View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
Post subject: "Hi ho hi ho its off to work we go" | |
|
Seriously we have to stop playing half a dozen dwarfs each week and expecting we can win games of footy. We need a "no more than 3 dwarfs" rule.
Playing all of Brown, Daics, Thomas, Treloar, Quaynor and Varcoe in the one side is suicidal. Of those, I reckon only Quaynor, Treloar and Thomas should be getting a game.
It seems we have only one strong bodied midfielder, in De Goey, whereas we should have 3, so that JDG can play mainly up forward where we desperately need him.
In the absence of Sier and Adams, we should be playing Wills and Goldsack. Then again wtfwik? |
|
|
|
|
BazBoy
Joined: 11 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
Nathan Buckley adamant we are not far off our best
Interesting to see how this one plays out _________________ I'm not arguing--just explaining why i am right |
|
|
|
|
masoncox
masoncox
Joined: 31 Aug 2015
|
Post subject: | |
|
Varcoe 3 goals in 12 matches.
Must be a record for a forward.
Midgets are a collingwood special.
Tony Shaw as a coach set the benchmark. |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
If we want to lose to Gold Coast next week, just play Max Lynch. Then you could play Keane who’s in his first year of Aussie Rules football. Tohill is another Irishman going around who should be playing VRL reserves if we were fielding a VFL reserves side. Or there’s Will Kelly who’s on one leg at the moment. We could get him to play on crutches next week but we need to get him into the VFL side first. Then there’s Tom Wilson. He was playing basketball last year but he has to learn some time so why not play him next weekend. We could play Moore next week just so we field a tall though probably he’ll tear his hamstring off the bone and won’t be back until June next week. We could play Roughy, who has concussion, next week and the AFL will conduct an investigation against Collingwood for bringing players back too soon. Reid is another. He’s just done his calf. Have I missed any talls out? |
|
|
|
|
BazBoy
Joined: 11 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
Yep Jett Charles Buckley 🤪🤪🤪🤪 _________________ I'm not arguing--just explaining why i am right |
|
|
|
|
Dark Beanie
Joined: 06 Feb 2004 Location: A galaxy far, far away.
|
Post subject: | |
|
At what height do you count a player as a dwarf? _________________ If you are foolish enough to be contented, don't show it, but just grumble with the rest. - Jerome K Jerome |
|
|
|
|
Mr Miyagi
Joined: 14 Sep 2018
|
Post subject: | |
|
Is this the Mason Cox definition of dwarf? |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
You can’t play Wills in the seniors because there’s a dedicated thread on Nicks declaring he is finished and should never play seniors again ...... unless of course, it’s Crocker who is picked in front of him. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Brown, Daicos and Quaynor should all play - Brown because he is best 22 and the other 2 because we need to develop our young talent - that cannot happen in the VFL because our VFL team is hopeless and no-one can learn anything playing in it.
Varcoe and Thomas don't get dropped because they are too small (that is, as Miyagi points out, just silly) but because they are not capable of playing to the required standard. Varcoe was, at one stage and Thomas never. Any suggestion that Treloar could even be in this conversation is, given our other midfield woes, ridiculous. He has just passed 600 disposals for the season and is on track to end with numbers better than any Collingwood player except Swan (once). I am not a fan of Treloar (he lacks defensive run and when he does go back has no idea what to do, kicks poorly too often and handballs pointlessly much of the time, in my respectful opinion) but, really, without him, Pendlebury, Sidebottom and Grundy, we'd have been bottom 4 this year. |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
I'm not against playing short players - up to 180 cms. What I am against however, is playing 6 small players. We are out muscled and out marked week after week, and part of the reason, is that we have too many small players on our list.
I realise that some of this is due to the unavailability of injured players, but it also reflects the recruiting of too many smalls imo.
Last night we had the option of playing Wills and Goldsack, but instead we went with Daicos and Brown. I realise it may not have made much difference to the result last night, but I reckon it would have forced the tigers to fight harder for their win. As it is, we are playing too many midgets, and not enough of them are good enough. Then again, maybe I've got no frigging idea. I'm just pissed off and incredibly frustrated, especially after we came so close to winning the flag last year, and now we are in free fall down the ladder. Not happy Jan. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
We didn't "go with" Daicos and Brown, rather than these 2. Brown got selected because he has been in the senior team, performing well, even when there was almost a full complement of players available. He was an important part of our winning forward line when it was functioning well. If we had dropped Brown for either of these two fringe players in the circumstances, it would have been ridiculous. We brought Daicos in because the Club has already put a line through Wills' name, because Goldsack was never going to play his role and because Daicos may (not will, may) develop into a long-term player but Wills and Goldie (for different reasons) will not now be that.
Perhaps they might have played Goldie in place of Scharenberg but, to be fair, I haven't seen Goldie play this year so I can't reliably report that Goldie is still quick enough to play senior footy. |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
Is it too simplistic to say that the 30th through to 40th players picked on any list aren’t up to to it at the time, whether they are 5’ 9” or 6’3” or in between.
Dunno ?? |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
Post subject: | |
|
RudeBoy wrote: | I'm not against playing short players - up to 180 cms. What I am against however, is playing 6 small players. ... |
It's not so much the height as that they have no athleticism. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies2016 wrote: | Is it too simplistic to say that the 30th through to 40th players picked on any list aren’t up to to it at the time, whether they are 5’ 9” or 6’3” or in between.
Dunno ?? |
It probably isn't quite accurate but it's close enough. I'm not going to waste everyone's time picking one of those hypothetical "best" 22s but I think we all know that there are - depending upon who you rate and who you don't - somewhere between 6 and 9 guys on the list who are not playing because of injury or stupidity who would make the difference between our present also-ran team and a genuine contender.
The thing is that when you're selecting players who are 30th to 40th on your list, the team is improved not only by bringing in a good player but by the removal of the poor player the good player replaces. Each change thus has two impacts. Without being harsh about Crocker (whose attitude I admire), losing Adams not only loses a solid player, it also brings in a guy who is not playing at the required standard. It isn't that you take out a good player and replace them with a solid one, you actually lose a good player and bring in a liability. The worse-hit you are with injuries, the more pronounced this becomes. So, eg, you can be missing your best backman - but your 7th-best is probably a reasonable quality footballer. It's when you get down to picking your 12th or 13th choice (which is where we are now) that you find that you've lost 6 good players to injury and replaced them with a player who might as well stay at home. |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
Post subject: | |
|
Next season will see the departure of Reid, Wells, Goldsack, varcoe, magden, and maybe a couple more, so we can recruit guys with height then I guess _________________ Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
|