Dogs v Roos in Ballarat - 12/03

[StevieG]

??????

Wallis didn't play.

He must have meant Barlow.

I think Hargrave's ability to close down small forwards will be missed more than Harbrow's, as a weakness JH had was his defensive game. There were often times last season where Shaggy was bagged for not getting into the game due to his nullifying work on forwards like Thomas.

Also, let's not get carried away with yesterday's game. I remember back in 2006 after a flogging at the hands of Richmond in a preseason match the doom and gloom on this board only to beat the same outfit in Rd 1 by 115 points. They are called practice matches for a reason.

 

[TempleKelvington]

Even at the ground I could hear people thinking Barlow was Wallis, pretty easy to if you have not seen Wallis live before.

Just on our defense. Any team that loses one or two good KP defenders will struggle to replace them, we are no different.

Tommy is I think looking like he will be playing his best footy since he started. He's not Brian Lake or Dale Morris, lets get that clear. He Spent time on Petrie and Petrie probably had the better of the dual but it was by no means a flogging and he won his fair share. Petrie is a very good player.

But Tom looks more assured in the contest, is prepared to go for the mark when required. He also takes on the game and becomes an option when we are running it out. He also was able to blank Thomas who was in his face a bit, a lot of players would have lost it with what he was doing to him. But as a ruckman he sucks!

The smalls are where I'm worried. Gilbee is just out of form. His judgment in the marking contest was poor. He gave his man too much space, didn't stand close enough and he paid the price.

Easton Wood struggled in the first half but his second was much better. But he seems worried by the smalls also. I think teams are working out that he likes a gallop so they don't let him run how he copes with that will be the key to him.

Harbrow, while quick, was never that good at stopping the quality forwards, his best work was mopping up and counter attack. We miss is attack, not his defense.

 

[The OBSTacle]

Yes in a what's called a trial match !

You need to take in to account that it was a practice match for TWO teams.

My two bobs on Thomas is he's a typical goal sneak as he has big games then doesn't get a kick for weeks. Flashy inconsistent type.

He turned 23 thirteen days ago. The good footy judges are the ones that can predict the future, not regutgitate the past. I have a pretty good return on player calls over the years. This bloke is about to rise another cog, bookmark it.

I'll be off now the Norf giddiness is relentless

It was a good win by ANY measure.

I'm looking forward to doubling the AFL experience in the first 16 rounds of the season, of the 11 kids we had on the park yesterday with a combined total of 157 AFL games experience. I'm also looking forward to adding another 3 kids to the side with a combined 68 games total experience (Cunnington, Greenwood, Bastinac) by the time we meet the Dogs in round 17.

I expect a much better showing than we have provided in recent seasons.

 

[Beasley]

What is it with some of these tools from Norf.

Please, just return to your own board to chat amongst yourselves so that Bulldogs supporters can discuss what is happening with our club and how our players performed in a practice match.

Apologies, but we dont really care about what you guys think on our pre-season form or where you think we may finish this year.

It is a board for Bulldogs supporters ......... not for others to come and stir the pot.

 

[X_box_X]

Wow, some people on here, North and Dogs fans alike, are taking this way, way to seriously.

Dead right. I'm surprised and concerned at some of our supporters' reactions to a few comments by North supporters. In due time, the mods will deal with you, but we shouldn't be getting sucked in by anyone. I would have thought we were too big of a fish to be sucked in by little sardines like them.

Also, it's probably worth noting again that this game was only a praccy match. It sounds basic, but haven't we learnt anything from the past? They mean zero. That means effort, discipline and dedication could potentially also mean zero. I'm sure we're not going to go hammer and tongs and go out of our way to apply blocks. I'm also certain that it wouldn't have been panic stations in the coach's box when Thomas was banging through all those goals. We obviously tried nothing to counteract that, but had it been a match for premiership points, we would have dealt with it accordingly. We know that wouldn't happen in a premiership match, so why are some of us suddenly worried?

 

[TempleKelvington]

I don't think anyone is getting carried away with the form from a practice match, but it's worth pointing out that we have some issue arising from the games. I mean we won them all last year and lost round 1 anyway.

Had we won yesterday those issue were still there...the result didn't instigate my thoughts anyway.

I also don't think those issues are massive problems for us. But maybe weaknesses that we need to highlighted, so we can fix.

The individual form of players in a practice game is really of little concern, especially experienced players. Hall has looked a bit out of it in the 2 games I have seen him in....but is Hall going to be going 100% in a praccy? He did enough at times to show he's fit and dangerous. He's waiting for the real stuff. I think asa group we are too. Our defense was down overall, needs to be addressed, better now than when the real stuff starts.

 

[SonOfScray]

Just ban the lot please, I don't really need to see what insignificant people from an insignificant club think about anything. Hate this respectful love in crap, I come to the Bulldogs board to read about the Dogs - discuss the Dogs.

 

[Roos_Rule]

As a non-dogs supporter who has seen them play twice now this pre-season I have to say young Libba is a very impressive player. It's early days yet I know but it's good to see the dogs benefiting from the father son rule.

 

[WheatsWorshipper]

Some people on here need to get over themselves. If North fans aren't trolling and are adding to discussion then what's the problem?

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

Some people on here need to get over themselves. If North fans aren't trolling and are adding to discussion then what's the problem?

Ziebull was being a flog.

Quick question: my sense is that you guys on BF rated Mitch Wallis ahead of Tom Liberatore (and the order you drafted them would reflect the clubs view on that).

What's the 'gap' between them and would it be fair to say Tom has shown more this pre season than Micth?

Who is more likely to play Round 1 and are either of likely to have one of those great debut seasons a la Bastinac last year playing all 22 games?

 

[Gus]

Quick question: my sense is that you guys on BF rated Mitch Wallis ahead of Tom Liberatore (and the order you drafted them would reflect the clubs view on that).

What's the 'gap' between them and would it be fair to say Tom has shown more this pre season than Micth?

Who is more likely to play Round 1 and are either of likely to have one of those great debut seasons a la Bastinac last year playing all 22 games?

Yeah Wallis was rated better, but they are different players. One inside, one outside.

They have both shown about the same promising signs this pre-season. I don't think there is much of a gap between them now. Will be played as a horses for courses thing seeing as Libba is an inside mid and Wally is an outside runner.

I'd say Libba is more a shot at round 1.

But neither will be a 22 game first season player. For that to happen you have to leave out one of Boyd, Cross, Griffen, Ward, Cooney, or Picken. Which I cannot see happening.

 

[X_box_X]

Quick question: my sense is that you guys on BF rated Mitch Wallis ahead of Tom Liberatore (and the order you drafted them would reflect the clubs view on that).

What's the 'gap' between them and would it be fair to say Tom has shown more this pre season than Micth?

Who is more likely to play Round 1 and are either of likely to have one of those great debut seasons a la Bastinac last year playing all 22 games?

Good question, although certainly not a quick one. Most people would have rated Wallis higher based on his two performances in the TAC Cup Grand Finals in 2009 and 2010. No bigger stage at U18s level than to show your worth, and Mitch certainly delivered on both occasions (although Libba was also very good in both too).

To be honest, though, I see Mitch as more of an accumulator while Libba (despite still being an accumulator) seems to be more inside, more of a clearance player, who will apply more blocks and get in and under moreso than Wallis.

Both players are fine tacklers, but I think the one thing that stood out with Mitch is his balance, poise and probably most importantly, his leadership. He also has a couple of inches on Tom, so that certainly helped him.

There appears to be a very little gap between the two players now. Libba has enjoyed the better preseason, but only just.

You can expect both players to certainly feature this year, but if any is going to debut in round one, it is going to be Libba. Very unlikely that he will play all 22 games like Bastinac did for you guys in his debut season, though.

You often see players taken later in the draft outperform the club's first round pick, too.

Roughead was taken at two, but Franklin (who was taken at five), is the superstar who obviously should have gone much higher than pick five in the 2004 Draft.

Melbourne rated Sylvia ahead of McLean in the 2003 Draft and, up until last year, McLean had outperformed him easily. It's just that injuries have slowed McLean down, but he was clearly a superstar in the making in his first few seasons, while Sylvia struggled between AFL and VFL level.

Same with Thomas and Pendlebury. Both mighty fine players, don't get me wrong, but Thomas was taken at two and Pendlebury at five, despite Pendlebury being the better player (not much between them, though).

I could use more examples, but the point I'm trying to make is that I was under the impression that is was very close in the pecking order between Wallis and Libba when both were drafted. Same with the players in the three examples I used. Libba could very well turn out to be the better player of the two. At this stage, I'd say it's very close to 50/50.

 

[Mr. Walker]

Two questions for those at the ballarat game

1. Did Skinner spend any time in the ruck and if so , how did he go.

2. on the basis of that last quarter are we sure now that we will play two ruckmen every game.

for the pendantics i know that is three questions but after all the trolling in this thread i don't care.

Also, on the question of who the club rated higher out of Wallis and Libba i don't think the draft pick order was the clubs choice. Under the F/S bidding process another club nominated Wallis first so the Dogs had to go with him first pick. they may still have gone this way given the choice but their hand as forced.

 

[Go_Dogs]

Quick question: my sense is that you guys on BF rated Mitch Wallis ahead of Tom Liberatore (and the order you drafted them would reflect the clubs view on that).

What's the 'gap' between them and would it be fair to say Tom has shown more this pre season than Micth?

Who is more likely to play Round 1 and are either of likely to have one of those great debut seasons a la Bastinac last year playing all 22 games?

That was probably the general consensus on BF and possibly brought about due to Mitch's very good grand final in the TAC which pushed him up a bit. Quite a few who had seen a bit of them had Libba in front though.

As far as where the club selected them, that was just based on who bidded for them. Other clubs rated Wallis higher by nominating a higher pick for him which meant we had to select him first. Sydney then used their second round pick (just a few before ours) to nominate for Libba as that was all that was required to ensure we had to take him in the 2nd round rather than him slipping out to the 3rd or beyond.

Libba has probably shown more thus far, and would seem to be the better chance to play early although I think both will play games throughout the year. Libba's body isn't as developed as Mitch and I think he would struggle to play out an entire season, especially playing as an inside mid.

 

[OldSchool]

Quick question: my sense is that you guys on BF rated Mitch Wallis ahead of Tom Liberatore (and the order you drafted them would reflect the clubs view on that).

What's the 'gap' between them and would it be fair to say Tom has shown more this pre season than Micth?

Who is more likely to play Round 1 and are either of likely to have one of those great debut seasons a la Bastinac last year playing all 22 games?

Talent wise I think they are very close with little too no gap. Libba probably has done a little in the last month but either guy could get a senior spot in round one.

 

[Before I Die]

Two questions for those at the ballarat game

1. Did Skinner spend any time in the ruck and if so , how did he go.

2. on the basis of that last quarter are we sure now that we will play two ruckmen every game.

for the pendantics i know that is three questions but after all the trolling in this thread i don't care.

Also, on the question of who the club rated higher out of Wallis and Libba i don't think the draft pick order was the clubs choice. Under the F/S bidding process another club nominated Wallis first so the Dogs had to go with him first pick. they may still have gone this way given the choice but their hand as forced.

Answer to Question 1: No

Answer to Question 2: I certainly would

Re "pedantics", the correct term is "pedants". I hope that is not being too pedantic.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

Thanks Gus, Go_Dogs, OldSchool and x_box_x for he replies.

I have s sneaking suspicion that Libba Jnr will provide another generation to be drafted by you in 20 odd years time.

 

[Gus]

Thanks Gus, Go_Dogs, OldSchool and x_box_x for he replies.

I have s sneaking suspicion that Libba Jnr will provide another generation to be drafted by you in 20 odd years time.

He knocked up your daughter or something?

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

T
Also, on the question of who the club rated higher out of Wallis and Libba i don't think the draft pick order was the clubs choice. Under the F/S bidding process another club nominated Wallis first so the Dogs had to go with him first pick. they may still have gone this way given the choice but their hand as forced.

True. I still don't understand how, if say clubs had rated both Libba and Wallis as first rounders, you could have gotten away with getting one for a second rounder. Does that make sense?

Anyway, I love the F/S rule and good to see smaller Vic teams doing well out of it. Just hoping Donald McDonald's kid is a god as some say. I'm sure its the only reason we keep him employed at the club.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

He knocked up your daughter or something?

No daughters I know of. Nah just saying that instinct tells me there a strong footy gene there.

 

[The Coon Dog]

True. I still don't understand how, if say clubs had rated both Libba and Wallis as first rounders, you could have gotten away with getting one for a second rounder. Does that make sense?

The bidding process works along the lines of using your next available selection, if a player has been nominated by another club.

Given Wallis was deemed to be a first round selection, we were compelled to use our first round pick on him. Once a club nominated Libba, we were then compelled to pick him with our next available selection.

I suppose in a simplistic sense if your first selection is say pick 20 & your second selection is pick 40, you would use pick 20 on the first player nominated (provided he was nominated by a team using pick 1-19) & pick 40 on the second player (provided he was nominated by a team with using pick 1-39).

 

[chef]

Thanks Gus, Go_Dogs, OldSchool and x_box_x for he replies.

I have s sneaking suspicion that Libba Jnr will provide another generation to be drafted by you in 20 odd years time.

I've heard Tom's younger brother Oliver is a better footballer than he was at the same age so we may not have to wait 20 years for another Libba.

 

[Mr. Walker]

True. I still don't understand how, if say clubs had rated both Libba and Wallis as first rounders, you could have gotten away with getting one for a second rounder. Does that make sense?

.

the rule says the club must use its "next available pick" So when another club with a pick lower than ours (can't remember the club or the pick) nominated Wallis as a first round selection for them we had to use our next availabe pick, which was a round 1, on Wallis. When the Swans, also in round 1, then said they would take Libba with their pick we had to use our "next available pick" which happened to be a second rounder to take Libba.

Basically what CD said but i have a nicer style!

 

[The Coon Dog]

the rule says the club must use its "next available pick" So when another club with a pick lower than ours (can't remember the club or the pick) nominated Wallis as a first round selection for them we had to use our next availabe pick, which was a round 1, on Wallis. When the Swans, also in round 1, then said they would take Libba with their pick we had to use our "next available pick" which happened to be a second rounder to take Libba.

Basically what CD said but i have a nicer style!

Mr. Walker, no matter how many times you, I or anyone else explains it in however a simplistic or nice way, there will still be people asking how it works & why don't we trade away our first 4 picks & use our last ones etc...

Gotta keep trying though.

 

[Kelvin31]

No daughters I know of. Nah just saying that instinct tells me there a strong footy gene there.

Gee ya reckon SLF? You don't you need any instincts to tell you that mate. PS: Instincts tell me the Danihers have a strong footy gene too