M Gardiner Watch Thread

[rodgerfox]

AA selection in 2003 would also confirm at least one great rather than good year.

Carry on...

You are aware who selects the AA team aren't you?

AA selection does not suggest anything at all.

[n1ck]

True, RF - Except that in 2003, Gardiner was far and away the best ruckman in the competition, and 2002 he was pretty bloody close to it too.

Wasnt the best tap ruckman - never has been - but his agility around the ground, and his footskills were breathtaking.

Thanks for those stats sRr...

Number 1 draft pick in 96, rising star winner in 97, growing influence on the team over the next few years, culminating in an AA spot in 2003.

[Mr Magic]

AA selection in 2003 would also confirm at least one great rather than good year.

Carry on...

You are aware who selects the AA team aren't you?

AA selection does not suggest anything at all.

RodgerFox, whoever the selectors were in 2003 I would humbly suggest that they might know more about AFL Football than either you or me.

As for your statement that 'AA selection does not suggest anything at all', whilst there may be arguments most years as to a player or 2 who could/should have been included, I don't recall any 'duds being selected.

Why do you seem so argumentative today?

[rodgerfox]

AA selection in 2003 would also confirm at least one great rather than good year.

Carry on...

You are aware who selects the AA team aren't you?

AA selection does not suggest anything at all.

RodgerFox, whoever the selectors were in 2003 I would humbly suggest that they might know more about AFL Football than either you or me.

As for your statement that 'AA selection does not suggest anything at all', whilst there may be arguments most years as to a player or 2 who could/should have been included, I don't recall any 'duds being selected.

Why do you seem so argumentative today?

Not sure about 03, but the All-Australian selectors in 07 were Gerard Healy, Kevin Bartlett, Robert Walls, Mark Bickley, Chris Mainwaring, Andrew Demetriou, Adrian Anderson and Rod Austin.

This means that guys like Walls and Bartlett, with whom 90% of the population disagree with on their opinions every day, select this 'team' based on their personal opinions. As I said, opinions which under usual circumstances get shouted down by the punters.

Guys like Mainwairing, who was the sole person to not vote for Nick Reiwoldt in the Rising Star - but instead gave his vote to the WA player, selects this 'team' based on his personal opinion.

And then there's Demetriou and Anderson. The two of them are the most crooked and devious humans on the planet. Not one single decision they make is not loaded. Every single decision they make has some sort of benefit for themselves, or as they put it 'for the game'.

It's a joke to AA team. There is no plausable criteria at all. It's just some guys' opinions. Guys who 90% of the time, people think are diickheads.

Actually, let me rephrase that. It's not a joke, it's a good concept like any representative side, and a great honour for the guys who are picked, I'm sure. But for people to use 'AA selection' as an argument is a joke.

And then of course, there's the fact that Pavlich is an AA FB (when he's never played there) and a AA HFF the next year.

Joel Bowden is a dual AA.

Lenny Hayes is a dual AA wingman!!

[Mr Magic]

AA selection in 2003 would also confirm at least one great rather than good year.

Carry on...

You are aware who selects the AA team aren't you?

AA selection does not suggest anything at all.

RodgerFox, whoever the selectors were in 2003 I would humbly suggest that they might know more about AFL Football than either you or me.

As for your statement that 'AA selection does not suggest anything at all', whilst there may be arguments most years as to a player or 2 who could/should have been included, I don't recall any 'duds being selected.

Why do you seem so argumentative today?

The All-Australian selectors are Gerard Healy, Kevin Bartlett, Robert Walls, Mark Bickley, Chris Mainwaring, Andrew Demetriou, Adrian Anderson and Rod Austin.

This means that guys like Walls and Bartlett, with whom 90% of the population disagree with on their opinions every day, select based on their personal opinions the AA team.

Guys like Mainwairing, who was the sole person to not vote for Nick Reiwoldt in the Rising Star - but instead gave his vote to the WA player, select this 'team' based on their personal opinion.

And then there's Demetriou and Anderson. The two of them are the most crooked and devious humans on the planet. Not one single decision they make is not loaded. Every single decision they make has some sort of benefit for themselves, or as they put it 'the game'.

It's a joke to AA team. There is no plausable criteria at all. It's just some guys' opinions. Guys who 90% of the time, people think are diickheads.

Actually, let me rephrase that. It's not a joke, it's a great concept like any representative side, and a great honour for the guys who picked I'm sure. But for people to use 'AA selection' as an argument for anything is a joke.

Well I reckon the players selected are happy enough to be lauded on their inclusion. Also, IIRC, most of the current players' 'performance based contracts' include bonuses for various achievements including AA selection.

Furthermore, using your AA criteria, all awards based on personal opinions of people you don't rate are a 'joke'

That would include
Brownlow Medal
Norm Smith Medal
Michael Tuck Medal
E.J Whitten Medal
etc.

So do you want to tell Harves his two Brownlows and countless E.J's are a 'joke'? Oh, and of course the numerous years he gained AA selection shouldn't be counted in his 'playing cv' either?

[n1ck]

It's almost as ludicrous as SaintBot's amazing outburst that the honour of our best and fairest award has been tainted by the appearance of Jason Blake in the top 10 last season

[rodgerfox]

Furthermore, using your AA criteria, all awards based on personal opinions of people you don't rate are a 'joke'

That would include
Brownlow Medal
Norm Smith Medal
Michael Tuck Medal
E.J Whitten Medal
etc.

So do you want to tell Harves his two Brownlows and countless E.J's are a 'joke'? Oh, and of course the numerous years he gained AA selection shouldn't be counted in his 'playing cv' either?

Very interesting point.

If Chris Grant didn't cop a week in 97, would Harves be any less of a player?

If Greg Williams had have had 43 touches in the last game of 1993 instead of 42, would he have been a better player? Or Wanganeen worse?

As for the Norm Smith. Spare me. In 2001, Buckley was awarded the Norm Smith medal at 3/4 time. His opponent Voss, almost won the game off his own boot in the last quarter.

Farcical.

To answer your question, yes the Brownlow is a joke. Probably the biggest joke of them all. Amongst all the hype and prestige, it's quickly forgotten that the umpires vote for it.

We scream abuse at them every single week about their lack of footy knowledge and condemn their football decision making - yet laud the Brownlow medallist as the best player in the country.

It's bizarre.

So, to answer your question I don't rate any of the personal awards. They are simply people's opinions. More often than not, opinions from people that I think are morons.

[Mr Magic]

RodgerFox, at least you're consistent.

[jill]

Can we just stick to topic & can we have FACTS rather than rumours.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Not sure about 03, but the All-Australian selectors in 07 were Gerard Healy, Kevin Bartlett, Robert Walls, Mark Bickley, Chris Mainwaring, Andrew Demetriou, Adrian Anderson and Rod Austin.

This means that guys like Walls and Bartlett, with whom 90% of the population disagree with on their opinions every day, select this 'team' based on their personal opinions. As I said, opinions which under usual circumstances get shouted down by the punters.

While I definately hear what you're saying (I stand ready to disagree vehemently with anything Robert Walls says on a moments notice), and I do think the process gone through to select AA is flawed, I have to say that dismissing it altogether is even more ridiculous.

Dislike the opinions of the selectors I generally do - mainly because so many people then trumpet them as their own well informed opinion without even really understanding the argument for, let alone against (and a special prop to Walls for being willing to pass incisive judgement on play he hasn't seen)... I'm willing to admit it's tall poppy. I'm also willing to admit that they've earned the right to play talking head on TV and I haven't... their resumes tell us that at the least, they're informed viewers.

So an AA selection is impressive at least because it represents a good enough season that it can get the above group to agree to their selection - i.e. a McIntosh, who cas Walls wetting himself well above and beyond doesn't get in.

Similarly the brownlow is, IMO, one of the most inspired awards in the world. IMO it's also represented wrong for 11 months of the year, it's not the leagues MVP, but an excellent recognition of consistency, perseverance and skill - in the midfield... and the voting system is fantastic.

To bring it back on subject, heading into the 2008 season, it's easy to discount Gardiner's '03 AA selection as any sort of indicator, the game, the player, and the requirements of the position have changed... to discount the selection altogether because you don't like the selectors opinions rings of sour grapes.

[rodgerfox]

...rings of sour grapes.

How so?

[BAM! (shhhh)]

...rings of sour grapes.

How so?

Sounds like because we don't like the selectors, and because we don't like the process, we discount any value there may be... easy to read it as because we don't like it it doesn't count... and that would imply that if it were our opinions...

FWIW, If Hamish McIntosh had made the '07 AA team (as a Walls lovechild), I'd probably be arguing your side. I get exactly where you're coming from, I just don't think we can entirely discount the honours and awards for being subjective. I'm a much bigger fan of the Champion Data team than the AA team though.

[rodgerfox]

...rings of sour grapes.

How so?

Sounds like because we don't like the selectors, and because we don't like the process, we discount any value there may be... easy to read it as because we don't like it it doesn't count... and that would imply that if it were our opinions...

FWIW, If Hamish McIntosh had made the '07 AA team (as a Walls lovechild), I'd probably be arguing your side. I get exactly where you're coming from, I just don't think we can entirely discount the honours and awards for being subjective. I'm a much bigger fan of the Champion Data team than the AA team though.

That's not my definition of 'sour grapes'.


Anyway, it's not that I don't like them. I don't know them. I just don't agree with their opinions - therefore any award that is based solely on those opinions doesn't get any creedance from me.

[saintsRrising]

Extract of St.M Dec 5 training report.

Numbers in the rehab group were plenty as usual, including our two recycled ruckmen (Gardy and King)...with Hayes, Montagna, Goddard, Hudghton, Gehrig, Milne...

Ball, Schnieder, Barlow, X, Harves, Gilbo, Bakes, Gram just running laps...Harvey carving up Xavier

...

....

......training was average though...

[saintsRrising]

From an interview with Kosi..

http://heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/comm ... 33,2288371

07 December 2007 Herald Sun
Jon Ralph
6%255E20322,00.htmlHe says with Gehrig back and Steven King and Michael Gardiner set for big seasons, he may well be used as a third tall forward.

King arrived at St Kilda in superb condition and Gardiner's foot problems finally seem to be behind him.
"It is quite exciting," Koschitzke said.

So good news on both Gardi....and King

[LTN16]

That link doesn't work try this one:

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/ ... 22,00.html

[St Fidelius]

AA selection in 2003 would also confirm at least one great rather than good year.

Carry on...

Yeah so was Matthew Allen AA .........

Had a few good seasons for Carlton but suffered foot injuries as was never the same...

Was then traded to Essendon

Does this scenario ring a bell

[saintsRrising]

AA selection in 2003 would also confirm at least one great rather than good year.

Carry on...

Yeah so was Matthew Allen AA .........

Had a few good seasons for Carlton but suffered foot injuries as was never the same...

Was then traded to Essendon

Does this scenario ring a bell

Not really, for your point is entirely irrelevant to what I posted. ......for the discussion then, primarly between TWO OTHER posters in the string, was on the number of good years that Gardiner had.

The issue was not on whether an AA could later play poor football.


But feel free to keep ringing your bell even if you are way way off tangent...

[4theluvoftheclub]

foot is fine. recent scans confirmed by specialist to be normal...got lots of work to do to get fitness right, and then the skills...doubt he will be playing in first 22 in first 4 or 5 games...needs match fitness and practice.

[saintsRrising]

foot is fine. recent scans confirmed by specialist to be normal...got lots of work to do to get fitness right, and then the skills...doubt he will be playing in first 22 in first 4 or 5 games...needs match fitness and practice.

thank you.

[n1ck]

good to hear 4theluvoftheclub, cheers.

[spert]

All we really know is that for rucking so far, we have King and Rix who can probably front up to play, as Kozi and Gards seem a big mystery with form/injuries or whatever right now. I know that King's 07 GF game was highly regarded by his teammates, so it always good to get a BOG ruckman from a premiership team me thinks. Gards would be a great plus in the forward line if he can hold together, same for Kozi.

[St Fidelius]

AA selection in 2003 would also confirm at least one great rather than good year.

Carry on...

Yeah so was Matthew Allen AA .........

Had a few good seasons for Carlton but suffered foot injuries as was never the same...

Was then traded to Essendon

Does this scenario ring a bell

Not really, for your point is entirely irrelevant to what I posted. ......for the discussion then, primarly between TWO OTHER posters in the string, was on the number of good years that Gardiner had.

The issue was not on whether an AA could later play poor football.


But feel free to keep ringing your bell even if you are way way off tangent...

No I don't believe I was way off tangent

The issue is whether Gardner has any good football left in him and I bought up another AA player that I feel has the same scenario

Go and waffle on some more pages you seem to be pretty good at that.

[n1ck]

[The issue is whether Gardner has any good football left in him

Thats not what the issue was...

[Riewoldting]

In 2001, Buckley was awarded the Norm Smith medal at 3/4 time. His opponent Voss, almost won the game off his own boot in the last quarter.

Farcical.

Buckley wasn't eligible for the Norm Smith medal