Toast The Official Bailey Banfield Appreciation Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Reader mode
ignoramus said:
I find it odd that people regularly express disbelief that BB keeps getting selected despite not laying tackles, etc., like a pressure forward should be.

Not trying to negate criticism of BB or anything, but if he continues to be picked despite routinely demonstrating few pressure acts, then it seems reasonable to me that his performance is not being assessed in terms of how much pressure he applies. Ergo, BB is not a "pressure forward" — in terms of performance, certainly, but also in terms of designated role. He's being asked to do something else, such that he is not often in the right positions to lay tackles (nor expected to).
Click to expand...

Those like me who use that description are only doing so because our coach has said that's why he's picked, for his defensive pressure. I agree that he isn't, hence my disgust at him being picked.

It's certainly not as a goal kicking threat, marking target or nullifying dangerous HB's because he's doing none of that either.

I'm still waiting for the reasoning those who support his selection can provide other than the ongoing comedy it provides for some. I'd honestly love to hear/read a cogent reason why he's playing because there isn't a statistical one, there isn't a performance one and as far as I can see or have heard there isn't a strategic or structural one that holds any water. The relief in understanding it would be great for me but every time it comes Longmuir gives a reason that isn't backed up by any measure or the eye test.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Wobbly Punt said:
Those like me who use that description are only doing so because our coach has said that's why he's picked, for his defensive pressure. I agree that he isn't, hence my disgust at him being picked.

It's certainly not as a goal kicking threat, marking target or nullifying dangerous HB's because he's doing none of that either.

I'm still waiting for the reasoning those who support his selection can provide other than the ongoing comedy it provides for some. I'd honestly love to hear/read a cogent reason why he's playing because there isn't a statistical one, there isn't a performance one and as far as I can see or have heard there isn't a strategic or structural one that holds any water. The relief in understanding it would be great for me but every time it comes Longmuir gives a reason that isn't backed up by any measure or the eye test.
Click to expand...
You may have a point, but it's kinda odd stuff to put in the Bailey Banfield appreciation thread.
 
Tonga Bob said:
You may have a point, but it's kinda odd stuff to put in the Bailey Banfield appreciation thread.
Click to expand...

Yes it is, you're right and I apologise. But in my defence I got sucked in by an open question to those of us who don't see the BB rainbows.

I only came here looking for reasons for any appreciations to help ease my frustrations but instead got sucked in to defending BB deniers. I see now even those who support him agree he is not a defensive forward so I remain confused why he plays and how he generates any support but this is not the thread for it.



So to redeem myself I will offer a sacrifice to the intent of the thread. So in terms of appreciation, I appreciate the effort he clearly makes in getting in to every FFC social media post via photos or videos and how nice his smile is when he gets himself in them. He has a very warm and engaging smile which I appreciate.




I do apologise for my earlier post and will leave you all to your safe zone of BB appreciation...as illogical as it may be.







(Sorry again) ;)
 
Wobbly Punt said:
Yes it is, you're right and I apologise. But in my defence I got sucked in by an open question to those of us who don't see the BB rainbows.

I only came here looking for reasons for any appreciations to help ease my frustrations but instead got sucked in to defending BB deniers. I see now even those who support him agree he is not a defensive forward so I remain confused why he plays and how he generates any support but this is not the thread for it.



So to redeem myself I will offer a sacrifice to the intent of the thread. So in terms of appreciation, I appreciate the effort he clearly makes in getting in to every FFC social media post via photos or videos and how nice his smile is when he gets himself in them. He has a very warm and engaging smile which I appreciate.




I do apologise for my earlier post and will leave you all to your safe zone of BB appreciation...as illogical as it may be.







(Sorry again) ;)
Click to expand...
There you go!

In related news, you should become a player's buddy 👍
 
Tonga Bob said:
There you go!

In related news, you should become a player's buddy 👍
Click to expand...

Now, given I apologised and ran away, is it fair you have dragged me back in to the BB Appreciation thread? I'm happy to let you all go wild in here with appreciation and not offer any counter views but surely you could also leave me alone to not have to come and see it? Unless of course we could get a BB Anti-Appreciation thread going as well? :cool: Although I'd be against threads like that too because the people who judge footy on Fantasy scores and turnovers that annoy them would have the "Brandon Walker Un-Appreciation Thread" going in no time and that'd drive me madder than this one does.

So, in summary, I promise to not poison this thread with facts if you could please stop reminding me this place on the internet exists.
Thanks and you're welcome.



PS - Honestly I never understood the buddy draft thing so I have stayed out of it and let the young'uns play on the lawn without me on that one.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

He’s finally being played as a medium forward, I think the days of classifying him as a tall are surely over in JLo’s mind.

He’s at his best when a small defender can’t tackle him, because he’s quite strong. He can gets hands away during an opposition tackle.

The left foot banana too is quite elite.

It would be great if you could improve his lateral movement and pace a little.
 
rgauci said:
He’s finally being played as a medium forward, I think the days of classifying him as a tall are surely over in JLo’s mind.

He’s at his best when a small defender can’t tackle him, because he’s quite strong. He can gets hands away during an opposition tackle.

The left foot banana too is quite elite.

It would be great if you could improve his lateral movement and pace a little.
Click to expand...
Banners said himself yesterday was his first game this year not playing as a tall, because Fyfe was back.

Definitely not off the table.
 
Wobbly Punt said:
Those like me who use that description are only doing so because our coach has said that's why he's picked, for his defensive pressure. I agree that he isn't, hence my disgust at him being picked.

It's certainly not as a goal kicking threat, marking target or nullifying dangerous HB's because he's doing none of that either.

I'm still waiting for the reasoning those who support his selection can provide other than the ongoing comedy it provides for some. I'd honestly love to hear/read a cogent reason why he's playing because there isn't a statistical one, there isn't a performance one and as far as I can see or have heard there isn't a strategic or structural one that holds any water. The relief in understanding it would be great for me but every time it comes Longmuir gives a reason that isn't backed up by any measure or the eye test.
Click to expand...
I might be able to help you with this.

So, the first thing we need to understand is that context is important.

No one is saying Banfield is in our best players. In fact, even the most ardent Banfield supporters will agree he's probably in the 22-25th best and even then it's an inflated figure because he plays at area of the ground we are thin for talent. Which brings us to the second thing.

There needs to be someone better to come in. You can't just drop a player because you don't like him, and think Cam Rayner will magically appear on the list to replace him. It's fanciful. I've actually read on here calls to 'drop him now' and yet when you ask who they'd replace him with it's crickets or players already tried and failed.

To address some of your concerns:

It's certainly not as a goal kicking threat

He's kicked 8 goals in 8 games. Not Wayne Carey stuff, but others in that category are Thilthorpe, Draper, Rozee, Silvagni, Motlop, Johnson and Rohan.

So, you're a little off here.

marking target

That's not his role. Would you say Schultz, Walters, Freddy and Switta are 'marking targets'? Of course not.

Having said that, Banfield took 8 marks yesterday. Equal 2nd to anyone on the ground. You might even say he's performed well above expectation in this area for someone in his role.

And finally here are his stats for this year in relation to because there isn't a statistical one, there isn't a performance one. Can you see below where you've made the mistake?

1684634624917.png
I really hope this has helped. I've tried to lay out the answers to your questions as clearly as I can put it with reasoning backed with statistics.

At the very least, you will be able to say you were given the reasoned response you have been asking for.
 

Attachments

  • 1684634015792.png
    1684634015792.png
    2.1 KB · Views: 39
Last edited:
WilloTree said:
I might be able to help you with this.

So, the first thing we need to understand is that context is important.

No one is saying Banfield is in our best players. In fact, even the most ardent Banfield supporters will agree he's probably in the 22-25th best and even then it's an inflated figure because he plays at area of the ground we are thin for talent. Which brings us to the second thing.

There needs to be someone better to come in. You can't just drop a player because you don't like him, and think Cam Rayner will magically appear on the list to replace him. It's fanciful. I've actually read on here calls to 'drop him now' and yet when you ask who they'd replace him with it's crickets or players already tried and failed.

To address some of your concerns:

It's certainly not as a goal kicking threat

He's kicked 8 goals in 8 games. Not Wayne Carey stuff, but others in that category are Thilthorpe, Draper, Rozee, Silvagni, Motlop, Johnson and Rohan.

So, you're a little off here.

marking target

That's not his role. Would you say Schultz, Walters, Freddy and Switta are 'marking targets'? Of course not.

Having said that, Banfield took 8 marks yesterday. Equal 2nd to anyone on the ground. You might even say he's performed well above expectation in this area for someone in his role.

And finally here are his stats for this year in relation to because there isn't a statistical one, there isn't a performance one. Can you see below where you've made the mistake?

View attachment 1692800
I really hope this has helped. I've tried to lay out the answers to your questions as clearly as I can put it with reasoning backed with statistics.

At the very least, you will be able to say you were given the reasoned response you have been asking for.
Click to expand...
Such an awesome response to someone who should have just been ignored.
 
Reader mode

Remove this Banner Ad

Toast The Official Bailey Banfield Appreciation Thread

Similar threads

Freo Big Fella
WE MUST TRADE BAILEY BANFIELD
Replies
19
Views
2K
Purple Jesus
Purple Jesus
Big Animal
The Official Winnie Docker appreciation thread
Replies
16
Views
940
FreoGirl
FreoGirl
King Huskii
Hughes and Banfield?
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
187
Views
7K
s_wd6
s_wd6
Granny Val
AFL Live Official app not working
Replies
7
Views
845
Granny Val
Granny Val
go_the_dockers
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management thread - Trade Targets
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
6K
yakamoto
Y
anchor man
Unneeded and unwanted threads
Replies
6
Views
532
ignoramus
I
Raz
Women's Footy Match day thread Essendon Versus Fremantle - Sat 31st August
2 3
Replies
69
Views
2K
dont bowl there
dont bowl there

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top