bro it was so highApart the one time he went up one handed to mark the ball you are spot on.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
bro it was so highApart the one time he went up one handed to mark the ball you are spot on.
agree, strikes me as real tall poppy syndrome - or bias/criticism coming from a place of insecurity or jealousy. bloody incels!!!!!!!Some people just don't like him due to his outgoing personality and the fact that he likes to celebrate a goal.
It's pretty obvious why.Amazing Rachele has copped plenty of criticism by some posters when he has had a reasonable year, even if had some quieter games which you expect for a younger player.
Meanwhile our 100+ game small forward continues to post far, far poorer numbers every week, yet Nix offers more positive comments about Murphy than Rachele.
Says everything really, when he justifies mediocrity.
Josh... hopefully this game becomes more your norm.
So you believe in holding players to different standards based on their potential?It's pretty obvious why.
Murphy is a C-grader, playing the same game every week, trying hard and achieving what he can. What is the point of criticising his game for improvement. We just have to wait for him to be dropped.
On the other hand, Rachelle is a young A-grader who has been under-achieving and showing a too-high percentage of poor efforts, apart from this week. Don't you think we get frustrated when seeing this from someone with a much higher ceiling?
Should he be immune from criticism? We are all very pleased that he has responded and improved.
Absolutely nothing amazing at all.
That was because the ball went too high it has nothing to do with being softApart the one time he went up one handed to mark the ball you are spot on.
bloody SNOWFLAKE football players marking with ONE HAND!!!!!!That was because the ball went too high it has nothing to do with being soft
And ducked his head. It's something Rowe and Compo went ape droppings over because they believed he heard footsteps.That was because the ball went too high it has nothing to do with being soft
That was because the ball went too high it has nothing to do with being soft
And ducked his head. It's something Rowe and Compo went ape droppings over because they believed he heard footsteps.
It was a similar to the situation when Rachele went one hand back in flight to try and mark the ball in front of Walker this year, the kick wasn't to him and others posters also gave him shit with that contest calling him soft. His follow up when the ball hit the ground was strong and lead to a goal.That was because the ball went too high it has nothing to do with being soft
Not listening to the guy that gives Laird 3 votes every weekAnd ducked his head. It's something Rowe and Campo went ape droppings over because they believed he heard footsteps.
So you believe in holding players to different standards based on their potential?
I can't speak for others, but the issue for me isn't 'quiet games' - that's absolutely going to happen. It's the effort and intensity that he plays at.Amazing Rachele has copped plenty of criticism by some posters when he has had a reasonable year, even if had some quieter games which you expect for a younger player.
Meanwhile our 100+ game small forward continues to post far, far poorer numbers every week, yet Nix offers more positive comments about Murphy than Rachele.
Says everything really, when he justifies mediocrity.
Josh... hopefully this game becomes more your norm.
Rachele's effort doesn't go missing for an entire game and his pressure stats show this, there is clearly one of two efforts which posters see and latch on with bias.I can't speak for others, but the issue for me isn't 'quiet games' - that's absolutely going to happen. It's the effort and intensity that he plays at.
Honestly my expectations on guys like Murph are so low I barely even care - I just don't want him in the team. But we've spent big on Josh Rachelle and made a significant commitment, because the kid can play. He can be a difference maker when he combines the effort required with his natural talent. Exactly what we saw on the weekend - I agree with Nicks that he pretty much was the difference for a large part of that game.
Rachele's effort doesn't go missing for an entire game and his pressure stats show this, there is clearly one of two efforts which posters see and latch on with bias.
Only a fool would have an opinion about something they see with their eyesIts the famous "eye test".
Kid is tracking better than Rankine / Bolton were at the same stage.
Only a fool would have an opinion about something they see with their eyes
So true. The world is full of very smart people.
The "eye test" is the one remaining beacon of truth.
We should delist Rachele - because so many have said he doesn't pass the eye test and is soft.
Its the famous "eye test".
Kid is tracking better than Rankine / Bolton were at the same stage.
This is very similar to the people that had Fog being mg delisted, not an AFL standard player etc
It's not just a couple of times a game. It's been the defining feature of his game for most of this year.Rachele's effort doesn't go missing for an entire game and his pressure stats show this, there is clearly one of two efforts which posters see and latch on with bias.
You can make a case for all of them, but after Cameron none of them are obviousgot 5 coaches votes for his game Saturday
10 Jeremy Cameron (GEEL)
5 Joshua Rachele (ADEL)
4 Riley Thilthorpe (ADEL)
4 Tom Stewart (GEEL)
3 Patrick Dangerfield (GEEL)
2 Tyson Stengle (GEEL)
2 Shaun Mannagh (GEEL)
weird set of votes - can't disagree with Cameron with 10
but Dangerfield with 3??
Nicksgot 5 coaches votes for his game Saturday
10 Jeremy Cameron (GEEL)
5 Joshua Rachele (ADEL)
4 Riley Thilthorpe (ADEL)
4 Tom Stewart (GEEL)
3 Patrick Dangerfield (GEEL)
2 Tyson Stengle (GEEL)
2 Shaun Mannagh (GEEL)
weird set of votes - can't disagree with Cameron with 10
but Dangerfield with 3??