Jared Petrenko

[Vader]

Yes...and I see that Mick Doughty has escaped your ire after an equally (if not more) underwhelming preseason and opening game (Champion Data have Dogga a mere three points up on Petrenko).

I guess they're in the the exact same place in the pecking order huh?

I thought Doughty had a fairly good game - and reading through the GameDay thread it seems that most people agree with me. Petrenko, on the other hand, was almost anyonymous - other than that spectacular pass to Walker.

I've never shied away from the fact that Doughty had a poor pre-season. I wasn't particularly concerned, given that he's played 200+ games and knows what's important and what isn't (the MMC most definitely isn't). He's since returned to form and your comment here is the only time anyone has called his position into question for R2.

Thankfully.

Using statistics isn't the best approach if you are trying to convert people to the dark side (as in against Petrenko) as statistics can be used to prove almost anything - as shown in previous posts. If someone who's whipping boy is Doughty or Douglas (For the record, I am not against either of them being in the team-Just used for example) made a thread trying to suggest reasons why they shouldn't be in the team (seen many posts on the issue), how would you respond to them? I would get the feeling the threads on those players position in the team would get locked.

At the very least I'd play the ball, rather than the man.. which is better than 80% of the posters in this thread.

I'd argue why I think they should have been retained, noting my previous comments about Doughty being given 6 weeks to show something and the fact that Douglas was playing his first game back from injury, having missed most of the MMC as a result.

Petrenko on the other hand played in the MMC and underwhelmed. Unlike Doughty though, he has carried his underwhelming form into the H&A season.

 

[Vader]

Not really.

Doughty has performed well at this level for a very long time and has credits in the bank.

Petrenko is trying to build a career, and as such is judged purely on current performances - no credits in the bank there.
....

Great post Macca! Exactly the sort of response that I was looking for.

 

[Vader]

Is this a comment that really encourages balance public debate? No.

Your chiding of others, playing the man and not the ball, is undermined by such churlishness, especially from a moderator.

Playing the man isn't debating, it's the last resort of someone who lacks the ability to engage in public debate. If that's what you wish to call "balance(d) public debate" then I don't want to encourage it.

Playing the ball on the other hand is entirely 100% encouraged.

 

[Freddy Bassett]

Petrenko, Matty Wright and Jaensch are Bigfooty favourites....
Otten, Hendo and Reilly aren't.....

Petrenko adds pace and hardness to our side but has ordinary foot skills. He had a good end of 2011 and deserves at least a few more games to cement his spot...

I think he will make it aswell. We need a few hard nuts in our side... He is at the perfect age now to make his mark

 

[bjn1960]

Playing the man isn't debating, it's the last resort of someone who lacks the ability to engage in public debate. If that's what you wish to call "balance(d) public debate" then I don't want to encourage it.

Playing the ball on the other hand is entirely 100% encouraged.

I agree with your above comments. The sentence I highlighted in bold -...then just go away and leave it to the adults. - is a churlish sentiment and what I was referring to. It doesn't encourage civil, balance, public debate, especially from a moderator.

 

[ruscy002]

I thought Doughty had a fairly good game - and reading through the GameDay thread it seems that most people agree with me. Petrenko, on the other hand, was almost anyonymous - other than that spectacular pass to Walker.

I've never shied away from the fact that Doughty had a poor pre-season. I wasn't particularly concerned, given that he's played 200+ games and knows what's important and what isn't (the MMC most definitely isn't). He's since returned to form and your comment here is the only time anyone has called his position into question for R2.

I haven't called either player's position into question for round 2 - I only stated that on output so far this year they are in almost the exact same position.

On the weekend's game, the stats don't lie. CD ranking points factor in disposal efficiency, clangers, contested vs uncontested possessions, value of possessions etc etc. Doughty finished on 68, Petrenko 65. Excluding FB/CHB and our subs, they were both easily in the worst 2-4 players on the ground in terms of what they offered the team.

 

[srv23]

I
At the very least I'd play the ball, rather than the man.. which is better than 80% of the posters in this thread.

I'd argue why I think they should have been retained, noting my previous comments about Doughty being given 6 weeks to show something and the fact that Douglas was playing his first game back from injury, having missed most of the MMC as a result.

Petrenko on the other hand played in the MMC and underwhelmed. Unlike Doughty though, he has carried his underwhelming form into the H&A season.

Ok so looking at Doughty compared with Petrenko on the weekend - bearing in mind one played BP/HBF and the other played as a small forward.

Petrenko - 13 possessions 6 contested possessions 4 tackles 3 inside 50's 3 goal assists

Doughty - 17 possessions 8 contested possessions 3 tackles 1 rebound 50 2 inside 50's

1 player is playing a role which is traditionally not a high possession position and whose role is inside 50 pressure (tackles/chase etc) and to kick or create goals.

1 player is playing a small/mid sized defender role whose role is to run at the ball, defend, create play running from defensive 50 into the midfield.

As such I would expect Doughty to be getting more posessions than Petrenko so in all he touched the ball only 4 more times, had 1 less tackle, had just the 1 rebound 50 as compared to the 3 goal assists of Petrenko and had 1 less inside 50.

Given the relative experience of the 2 players and the respective roles they were playing on the weekend, how has Doughty turned his form around and played a "fairly good game" while Petrenko has "carried on his underwhelming MMC form" when he only had 4 more touches than Petrenko. Who was Dogga playing on in defense as straight after any of those GC smalls (eg Brown/Caddy) kicked a goal Dogga seemed to be lining up next to him before the next centre bounce?

FWIW I don't think either of them should be dropped. I thought Dogga played a reasonable game and Pets was a touch quiet but played his role well in terms of his tackling/chasing and forward pressure. He kicks the goal he missed and all of a sudden a 13 touch 1 goal 3 goal assist game is looking pretty reasonable for a "defensive" small forward.

 

[srv23]

Playing the man isn't debating, it's the last resort of someone who lacks the ability to engage in public debate. If that's what you wish to call "balance(d) public debate" then I don't want to encourage it.

Playing the ball on the other hand is entirely 100% encouraged.

With all due respect Vader, do you consider calling posters who don't agree with your opinion (which you claim as fact) ignorant playing the ball or playing the man as this is something you do quite often?

 

[AFC979810]

Petrenko, Matty Wright and Jaensch are Bigfooty favourites....
Otten, Hendo and Reilly aren't.....

Although throw in Doughty to the mix of unpopular big footy players...

To answer Vaders question regarding Petrenko - I think he is 100% best 22... I agree that he was underwhelming against the Gold Coast - however we won by 69 points in a cakewalk so you cant imagine us making any changes...Give Petrenko the chance to play a tightly contested scrappy game of football and you will see how valuable he is...

I think one of the reasons that Petrenko is in our side is that he is one of our few players who has blistering pace and is tough as nails. He is wonderful in the contested ball situations, but also has the ability to use his pace to get open across half forward.

The other reason is that he is one of the few players who can play up forward, down back and through the middle... I think for our structure he is very important as it gives us flexibility - there aren't too many players on our list who can do this (can't really think of any)...

Plus Vader - who would you prefer we play instead of Pets?

 

[Vader]

With all due respect Vader, do you consider calling posters who don't agree with your opinion (which you claim as fact) ignorant playing the ball or playing the man as this is something you do quite often?

Lets take your earlier post as an example..

I think it's more the irony that someone like Vader who continuously goes on about the "morons" on Big Footy bagging players like Doughty and Reilly despite them being selected and therefore clearly rated by the coach will turn around and write something like this about a player he feels it's ok to bag despite the fact that he was selected for Round 1 and therefore clearly rated by the coach.

In Vaders eyes:

The AFC caching staff and Vader know more than the Big Footy mob when it comes to Reilly/Dogga/Douglas etc

However

Vader knows more than the AFC coaching staff and the Big Footy mob when it comes to Petrenko.

Couldn't give a crap which player it was, it's Vaders blatant double standards regarding whether or not he personally rates a player as to whether or not selection proves that they are in fact a good player.

I count 5 uses of the name "Vader" and only 1 use of "Petrenko", which is almost purely incidental.

Your post is all about he and my (admitted) bias. Not once have you addressed any of the issues I raised regarding Petrenko's inadequacies, or tried to justify his selection. All you've done is to attack me and my posting, without any reference to the actual topic of discussion.

This is what I mean about playing the man. You haven't even looked at the ball in your entire post. Such posts are beneath contempt, because they do nothing to further the discussion.

I don't care if people disagree with me. That's fine. The OP was a challenge to people who disagree with me to justify their position, given Petrenko's woeful start to the season. All I ask is that you play the ball, not the man. Is it really that hard to do?

 

[Pilchard_Adams]

Not really.

Doughty has performed well at this level for a very long time and has credits in the bank.

Petrenko is trying to build a career, and as such is judged purely on current performances - no credits in the bank there.

Having said that, no-one is immune from poor performance. While Doughty's game was not a stand-out, it also doesn't stick out in my mind as being one that demands him being dropped. However, there probably will be times as the season progresses that he might well be replaced by a younger faster defender on the way up.

Back to Petrenko. He's nowhere near as bad as Vader suggests, nor is he as good as some have given him credit for.

However, he has been rather quiet in the last 2 weeks

His problem is that there are plenty of alternatives to him for his spot, so he does have to perform while at the same time trying to establish himself safely in the best 22.

IMO he shows that he has the assets to do so - pace, courage, athleticism, fierce tackling etc. But having them, and using them to the max are 2 different things. We rarely see them all on display at the levels we would like them to be.

IMO he won't be dropped this week, as I'm sure the club would also like to see all his promise delivered as it could and should be and to do that he has to play. I think Sando will give him a goodly chance to do just that, but it has to be at a higher level than the past 2 weeks or he will eventually be replaced by Wright, Jaensch or Kerridge.

I hope he makes it because IMO he has the tools to do so.

No one should be saying players have "credits in the bank" in the AFL... Just because a player has performed at an average passable level in the AFL for a few years does not = gifting games. EVERY player has to earn their spot and Id expect a 5 game player be given the same amount of time as a 200 game 30+ aged player to show form. Infact if a 200 game player had several bad weeks in a row I would be wanting that player dropped back to the SANFL for a while. Whats the point in carrying someone who isnt going to get any better? Le them regain their form in the SANFL. However there is actually a benefit from playing a 5 game player for 3 weeks in a row regardless of form.

Giving players games simply because they have "credits in the bank" is denying the development of the younger player that will eventually take the older players place in the side, while extending the aging players career longer than it should.

Tough calls need to be made in the AFL. Doubt Collingwood would be where they are if they kept playing Presti, Lockyer, Obree, Lonie, Holland, Davis and im sure theres more.

 

[Vader]

To answer Vaders question regarding Petrenko - I think he is 100% best 22... I agree that he was underwhelming against the Gold Coast - however we won by 69 points in a cakewalk so you cant imagine us making any changes...Give Petrenko the chance to play a tightly contested scrappy game of football and you will see how valuable he is...

I think one of the reasons that Petrenko is in our side is that he is one of our few players who has blistering pace and is tough as nails. He is wonderful in the contested ball situations, but also has the ability to use his pace to get open across half forward.

The other reason is that he is one of the few players who can play up forward, down back and through the middle... I think for our structure he is very important as it gives us flexibility - there aren't too many players on our list who can do this (can't really think of any)...

Good response. I still think we have better options.. but I have to give credit where it's due.

Plus Vader - who would you prefer we play instead of Pets?

I'd love to see what Kerridge has to offer.. and maybe Brown (once he's regained his standing with the selectors).

Ok so looking at Doughty compared with Petrenko on the weekend - bearing in mind one played BP/HBF and the other played as a small forward.

Petrenko - 13 possessions 6 contested possessions 4 tackles 3 inside 50's 3 goal assists

Doughty - 17 possessions 8 contested possessions 3 tackles 1 rebound 50 2 inside 50's

1 player is playing a role which is traditionally not a high possession position and whose role is inside 50 pressure (tackles/chase etc) and to kick or create goals.

1 player is playing a small/mid sized defender role whose role is to run at the ball, defend, create play running from defensive 50 into the midfield.

Finally.. you've discovered where the playing field is and have finally started to kick the ball.

In answer to your post, I'd also point out that the ball spent 80% of its time in our forward half of the ground. Most of the work was being done by our midfielders, who kept repelling GC's attacks long before they ever got anywhere near our defenders. It's hard to win 20+ disposals when the ball is only rarely down your end of the field.

Doughty wasn't the only defender who was well down on the stats count - the lower half of the stats table is dominated by our defenders. Rutten had just 10 disposals, Henderson 8 (albeit in less than half a game), Talia 15, Otten & Doughty 17. Ignoring Lynch (who played less than half a game), Walker & Petrenko are the only non-defenders in our bottom 6 disposal winners. Walker kicked 5 goals.. what did Petrenko do?

 

[Vader]

No one should be saying players have "credits in the bank" in the AFL... Just because a player has performed at an average passable level in the AFL for a few years does not = gifting games. EVERY player has to earn their spot and Id expect a 5 game player be given the same amount of time as a 200 game 30+ aged player to show form. Infact if a 200 game player had several bad weeks in a row I would be wanting that player dropped back to the SANFL for a while. Whats the point in carrying someone who isnt going to get any better? Le them regain their form in the SANFL. However there is actually a benefit from playing a 5 game player for 3 weeks in a row regardless of form.

Giving players games simply because they have "credits in the bank" is denying the development of the younger player that will eventually take the older players place in the side, while extending the aging players career longer than it should.

Like it or not, that's the way the system works - and justifiably so.

Senior players are not immune to being sent back to the SANFL if/when their form drops away. They're just given longer to prove themselves, before the demotion happens.

In the current context.. I'd like to think that Petrenko will be given 3 weeks. If he's still stinking it up after that period, the way he is at present, then I would expect to see him lining up for the hybrids in R4 (SANFL R5). On the other hand, a player like Doughty would be given around 6 weeks to prove himself. Thankfully for Doughty, he needed only 1.

Tough calls need to be made in the AFL. Doubt Collingwood would be where they are if they kept playing Presti, Lockyer, Obree, Lonie, Holland, Davis and im sure theres more.

I really wish people would stop bringing up this drivel.

Firstly, the difference between Adelaide's list & Collingwood's is like chalk & cheese. The 22 players they fielded on Grand Final day had approx 1000 more games experience than the entire 40 on our senior list. This means that they could afford to drop a handful of experienced players, because they still had 15-18x 100+ game players left to carry the youngsters. We don't have that luxury.

Secondly, do you notice what else those players have in common? None of them are on Collingwood's list any more. That's right.. they sold everyone that they were rotating them, when in reality they were dropping them because their days were over.

Gotta hand it to Eddie McGuire. The guy could sell sand to the Arabs.

 

[srv23]

Lets take your earlier post as an example..

I count 5 uses of the name "Vader" and only 1 use of "Petrenko", which is almost purely incidental.

Your post is all about he and my (admitted) bias. Not once have you addressed any of the issues I raised regarding Petrenko's inadequacies, or tried to justify his selection. All you've done is to attack me and my posting, without any reference to the actual topic of discussion.

This is what I mean about playing the man. You haven't even looked at the ball in your entire post. Such posts are beneath contempt, because they do nothing to further the discussion.

I don't care if people disagree with me. That's fine. The OP was a challenge to people who disagree with me to justify their position, given Petrenko's woeful start to the season. All I ask is that you play the ball, not the man. Is it really that hard to do?

Ok then, are you going to respond to my actual post detailing a comparison between Doughty and Petrenko in round 1 describing their respective posession count and a few other stats as well as looking at the respective roles they play and trying to work out why, based on that, you consider Petrenko's game woeful and Doughty returning to reasonable form.

A number of people including myself have tried to discuss the role Pets plays ie small forward and how looking at stats like possession count is not a great indication of how they have played. You mentioned somewhere about wanting to see a 20+ disposal game from him but that is not realistic expectations of defensive small forward - even the best small forward currently playing in Milne has never managed to average more than 15 touches in a season.

You talk about chasing and tackles as proof of being second to the ball and lazy rather than them being an indication of intense forward pressure which is exactly what is required of a small forward. No doubt if he had a low tackle count you would also see it as him being lazy and not working hard enough such is your bias against Petrenko.

My comments about irony were simply that you will slam those posters who write negative things bagging the likes of Dogge/Reilly which while I may not agree with, I don't have a huge issue with. You are supporting one of our players, 150/200 game players no less. However to then come out with a rant like this about a young player who, while a bit quiet, still played his role in the side given the position he was playing (defensive small forward) is quite frankly ridiculous. If Dogga had had a shocker and SP or Paladin had written a similar rant about his NAB cup form and round 1 form and how does he justify his spot in the side, you would have been there supporting Doughty all guns blazing. If you see that as playing the man so be it.

BTW You haven't actually responded as to whether you consider calling posters who disagree with your opinion ignorant as playing the man or ball. You said you don't care if people disagree but you still respond to their posts by calling them ignorant. Call me crazy but I would consider calling other posters ignorant far more in the realm of playing the man than posters pointing out the irony and double standards between your posts depening on which player you are discussing.

 

[Paladin]

Petrenko lazy? What dribble I don't think we have a more desperate or hard working player. More embarrassing stuff from our trolling mod

 

[jackster83]

I liken Pets to Max Rooke. Going by stats alone, Rooke was nowhere near Geelong's best 22 yet was one of the absolute favourites of the coaches and players at the Cattery. Why? Because he was hard at it, tackled brutally, kicked goals when needed and always put in the 1%ers.

 

[Vader]

Ok then, are you going to respond to my actual post detailing a comparison between Doughty and Petrenko in round 1 describing their respective posession count and a few other stats as well as looking at the respective roles they play and trying to work out why, based on that, you consider Petrenko's game woeful and Doughty returning to reasonable form.

I have.. 2 posts down. I'm guessing our posts crossed in the ether.

A number of people including myself have tried to discuss the role Pets plays ie small forward and how looking at stats like possession count is not a great indication of how they have played. You mentioned somewhere about wanting to see a 20+ disposal game from him but that is not realistic expectations of defensive small forward - even the best small forward currently playing in Milne has never managed to average more than 15 touches in a season.

You talk about chasing and tackles as proof of being second to the ball and lazy rather than them being an indication of intense forward pressure which is exactly what is required of a small forward. No doubt if he had a low tackle count you would also see it as him being lazy and not working hard enough such is your bias against Petrenko.

My comments about irony were simply that you will slam those posters who write negative things bagging the likes of Dogge/Reilly which while I may not agree with, I don't have a huge issue with. You are supporting one of our players, 150/200 game players no less. However to then come out with a rant like this about a young player who, while a bit quiet, still played his role in the side given the position he was playing (defensive small forward) is quite frankly ridiculous. If Dogga had had a shocker and SP or Paladin had written a similar rant about his NAB cup form and round 1 form and how does he justify his spot in the side, you would have been there supporting Doughty all guns blazing. If you see that as playing the man so be it.

While I've disagreed with people taking these stances, I certainly haven't slammed them. I've argued against them, but always from a position of respect.

If Dogga had a shocker, then there's nothing more certain than Paladin creating a thread.. and me sticking to my 6-week countdown (which would now be down to 5 weeks). There's nothing wrong with that - any player who is performing poorly should be challenged, whether they're my whipping boy or one of my favourites.

I'm not going to bite on SP. There's not a single poster on BigFooty who I respect less and hold in lower regard, but that's just my personal opinion. Paladin might have blundered & clashed with me repeatedly over summer, over the Doughty thing, but I do at least value his opinions to some degree.

BTW You haven't actually responded as to whether you consider calling posters who disagree with your opinion ignorant as playing the man or ball. You said you don't care if people disagree but you still respond to their posts by calling them ignorant. Call me crazy but I would consider calling other posters ignorant far more in the realm of playing the man than posters pointing out the irony and double standards between your posts depening on which player you are discussing.

What went on during the pre-season was a fair bit of stupidity by a number of posters who obviously have no clue as to how the AFC selectors do their job. Anyone suggesting that Reilly, Douglas or Doughty was ever going to miss R1 (barring injury) was in lala-land. Seriously, it was never going to happen. Only someone who is completely ignorant of the AFC could or would have suggested otherwise.

 

[srv23]

Good response. I still think we have better options.. but I have to give credit where it's due.

I'd love to see what Kerridge has to offer.. and maybe Brown (once he's regained his standing with the selectors).

Finally.. you've discovered where the playing field is and have finally started to kick the ball.

In answer to your post, I'd also point out that the ball spent 80% of its time in our forward half of the ground. Most of the work was being done by our midfielders, who kept repelling GC's attacks long before they ever got anywhere near our defenders. It's hard to win 20+ disposals when the ball is only rarely down your end of the field.

Doughty wasn't the only defender who was well down on the stats count - the lower half of the stats table is dominated by our defenders. Rutten had just 10 disposals, Henderson 8 (albeit in less than half a game), Talia 15, Otten & Doughty 17. Ignoring Lynch (who played less than half a game), Walker & Petrenko are the only non-defenders in our bottom 6 disposal winners. Walker kicked 5 goals.. what did Petrenko do?

Had 6 contested possession, 4 tackles (mostly inside 50 tackles) 3 goal assists and missed a snap shot on goal. Walker is our full forward, Petrenko is a defensive small forward.

As for the "the ball spent most of the time up forward and as such the forwards should touch the ball more and it's not surprising Doughty didn't get 20 touches" In fact you said he was "down" on posessions.

Well in 2010/2011 the ball was mostly in our defensive 50 so as such Doughty should have touched the ball more in those years - I mean you said his 17 touches was "down" on his usual possession counts but in 2010 and 2011 (when you stated he had good years) he only averaged 18.7 and 18.5 touches respectively. So 17 is in fact not that far from the realm of his usual possession count. In fact he only topped 20 touches 6 times in 2011 and got a "paltry" 13 touches on 3 occasions last year including twice in the first 4 rounds of 2011 (when the season was still alive) 4 of his 6 20 touch games came from round 17 onwards when the season was well and truly over.

You see I don't have this flat out I expect "x" number of posessions from every player regardless of their position perspective. As such I see numbers in the high teens as quite acceptable for a defender and a number around 10-15 as reasonable for a small forward as you have to look at a number of other aspects of their game to determine their influence. Who cares if Dogga gets 25 touches if his opponent kicks 4 goals in a match winning perfromance, who cares if Pets touches the ball 6 times if he kicks 4 goals and has 5 tackles. It is all relative.

 

[Vader]

Petrenko lazy? What dribble I don't think we have a more desperate or hard working player. More embarrassing stuff from our trolling mod

How else do you explain the fact that he's always 2nd to the ball - hence high tackling stats & low disposals? How else do you explain the fact that half of his disposals came in the last quarter, when all of the hard working players were completely out on their feet (and only those who were too lazy to work earlier had energy left)?

Maybe it is a wrong call.. but it's the call I'm making on the evidence I see before me.

 

[Vader]

Had 6 contested possession, 4 tackles (mostly inside 50 tackles) 3 goal assists and missed a snap shot on goal. Walker is our full forward, Petrenko is a defensive small forward.

As for the "the ball spent most of the time up forward and as such the forwards should touch the ball more and it's not surprising Doughty didn't get 20 touches" In fact you said he was "down" on posessions.

Well in 2010/2011 the ball was mostly in our defensive 50 so as such Doughty should have touched the ball more in those years - I mean you said his 17 touches was "down" on his usual possession counts but in 2010 and 2011 (when you stated he had good years) he only averaged 18.7 and 18.5 touches respectively. So 17 is in fact not that far from the realm of his usual possession count. In fact he only topped 20 touches 6 times in 2011 and got a "paltry" 13 touches on 3 occasions last year including twice in the first 4 rounds of 2011 (when the season was still alive) 4 of his 6 20 touch games came from round 17 onwards when the season was well and truly over.

You see I don't have this flat out I expect "x" number of posessions from every player regardless of their position perspective. As such I see numbers in the high teens as quite acceptable for a defender and a number around 10-15 as reasonable for a small forward as you have to look at a number of other aspects of their game to determine their influence. Who cares if Dogga gets 25 touches if his opponent kicks 4 goals in a match winning perfromance, who cares if Pets touches the ball 6 times if he kicks 4 goals and has 5 tackles. It is all relative.

Thank-you for proving that Doughty is back to his old self. Couldn't have done it better.

Now... wasn't this thread supposed to be about Petrenko?

See I could.. maybe.. buy the small forward / less disposals thing. Maybe.. if it weren't for the fact that Callinan made him look like a goose. Even Porps, who was severely out of sorts, effectively playing his first senior game in 18 months, had more disposals & impact on the game. These things just don't add up to a pretty picture for Petrenko.

 

[ruscy002]

What went on during the pre-season was a fair bit of stupidity by a number of posters who obviously have no clue as to how the AFC selectors do their job. Anyone suggesting that Reilly, Douglas or Doughty was ever going to miss R1 (barring injury) was in lala-land. Seriously, it was never going to happen. Only someone who is completely ignorant of the AFC could or would have suggested otherwise.

I don't know if this is your intent, but you've taken a very broad brush and marked posters as stupid/ignorant irrespective of whether or not they were arguing that player x would or should be left out. One I can agree with, the other I take great issue with.

 

[srv23]

I have.. 2 posts down. I'm guessing our posts crossed in the ether.

No worries - saw that and was going to edit my post to add an apology

While I've disagreed with people taking these stances, I certainly haven't slammed them. I've argued against them, but always from a position of respect.

You claimed I was playing the man. I don't believe I was - I was merely pointing out something I saw as quite ironic - especially since you've used selection to justify your opinions on Doughty/Reilly. If perceived as playing the man I apologise but it wasn't intended.

If Dogga had a shocker, then there's nothing more certain than Paladin creating a thread.. and me sticking to my 6-week countdown (which would now be down to 5 weeks). There's nothing wrong with that - any player who is performing poorly should be challenged, whether they're my whipping boy or one of my favourites.

Certainly - but you then must expect that after some of the comments you've made about other players, and what is perceived to be a massive bias against Petrenko, you must expect that people will speak up in his defence and maybe point out your previous posting on other but similar topics. Did you really start this thread to have people discuss the merits of his football ability to convince you that he is worthy of selection or did you do it to have a go at your favourite whipping boy? It's fine either way but given your blind support of Doughty in the face of his horrible preseason form, it was inevitable that the Pets lovers out there would bite back.

I'm not going to bite on SP. There's not a single poster on BigFooty who I respect less and hold in lower regard, but that's just my personal opinion. Paladin might have blundered & clashed with me repeatedly over summer, over the Doughty thing, but I do at least value his opinions to some degree.

What went on during the pre-season was a fair bit of stupidity by a number of posters who obviously have no clue as to how the AFC selectors do their job. Anyone suggesting that Reilly, Douglas or Doughty was ever going to miss R1 (barring injury) was in lala-land. Seriously, it was never going to happen. Only someone who is completely ignorant of the AFC could or would have suggested otherwise.

You may have perceived it as ignorant and you have been proven correct at selection. CALLING people ignorant I believe to be playing the man, but no harm, no foul. I don't think you've called me ignorant so play on.

 

[ruscy002]

Thank-you for proving that Doughty is back to his old self. Couldn't have done it better.

Now... wasn't this thread supposed to be about Petrenko?

See I could.. maybe.. buy the small forward / less disposals thing. Maybe.. if it weren't for the fact that Callinan made him look like a goose. Even Porps, who was severely out of sorts, effectively playing his first senior game in 18 months, had more disposals & impact on the game. These things just don't add up to a pretty picture for Petrenko.

You're arguing this after a bad game and an average preseason comp. You weren't arguing this after the last 3-4 games of the season where he averages 17 disposals, 6 tackles and a goal or two per game...

 

[srv23]

Thank-you for proving that Doughty is back to his old self. Couldn't have done it better.

So is he or is he not down on posessions? Is a 13 game possession pathetic and worth of being dropped (cause Dogga should have been dropped twice in the first month last year)? Should every player get 20 touches or not? You've once again ignored the crux of the argument taking from it a belief it has proved your point whereas if you actually read it carefuly and analyse it you would see it raises the double standrads, misconceptions and inacuracies in a number of your previous posts.

Now... wasn't this thread supposed to be about Petrenko?

See I could.. maybe.. buy the small forward / less disposals thing. Maybe.. if it weren't for the fact that Callinan made him look like a goose. Even Porps, who was severely out of sorts, effectively playing his first senior game in 18 months, had more disposals & impact on the game. These things just don't add up to a pretty picture for Petrenko.

Callinan played alot further up the ground than Pets who was stationed in the forward 50 for most of the game. Callinan ventured up through half forward, into the midfield and was even seen on the half back line. Pets doesn't have the class of Callinan but it's a lot easier to get your hands on the ball when you spend more time following it around the ground. So that explains Callinan's 5 extra touches.

Porps had a whole 4 extra touches but again if you think he was/is playing the same "small forward" role as Pets I don't know what to say. He's not a crumbing forward and he also pushed into the midfield a bit on the weekend. Porps by the way may have kicked a goal but had 0 goal assists compared with Pets 3 and 1 tackle compared with Pets 4. Pets played a role in the side. He may have been a touch quiet but to dismiss his game as pathetic is crazy.

 

[mrmatt]

Callinan played alot further up the ground than Pets who was stationed in the forward 50 for most of the game. Callinan ventured up through half forward, into the midfield and was even seen on the half back line. Pets doesn't have the class of Callinan but it's a lot easier to get your hands on the ball when you spend more time following it around the ground. So that explains Callinan's 5 extra touches.

Porps had a whole 4 extra touches but again if you think he was/is playing the same "small forward" role as Pets I don't know what to say. He's not a crumbing forward and he also pushed into the midfield a bit on the weekend. Porps by the way may have kicked a goal but had 0 goal assists compared with Pets 3 and 1 tackle compared with Pets 4. Pets played a role in the side. He may have been a touch quiet but to dismiss his game as pathetic is crazy.

^ This. Porps was also on the ball for a significant part of the last quarter. There seems to be a large proportion of the statistical analysis from this thread that is not responded to because it doesn't fit with the OP 'number-crunching' and seemingly predetermined POV.
I did like the challenge the OP suggested and I feel there have been some very valid points made to counter the argument... but it has all been lost in the squabbling and side-tracking.
That's BigFooty, I suppose.
At the end of the day I think Pets is safe in the team for the foreseeable future and if he continues to tackle, harass, smother and create opportunities (Goals and assists) up forward he has every reason to be.
And if the last two weeks have been his quiet games then even better.