How long will we continue to ignore McVeigh's weak performances?

[SWANNIES RULE]

9 posessions, 0 clearances, 1 clanger.

One of his worst performances of the year.

But I doubt the leadership group will care come Thursday when the team is selected. The fact that he's in the boys club will be enough to earn him selection once again.

It's mind boggling to think that he is still in the side. Schmidt should never of been dropped in the first place. And even since then, Schmidt has played a couple of blinders in the ressies while McVeigh has continued with poor performances. No action is taken.

We've been selecting teams with reputation our first priority, form our second. I also think it's a joke how the team selection is left to the players themselves.

Paul Bevan's selection is another perfect example. Guys like Laidlaw, Thornton and Brabazon were all magnificent in the first 4-5 weeks in the reserves - None of them earned selection. Bevan comes back, plays one average game in the ressies and is included in the senior side the next week. Can anyone else see the injustice in that?

If we keep rewarding reputations over form then we won't make the 8, simple as that. There are too many guys who expect to be automatically selected each week. The leadership group needs to show some balls by dropping a big name. I'm sure they won't, though.

Flame and criticise me if you must, but it's true.

 

[natlovestheswans]

McVeigh makes me sick.

BRING BACK SCHMIDT!

 

[Rabbit 34]

Oh for f**k sake give the mcveigh bashing a rest, every f**king time we lose, its this guys f**king fault or this guys f**king useless...

Win as a team and lose as a team...stop bagging a guy because he's not a match winner, nobody played poorly last night ..

to this thread

 

[bloodsbigot]

9 posessions, 0 clearances, 1 clanger.

One of his worst performances of the year.

But I doubt the leadership group will care come Thursday when the team is selected. The fact that he's in the boys club will be enough to earn him selection once again.

It's mind boggling to think that he is still in the side. Schmidt should never of been dropped in the first place. And even since then, Schmidt has played a couple of blinders in the ressies while McVeigh has continued with poor performances. No action is taken.

We've been selecting teams with reputation our first priority, form our second. I also think it's a joke how the team selection is left to the players themselves.

Paul Bevan's selection is another perfect example. Guys like Laidlaw, Thornton and Brabazon were all magnificent in the first 4-5 weeks in the reserves - None of them earned selection. Bevan comes back, plays one average game in the ressies and is included in the senior side the next week. Can anyone else see the injustice in that?

If we keep rewarding reputations over form then we won't make the 8, simple as that. There are too many guys who expect to be automatically selected each week. The leadership group needs to show some balls by dropping a big name. I'm sure they won't, though.

Flame and criticise me if you must, but it's true.

I agree... I think Mcveigh is actually fairly krap... and nobody has the guts to say it. He really needs to improve. In saying that though... I thought Goodes was pretty bad in his 1998-2002 seasons... and he proved me wrong. Maybe Mcveigh will do the same?

 

[bloodsbigot]

Oh for f**k sake give the mcveigh bashing a rest, every f**king time we lose, its this guys f**king fault or this guys f**king useless...

Win as a team and lose as a team...stop bagging a guy because he's not a match winner, nobody played poorly last night ..

to this thread

What the hecks your problem?

 

[natlovestheswans]

Oh for f**k sake give the mcveigh bashing a rest, every f**king time we lose, its this guys f**king fault or this guys f**king useless...

Win as a team and lose as a team...stop bagging a guy because he's not a match winner, nobody played poorly last night ..

to this thread

LMAO.

Thanks, i needed a laugh.

 

[SWANNIES RULE]

Oh for f**k sake give the mcveigh bashing a rest, every f**king time we lose, its this guys f**king fault or this guys f**king useless...

Win as a team and lose as a team...stop bagging a guy because he's not a match winner, nobody played poorly last night ..

to this thread

Hop on back to the Adelaide board mate. Your input isn't needed.

I'm not blaming the loss squarely on McVeigh. I'm trying to make a point, that point being that we continue to ignore poor performances from certain players because they have better reputations than others.

 

[natlovestheswans]

nobody played poorly last night ..

This is the funniest part.

 

[Rabbit 34]

Hop on back to the Adelaide board mate. Your input isn't needed.

I'm not blaming the loss squarely on McVeigh. I'm trying to make a point, that point being that we continue to ignore poor performances from certain players because they have better reputations than others.

"Reputation" it's a double edge sword, it also make you view his perfomance to be worse than what it is in reality..which means you would drop him from the side rather than the one who is playing more poorly...

 

[oldman -pop]

Hop on back to the Adelaide board mate. Your input isn't needed.

I'm not blaming the loss squarely on McVeigh. I'm trying to make a point, that point being that we continue to ignore poor performances from certain players because they have better reputations than others.

Sorry to say but you have a habit of bagging some players from time to time and I guees some have favorites which is fine but some pick out some players for straight bagging for what ever reason But its just my thoughts and its not a criticism of you its just my thoughts

 

[Bombers_Forever]

I think you guys are harsh on McVeigh. He was selected after he was drafted a took a while to get into the team and stay there. I think he is a player who won't have a blinder one week, then a shocker. He is in a bad patch but he has shown before that if Roos has patience, he will get into form and will be consistent for a 6-8 week period.

 

[SWANNIES RULE]

"Reputation" it's a double edge sword, it also make you view his perfomance to be worse than what it is in reality..which means you would drop him from the side rather than the one who is playing more poorly...

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

How have you rated McVeigh's season?

 

[liz]

I thought Goodes was pretty bad in his 1998-2002 seasons...

Goodes didn't debut until 1999 and then won the Norwich Rising Star award in his first season. His next couple were up and down but no more so than is normal for a youngish player making his way, and he suffered from having to carry the workload up forward with Magic after Plugger retired. He's not really a key forward and he found it hard to adjust.

Once Hall arrived in 2002 and meant that Goodes could move around to different positions, he started to flourish. His first half of 2002 wasn't great - but then the whole team struggled during that final period of Eade's rule, but once Roos took over he was superb and finished 3rd in the B&F that year. So it was only really 2000-2001 that he struggled slightly, but as I said, no more so than many younger players. McVeigh is past that equivalent period in his career, so I don't think the comparison is meaningful.

That said, I haven't written off McVeigh yet, but I do think there are a couple playing in the reserves that seriously deserve their chance in the senior team.

 

[bloodsbigot]

Goodes didn't debut until 1999 and then won the Norwich Rising Star award in his first season. His next couple were up and down but no more so than is normal for a youngish player making his way, and he suffered from having to carry the workload up forward with Magic after Plugger retired. He's not really a key forward and he found it hard to adjust.

Once Hall arrived in 2002 and meant that Goodes could move around to different positions, he started to flourish. His first half of 2002 wasn't great - but then the whole team struggled during that final period of Eade's rule, but once Roos took over he was superb and finished 3rd in the B&F that year. So it was only really 2000-2001 that he struggled slightly, but as I said, no more so than many younger players. McVeigh is past that equivalent period in his career, so I don't think the comparison is meaningful.

That said, I haven't written off McVeigh yet, but I do think there are a couple playing in the reserves that seriously deserve their chance in the senior team.

Oh... he he. I see. I got my years mixed up. For some reason I thought his debut year was 1997. Must've been thinking about someone else.

And yes... the turning point was when Roos took over. Man... I love Paul Roos. My role model.

 

[Rabbit 34]

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

How have you rated McVeigh's season?

With reputation come's expectation, if he's not great then he is siht

I don't rate mcveigh very highly or poorly just that we have to live with limitations and great players don't grow on trees ready for the picking whenever we want.

So ok this guy dosn't play as well as we would like him too, so lets give him the boot bring in a new guy and when we lose next week we will give someone else the boot, ect ect

Thats not a plan to winning games.
Why can't the coaching staff get this guy to play good footy, play a role do something constructive with him.
Responseablity must be placed on the coaching staff if he's not doing what they wan't him to do....

Like i said we have limitations and have to find a way to get this side to be competetive within these limitations. Which we do very well, actually where the best at it

 

[rancidpants13]

This is the funniest part.

yes, an amusing finish to the post....maybe a typo, and it should have read EVERYBODY played poorly.....as far as dumb mistakes and skill errors go, it was about the worst performance across the board since roos took over, he must've been spewing, and certainly looked it on TV shots to the coaches box, although maybe that was to do with another bath for bazza courtesy of "umpire intrepretations" of certain rules....
mcveigh is surely on thin ice, and yes, he may bounce back and end up winning a norm smith medal (i'll take that) but that's what the reserves are for, and he needs a stint there, we have a few players putting hands up for a senior call-up...as for bevan, he was one of our best last night, i thought....generally, though, this season has unfolded like the previous two....we fluctuate wildly the first half, then get serious and start to play proper footy, climb into the top four and book a place against west coast in the GF....we can do it again

 

[liz]

it was about the worst performance across the board since roos took over,

That's what we were saying three weeks ago, after the Saints match.

I dont think they were anything like as bad as they were against the Saints that night. The workrate was there for all but a couple of players.

They just played a bit dumb in my opinion - banging it in aimlessly when they were better served to be patient and look for an option, and conversely, moving it far too slowly up the ground so that there was no space when they got there.

Give credit to the Bombers though. Their skills weren't much better than the Swans but they set up much smarter, took more risks, and mostly made it hard for the Swans to use the corridor in the way they have so successfully for the last fortnight.

 

[snappy]

well i feel for the guy really, and i hope he dosent read this web site.. BUT..
Before i talk about a particular incident that involved him, most of the team had a shocker and theres no way u can blame any individual..
SO the ball was in our forward 50 lose on the ground after an attempted mark, there was a contest between hall & micheal to get to the ball ,when all of a sudden mcviegh runs past the ball thats within a couple of meters him, following his his man.. now you might not think much of it, but what resulted was essondon rebounded and scored.. to me i think its pathedic he should have gone for the ball, forget his his man, try help out his team mate, create pressure in the forward 50, make a contest out of it, hold the ball up, dish it off, do something with it, not runaway from it when its vertualy(spelling) at your feet.. dam man what are you thinking?? i bring this up because its the 2nd time ive seen him do exactly the same thing this year, with almost the same consequence. whether its the defensive mind set i dont know, but its rubbish football..

 

[Skystyler]

he had a good game against Port, but thats it this year. Drop him. Schmidt deserves a recall (didn't deserve to be dropped in the first place).

TBH it wasn't a bad performance from the team in general. If not for a cruel bounce we would be talking about a great win, courage, never say die... Essendon were fired up and played well by their standards - especially at such a hostile venue. we were crueled by the footy gods and their minions. Hardly time to panic.

Can we still make the top 4? of course we can. Eagles will finish on top by a long way. The wheels will come off the cat juggernaut. The pies and the roos dont scare anybody. Spots 2-4 are still up for grabs.

 

[rancidpants13]

That's what we were saying three weeks ago, after the Saints match.

I dont think they were anything like as bad as they were against the Saints that night. The workrate was there for all but a couple of players.

They just played a bit dumb in my opinion - banging it in aimlessly when they were better served to be patient and look for an option, and conversely, moving it far too slowly up the ground so that there was no space when they got there.

Give credit to the Bombers though. Their skills weren't much better than the Swans but they set up much smarter, took more risks, and mostly made it hard for the Swans to use the corridor in the way they have so successfully for the last fortnight.

when a normally slick, classy ball user like the malch stuffs up as often as he did, we're in strife....buchanan's awful kicking, goodes, hall, micky o, we had so many players making clanger after clanger, every time it looked like we were back in the game and ready to roll them, we blew it again....i'm sorry, i don't think essendon won it as much as we lost it....holding them to 74 points was what i'd have expected, but scoring only 73 in reply, just awful...the ground looked very greasy and the bombers made less handling mistakes but it's not like they looked particularly impressive....and remember they had 4 goals on the board before we turned up....so we kept them to 50 points after about the first 15 minutes

 

[swannykika]

if we were going to give anyone teh flick purely based on form, we would drop 1/3rd of the friggin side. McVeigh is not Goodes or Kirk, never will be, but in my opinion he mostly does his job and is improving slowly over time. btw, where the hell has ROK gone.

 

[Shake down the thunder]

btw, where the hell has ROK gone.[/quote]


I was thinking the same thing until I saw that he had 20+ possies - still more than most of our midfield.

Bring back Schmidt. I thought the Bombers exposed Kirkies pace (not that he should be hung out to dry) and really our skill level was woeful. Dropped marks, slipping over, fumbles and whilst Amon was under pressure his miss in the second when he didn't hit anything with his shot in the clear from 25m was criminal. to think on draft day many moons ago I think Kevin sheehan called him a goal sneak (and correct me but didn't he kick a bag in the U18 GF)

 

[Skystyler]

Jobe Watson was killing jude Bolton at the start of the game. Then Kirk went on him and I hardly saw him again. Didn't notice anyone exploiting his lack of pace. Who was on Winderlich? he was by himself all night.

Looking at the game stats, we let them have over 300 possies which is a lot against us (opponents average about 280), and over 100 marks (normally around 80). Plus we only laid 39 tackles while they laid 57. This is the reason the game was close. They wanted it more.
The bombers are the least tackled team in the comp. I dont know why this is - must have something to do with the flooding their doing.

 

[snappy]

btw, where the hell has ROK gone.

I was thinking the same thing until I saw that he had 20+ possies - still more than most of our midfield.

Bring back Schmidt. I thought the Bombers exposed Kirkies pace (not that he should be hung out to dry) and really our skill level was woeful. Dropped marks, slipping over, fumbles and whilst Amon was under pressure his miss in the second when he didn't hit anything with his shot in the clear from 25m was criminal. to think on draft day many moons ago I think Kevin sheehan called him a goal sneak(and correct me but didn't he kick a bag in the U18 GF)[/QUOTE]


Would be nice if he became a goal sneak again, i was mentioning to someone before the game, he could be the difference between winning and losing games,even a GF/GF appearence (look at Davies) he gets plenty of the ball, imo thats what theyre paid for, to nail snaps/goals on the run, every time he touched the ball i cringed, and looking at the replay, hes last shot should have went sailing through he was no more than 20m out slight angle.. anyway im sure they will all improve...*

 

[No1SwansFan]

Would be nice if he became a goal sneak again, i was mentioning to someone before the game, he could be the difference between winning and losing games,even a GF/GF appearence (look at Davies) he gets plenty of the ball, imo thats what theyre paid for, to nail snaps/goals on the run, every time he touched the ball i cringed, and looking at the replay, hes last shot should have went sailing through he was no more than 20m out slight angle.. anyway im sure they will all improve...*

Buchanan's kicking at goal has been attrocious for a few weeks now. And your right if our goal sneaks like davis buchanan and schneider are firing the whole team fires. We need to live with the fact Hall will be hard pushed to get a touch most times and be using our running players to be scoring.

And whats the deal with our backs playing forward roles and kicking goals for us Barry and C.Bolton have kicked a few this year (not a heap but a few). Mayb we need to mix it up a bit and surprise the oppositions.