Giansiracusa's last season

[GVGjr]

We all know this is Gia's last season. He played well last season and earned another year with us.

Macca mapped out a plan to have Gia play the majority of the season in the seniors with a number of games as a Sub and a few at the VFL. I think the aim if for Gia to be a coach of some capacity at the club next year.

Discussions on the forum have indicated that a lot of the members think he's done and should make way for the next generation of youngsters.

What do you think the club should do?
Maintain the original plan that I detailed above?
Drop him and only play him when we absolutely have to?
Just give him a farewell game later in the year like we have with other players?

I think Gia has a few more weeks to establish himself as a genuine player for the senior side but he has to earn his position. I'm not in favour of dropping him just to make spots available for the youngsters. If they earn it then great gut I see little value in gifting games at the moment.

I'd be interested in your thoughts.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

I believe much of the criticism of Gia on the forum is unwarranted.
He has played 7 games with most as sub. Actual game time would be less than 50% but averaging 10 disposals.

He has generally had some impact when he is on the ground.

I see no reason to change the plan.

[westdog54]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

Stick to the plan as far as I'm concerned. I'm more than happy with our player management strategies and I'm happy to back Macca and the rest of the MC to do the right thing.

[boydogs]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

There have been games where we have needed a midfielder with pace to break the game open to come on as sub, but instead we've had Gia there. But then in some games he has come on and done well, setting up some crucial goals. Maybe just mix it up a bit more, not sure it was the right move when Macca declared Gia would be sub on a Thursday, we need to be a bit more unpredictable than that

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

Time to reassess for mine. I don't think any of the criticism is aimed at Gia at all, certainly not from me.

The issue is the use of Gia. For me either he plays all game or not at all. Macca is still having problems with the sub (see North in Round 2) and having Gia as a sub is so predictable that we are giving away any tactical advantage ebfore the game has even started. It's not like we can afford to gift away any advantages at the moment.

So if he is still ahead of Stringer, Hunter, Dahl, Hrovat, Grant, Dickson, Crameri, Honeychurch, Murphy or mids who could play defensive forward like Smith, Higgins, Stevens etc, or talls like Jones, Campbell, Ayce - Then play him on the ground and let form take its course.

If he's not in ahead of 6 names from that list then have him play VFL as a playing assistant coach until such time that he is considered in the top 6 forwards on the list. If the argument is that kids can develop well in the VFL (which is true), the extending that thought to Honeychurch and Hrovat (etc) playing alongside him in the VFL will give them even more hand in developing as smaller players, not least of which Gia can pinch hit in the centre at VFL level and give added experience to those guys.

We've been out-coached with Gia as the sub this year, and giving Gia 15 minutes only against North just goes to show this best laid plan might need a re-think. I think we need to step back from this as a 'the MC are wrong', 'don't Gia bash' or 'Macca needs to be believed in'. It's not about those things, its asking now one third of the season down how would we rate the strategy of the inclusion of Gia in the side, especially as the sub. I suggest the plan hasn't worked successfully enough to continue as a specialised sub player.

I think we go back to basics, real basics, that being either he's good enough to be best 21 or he is not. Having a 32 old slow-ish forward pocket as the sub isn't a savvy idea, its just not. Gia can't play any other role on the ground. Hypothetically, we give Aaron Davey a year contract last year. If the debate was over Aaron Davey playing as a boarderline permanent sub after 1/3 of a season without it being a success, would the discussion be different?

If the match committee and coaches think he holds down a spot over a kid, then that's a decision for them and another debate.

[GVGjr]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

Terrific post BT.

[Bornadog]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

Terrific post BT.

Ditto, makes a good case.

[Maddog37]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

I think he may come in handy later in the year as the younger guys start to fatigue.

[soupman]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

Good post BT.

I completely agree that we shouldn't be afraid or reluctant to let Gia coach at Footscray, his selection should be on merit not just because he is the easy choice as sub.

I however don't think he is that poor a use of the sub in the context of where our side is at. We are aiming to win, but if there is a slight advantage to the clubs long term future at the expense of a smallish tactical advantage I'm prepared to make that sacrifice.

The issue for me is that if Gia isn't sub then someone else is, and I much prefer the option of a 32 year old veteren only getting a quarter every week than a promising 19 year old.

I think the argument that "either he's good enough to be best 21 or not" could be equally applied to the other players in the squad. Everyone in the best 22 has earnt their spot, so if we have to pick one of them to be the player who has the least game exposure I want to make sure the players I want playing full games are doing so.

The ideal sub would be described as being someone who has pace, can break the lines, can be damaging with the footy, can get multiple touches in a short time period and most importantly can make an impact. Gia fits most of the categories, but the other players on our list who would have a similiar output are guys we want to see do it for a full match. At this stage of our development I'd much rather start Tutt in the 21 ahead of Gia if they are both "best 22", regardless of whoever is better at this stage, because while Gia starting might make us a slightly better chance of winning we have more to gain from Tutt getting real gametime.

Also having Footscray instead of Williamstown means we can control the roles our players play in the reserves, meaning that I would rather our young players play four quarters in an appropriate role at Footscray than a quarter in the AFL in what is quite possibly already a dead game.

If Gia isn't best 22 then he shouldn't be picked, but if he is then for me it is a matter of opportunity cost. Putting someone else in the sub role robs them of an opportunity to play, learn and develop from 4 quarters of footy at either level, and I think a full game for someone like Tutt, or Honeychurch, or Hunter (all players that would fit the sub mould at our club) would be far more beneficial.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

Good post BT.

I completely agree that we shouldn't be afraid or reluctant to let Gia coach at Footscray, his selection should be on merit not just because he is the easy choice as sub.

I however don't think he is that poor a use of the sub in the context of where our side is at. We are aiming to win, but if there is a slight advantage to the clubs long term future at the expense of a smallish tactical advantage I'm prepared to make that sacrifice.

The issue for me is that if Gia isn't sub then someone else is, and I much prefer the option of a 32 year old veteren only getting a quarter every week than a promising 19 year old.

I think the argument that "either he's good enough to be best 21 or not" could be equally applied to the other players in the squad. Everyone in the best 22 has earnt their spot, so if we have to pick one of them to be the player who has the least game exposure I want to make sure the players I want playing full games are doing so.

The ideal sub would be described as being someone who has pace, can break the lines, can be damaging with the footy, can get multiple touches in a short time period and most importantly can make an impact. Gia fits most of the categories, but the other players on our list who would have a similiar output are guys we want to see do it for a full match. At this stage of our development I'd much rather start Tutt in the 21 ahead of Gia if they are both "best 22", regardless of whoever is better at this stage, because while Gia starting might make us a slightly better chance of winning we have more to gain from Tutt getting real gametime.

Also having Footscray instead of Williamstown means we can control the roles our players play in the reserves, meaning that I would rather our young players play four quarters in an appropriate role at Footscray than a quarter in the AFL in what is quite possibly already a dead game.

If Gia isn't best 22 then he shouldn't be picked, but if he is then for me it is a matter of opportunity cost. Putting someone else in the sub role robs them of an opportunity to play, learn and develop from 4 quarters of footy at either level, and I think a full game for someone like Tutt, or Honeychurch, or Hunter (all players that would fit the sub mould at our club) would be far more beneficial.

You make a good counter position for sure. But as to first year (or so) players playing 4 quarters in the AFL as opposed to 1 in the AFL, I'm not too sure I can agree. With the VFL games against Richmond, Bendigo and last week, we've seen that the competition didn't force the kids to play well. The opposition was small and so far below AFL standard that really just amounted to a mid-week practice match. So for a kid to get picked, get into the zone, learn match day prep, warm up, be a part of it, sit next to Kingy or Corey, or Gia if he's playing and watch the game, get the pace, understand the pressure (etc, etc), to me isn't necessarily counter productive to the young kids development. I'm sure Marcus got more out of 1 quarter of AFL then running rings around the virtual witches hats last week in the VFL. There is so much more to learning the next level then being sub or not. So looking at us, I'm not too sure I can agree.

Looking at other teams, Gia as the sub makes us too predictable and denies us flexibility. The North match day coaching killed us and I think it will be common strategy against us now. That is, by selecting a slow-ish forward pocket we will almost have to sub off either Jones, Stringer, Grant or Crameri. So at 3/4 time, the opposition coach will sub out a mid sized defender knowing what we will do, and push down a slower mid or bench player to cover Gia. They then sub on a runner to add spark to their midfield of which we get no injection of fresh legs. It's too predictable and shows our hand before the game which gives away any advantage of unpredictability or flexibility. I just don't see the merit in pursuing using Gia this way when we've seen it not work well enough, or often enough.

I'm just unable to see the 'how' or 'why' with this anymore. On balance, I can't accept the player development angle, and strategically on match day I can't see it either. As per my last post, if we were talking about Aaron Davey on a one year contract and not a club legend I'm not sure this thread would have even been started.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

OK, so Gia retires tomorrow. Or hurts himself. Now, it's time to pick a new use for the sub. Do we just go the debutant, young players without the tank for four quarters, or do we take a tactical approach I.e. Grant as sub.

I think the answer to that question holds the key to the Gia issue. As others have said, if he's not sub then someone else is, and it depends on how we think we'd use that. If the tactical option, I'm all for Gia playing for the Scray, if we're just going to use it for young players, then the current use is best.

[Mantis]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

He needs to play.. He hits the scoreboard and we need players who can do that.

I see him as duelling with Dickson for a spot in the team and with Tory out for an extended period Gia should play a bit more regularly in the starting 21.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

What exactly does Gia playing today as sub again do?

The argument that say JJ (or others) is better to play VFL is redundant. Tacticly, what does Gia playing do? We can't insert a tall, or inject pace. All we will do is replace a out of form forward with a 32 year ols slowish forward pocket.

Seriously, what is the point, what is the advantage for kids who could do with getting used to the speed and preparations of the AFL? What is the match day advantage?

It's not about Gia as a person or player, if he's best 21 play him, but as a sub it's not working. Not working. Not working.

[lemmon]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

Agreed BT, I think he is still very much a first team player, he brings more smarts and guile than anyone else we have so I'd be starting him. If he can't run out a full game than he shouldn't be on the list full stop but I'd much rather see a Tutt as sub who can come in and actually break lines.

[Remi Moses]

Re: Giansiracusa's last season

It isn't working and it's not for the future.
I would have had JGrant today as the sub.
With no VFL game he hasn't had any more games under his belt.
Far to negative