up forwards well is an area that he needs to work on.

This entire thread is full of people completely s***-canning a bloke that was named in the best few players on the ground by the actual coaches... while you have declared his game a failure?

The gist of bluthy's OP is that if Jarryn works a little harder then his "vision" & kicking trajectory will improve, which I am saying is pretty difficult given that he is already getting every last drop out of himself. Asking for Geary to become a really damaging player by foot is like asking for Armitage to become a speedy outside player - fantasy.

[saintsRrising]

... while you have declared his game a failure?

If I have, perhaps you would do me the courtesy of quoting where I stated such a thing? Otherwise can you desist from making such claims.

I am pretty sure I have repeatedly stated that he should not be dropped, and that he is very good at many aspects of the game.... but have commented on the OP in terms of his ability to be damaging with the ball on setting up our forwards. Pretty sure two that I have given many examples of players with flaws who have played many games for the Saints.

The gist of bluthy's OP is that if Jarryn works a little harder then his "vision" & kicking trajectory will improve, which I am saying is pretty difficult given that he is already getting every last drop out of himself. Asking for Geary to become a really damaging player by foot is like asking for Armitage to become a speedy outside player - fantasy.

You do like to exagerate and go for the extremes. No we cannot make Armo much faster, though some running coaching may tweak it...nor can we make Saad taller. But yes I would hope that the many, many coaches now on the St Kilda payroll are actually there to IMPROVE all of our players and to not just watch them, like we fans do.

What is wrong with it being difficult? Playing in the AFL means that EVERYONE at that level is playing at an elite level by overal standards. That means to remain at that level that you constantly have to improve. Aspects of the game such as kicking and ball use CAN be improved by coaching an application. Just because Gearyy cannot become the next Jarman does not mean that he cannot improve his kicking and ball use by a little bit, or may be more. Just one or two more accurate kicks in a game could lead to one or two more goals to us, and one or two less to the oppostion. AFL is a game of many small actions that all add up to a win ora loss.

Also he does not necessiarilly have to become really damaging. He just needs to become more damaging. A few players being that little bit better would have resulted in a win last weekend.

Have you heard of a guy called Harvey that played for the Saints? His kicking early on was so so, and on goal it remained that way for his whole career. BUT he learnt to become very damaging in setting up forwards by not kicking the ball too long, as at any longer distance his accuracy was poor. He became the master of the 30m pass anda big part of that was his timing in when he kicked. Geary often "bombs" the ball. Just not "bombing" as often would lead to an immediate improvement.

Frankie Pecket is another player who improved his ball use over time and later in his career was much better than in his early years. Early on fans would often groan when he had the ball.

[The Redeemer]

I don't think Geary needs to do too much more than play with intensity and help teach the kids to play with a zealous devotion to the game. He isn't a bad influence around a bunch of young kids.

See I find this attitude really patronising toward Jarryn. There is this sense that this is his best and he's a great tryer and should be applauded for it. Why can't he aim higher? We are always putting the heat of Steven and Armo that they are now in the their prime and will they be elite or A-grade or b-grade and questioning their kicking and decision making. And yet Geary who's just hit 100 games and is one of the few players we have in his prime, somehow goes under the radar and if you dare question his skill set or his future then somehow you're being mean to good honest tryer. Its very patronising.

I guarantee you what I'm saying is the exact conversation Richo and the coaches will be having with Gears. They won't want him resting on his laurels. They'll want him to go to another level and pushing him to work on his weakness and develop into a weapon. There are half-back players on our list, and more coming in each year, who will be getting lots of games under their belts and will get up to the same experience level that Geary has in a few seasons and a lot of them will have better disposal skills. And then Geary may very well find himself superseded. And its great that Geary is a leader and a fantastic clubman and teacher but there will be more players taking on those roles as they get a few seasons under their belts. His experience is extremely valuable now but maybe not so much in a few seasons with the likes of Dustan, Billing, Ross, Newnes, Weller getting up to the 100 game mark themselves.

Oh and the "Highly rated internally" thing is pretty close to meaningless. Richo said numerous times that Stanley was "a vital part of this clubs future" before he was traded out shortly after. AFL is a ruthless business and you need to keep sharpening your edges to show you are a weapon for the club.

Maybe Geary is discussed within a patronising sphere because folks ideally want to see him get better but ultimately know he has the kicking skills of a 15 year old B-Grader?

From where I sit, patronise away. Ideally the sooner it ceases the better and he is replaced in the side with a better half-back that can kick the ball.

[dragit]

If we are talking about Geary stepping up, becoming a leader and impacting the game then he would have to be given a tick for last week surely? The coaches thought so, but not you?

... while you have declared his game a failure?

If I have, perhaps you would do me the courtesy of quoting where I stated such a thing? Otherwise can you desist from making such claims.

IMO saying but wow he had 24 disposls means little. The role he played was one where you would expect to get that or more. However the role he played is also meant to be one where he sets up the play, and in te game against GWS by that measure he failed.

When you looked at the stats did you also look at what position and role he was playing?
For example 9 marks. Is this good or bad relative to the position he played?

Yes 9 Marks would be a good result for any player in this role. 24 touches at 80%, 6 rebound 50's, 3 inside 50's all great numbers. You seem pretty clear on his role - what were the coaches instructions?

At his age he is more than ripe to step up...but will he?

At 101 games and almost 27 Geary is not going to change...the Geary of today, is the same Geary as 4 years ago.

This is completely false - 4 years ago he averaged 9 disposals per game… this year he will push into the 20's - I think you would pretty safely call that stepping up. I imagine every aspect of his game will be improved on 4 years ago. - but he still won't be Chris Judd.

every time he gets the ball you just little faith that he will use it well.

he knows he cannot kick.

You clearly have no faith in this guy to improve at all, but maybe your expectation of what he could become are just fanciful… evidenced by the brownlow medalists you keep referencing?

Have you heard of a guy called Harvey that played for the Saints?

Yep, the guy had won a B&F & AA in his 5th year, with less games than geary has played… another absurd comparison...

Clearly Geary's biggest weakness is footskills which I think overall he has improved btw, baring in mind he hasn't played many games in 18 months. He's never going to be a great kick, but if we are talking about him stepping up as a leader and he continues to be in our best each week, I don't think we can ask for much more.

[Bluthy]

I want to see Geary at least trying to spear it in a bit more. That indicates to me that the club has got an environment of working on players kicking and giving it a priority and telling them to take that risk because its how you get better. Its too easy to say "draft kids who can kick". Hawthorn draft a kid like Bill Hartaung for his elite speed and see that his kicking is ok. I bet they then go to work on his kicking from the very minute he walks in the door. They make it happen and don't just rely on some innate ability. I don't believe they are just somehow drafting brilliant kickers, as well as speed merchants, as well as tough as nails. They are rounding out all aspects of their players. Apparently their kicking coach is brilliant. I think I heard one of the players say they have also been taught how to run - how to run!! - and that has speeded them up!

I think Geary, like quite a few other players, has suffered from not being a good development environment during his formative years. And yes Dragit I think you can improve your vision and kicking. You may not have the inbuilt x-factor vision like Billings but lowering the eyes is a skill like marking, positioning, running patterns, overlap etc. Bombing it in or to a pack can very easily become a habit when young and you are panicky and don't want to screw up. Once ingrained its hard to give up. I've been impressed with players like Dunstan who are trying to spear it in to forwards. A lot of times it not coming off but he will get better. Newnes is another player with a really awkward kicking style that should have been looked at a long time ago. Even ARmo and Steven should probably be better kicks if the club had the resources and focus put into them. We now have Peta Searle doing development work so I hope she is working with players on their kicking because its just getting more and more important.

At 27 maybe Jarryn is too long in the tooth to change a lot but I'd rather see him screw up trying a risky kick to a forward than generic, safe up and under kicking to packs that doesn't hurt your stats. It sets an example for the next-gen to take it on with risk-reward kicking and that we have an environment that values brave kicking and penetration.

[saintsRrising]

If we are talking about Geary stepping up, becoming a leader and impacting the game then he would have to be given a tick for last week surely? The coaches thought so, but not you?

... while you have declared his game a failure?

If I have, perhaps you would do me the courtesy of quoting where I stated such a thing? Otherwise can you desist from making such claims.

IMO saying but wow he had 24 disposls means little. The role he played was one where you would expect to get that or more. However the role he played is also meant to be one where he sets up the play, and in te game against GWS by that measure he failed.

When you looked at the stats did you also look at what position and role he was playing?
For example 9 marks. Is this good or bad relative to the position he played?

Yes 9 Marks would be a good result for any player in this role. 24 touches at 80%, 6 rebound 50's, 3 inside 50's all great numbers. You seem pretty clear on his role - what were the coaches instructions?

At his age he is more than ripe to step up...but will he?

At 101 games and almost 27 Geary is not going to change...the Geary of today, is the same Geary as 4 years ago.

This is completely false - 4 years ago he averaged 9 disposals per game… this year he will push into the 20's - I think you would pretty safely call that stepping up. I imagine every aspect of his game will be improved on 4 years ago. - but he still won't be Chris Judd.

every time he gets the ball you just little faith that he will use it well.

he knows he cannot kick.

You clearly have no faith in this guy to improve at all, but maybe your expectation of what he could become are just fanciful… evidenced by the brownlow medalists you keep referencing?

Have you heard of a guy called Harvey that played for the Saints?

Yep, the guy had won a B&F & AA in his 5th year, with less games than geary has played… another absurd comparison...

Clearly Geary's biggest weakness is footskills which I think overall he has improved btw, baring in mind he hasn't played many games in 18 months. He's never going to be a great kick, but if we are talking about him stepping up as a leader and he continues to be in our best each week, I don't think we can ask for much more.

This is a farce...you obviously cannot back up your claim that I stated that Geary is a failure and resort to subetfuge instead.

ie My post on his disposals skills not improving in 4 years you try and distort into picking the ONE year that his disposal tally dipped and claim I was talking about his whole game not improving. What rubbish. And in your own posts you keep referrring to his poor footskills and that he cannot improve them!

Your clearly do not want to discuss the OP and instead what to rabbit on that I am denigrating the other aspects of Geary's game despite the fact that I have regularly praised these., said he will play many games for the Saints, etc etc.

[bergholt]

Pretty solid job on Ablett tonight.

[MC Gusto]

Great in the last qtr

[dragit]

If we are talking about Geary stepping up, becoming a leader and impacting the game then he would have to be given a tick for last week surely? The coaches thought so, but not you?

... while you have declared his game a failure?

If I have, perhaps you would do me the courtesy of quoting where I stated such a thing? Otherwise can you desist from making such claims.

IMO saying but wow he had 24 disposls means little. The role he played was one where you would expect to get that or more. However the role he played is also meant to be one where he sets up the play, and in te game against GWS by that measure he failed.

When you looked at the stats did you also look at what position and role he was playing?
For example 9 marks. Is this good or bad relative to the position he played?

Yes 9 Marks would be a good result for any player in this role. 24 touches at 80%, 6 rebound 50's, 3 inside 50's all great numbers. You seem pretty clear on his role - what were the coaches instructions?

At his age he is more than ripe to step up...but will he?

At 101 games and almost 27 Geary is not going to change...the Geary of today, is the same Geary as 4 years ago.

This is completely false - 4 years ago he averaged 9 disposals per game… this year he will push into the 20's - I think you would pretty safely call that stepping up. I imagine every aspect of his game will be improved on 4 years ago. - but he still won't be Chris Judd.

every time he gets the ball you just little faith that he will use it well.

he knows he cannot kick.

You clearly have no faith in this guy to improve at all, but maybe your expectation of what he could become are just fanciful… evidenced by the brownlow medalists you keep referencing?

Have you heard of a guy called Harvey that played for the Saints?

Yep, the guy had won a B&F & AA in his 5th year, with less games than geary has played… another absurd comparison...

Clearly Geary's biggest weakness is footskills which I think overall he has improved btw, baring in mind he hasn't played many games in 18 months. He's never going to be a great kick, but if we are talking about him stepping up as a leader and he continues to be in our best each week, I don't think we can ask for much more.

This is a farce...you obviously cannot back up your claim that I stated that Geary is a failure and resort to subetfuge instead.

ie My post on his disposals skills not improving in 4 years you try and distort into picking the ONE year that his disposal tally dipped and claim I was talking about his whole game not improving. What rubbish. And in your own posts you keep referrring to his poor footskills and that he cannot improve them!

Your clearly do not want to discuss the OP and instead what to rabbit on that I am denigrating the other aspects of Geary's game despite the fact that I have regularly praised these., said he will play many games for the Saints, etc etc.

Hilarious, My claim? I haven't picked any year to distort figures, just responded to your claim which I can imagine must be pretty embarrassing.

Your quotes above, nothing to do with me denigrating you, sorry that it looks so bad when you read them back.

[Moods]

I haven't had time to read through all the bickering. Gears has his deficiencies, which will always prevent him from being elite - however tonight - great game Gears!!

[Sobraz]

Solid game, no question.
Not sure why many get personally offended when his position is questioned. It's never a slight on his character. With Webster to return and more young kids soon to be knocking down the door like McKenzie and Acres, much like Sinclair has, his position is a relevant discussion. But tonight he was better. In what was an outstanding team performance and victory.

[saintsRrising]

Hilarious, My claim? I haven't picked any year to distort figures, just responded to your claim which I can imagine must be pretty embarrassing.

LOL...I was talking about his disposal skills. You know quality rather than quantity. But you compare quantity as an argument = laughable.

Your quotes above, nothing to do with me denigrating you, sorry that it looks so bad when you read them back.

Why would be I be embarrased? Tonight 100% endorsed what I had said and suggested.

Geary instead of "bombing" it used short kicks to be much more effective tonight = much smarter play, see despite what you stated he can improve his disposal!

The coach rather than having Geary get loose to set up play instead concentrated on using his defensive talents to full advantage. Fisher and Savage instead were the main avenues out of defence. How good was Savage tonight?

Win Win as far as I am concerned for the team.

[dragit]

Solid game, no question.
Not sure why many get personally offended when his position is questioned. It's never a slight on his character. With Webster to return and more young kids soon to be knocking down the door like McKenzie and Acres, much like Sinclair has, his position is a relevant discussion. But tonight he was better. In what was an outstanding team performance and victory.

I'm not normally annoyed at discussions on whether players should be in the side or not, but when they are our best few and still canned I think they deserve defending...
But, good on you for getting on here after declaring that we would be more likely to win without Gears…
Bruce completely out-played my expectations tonight, I'm not sold on him, but tonight he was awesome.

[Wayne42]

Solid game, no question.
Not sure why many get personally offended when his position is questioned. It's never a slight on his character. With Webster to return and more young kids soon to be knocking down the door like McKenzie and Acres, much like Sinclair has, his position is a relevant discussion. But tonight he was better. In what was an outstanding team performance and victory.

I'm not normally annoyed at discussions on whether players should be in the side or not, but when they are our best few and still canned I think they deserve defending...
But, good on you for getting on here after declaring that we would be more likely to win without Gears…
Bruce completely out-played my expectations tonight, I'm not sold on him, but tonight he was awesome.

Clearly this is a site for passionate supporters to vent as opposed to having anything at all to do with the team or the club, makes for a great read, especially when some posters think what they
spew out has an affect on the club or the team..

[Bluthy]

Solid game, no question.
Not sure why many get personally offended when his position is questioned. It's never a slight on his character. With Webster to return and more young kids soon to be knocking down the door like McKenzie and Acres, much like Sinclair has, his position is a relevant discussion. But tonight he was better. In what was an outstanding team performance and victory.

Maybe Geary needs to be a tagger regularly. He's got the speed, the endurance and can dishout out the tough niggle. Like you say with Webster, WRight, Savage, McKenzie, Acres, Sinclair we've got a lot of run and carry players who can give great drive out of the back half. But then again GC weren't relentlessly pumping the ball into our defence the way the top teams will - so do you go with Geary in defence to give that loose man cover he does so well. Personally I think attack is the best form of defence and if you aren't continually running and kicking the ball out of defence with real penetration then they just set up a wall and lock you in.

[dragit]

Hilarious, My claim? I haven't picked any year to distort figures, just responded to your claim which I can imagine must be pretty embarrassing.

LOL...I was talking about his disposal skills. You know quality rather than quantity. But you compare quantity as an argument = laughable.

Your quotes above, nothing to do with me denigrating you, sorry that it looks so bad when you read them back.

Why would be I be embarrased? Tonight 100% endorsed what I had said and suggested.

Geary instead of "bombing" it used short kicks to be much more effective tonight = much smarter play, see despite what you stated he can improve his disposal!

The coach rather than having Geary get loose to set up play instead concentrated on using his defensive talents to full advantage. Fisher and Savage instead were the main avenues out of defence. How good was Savage tonight?

Win Win as far as I am concerned for the team.

I'm calling a truce (or you win) as I can't even work out what we are arguing about anymore

[The Redeemer]

Great in the last qtr

So he was great in the last quarter? Come on...please do better than that...the game was over by the final term.

[dragit]

Great in the last qtr

So he was great in the last quarter? Come on...please do better than that...the game was over by the final term.

You didn't rate his game at all?

[terry smith rules]

I notice he got a vote from the coaches, so some here maybe watching a different game