Universal Love Charlie ‘Chook’ Constable

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Also did anyone know that CC's actually stands for corn chips on the packet.
Took most of my life to figure that out.
 
Spazz Cat said:
Nah I like him so far.
I am just sceptical on how unfit he's meant to be.
If he's as unfit as you all say I find it hard to believe they'd consider giving him a game.
Or drafting him.
Or that it was even possible to come through the U/18 system.
If your right we're a insanely irresponsible club.
Click to expand...

Well, it has been said that most of our team are below peak fitness because GF, short pre-season etc, so...........
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Seeds said:
Does it have to happen?
Click to expand...
Are you saying that Charlie Constable, a guy who has played only limited minutes, was intentionally left on the bench late in two matches when we were cooked, down on rotations, and struggling to maintain a slim lead for... ummm.... some reason.

Are you saying that after an opposition goal late, the coaches box is looking at a centre bounce thinking "we need a clearance forward so we can lock it in". Knights then looks at Charlie on the bench and says, "Nah better save him for later when we really need him".
 
CatToTheFuture said:
Are you saying that Charlie Constable, a guy who has played only limited minutes, was intentionally left on the bench late in two matches when we were cooked, down on rotations, and struggling to maintain a slim lead for... ummm.... some reason.

Are you saying that after an opposition goal late, the coaches box is looking at a centre bounce thinking "we need a clearance forward so we can lock it in". Knights then looks at Charlie on the bench and says, "Nah better save him for later when we really need him".
Click to expand...
You got to love the conspiracy theories in this thread ...anything to ignore the harsh reality that his fitness is just nowhere near AFL standards

and it’ll continue long after he’s delisted
 
CatToTheFuture said:
Are you saying that Charlie Constable, a guy who has played only limited minutes, was intentionally left on the bench late in two matches when we were cooked, down on rotations, and struggling to maintain a slim lead for... ummm.... some reason.

Are you saying that after an opposition goal late, the coaches box is looking at a centre bounce thinking "we need a clearance forward so we can lock it in". Knights then looks at Charlie on the bench and says, "Nah better save him for later when we really need him".
Click to expand...
I thought they were just resting him up so he'd be fine for the VFL this coming weekend...
 
CatToTheFuture said:
Are you saying that Charlie Constable, a guy who has played only limited minutes, was intentionally left on the bench late in two matches when we were cooked, down on rotations, and struggling to maintain a slim lead for... ummm.... some reason.

Are you saying that after an opposition goal late, the coaches box is looking at a centre bounce thinking "we need a clearance forward so we can lock it in". Knights then looks at Charlie on the bench and says, "Nah better save him for later when we really need him".
Click to expand...
I said the reason. They dont believe he can play outside the middle. Where are you getting a conspiracy from?
 
you pick one said:
Does that explain rds 1 ,2 and 3? It would be legit if he were picked this week.
Click to expand...

It's pretty legit for the first 3 rounds also when you consider the options we haven't had available, the lack of senior players available in our VFL practice matches, and we have alternated with the medical sub by also using Zuth after he was omitted from the senior side
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

cats_09 said:
It's pretty legit for the first 3 rounds also when you consider the options we haven't had available, the lack of senior players available in our VFL practice matches, and we have alternated with the medical sub by also using Zuth after he was omitted from the senior side
Click to expand...
Do you have who the emergencies were for those 3 games? they disappear on the AFL web site once the sub is announced.
 
you pick one said:
Do you have who the emergencies were for those 3 games? they disappear on the AFL web site once the sub is announced.
Click to expand...

Round 1 the emergencies were Narkle, Henry, Constable & Evans, with the 2 latter being the ones who travelled to Adelaide. We know that subsequently Scott has said his preference is for debutants to not be the sub, which would suggest that Evans traveling was either for him to get the experience of what that's like, or maybe they had some doubts over say Dahlhaus who may have had to pass a fitness test to confirm his spot

Round 2 emergencies were Zuthrie, Jenkins, Narkle & Holmes, and Zuth ended up with the "medical sub vest", and as with Evans the week before it's unlikely that we would have seen Holmes as the sub

Round 3 emergencies were Zuthrie, Jenkins, Close and Constable
 
cats_09 said:
Round 1 the emergencies were Narkle, Henry, Constable & Evans, with the 2 latter being the ones who travelled to Adelaide. We know that subsequently Scott has said his preference is for debutants to not be the sub, which would suggest that Evans traveling was either for him to get the experience of what that's like, or maybe they had some doubts over say Dahlhaus who may have had to pass a fitness test to confirm his spot

Round 2 emergencies were Zuthrie, Jenkins, Narkle & Holmes, and Zuth ended up with the "medical sub vest", and as with Evans the week before it's unlikely that we would have seen Holmes as the sub

Round 3 emergencies were Zuthrie, Jenkins, Close and Constable
Click to expand...
Looking at that you would think there was a little wriggle room there with a re shuffle of the white board if the clubs opinion of Charlie had been as low as that displayed by some here,now I admit it's getting hard to justify his selection and it would be a brave man to think he will be in the best 22 with the players we have to return from injury, even this week there must be a huge ? around his selection or not even with the extra injuries.I hope we don't revert to Zuthrie but that also not a vote for Charlie right now.
 
you pick one said:
Looking at that you would think there was a little wriggle room there with a re shuffle of the white board if the clubs opinion of Charlie had been as low as that displayed by some here,now I admit it's getting hard to justify his selection and it would be a brave man to think he will be in the best 22 with the players we have to return from injury, even this week there must be a huge ? around his selection or not even with the extra injuries.I hope we don't revert to Zuthrie but that also not a vote for Charlie right now.
Click to expand...

The following are the senior players who were named to line up in our most recent VFL practice match - so the one following our win over the Lions as we didn't have a match last week, and Dangerfield was added to this list the next day:
  • 9 – Max Holmes
  • 10 – Ben Jarvis
  • 11 – Josh Jenkins
  • 15 – Nathan Krueger
  • 16 – Sam De Koning
  • 19 – Quinton Narkle
  • 20 – Oscar Brownless
  • 21 – Nick Stevens
  • 22 – Mitch Duncan
  • 28 – Darcy Fort
  • 33 – Shannon Neale
  • 39 – Zach Guthrie
  • 41 – Cam Taheny
  • 43 – Stefan Okunbor
  • 45 – Bradley Close
From the above list we've added Duncan & Holmes to the senior side for our Easter Monday clash; and with Higgins & Evans to miss through injury we'll likely see Menegola return, while Close has been getting a few mentions as being in line for a recall now he's recovered from his own injury issues, and if we want to add an additional tall forward option in place of say Dahlhah, that's likely to mean one of Jenkins, Fort or Jarvis

If we then look at options for the emergency list this week, the names in the mix most likely are Zuthrie, Constable, Narkle, Jarvis*, Jenkins* & Fort*, and if a debutant is named it seems highly unlikely they'll be the sub, so I'm going with Zuthrie as sub this week

*pending not actually being selected in the 22; note, I just don't see the first 3 names I list as potential emergencies as being selected in the 22
 
Strange Cat said:
You got to love the conspiracy theories in this thread ...anything to ignore the harsh reality that his fitness is just nowhere near AFL standards

and it’ll continue long after he’s delisted
Click to expand...

Yeah like he looked at any moment he might lapse into cardiac arrest!
Fairdinkum are you for real?
Learn to read some body language and put your head around that if you can.
Explains why Knights is low in the pecking order or at least should be.
 
Last edited:
I think a bit much is being made of his game time. His fitness isn't a strength but I think the main reason he's playing low game time is because he's a midfielder only who isn't in our first choice midfield makeup. He can't really play anywhere else so sits on the bench while a guy like Parfitt goes up forward or Guthrie or O'Connor drift back into defence for a period of time. And if the game is on the line late you want your best midfield group in there and he's clearly behind Selwood, Guthrie, Duncan, O'Connor, Parfitt and Smith as midfielder/wingers. Holmes and Clark also spent lots of time on the bench in the second half because you'll back experienced guys like Duncan, Guthrie and Smith to get the job done over young kids in a game that was really important to win.

I think we can put to bed the idea he's being unfairly maligned by not being picked. Right now he's borderline best 22 and we've got plenty to come back from injury. But he's shown some improvement this year with his decision making and ball use. Fitness and defensive running can be improved over time and he's being picked ahead of Narkle who has some talent so he must be doing something right. My big issue is still that he doesn't seem to have an elite part of his game that will make him stand out. If he wants to have a long AFL career he really needs to be a contested ball and clearance player but his clearance work has only been ok and his contested ball numbers are poor for an inside midfielder this year.

We'll see what happens for the rest of this year. I'm not writing him off yet but I haven't seen enough improvement to guarantee him another year on the list yet. He's been in my "probably won't make it" bucket for a while and he's yet to convince me otherwise.

PS - Can we forget this idea that racking up possessions as a midfielder is some massive talent? O'Connor moves to midfield and racks up touches. Guthrie goes to midfield and racks up touches, etc. Constable's numbers always look better than other kids because he plays as a permanent mid where the others don't. It's not a fair comparison and "the ability to find the footy" must be the most overrated talent in the game.
 
Ratcat said:
Yeah like he looked at any moment he might laps into cardiac arrest!
Fairdinkum are you for real?
Learn to read some body language and put your head around that if you can.
Explains why Knights is low in the pecking order or at least should be.
Click to expand...
That's such a weird take on things
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top