Trading...Tanking

[Ghost Dog]

Re: Trading...Tanking

From what I can tell it's nothing more than a convenient under researched expression that appeals to people that are either frustrated with results or prone to taking short cuts in life. It's certainly not good for the game to have so many people willing their side to lose once they come to the realization that they won't make the finals.

The AFL introduced priority picks to try and help clubs that bottom out but this ended up with the public wanting their clubs to tank games to gain extra selections which isn't ideal.
The Hawks never dropped games to move up the order nor did the Swans. Well run sides don't need to cheat the system. Thankfully we have a coach that wants to prove himself and he wouldn't throw games to jump a few positions in the draft order.

It's a shame we don't have a relegation system like the EPL. No EPL fan wants to see their side lose and be dropped down a division. They don't have a draft that can be compromised by all this negative speculation either.

My thoughts exactly. If I do suspect we tank, ( we won't ) I will immediately toss my card off the westgate.

[FrediKanoute]

Re: Trading...Tanking

Unfortunately that's all most fans in the EPL can hope for because the majority of teams have no chance of winning it, unless their team get's bought by the right kind of billionaire. That's a worse issue than potential tanking in my view.

Agree, the EPL and most football competitions are dominated by a few teams who win all the silverware. Its where the AFL is heading, because player development, player screening and free agency are directly correlated to clubs with money. In general (and 2012 was an exception), but the EPL title race is boring with the top 4 spots wrapped up by Christmas. The real excitement is seeing which teams avoid the drop. That isn't healthy.

[FrediKanoute]

Re: Trading...

I posted it because I was curious about what elements of our style of play make you think we are going to be hard to play against. We win a stoppage then kick it straight to the other team...and by recruiting players with poor foot skills we are perpetuating a 'now' problem (Cross, Boyd et al) into a future problem (Smith).

Who cares if you are 'hard at it' if you cannot release the ball to a team-mate. I don't ever remember us being the 'quickest' team in it, but we did have leg-speed. Now we have very little and it hurts us...it hurts us even more because our lack of legspeed and poor kicking skills make it impossible to maintain possession of the ball.

Yes - we need players who can play. To me, the old adage that if you can't kick you can't play has never been truer and we have far too many players in our side in this category.

I can't disagree with any of this, especially the last part. Being able to kick and kick accurately is a fundemental. I've on seen Smith in a few games and I find him underwhelming. Hard at it yes, but highly skilled no. Wasted high pick in my opinion.

[anfo27]

Re: Trading...

I posted it because I was curious about what elements of our style of play make you think we are going to be hard to play against. We win a stoppage then kick it straight to the other team...and by recruiting players with poor foot skills we are perpetuating a 'now' problem (Cross, Boyd et al) into a future problem (Smith).

Who cares if you are 'hard at it' if you cannot release the ball to a team-mate. I don't ever remember us being the 'quickest' team in it, but we did have leg-speed. Now we have very little and it hurts us...it hurts us even more because our lack of legspeed and poor kicking skills make it impossible to maintain possession of the ball.

Yes - we need players who can play. To me, the old adage that if you can't kick you can't play has never been truer and we have far too many players in our side in this category.

I don't pretend to be a footy guru & i don't have the footy background you do so there is no point getting into specifics about styles of play.I call it as i see it & our lack of pace had little if any effect on the final outcome of yesterdays game.
IMO we lost yesterday because we were not prepared to work hard enough defensively. We allowed them to pass the ball around, take uncontested marks at will & move the ball up the ground with little to no pressure.
That to me has nothing to do with pace but rather a unwillingness not to run hard enough to do your job defensively. This is a bad habit that we have had for years & one I'm sick to death of seeing.
We don't need to be drafting players because they are visually appealing, we need to get guys in that are unwavering & uncompromising in their approach & guys that are mentally tough. If these guys happen to be quick & kick the ball well, then thats great but that should not be the basis of why we pick these kids.
I for one like the direction Macca is taking.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Trading...

4.3 kicks a game, wow.

We don't count handballs anymore?


16 touches (11 contested!) after coming on as a sub isn't too bad.

11 touches at 91% this week.

3 touches in less than a quarter as a sub on debut doesn't really count for much.

[Greystache]

Re: Trading...

We don't count handballs anymore?


16 touches (11 contested!) after coming on as a sub isn't too bad.

11 touches at 91% this week.

3 touches in less than a quarter as a sub on debut doesn't really count for much.

Because we desperately need players handling more...

If a young player on our list was averaging 10 touches a game you'd be screaming for them to be dropped, let alone using them as the poster boy for who we should have drafted.

You were smashing Smith for only getting a couple of touches when coming on as the sub for less than a quarter, but when it suits it doesn't really count.

[Sedat]

Re: Trading...Tanking

I don't necessarily have a problem with us getting Smith over a Crozier or McKenzie type (although I am concerned that you cannot deconstruct and reconstruct the kicking technique of an 18yo). After all, Brendan McCartney deserves the chance to mould and shape the team as he sees fit. I have a much bigger problem with needlessly losing Ward (obviously occurred before BMac's arrival), which necessitated the line of thought that we needed another hard-at-it midfielder as immediate replacement. Ward is an elite mid of the competition already and will be for another 8-10 years, whereas all of Smith, Crozier and McKenzie are unknown quantities at the minute. However it would stand to reason that retaining Ward would have meant less of a need for more inside midfield grunt at the draft table last year. Likewise losing Harbrow led us to believe that we needed to select a small defender the previous draft, and Jayden Schofield has already left the club. These issues in isolation don't mean an awful lot, but when added together they go a very long way to explaining the lopsided list that we currently have.

[GVGjr]

Re: Trading...Tanking

From my perspective there were two major problems yesterday.
First, it is all very well getting numbers in and around the ball, and getting first hands on the pill. But eventually it has to come out of the pack situation. When it did yesterday, the only players there to receive and distribute it were Lions.
Next, to many of our players were content to trot along in the wake of opponents running with the ball, rather than really chasing.
Then of course there was our old chestnut of allowing the opponent far to much room, and latitude.

[Bulldog4life]

Re: Trading...

Because we desperately need players handling more...

If a young player on our list was averaging 10 touches a game you'd be screaming for them to be dropped, let alone using them as the poster boy for who we should have drafted.

You were smashing Smith for only getting a couple of touches when coming on as the sub for less than a quarter, but when it suits it doesn't really count.

I agree with you and I like Smith. It is irritating to continually read "who we should have drafted". It is more constructive to comment on what type of player we should draft in the forthcoming draft. We've got Smith now let's support the lad.

[Remi Moses]

Re: Trading...Tanking

Watched a player the other night who wouldn't kick once upon a time.
One Jobe Watson. Let's wait and see before we make a conclusive judgement.

[Ghost Dog]

Re: Trading...

I agree with you and I like Smith. It is irritating to continually read "who we should have drafted". It is more constructive to comment on what type of player we should draft in the forthcoming draft. We've got Smith now let's support the lad.

Good point there Bulldog4life. Besides, will he be any worse than Boyd?

[LostDoggy]

Re: Trading...Tanking

We need an omen. Perhaps if we play Sherman each week we'll get the results some on this thread are looking for