Guy O'Keefe

[Go_Dogs]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

If I was O'Keefe, I'd walk.

To chase the premiership dream at the Demons?

[LostDoggy]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

The reason there has been so much discussion on a player that hasnt debuted yet on this forum is because he has played so well without reward which is very strange.Especially when players with less form have been given the nod in front of him.
There are out of form players & players who would be carrying injuries that could do with a rest
This week against the Eagles would be the perfect time to debut him its not as if he hasnt deserved it.

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!

[Missing Dog]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

If you were a player trying to force your way into a senior side than you would do everything imaginable to earn that privilege, you would make sure the selection committee had no other choice but to pick you. Having missed a rehab session shows a lack of professionalism and a lack of maturity on the players behalf. I would be disappointed with Eade & co. if they did pick him and ignored this indiscretion.

St Kilda dropped Jason Gram an established AFL player to the VFL for missing a rehab session and he was already playing seniors, so you can only imagine that a young kid yet to play an AFL game trying to earn promotion missing a rehab session would not and should not warrant selection.

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.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

To chase the premiership dream at the Demons?

Being wooden spooner at AFL level > winning a premiership at VFL level

[Happy Days]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

So missing one rehab session should stamp his card for good?

If it's the reason he didn't get picked last week, then good. That would be a suitable punishment. But to continue on with it is a bit much; the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

[Missing Dog]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

I'm certainly not stamping his papers for good and I don't think anybody is for that matter. I think the door was shut on his debut last week because of the missed rehab session and now he needs to wait for that door to re-open. Just because he played well on the weekend it does not mean he will earn an immediate call up, they are the consequences of his original actions.

[The Coon Dog]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

So missing one rehab session should stamp his card for good?

If it's the reason he didn't get picked last week, then good. That would be a suitable punishment. But to continue on with it is a bit much; the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

That's an assumption on your behalf that if Guy isn't picked this week its because of that. Clearly there would be other factors & I think we should have a bit of faith in the match committee.

[Happy Days]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

That's an assumption on your behalf that if Guy isn't picked this week its because of that. Clearly there would be other factors & I think we should have a bit of faith in the match committee.

Williamstown's second best player all season, probably best on ground for them last weekend; it's pretty safe to assume his ability isn't whats keeping him off the park, at least not the determining factor anyway.

I was just going on what's been suggested by many others, anyway.

[Remi Moses]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

If you were a player trying to force your way into a senior side than you would do everything imaginable to earn that privilege, you would make sure the selection committee had no other choice but to pick you. Having missed a rehab session shows a lack of professionalism and a lack of maturity on the players behalf. I would be disappointed with Eade & co. if they did pick him and ignored this indiscretion.

St Kilda dropped Jason Gram an established AFL player to the VFL for missing a rehab session and he was already playing seniors, so you can only imagine that a young kid yet to play an AFL game trying to earn promotion missing a rehab session would not and should not warrant selection.

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.

Here here ,missing a rehab session in this professional era is unforgiveable. I'd also be certain if an established player did the same thing he'd be dropped.

[Ozza]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

Williamstown's second best player all season, probably best on ground for them last weekend; it's pretty safe to assume his ability isn't whats keeping him off the park, at least not the determining factor anyway.

I was just going on what's been suggested by many others, anyway.

Perhaps the match committee think he is simply a very good VFL player that won't make the jump. I'm only speculating - but there has been many many players who can't make the jump - and as TCD said earlier - I'm happy to have faith in the match committee on who is ready and able.

[Go_Dogs]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

Being wooden spooner at AFL level > winning a premiership at VFL level

Maybe, but when you on the list getting paid regardless, I doubt it matters too much. If he's as good as everyone seems to think, he'll get his opportunity. If he spits the dummy and changes clubs, good luck to him too - but it shows a lack of athlete mentality and would tend to show he's a pretty soft character, and perhaps one we wouldn't want anyway.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

Perhaps the match committee think he is simply a very good VFL player that won't make the jump. I'm only speculating - but there has been many many players who can't make the jump - and as TCD said earlier - I'm happy to have faith in the match committee on who is ready and able.

But how can they ever ever know, if they never never (give him a) go?

Conjecture and speculation about a players' suitability is just that.. unless a player has a fair chance, and he's earnt that chance (that plenty of others haven't -- Williams, Grant, Stack, Lynch, just to name four who have played recently), to just stymie a guy's career because he MAY not look the part is negligent in the extreme.

And if they think he's never going to make it, why draft him? I can't stand how clubs draft players and then complain that they are 'too slow', 'have too small a tank' etc. It's not as if these issues didn't exist before they were drafted -- it just points to their own incompetence in not doing their proper due diligence on potential draftees.

And I have to say that you have far more faith in the match committee than I do: they have not proven themselves infallible by any stretch of the imagination.

[Happy Days]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

But how can they ever ever know, if they never never (give him a) go?

Conjecture and speculation about a players' suitability is just that.. unless a player has a fair chance, and he's earnt that chance (that plenty of others haven't -- Williams, Grant, Stack, Lynch, just to name four who have played recently), to just stymie a guy's career because he MAY not look the part is negligent in the extreme.

And if they think he's never going to make it, why draft him? I can't stand how clubs draft players and then complain that they are 'too slow', 'have too small a tank' etc. It's not as if these issues didn't exist before they were drafted -- it just points to their own incompetence in not doing their proper due diligence on potential draftees.

And I have to say that you have far more faith in the match committee than I do: they have not proven themselves infallible by any stretch of the imagination.

Agree 100%

I'm not totally against the match comittee handing out encouragment awards, but to keep someone as underpreforming as Eagle in the side for this long, with O'Keefe knocking the door down, is almost criminal. He may be the golden boy, but it's gone too far.

Thats why the assumption regarding "rehabgate"; because based on Eagle, it can't be form alone that's keeping him out.

[Sedat]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

Always dangerous to speculate that the player simply won't cut it at AFL level because of perceived weaknesses in his game without having actually given them the opportunity to do so. Otherwise the likes of Greg Williams and Sam Mitchell might never have had an AFL career of significance.

Having said that, there's no great rush on O'Keefe - he's only in the 2nd year of his AFL career and has time on his side to continue to work on deficiencies in his game to make him as AFL ready as possible. We don't "play the kids" for the hell of it, 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 - 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 has fulfiled his end of the bargain in this scenario you'd have thought, just needs to continue to perform and wait for the opportunity in his area to emerge).

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

[Ozza]

Re: Guy O'Keefe

But how can they ever ever know, if they never never (give him a) go?

Conjecture and speculation about a players' suitability is just that.. unless a player has a fair chance, and he's earnt that chance (that plenty of others haven't -- Williams, Grant, Stack, Lynch, just to name four who have played recently), to just stymie a guy's career because he MAY not look the part is negligent in the extreme.

And if they think he's never going to make it, why draft him? I can't stand how clubs draft players and then complain that they are 'too slow', 'have too small a tank' etc. It's not as if these issues didn't exist before they were drafted -- it just points to their own incompetence in not doing their proper due diligence on potential draftees.

And I have to say that you have far more faith in the match committee than I do: they have not proven themselves infallible by any stretch of the imagination.

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 heaps 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.