The Pile-On

[bornadog]

They have to reward training form right now - because that is ALL THERE IS.

If Gowers - and Gardiner who, as another posted once said is supposed to be an EXCELLENT track worker! - are training well whilst others aren't, then they should be selected. Otherwise selection truly becomes a boys club/coaches favourites club call it what you will.

The players need to see positive performance being rewarded. They need to see poor EFFORT being excluded. Beyond that - skill level, decision making etc - all that stuff is a work in progress for every player!!!

Totally agree. There are the scratch matches as well, which I guess is really an extension of training right now.

[comrade]

Don't you have to reward players that train well and play well in VFL or scratch matches and drop players when they don't play well.?

Sure, but I struggle to believe Gowers is training so much better than everyone else that he keeps being considered in spite of his track record at highest level.

Actual performance > training performance

[mjp]

Sure, but I struggle to believe Gowers is training so much better than everyone else that he keeps being considered in spite of his track record at highest level.

Actual performance > training performance

But what other explanation is there? You either believe it or you think Bevo is a complete goose...is there a "Option C".

[GVGjr]

They have to reward training form right now - because that is ALL THERE IS.

If Gowers - and Gardiner who, as another posted once said is supposed to be an EXCELLENT track worker! - are training well whilst others aren't, then they should be selected. Otherwise selection truly becomes a boys club/coaches favourites club call it what you will.

The players need to see positive performance being rewarded. They need to see poor EFFORT being excluded. Beyond that - skill level, decision making etc - all that stuff is a work in progress for every player!!!

I'm not sure this is the correct answer for our often confusing team selections.
What we had previously was a VFL side and for whatever reason we often ignored the better performed players for other players that fitted the flavor of the month type selections that we seem to go with on occasions.

I mentioned earlier in the week that I was neutral on the Gowers selection and I probably remain that way for the game against the Tigers but assuming he is selected he has to perform better than he did on Thursday night. I haven't been critical of Gardiner either but I do find it confusing that he is preferred over Lewis Young and Trengove because regardless of how he is training or performing in the practice games he just seems to be a way off what is needed at the senior level and perhaps he just needs more time before coming back into the senior side calculations. I'd be interested in hearing the logic of his selection over the other two but failing that all that I can go with, and this is the same for all WOOF members, is what we see on game day and from my perspective that hasn't been up to expectations.

I get the logic of bringing in the younger guys but outside of Vandermeer it's questionable on how it has helped the side

We drop Schache after one poor game in the seniors (after making him earn his senior spot) when conditions wouldn't have suited him anyway but have tolerated some soft performances from Bruce because of his name so I think you can see why I question just how committed are to picking players 'in form' however you want to measure it?
West gets dropped off one poor performance and yet Richards has been maintained after 3 less than impressive games and I'm a big fan of Ed.

I get we shouldn't be overly critical of players and there is probably some other considerations we aren't privy to but we can only call it based on what we see.

[comrade]

But what other explanation is there? You either believe it or you think Bevo is a complete goose...is there a "Option C".

I don't know, but playing devil's advocate...

Option C = Bevo overruled our recruiting dept and chose Gowers as a rookie causing our recruiting boss to leave. He's only human and has a vested interest in giving Gowers as much opportunity to prove himself right.

[mjp]

I'm not sure this is the correct answer for our often confusing team selections.
What we had previously was a VFL side and for whatever reason we often ignored the better performed players for other players that fitted the flavor of the month type selections that we seem to go with on occasions.

We either believe it is based on form or based purely on 'gut feel'. Playing well in the VFL isn't always the 'tell'...what the coaches want to see might not be thought of as a 'good game' to a secondary observer.

I mentioned earlier in the week that I was neutral on the Gowers selection and I probably remain that way for the game against the Tigers but assuming he is selected he has to perform better than he did on Thursday night. I haven't been critical of Gardiner either but I do find it confusing that he is preferred over Lewis Young and Trengove because regardless of how he is training or performing in the practice games he just seems to be a way off what is needed at the senior level and perhaps he just needs more time before coming back into the senior side calculations. I'd be interested in hearing the logic of his selection over the other two but failing that all that I can go with, and this is the same for all WOOF members, is what we see on game day and from my perspective that hasn't been up to expectations.

I'm fine with Gowers. And West. And Schache. And whoever. All of them can be frustrating. As long as they are giving effort whilst I might be frustrated with the outcomes I am fine. When they make the same mistakes/play the same way over and again (Dale = anti-pressure which annoys me for example) then I think they need a rest...but they don't necessarily need to be dropped in order to learn a lesson.

I get the logic of bringing in the younger guys but outside of Vandermeer it's questionable on how it has helped the side

We drop Schache after one poor game in the seniors (after making him earn his senior spot) when conditions wouldn't have suited him anyway but have tolerated some soft performances from Bruce because of his name so I think you can see why I question just how committed are to picking players 'in form' however you want to measure it?
West gets dropped off one poor performance and yet Richards has been maintained after 3 less than impressive games and I'm a big fan of Ed.

The management of our younger players has been strange - you would recall I posted a few weeks ago that maybe our preference was to be YOUNG versus being GOOD so I get your point. There was another comment about Bevo liking his shiny new toys - 5x debuts in any season seems like a lot, let alone in 8 weeks! BUT. I agree with your point on Richards but we don't know what he is being asked to do. Likewise West. Then there is the positional roles each player is being asked to play and - as I mentioned with Gowers - maybe it is as simple as he plays the same role as Lloyd, we needed that 'role' for the forward structure we were going with, Lloyd is out therefore Gowers is in. Or something. I don't know but I am sure it is more 'scientific' than it seems.

I get we shouldn't be overly critical of players and there is probably some other considerations we aren't privy to but we can only call it based on what we see.

Fair enough.

[The Adelaide Connection]

An interesting thread and I think there is merit in the suggestion that over on Fb and the like people are upping their keyboard warriorism as some kind of cathartic release that maybe they would usually get at the footy.

I am living in relative normality at the moment and I can only speculate and imagine the stress and frustration of people caught in the Victorian lockdowns, but I suspect the Pile-on's might get more frequent, larger, and more aggressive as it drags out.

I'd wager that even if we play a near-perfect game against the Tigers people will still jump on something. I actually worry about Billy Gowers (or whoever else ends up being in the line of fire) because I think things are starting to go a bit 'next level' and these guys are pretty active on social media and that hate is likely to find him almost everywhere he goes.

[Grantysghost]

I'd hate to see what he's copping if this is required....

[bulldogsthru&thru]

I don't know what is being said on social media, and i'd hate to think of what it could be. No-one deserves personal attacks but it doesn't mean his game can't be criticised simply because he's a nice guy having a crack. Poor Billy looks simply devoid of confidence at the moment. We know he is capable of better. But can he consistently deliver that? I don't think so. I think his first season was a flash in the pan.

[Grantysghost]

No-one deserves personal attacks

Spot on, so many keyboard warriors on social media must be tough if you're struggling. At least people on here are considered.

[comrade]

Feels like he's been thrown to the wolves and that's on Bevo.

[azabob]

Feels like he's been thrown to the wolves and that's on Bevo.

Because Bevo selected him to play?

[comrade]

Because Bevo selected him to play?

Yeah, selecting him after the Suns game.

Billy, bereft of all confidence and already in the gun, was on a hiding to nothing by playing vs the Tigers.

[The bulldog tragician]

Tom Boyd has also spoken out.
photo upload site

[jazzadogs]

His full name was trending on twitter last night, which means it was one of the most common phrases being used in Melbourne at the time. That is never a good sign.

There's also been a disgraceful article from the Hun about his negative Supercoach score, which has been widely criticised.

Tbh this is the sort of stuff I was hoping this thread would discuss. I think all of us on social media should think about where we are posting and who our audience might be, and call out those who cross the line.