Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

[Danny the snakeman]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Gotta laugh at some of the the keyboard selectors around here going ape over MC team selection this week.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Gotta laugh at some of the the keyboard selectors around here going ape over MC team selection this week.

To be fair. Two underperforming players were replaced by players who played well in the scratch match just before the first bounce. Significant changes in that Gardner wasn’t beaten and Schache played really well. That kind of changes everything in making an assessment of the team to actually play. If you change critical selections, the assessment in the lead up still stands, as the assessment changes after the two moves. I think if the two changes happened on Thursday many responses would be different. So the point is redundant. But I find it strange in the glow of finals victory this is where you’ve chosen to harness the great result, fun and excitement. To each their own I guess.

[Ghost Dog]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Some fringe players really rewarding Luke's selection of them. Hard to believe Josh has only kicked 1 AFL goal before this game, this year. So happy to see him leaping about.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

To be fair. Two underperforming players were replaced by players who played well in the scratch match just before the first bounce. Significant changes in that Gardner wasn’t beaten and Schache played really well. That kind of changes everything in making an assessment of the team to actually play. If you change critical selections, the assessment in the lead up still stands, as the assessment changes after the two moves. I think if the two changes happened on Thursday many responses would be different. So the point is redundant. But I find it strange in the glow of finals victory this is where you’ve chosen to harness the great result, fun and excitement. To each their own I guess.

Yep. Aside from the ruck, the two players most on here were crying out for were Schache and Gardner. They played and had important impacts.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Yep. Aside from the ruck, the two players most on here were crying out for were Schache and Gardner. They played and had important impacts.

I haven’t seen much of Gardner. And this isn’t meant to be a put down, but he’s a huge upgrade on Cordy. He’s taller, seems much quicker, checks his opponent well, spoils really bloody well to kill the contest, is a good decision maker and was barely beaten. He doesn’t look like a guy who is going to get huge numbers, but won’t need to if he can shutdown his man and help spoil in packs. I was really impressed.

[mjp]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

I haven’t seen much of Gardner. And this isn’t meant to be a put down, but he’s a huge upgrade on Cordy. He’s taller, seems much quicker, checks his opponent well, spoils really bloody well to kill the contest, is a good decision maker and was barely beaten. He doesn’t look like a guy who is going to get huge numbers, but won’t need to if he can shutdown his man and help spoil in packs. I was really impressed.

I think he made a poor error (trying to tap the ball in the goal-square) that gave Essendon one goal and obviously conceded the 50m penalty that gave them another...

The first error was just the action of a player who needs some game time - the 50m penalty was '50-50' but with time running out you had to know any free kick would be a disaster...sense the mood of the game.

I feel I have been a big defender of him on this board - particularly last year when he was really (and I still say unfairly) crucified - and whilst I understand your positive comments about him I don't think we should be anointing him just yet...I think his major asset right now is his leg speed which enables him to defend on the lead much more effectively than a player like Cordy.

Cordy I do think gets too much of a hard time fwiw - the problem isn't necessarily Cordy but more the fact he really can't play as a tall defender - he is more a mid-sizer...and he never seems to be selected as such. I guess the Gardner injury this year has prevented this but I think a structure that included Keath/Gardner/Williams/Dale/Duryea and one of Wood/Cordy would be more than fine...

[Bornadog]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

I think he made a poor error (trying to tap the ball in the goal-square) that gave Essendon one goal and obviously conceded the 50m penalty that gave them another...

The first error was just the action of a player who needs some game time - the 50m penalty was '50-50' but with time running out you had to know any free kick would be a disaster...sense the mood of the game.

I feel I have been a big defender of him on this board - particularly last year when he was really (and I still say unfairly) crucified - and whilst I understand your positive comments about him I don't think we should be anointing him just yet...I think his major asset right now is his leg speed which enables him to defend on the lead much more effectively than a player like Cordy.

Cordy I do think gets too much of a hard time fwiw - the problem isn't necessarily Cordy but more the fact he really can't play as a tall defender - he is more a mid-sizer...and he never seems to be selected as such. I guess the Gardner injury this year has prevented this but I think a structure that included Keath/Gardner/Williams/Dale/Duryea and one of Wood/Cordy would be more than fine...

Totally agree with you on Gardner and Cordy. Gardner is about to hit 20 games and I think he has been ok without being outstanding. He has played the role that Bevo has set him. I still feel a little nervous when he has the ball in hand, especially when he goes for the short pass, a bit like Lake use to be. However, with experience, he is getting better and better.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

I think he made a poor error (trying to tap the ball in the goal-square) that gave Essendon one goal and obviously conceded the 50m penalty that gave them another...

The first error was just the action of a player who needs some game time - the 50m penalty was '50-50' but with time running out you had to know any free kick would be a disaster...sense the mood of the game.

I feel I have been a big defender of him on this board - particularly last year when he was really (and I still say unfairly) crucified - and whilst I understand your positive comments about him I don't think we should be anointing him just yet...I think his major asset right now is his leg speed which enables him to defend on the lead much more effectively than a player like Cordy.

Cordy I do think gets too much of a hard time fwiw - the problem isn't necessarily Cordy but more the fact he really can't play as a tall defender - he is more a mid-sizer...and he never seems to be selected as such. I guess the Gardner injury this year has prevented this but I think a structure that included Keath/Gardner/Williams/Dale/Duryea and one of Wood/Cordy would be more than fine...

Not sure I anointed him. I’ve seen very little of him (nothing last year) and I thought his game was good (the 50m wasn’t there) and has some nice traits. I’m happy to stand by it. I hope with a game under his belt there’s improvement coming this week too.

On Cordy, I watched him live at least 6 times in his last TAC year. I never thought he was going to be a KPD. I hope the MC is open to trying other things with him.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Not sure I anointed him. I’ve seen very little of him (nothing last year) and I thought his game was good (the 50m wasn’t there) and has some nice traits. I’m happy to stand by it. I hope with a game under his belt there’s improvement coming this week too.

On Cordy, I watched him live at least 6 times in his last TAC year. I never thought he was going to be a KPD. I hope the MC is open to trying other things with him.

Yeah Gardner for me is simply a good upgrade on Cordy for that 2nd KPD spot. Now, this isn’t a knock on Gardner, but i think our defence would be much better off if we can get someone in who knocks him down to the 3rd KPD spot. It’d be a huge upgrade to have Keath and someone just as capable to play alongside him.

Cordy I agree is undersized for a KPD. But he doesn’t even have the closing speed to stick with the big forwards so how he could keep up with a mid sized forward is the concern. I just don’t think he makes it. Only way is probably as a forward ala 2016.

[Ozza]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

I think he made a poor error (trying to tap the ball in the goal-square) that gave Essendon one goal and obviously conceded the 50m penalty that gave them another...

The first error was just the action of a player who needs some game time - the 50m penalty was '50-50' but with time running out you had to know any free kick would be a disaster...sense the mood of the game.

I feel I have been a big defender of him on this board - particularly last year when he was really (and I still say unfairly) crucified - and whilst I understand your positive comments about him I don't think we should be anointing him just yet...I think his major asset right now is his leg speed which enables him to defend on the lead much more effectively than a player like Cordy.

Cordy I do think gets too much of a hard time fwiw - the problem isn't necessarily Cordy but more the fact he really can't play as a tall defender - he is more a mid-sizer...and he never seems to be selected as such. I guess the Gardner injury this year has prevented this but I think a structure that included Keath/Gardner/Williams/Dale/Duryea and one of Wood/Cordy would be more than fine...

Wasn't it Young that gave away the 50m that cost a goal (Devon Smith kicked). The 50m Gardner gave away led to a Draper shot on goal that was a behind. Splitting hairs on the overall topic - but I'm sure it was Young who gave away the costly one.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Wasn't it Young that gave away the 50m that cost a goal (Devon Smith kicked). The 50m Gardner gave away led to a Draper shot on goal that was a behind. Splitting hairs on the overall topic - but I'm sure it was Young who gave away the costly one.

You mean the 50m penalty on Gardner where Francis ran into him and fell over? Oh yeah another oversight by Essendon fans.

[Grantysghost]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

Wasn't it Young that gave away the 50m that cost a goal (Devon Smith kicked). The 50m Gardner gave away led to a Draper shot on goal that was a behind. Splitting hairs on the overall topic - but I'm sure it was Young who gave away the costly one.

It was Young, he was following in behind Draper which I thought was ok within the rules. I think the umpire might have interpreted he wasn't close enough but I'm not sure there's a set limit like 5 metres or something. Fair enough the umpire deemed it a 50 you move on it's a tough job.

[EasternWest]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

You mean the 50m penalty on Gardner where Francis ran into him and fell over? Oh yeah another oversight by Essendon fans.

Gards sat him down 50 metres off the ball. Sure Francis put plenty of mustard on it but for mine I had no problem with that being a free kick.

[Bornadog]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

It was Young, he was following in behind Draper which I thought was ok within the rules. I think the umpire might have interpreted he wasn't close enough but I'm not sure there's a set limit like 5 metres or something. Fair enough the umpire deemed it a 50 you move on it's a tough job.

Ch7 said it Young, but BSmith ran past not following anyone on the opposite side of Young.

[Mantis]

Re: Always Right Match Committee - Finals Week 1

It was Young, he was following in behind Draper which I thought was ok within the rules. I think the umpire might have interpreted he wasn't close enough but I'm not sure there's a set limit like 5 metres or something. Fair enough the umpire deemed it a 50 you move on it's a tough job.

The umpire said in the explanation to Young that he was more than the allowed 2m away.