Positives

[Teflon]

From Xazza BF reckons strong source who knows 1 other said it too


nasiah gone either end of this year or next
Bytel gone end of year

[Shaggy]

From Xazza BF reckons strong source who knows 1 other said it too


nasiah gone either end of this year or next
Bytel gone end of year

You should not post in a positive thread given your hatred of Ratts.

You currently turn everything into slime.

[Teflon]

From Xazza BF reckons strong source who knows 1 other said it too


nasiah gone either end of this year or next
Bytel gone end of year

You should not post in a positive thread given your hatred of Ratts.

You currently turn everything into slime.

Apologies that’s just BS
I like Ratts he just can’t coach but this was in the players thread - nothing to do with Ratts
Take it for what it is
You’re posting has a nice touch of slime bout it though

[Vortex]

I think Sharman is not big enough to be a kp and quick enough to not be a kp

Not at all sure what he is?

He’s definitely not a defender - Ratten wrong about that

I'd be flabbergasted if Ratts doesn't know he's not a key position player ESPECIALLY a defender. I just think because Ratts has had vrtually no depth and no options at all left at Sandy this year he has had to turn a fringe player into a project players and experiment this year. Sharman has been very VERY lucky to be getting a game and all credit to Ratts for trying everything he can to develop players who look way off the pace.

I think when Hayes gets back in the side Sharman will return to doing most of his development at Sandy. Personally I haven't seen anything yet to suggest he can make it at AFL level. But he's got 2 years to keep trying and a coach who's giving him all the resources he can.

[Devilhead]

Sharman needs to pit on 5 to 7 kg of muscle ... get up to 90 kg

He has shown he has a great leap, agility and is a good kick for goal .... reckon he has shown plenty of poise under pressure as well in those few games down back

He has played 14 games ...... well worth perservering with

Could well do better under a different forward coach and also if he wasn't moved around as much ..... its been a good learning curve but time to settle him into one position

Another 40 games under his belt with added strength he could well be a weapon ...... if developed correctly

[spert]

I still think Sharman has massive upside for us, should start at FF and King at CHF , and mids instructed to kick it to either, whoever is free, instead of King everytime.

King hasn't got enough presence to be a FF, and the opposition know that now, but he could develop as a CHF which would force to him to move around more in that position

[Vortex]

Sharman needs to pit on 5 to 7 kg of muscle ... get up to 90 kg

He has shown he has a great leap, agility and is a good kick for goal .... reckon he has shown plenty of poise under pressure as well in those few games down back

He has played 14 games ...... well worth perservering with

Could well do better under a different forward coach and also if he wasn't moved around as much ..... its been a good learning curve but time to settle him into one position

Another 40 games under his belt with added strength he could well be a weapon ...... if developed correctly

Probably needs to learn how to win his own ball more than anything. Then probably needs to learn what to do when he doesn't have the ball. Probably also needs to learn how to chase and tackle. Will probably struggle to improve his agility though and that could see him struggle in most positions except where you run and jump at the ball in a straight line. Can he become a full time backine player that try's to get a fist to the ball, it's only one trick though so he will need to develop a lot more if he wants to make it at the AFL level. He's got 2 years to make try and make it which is the positive.

[saynta]

From Xazza BF reckons strong source who knows 1 other said it too


nasiah gone either end of this year or next
Bytel gone end of year

Listening to crap from Big Footy. f****** spare me.

[Teflon]

From Xazza BF reckons strong source who knows 1 other said it too


nasiah gone either end of this year or next
Bytel gone end of year

Listening to crap from Big Footy. f****** spare me.

It’s either that or listening to the same cr@p from you???
I know which I’d prefer…..

[saynta]

From Xazza BF reckons strong source who knows 1 other said it too


nasiah gone either end of this year or next
Bytel gone end of year

Listening to crap from Big Footy. f****** spare me.

It’s either that or listening to the same cr@p from you???
I know which I’d prefer…..

Or you, hey?

[Scollop]

Add Ben Long to the list of positives. He was terrific last night.

Long? Really? After after one disposal and a hit on Rich by half time, Long had to improve. He did, but after Rainer's 1st goal in last (on Clark), Hunter had a break, and Long was on Rainer. Result? Within 30 secs, another Rainer goal. Long followed the ball into Bris forward line, ran needlessly into I think Hipwood & Howard with no regard for what his opponent was doing, fell over, and Rainer waltzed freely into goal from a handball over the top and gave Bris some breathing space. Next centre bounce, who had the first real possession? Rainer. Long was taken off him.

Hardly a terrific game.

He is a good pressure player and tackler, but that is about it. Needs to get more of the ball, and do more with it.

Even last week when he was in the game most quarters, had 14 possessions, but half of them were turnovers. Vs Eagles? - 5 possessions.

Playing for his career. May get another two years, but only depth imo.

We had a few players make mistakes on Friday night…but this thread is supposed to celebrate the positives

What happened in that whole last quarter is that Longy had more positives than negatives. In the whole of the second half we mounted a good comeback. Long was one of our better contributors in that second half

Others have been called slime for commenting negatively

Just want to say your summary regarding Long is off the mark. You’re painting half the picture.

E.g. You mention after Rainer’s second goal that he immediately get’s another possession. Rainer did but Long gets involved and we defend and Long moves the footy out of the danger area. 2 minutes or so later he also makes space in the middle and handballs to Lienert who kicks it down Max’s throat dead in front about 40 metres out.

Long wasn’t initially on Rainer in the last quarter and Long doesn’t line up in the middle where Rainer sometimes starts. I saw Ratts in the box at one stage ask one of his assistants “Who?” Maybe he was talking about Rainer. Rainer kicked 3 goals on 3 different opponents. Sinclair was on him when he slotted his third goal in that last quarter from a tight angle with the round the corner shot.

[takeaway]

Add Ben Long to the list of positives. He was terrific last night.

Long? Really? After after one disposal and a hit on Rich by half time, Long had to improve. He did, but after Rainer's 1st goal in last (on Clark), Hunter had a break, and Long was on Rainer. Result? Within 30 secs, another Rainer goal. Long followed the ball into Bris forward line, ran needlessly into I think Hipwood & Howard with no regard for what his opponent was doing, fell over, and Rainer waltzed freely into goal from a handball over the top and gave Bris some breathing space. Next centre bounce, who had the first real possession? Rainer. Long was taken off him.

Hardly a terrific game.

He is a good pressure player and tackler, but that is about it. Needs to get more of the ball, and do more with it.

Even last week when he was in the game most quarters, had 14 possessions, but half of them were turnovers. Vs Eagles? - 5 possessions.

Playing for his career. May get another two years, but only depth imo.

We had a few players make mistakes on Friday night…but this thread is supposed to celebrate the positives

What happened in that whole last quarter is that Longy had more positives than negatives. In the whole of the second half we mounted a good comeback. Long was one of our better contributors in that second half

Others have been called slime for commenting negatively

Just want to say your summary regarding Long is off the mark. You’re painting half the picture.

E.g. You mention after Rainer’s second goal that he immediately get’s another possession. Rainer did but Long gets involved and we defend and Long moves the footy out of the danger area. 2 minutes or so later he also makes space in the middle and handballs to Lienert who kicks it down Max’s throat dead in front about 40 metres out.

Long wasn’t initially on Rainer in the last quarter and Long doesn’t line up in the middle where Rainer sometimes starts. I saw Ratts in the box at one stage ask one of his assistants “Who?” Maybe he was talking about Rainer. Rainer kicked 3 goals on 3 different opponents. Sinclair was on him when he slotted his third goal in that last quarter from a tight angle with the round the corner shot.

I agree Rainer kicked the 3 goals on diff opponents, never said otherwise. Irresponsible defending by Long for Rainer's 2nd goal though. I was responding to the comment re Long having a terrific game. Not in my view.

To paint the full picture, how did Long go in the first half?

[Scollop]

Do you want me to name all the players who were poor in the first half?

This is the ‘positives’ thread, not the Ben Long thread.

[takeaway]

Do you want me to name all the players who were poor in the first half?

This is the ‘positives’ thread, not the Ben Long thread.

Correct. Ben Long shouldn't be in it.

[Scollop]

Do you want me to name all the players who were poor in the first half?

This is the ‘positives’ thread, not the Ben Long thread.

Correct. Ben Long shouldn't be in it.

That’s the spirit

[Banger9798]

Do you want me to name all the players who were poor in the first half?

This is the ‘positives’ thread, not the Ben Long thread.

Correct. Ben Long shouldn't be in it.

That’s the spirit

He's positive that Long is not a positive

[Scollop]

I could highlight 50 different incidents of stuff ups and clangers from 6-8 of our best players on the night…

but what’s the fkn point of that?

I’m absolutely confident that it’s a shyte thing to do, to start highlighting negatives in a positive thread

[Yorkeys]

Ben was/is a positive, selective nitpicking notwithstanding.
Another less noticed positive is we could have/should have won with Jack Steele having a rare quiet one.

[takeaway]

I could highlight 50 different incidents of stuff ups and clangers from 6-8 of our best players on the night…

but what’s the fkn point of that?

I’m absolutely confident that it’s a shyte thing to do, to start highlighting negatives in a positive thread

Ha Ha. Have a read of the thread.

[The Fireman]

Long is a ripper….can’t believe some of the crap written on here

[Teflon]

Long is a ripper….can’t believe some of the crap written on here

Yep
Long needs to add some consistency but done if his traits can’t be taught
Could be our Max Rooke

[B.M]

Max Rooke

Now there’s a player!!!

FFS

[Vortex]

Long is a ripper….can’t believe some of the crap written on here

Yep
Long needs to add some consistency but done if his traits can’t be taught
Could be our Max Rooke

Did Bazza over at BF tell you that, can you ask Bazza over at BF who can be our goal kicker.

[Banger9798]

I could highlight 50 different incidents of stuff ups and clangers from 6-8 of our best players on the night…

but what’s the fkn point of that?

I’m absolutely confident that it’s a shyte thing to do, to start highlighting negatives in a positive thread

Although Scollop, you're negativity about those negatives has ,mathematically at least, turned them into a positive

[Scollop]

I could highlight 50 different incidents of stuff ups and clangers from 6-8 of our best players on the night…

but what’s the fkn point of that?

I’m absolutely confident that it’s a shyte thing to do, to start highlighting negatives in a positive thread

Although Scollop, you're negativity about those negatives has ,mathematically at least, turned them into a positive

STEM fan