Guy O'Keefe

[LostDoggy]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

We don't "play the kids" for the hell of it,

But we do (play the kids for the hell of it: Lynch, Hill's first game, Stack's first game - when he wasn't even getting a regular game in Willy 1sts! - Grant, Reid's first game),

which I have great respect for our match commitee to ensure that players earn their place in the team either by form or filling structural holes in our list

... and we don't (make players earn their place based on form or structural holes: Eagle, Addison, Harbrow)!

Total lack of consistency here, which can really mess with a list. Hard not to see that the match committee have their favourites that play regardless of form or fitness.

Oh, and pretty stupid for a player on the cusp to miss a compulsory rehab session. Just dumb.

Totally agree with this. Let himself down here.

[Mofra]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

But we do (play the kids for the hell of it: Lynch, Hill's first game, Stack's first game - when he wasn't even getting a regular game in Willy 1sts! - Grant, Reid's first game)

I doubt they missed rehab sessions though; wasn't there an Eade comment just prior to Hill's first game about being the debut being "reward for effort" or something to that effect?

[LostDoggy]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

I don't think it is as simple as that though. Put it this way - again I'm purely speculating as I haven't really seen much of the kid - other clubs - including GC17 - will have noted that he has been in the best all year in the VFL - so in that case he will be on somebody radar. So if our match committee have decided - due to pace, attitude or whatever - that they would prefer to trade GO'K, then why would you play him once and risk effecting whatever currency he has.

In any case, since I met his father at a work function earlier in the season - i have been hoping Guy would get a game at some stage. I still hope he gets a chance - but I have no doubt that Rocket and co are in the best position to decide on this. They see him at training, in intra clubs, in games every week - so I'm quite comfortable with letting the experts do their work.

I don't agree that scouts and clubs are incompetent or don't do due dilligence on players - that is fairly short sighted. Picking which 17 year olds will make good AFL players is extremely difficult - particularly as it involves trying to predict how much a player can improve and in which areas.

Matthew Boyd for instance, in his first couple of years at the Dogs, lacked a step of pace and his skills and decision making needed hepas of work. And now he's become a gun because those have improved. It takes a fairly dogged attitude and work ethic to improve to the level he has - and not one club saw that in him until he hit his 20s.

Hi Ozza.

Agree that some players don't blossom till a bit later, but that's not what we're talking about here. He's ALREADY outperforming most of the list, albeit at a lower level. There are some players who have never even shown that they are capable at VFL level that are getting games at senior level.

Also, while scouting is by no means an exact science, you can't tell me that AFL scouting is already at its maximum capacity -- most clubs didn't even have full-time professional recruiting departments until relatively recently, and the draft camp is also a recent development. There are still plenty of holes and room to improve in many footy departments, and there is no doubt that there are some pretty ordinary scouts getting a gig out there.

What I don't understand is the seeming disconnect between the recruiters and the coaching departments -- while they work closely together, often a player will be picked because the recruiter likes them, but will never get a game because the coach is adamant the player is 'too slow' etc. This is a ridiculous system that you will never find in professional sports around the world except in extreme and usually detrimental cases (management interfering with transfer targets in soccer for example). I find it bizarre that the 'head recruiter' has final say and responsibility over the success of draftees (the Terry Wallace excuse). The head coach must surely have final say over who comes in to the club, and under what conditions, so that he gets to pick his team from players he personally chose.

If GOK is getting the short shrift because he was primarily a Scott Clayton pick-up (who liked what he saw) rather than a Rodney Eade one (who thinks he's too slow and unfit) that's just bizzarre.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

I doubt they missed rehab sessions though; wasn't there an Eade comment just prior to Hill's first game about being the debut being "reward for effort" or something to that effect?

I thought it was the exact opposite -- Hill was 'letting himself down with effort', so Rocket gave him a taste of AFL football "WHEN HE PROBABLY DIDN'T REALLY DESERVE IT" (I'm sure I'm quoting this verbatim) to whet the appetite, and Hill turned himself around after that and got his second game (which he deserved) a year and a bit later.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

Do you think GOK dose not get a game because he might not do exactly what is asked of him, where as others are told to do certain things, do them and then get rewarded.

I too think it is odd that he is not given ago but think that he must not be doing certain things that the match committe have asked him to do during games, so they wont play him.

[mighty_west]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

I guess it's just been tough for Guy to make his debut because of circumstance more than anything.

When he was on fire early on for Willy, so to were the Bulldogs side, now that he could have a chance of playing, he has tapered off somewhat in form as well, he did the same last year as well, started off like a house on fire, but his form went downhill in the second half of the season.

The other problems are where he would be best suited in the Dogs line up? Having hearing Gary Ayres talking up his game on the weekend, saying how well he was being a link type of player, do we really need that type in the Dogs side right now? compared to a Stack playing mainly up forward or Everitt as a flanker, Harbrows played well down back, but he has experienced players around him, maybe Stack got the nod ahead of O'Keefe because of his attitude.

That brings me to another issue, how many kids can we play at once? We are currently third on the ladder, we now have an "easier" few games with Freo & West Coast at home, but if we bring in too many kids, can that be something the match commitee are thinking about?

Whilst a player like Eagleton has been down in form of late, can we afford to lose more experience especially with the likes of Higgins, Murph, Welsh missing? West Coast will now be hungry to win, they don't now have the "priority picks" issue hanging over their head, and they have played well at times this year, we can only remember the first time we played them this year at Subi.

[Sedat]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

But we do (play the kids for the hell of it: Lynch, Hill's first game, Stack's first game - when he wasn't even getting a regular game in Willy 1sts! - Grant, Reid's first game)

I was referring more to player types that were identified to add a missing dimension to our senior team - the likes of Grant, Hill, Stack and Lynch all possess weapons that are quite rare in our list, so they were given senior game time ahead of schedule because that type of player was in short supply in the senior team. Ditto Tom Williams, but I don't think anyone is complaining that he's been rushed into the senior team on the back of much poorer form than most of the Dogs players at Willy. In Reid's case he got a game based on form despite the team having many of his type already in the team - O'Keefe at the moment is in a similar boat to where Reid was last season in that his type is adequately catered for on our list. I'd love to see what he's made of in the senior team but the opportunities will come soon enough - Crossy certainly didn't receive the red carpet treatment into the senior team until almost 4 years of dominance at the lower level.

... and we don't (make players earn their place based on form or structural holes: Eagle, Addison, Harbrow)!

Total lack of consistency here, which can really mess with a list. Hard not to see that the match committee have their favourites that play regardless of form or fitness.

Addison and Harbrow filled holes in our list, and despite highly regarded by the match commitee for his hardness at the contest, Addision was dropped for an extended spell this season following a couple of ordinary matches.

We could be here all day talking about the Eagle. But in this season alone, he was more than pulling his weight up until his 250th - since then he has not in the opinion of many of us here, but his type must still be considered to be in short supply by the match commitee because he 's still running around (like a headless chook it must be said ). My personal opinion is that Everitt could fill his run and carry role at a pinch (with better foot skills).

[azabob]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

I thought it was the exact opposite -- Hill was 'letting himself down with effort', so Rocket gave him a taste of AFL football "WHEN HE PROBABLY DIDN'T REALLY DESERVE IT" (I'm sure I'm quoting this verbatim) to whet the appetite, and Hill turned himself around after that and got his second game (which he deserved) a year and a bit later.

The Hill situation from what I recall he wasnt ready for AFL footy but due to injuries and our poor 2007 season they thought lets give him a game. ANd it came off he did well the pre seaon of 2008 and hasnt really looked back since.

I guess it comes down to its easier to play the kids when your team isn't winning as you dont have much too lose. I think thats part of the problem.

[Big_Willba]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

the kid wouldnt be talked about like this if he couldnt play. i dont think there has been one post on here saying he cant play and isnt good enough to make it at the AFL level, its only that he isnt quite fit enough or doesnt have the best leg speed. another pre-season and i think he'll be playing alot of senior footy next year. (if he approaches this pre-season all guns blazing) he should grab boydy or crossy and say get me to the level i need to be at over the summer.

although i dont think a taste of it this year would hurt, like hillys situation a couple years ago.

[GVGjr]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

There has been a lot of comments and references in this thread over the last couple of days about "off field incidents" but the only thing I have seen written is he apparently missed one or perhaps two compulsory training sessions.

Assuming that it's true, and I have no reason to question that, it's not great for a young player trying to crack a spot in the senior side but it's hardly what I would a catalyst to speculate that a player isn't behaving.

What I have seen all season long is a player that works very hard and one that is very determined to become a senior footballer. Who knows if he will make it or not.

The true way of testing the seriousness of this is to see if he is selected in the Williamstown seniors or reserves. Good clubs like ours wouldn't hesitate to push a player back into the reserves if they weren't representing the club appropriately.

[Bumper Bulldogs]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

We are going to learn alot by 5pm tomorrow If Rocket doesnt want to play him or doesnt rate him as others have suggested we will know then.
End of story!

Tough Call!

[Bumper Bulldogs]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

I think we all need a little perspective in this scenario, I can only hope that Guy has learnt a lesson from his actions and this will continue to make him a better player and adopt a professional attitude considering he is now an elite athlete.

Their is always two sides to the story. Not saying that O know has happened however we may be better to give him a run and let him understand really how far off in fitness and intensity he really is.

The worst is he blows it again, the best is he knuckles down and puts in a good pre-season and matures over the summer.

[boydogs]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

truth be told, O'Keefe won't fill a gaping hole in our structure, and the players currently in the side that he is competing against haven't yet done enough in the MC's eyes to warrant demotion just yet

O'Keefe at the moment is in a similar boat to where Reid was last season in that his type is adequately catered for on our list

Who are you thinking of when you say this? O'Keefe to me is a skillful midfielder/forward who is most similar to Higgins & Gia, who are out injured ATM

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

Change of pace. If he is not in favour with the powers that be, perhaps it is best to offer him up trade whilst he has put in a strong VFL season while he may have a peak in interest.

[Sedat]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

Who are you thinking of when you say this? O'Keefe to me is a skillful midfielder/forward who is most similar to Higgins & Gia, who are out injured ATM

He's competing against Aker for a spot in the current team.