Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - PART III

[Art Vandelay_]

I'll take it you agree with justification of those players being dropped.

Depth has nothing to do with dropping players or not.

It's about team discipline, if a senior player is putting up poor performances they should be dropped regardless of how good his replacement is.

No I don’t. Guthrie is the best argument of the 3
Motlop and Blicavs weren’t credible.

Depth has everything to do with it. You replace players with guys you expect to do better. If guys aren’t doing stuff in the VFL then how can you expect them to do better in the AFL?
So either we had the depth to do so (and your claim to the contrary is nonsense) or we don’t.(and your claim to drop certain ‘favourites’ is nonsense).

Which is it?

 

[Vdubs]

I'll take it you agree with justification of those players being dropped.

Depth has nothing to do with dropping players or not.

It's about team discipline, if a senior player is putting up poor performances they should be dropped regardless of how good his replacement is.

What we call poor may not correlate with coach/MC opinions .They might have specific roles, pressure acts, decoy acts etc that we are not aware of. Stats are not the be all end all. Attitude at training could be a big determinant.

 

[catempire]

From my perspective, the depth is very shallow.

Is it any shallower than any other team?

 

[catempire]

Their quality across the ground is so much better that it could carry a ‘great white hope’

Really disagree with this. Our 17th-22nd best players are every bit as good as theirs. They had a system that worked really well and got the most out of every single player. We have, as yet, been unable to do the same.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Now we’re going back to 2016
Imo Motlop suffered the same problem Hawkins does and probably to an extent Cockatoo does.

We’re mostly all in agreement Hawkins isn’t the problem, it’s more how slowly we move the ball. Well this affected Motlop also. Plays on a wing and what’s he see with our slow movement... no space to run into and a clogged forward 50 to kick to. Plays forward pocket and by the time the ball gets there the forward 50 has 35 guys in it. Hard to express yourself as a flair player.

The 2016 PF was the game I thought this was the biggest problem. Any time we got the ball in space on the wing we moved it so slow that Jones marked everything all night.

Not sure how we got into this. The inference was clearly about picking favourites in 2018. Which isn’t a credible claim.

I was talking bout 2016 as well from a few posts back.
Yeah Motlop was unfairly criticised at times (particularly last year) but there were times when he really wasn't and the effort and desire actually wasn't there.
Yeah personally haven't noticed any favourites my self this year. Cuthrie has played well and deserved his spot, same with Blitz.
Zuthrie and Parsons might be getting there though.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I was talking bout 2016 as well from a few posts back.
Yeah Motlop was unfairly criticised at times (particularly last year) but there were times when he really wasn't and the effort and desire actually wasn't there.
Yeah personally haven't noticed any favourites my self this year. Cuthrie has played well and deserved his spot, same with Blitz.
Zuthrie and Parsons might be getting there though.

Parsons I’d drop. Who for I don’t know.
Not sure Miers or Jones would do much better atm. Maybe worth trying.

Zuthrie I just can’t find a replacement. Seems like all our small/medium defenders are in atm.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Tomorrow’s team selection might tell us a lot.
If things continue serious questions have to be asked of the match committee (all of them).

 

[Cataholic]

Is it any shallower than any other team?

Don’t know enough about other teams to make an informed comment.

But ours isn’t as deep as I’d like, personally.

 

[Cataholic]

Really disagree with this. Our 17th-22nd best players are every bit as good as theirs. They had a system that worked really well and got the most out of every single player. We have, as yet, been unable to do the same.

By ‘quality’ I was referring to the total of the parts, not just the individuals.

And in total, we’re poor by comparison.

Their system, belief and desire is better. A quality unit.

We’re not, because we can only bring it for brief bursts.

 

[catempire]

So Smith was training well enough to be the number 1 ruckman against Melbourne, Stanley then trained well enough to be the number 1 ruckman against Hawthorn and Blicavs must have trained great last week to be the number 1 ruckman against the eagles. Sounds like the under 11s where the coach is handing out a McDonald's voucher for the best trainer.

Way to misrepresent things.

Stanley was unavailable for the Melbourne game. The point was he trained better over preseason than Smith.

 

[catempire]

By ‘quality’ I was referring to the total of the parts, not just the individuals.

And in total, we’re poor by comparison.

Their system, belief and desire is better. A quality unit.

We’re not, because we can only bring it for brief bursts.

That’s a different argument to depth though, isn’t it.

 

[catempire]

Ah yes the old staple. How dare posters have an opinion because we don't work at the club. Grade One idiocy right there.

Right to an opinion is universal. As is others right to criticise yours (or anyone else’s) including on the basis that you have less information than those making the decisions.

 

[Cataholic]

That’s a different argument to depth though, isn’t it.

If those playing can’t bring the desire, belief and system, then they don’t have the quality/s needed.

If those behind them don’t bring improvement on that then there’s little / no depth.

 

[catempire]

Yes he can. Easily:

1. Pick as close as we can to two competent rucks. Preferably Smith and Stanley. Remember the oft-repeated mantra around here "well, he wasn't recruited play reserves", if that doesn't apply to Smith nothing does.
2. Play actual defenders in defence and actual forwards in the forward line.
3. Drop players when they have terrible games. That goes for everyone. Including his pets.
4. Promote players when they deserve it, and there is a role for them. Underperforming players like Gregson and Parsons for say Murdoch - as a forward - is a straight swap for example. We all like Zac Guthrie, but he's been down for a while and a straight swap for Thurlow (first round draft pick remember) could be good too.

If he were to start doing things like that, a lot of frustrations will be removed instantly.

Subjective judgement calls where there is no right or wrong.

 

[Cataholic]

Right to an opinion is universal. As is others right to criticise yours (or anyone else’s) including on the basis that you have less information than those making the decisions.

Never have, never will.

But does that mean the club’s decisions will always be beyond reproach, and always better than those of observers?

 

[Spazz Cat]

Parsons I’d drop. Who for I don’t know.
Not sure Miers or Jones would do much better atm. Maybe worth trying.

Zuthrie I just can’t find a replacement. Seems like all our small/medium defenders are in atm.

I'd go Parsons for Murdoch.
I'd like one of our more experienced mid size players to go back instead of Zuthrie.
Possibly Joel or Scooter, also definitely Blitz.

 

[catempire]

Don’t know enough about other teams to make an informed comment.

But ours isn’t as deep as I’d like, personally.

I think this is something that needs more scrutiny. Depth across the competition has been eroded since the addition of GWS and GC. There’s 80 or so players not available to the 16 clubs that preceded them.

I think you’d find that Geelong’s depth compares favourably to most other sides.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I'd go Parsons for Murdoch.
I'd like one of our more experienced mid size players to go back instead of Zuthrie.
Possibly Joel or Scooter, also definitely Blitz.

A credible need for experience and leadership in the back half.
Can’t see Joel’s hubris allowing him to go anywhere other the middle.
I’d send Scooter to Ross.

 

[catempire]

Never have, never will.

But does that mean the club’s decisions will always be beyond reproach, and always better than those of observers?

Absolutely not and absolutely not what I said. You miss the point. All opinions are fair game, including those made from a position of relative ignorance. Opinions can be fairly criticised.

Put it this way, I’m an economist. You absolutely should take no notice of my views on medicine, engineering or any other field. I’m still able to give my views on those topics but you are free to tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about.

 

[Cataholic]

Absolutely not and absolutely not what I said. You miss the point. All opinions are fair game, including those made from a position of relative ignorance. Opinions can be fairly criticised.

Put it this way, I’m an economist. You absolutely should take no notice of my views on medicine, engineering or any other field. I’m still able to give my views on those topics but you are free to tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about.

Sorry, my question wasn’t meant to be antagonistic.

What I’m trying to discern is where the line in the sand is re: scrutiny of the club.

It’s easy for the club, or others, to hide behind the ‘we know better’ clause to shut down discussion, but that doesn’t necessarily promote the critical analysis that is sometimes needed from within, and without, to ensure integrity and accountability.

 

[Spazz Cat]

A credible need for experience and leadership in the back half.
Can’t see Joel’s hubris allowing him to go anywhere other the middle.
I’d send Scooter to Ross.

I'd try Menegola on Ross. Big boy with endurance. Shut down roles could suit him.

 

[catempire]

Sorry, my question wasn’t meant to be antagonistic.

What I’m trying to discern is where the line in the sand is re: scrutiny of the club.

It’s easy for the club, or others, to hide behind the ‘we know better’ clause to shut down discussion, but that doesn’t necessarily promote the critical analysis that is sometimes needed from within, and without, to ensure integrity and accountability.

Any scrutiny/criticism can be made. It’s just that in doing so you yourself may be criticised for the position you take. That includes saying you are ignorant of facts and information. This is an unregulated space. There is no “line” to speak of.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I'd try Menegola on Ross. Big boy with endurance. Shut down roles could suit him.

He’s just had a good game playing as a mid though.
Scott said on 360 that the first cab off the rank was Cockatoo. Ablett and Nakia out.

I’d just give him more mid time. Scooter is our best run with player and not really compatible elsewhere.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Absolutely not and absolutely not what I said. You miss the point. All opinions are fair game, including those made from a position of relative ignorance. Opinions can be fairly criticised.

Put it this way, I’m an economist. You absolutely should take no notice of my views on medicine, engineering or any other field. I’m still able to give my views on those topics but you are free to tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about.

I'm a boilermaker by trade but I certainly know Bit Coin is the future of currency. Everyone should sell everything they own and jump on now.

 

[Cataholic]

Any scrutiny/criticism can be made. It’s just that in doing so you yourself may be criticised for the position you take. That includes saying you are ignorant of facts and information. This is an unregulated space. There is no “line” to speak of.

That is sometimes a too convenient fall-back position though.......it can be argued to eternity that the club is always right simply because it’ll always have more info than anyone else.

The premise is true, but if it’s used to deflect scrutiny then it’s not healthy.