Past #24: Levi Greenwood - officially traded to Collingwood FC for pick 25 (2014) - retires rd16 2021 due to concussion symptoms - go well Pig

Remove this Banner Ad

Someone in another thread mentioned him not killing a ball in the third Q last week that resulted in a goal

Is that all....?? FFS...

The reality is, Greenwood was brought in to play the negating/tagger role. He played it admirably against Cotchin, not so much against Rich.

Rich single handedly brought his side back into the game in the 3rd quarter with 12 possessions. No player who has a hard tag (with the exception of Ablett who is completely unstoppable) should have that influence.

Given Greenwood doesnt add that much with outside play and skill, if he cant do his job as a tagger, unfortunately he becomes a liability.

I have no issue with this decision. although, people are correct when they say numerous others have had been afforded far more opportunities from Scott.

Im looking at you Patch, Spud, JMac.
 
The only other reason i think Greenwood may be out, is that Murphy still may not play tonight, therefore 2 taggers will be unneeded. If Murphy plays there may be a late change.
 
The reality is, Greenwood was brought in to play the negating/tagger role. He played it admirably against Cotchin, not so much against Rich.

Rich single handedly brought his side back into the game in the 3rd quarter with 12 possessions. No player who has a hard tag (with the exception of Ablett who is completely unstoppable) should have that influence.

Given Greenwood doesnt add that much with outside play and skill, if he cant do his job as a tagger, unfortunately he becomes a liability.

I have no issue with this decision. although, people are correct when they say numerous others have had been afforded far more opportunities from Scott.

Im looking at you Patch, Spud, JMac.

It wasn't just Rich, Hanley did it also, so why is Hine still there
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It wasn't just Rich, Hanley did it also, so why is Hine still there

Hanley burnt Hine for pace. The goals he kicked were so brilliant that we havent seen anything of that ilk since Adrian McAdam circa 93.

Whereas Greenwood was a perfect match up for Rich. Similar types of hard at it, in and under players. Greenwood simply played too far away from him and it cost us the game.
Given he has been dropped, one can only presume it was because he didnt play to instruction. Not because he got beaten by the brilliance of his opponent ala Hine.

That's just my humble opinion, im no expert.
 
who's been gifted games? this is a nonsensical charge repeated ad nauseum on big footy. name one player. if you can't stop slandering the footy coaches


LOL name one? Too easy, I'll name a few!

(And it's hardly "slander" pointing out that there seem to be rules for some, and rules for others in this team).

- Harper
- Bastinac
- Wright
- Adams
- Anthony
- Firrito

Have all been given more than enough opportunity to address their problems, on game day, in the seniors, for sustained periods.

This is not to say Bastinac or Adams should necessarily be dropped - not saying that at all. What I am questioning is why Greenwood gets pretty much best on ground one week, servicable the next, and then out the team after that? If there are deficiencies in his game, why doesn't he get half a season to sort them out like others do?

Why doesn't he get half a season to work on his kicking skills, like Lindsay Thomas was afforded in front of goal two years ago?

If it's about going missing in games, maybe he should talk to two of our senior players Harvey and Petrie - they know all about it.

It's pretty friggin silly to suggest that anyone mounting a case for Greenwoods' inclusion simply has a 'mancrush' on him. What's wrong with liking someone who has a red hot go, getting the same opportunity to get better as everyone else has?

If selection is based on crushes on men, then fair dinkum - some people ought to book out a hotel room and order up on the French Champapgne, and invite all the other players I listed up to have sweet nothings whispered to them. Because that's all they've given us at certain stages - SWEET NOTHING.
 
half of you can't see the big picture here. it's not always about player X tagging player Y. Jack and swallow went down and brisbane started getting on top in the midfield. This allowed them to lay blocks and get it to rich at every opportunity (smart given he's there best user). Levi needed help and he certainly didn't get it from his teammates or Brad.
 
Just watching an old game of North v Carlton - Simpson, Harding are playing.

Greenwood blanketing Judd and diving on that ball like he's possessed. There's a reason people have always liked him.
 
half of you can't see the big picture here. it's not always about player X tagging player Y. Jack and swallow went down and brisbane started getting on top in the midfield. This allowed them to lay blocks and get it to rich at every opportunity (smart given he's there best user). Levi needed help and he certainly didn't get it from his teammates or Brad.

Excellent point mate. But it is not convenient for those who think Scott always pulls the right reign to realize this, and instead lay all the blame for the loss on Levi to justify his omission.
 
half of you can't see the big picture here. it's not always about player X tagging player Y. Jack and swallow went down and brisbane started getting on top in the midfield. This allowed them to lay blocks and get it to rich at every opportunity (smart given he's there best user). Levi needed help and he certainly didn't get it from his teammates or Brad.

Rich was 20-30 metres in space for almost the entire third quarter. That is more than just team structure/blocking etc.
 
im shattered about this decision - FFS why doesnt he have as much leeway as some of those other f...... guys.

I love the way he plays - he represents exactly what we should be about - however i think its showing that attack means more then defence to this coaching group.very dissapointed.
 
Is Levi being told to play tight on someone, and then just thumbing his nose at that instruction and purposely giving his opponent 30m of space? I doubt he'd do that. Is he not fit enough to keep up with an opponent? Are we even clear on what his instructions were?

Is he just an old school grunt-truck who can't keep up with a gameplan that requires 100% running 100% of the time? Would he be at home playing a blue-collar role in, for example, a Longmire or Lyon side?

I don't know, just throwing these questions out there. It just seems strange to a lot of us that someone who has a red hot go gets dropped before many others. I'd like to know what the instructions for him were, whether they were actually reasonable expectations (as reasonable as playing one buggered ruck for whole matches whole seasons for example - that's very reasonable), and how far he fell short of them. You'd have to suggest it was a long way short if he finds himself out after one week! To me, there's always room for a footballer who just wants to attack the ball, or the man that has it, like nobody's business.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gave us 10000% more than young guys like Hine and Garner could hope to.

That's not a knock on the young kids, rather it's plaudits directed at Levi.

Sensational desire and effort today.
 
I love the way he plays. His hardness and gut-running are incredible. He covers the ground as well as anyone. Should be able to forge a career on these two attributes alone.

However, he gave his haters plenty of ammunition today with his disposal.

He was good in the 2nd half. He just seemed to make a lot of bad decisions or execute poorly when the game was up for grabs. His endeavour at times mirrored Ziebell. No one has ever questioned Levi's attack on the ball.

He could still be a good footballer for us and/or many other teams.
 
38 disposals means he can find the footy. But man did he butcher it by both foot and hand. And the interchange mistake................ So many on here talk about guys not having the skills to take us further, but in the same breath talk up Greenwood. However, fix that disposal (as he did to some degree in the seond half) then we have ourselves a player.
 
Could play mcmillans role with ease, an he would get more of the footy doing so.

He is a natural accumulator and we need blokes like him to create contests.

No he couldn't. McMillan plays a defensive winger/HBF role on the taller players. Levi would get smashed in the air.
 
He tries hard which is what we all love from him and he did end up accumulating a lot of the ball but man did he butcher it badly in the first half, really frustrating. He cleaned that up to a degree in the second half but he does need to work on his disposal and vision.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Past #24: Levi Greenwood - officially traded to Collingwood FC for pick 25 (2014) - retires rd16 2021 due to concussion symptoms - go well Pig

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top