Motlop's "personal issues"

[Peck]

KT and Lurk3r - I'd love you to answer these questions...

Do you like where the club's at? Do you enjoy it being derided by the rest of the footballing community? Do you feel happy going home / turning off the TV after yet another soul-destroying, pea-hearted effort?

No, of course i don't. I don't get angry about it and blame it all on a player who clearly isn't playing as bad as you make out though.

If not, have you even bothered to try and rationalise how it's sunken to its current depths? And are you so offended by any form of critical analysis that you see it as "soft centred"-ness? If so, don't read opinion-based forums... and go assess who needs to HTFU.

I'm not reduced to tears by the criticism motlop has copped, but its completely unwarranted at this point, so I feel obliged to say something.

I'm astounded that people still think hes playing terribly, almost as astounded as I am at criticism about Troy Chaplins hardness.

 

[Macgonagle]

No, of course i don't. I don't get angry about it and blame it all on a player who clearly isn't playing as bad as you make out though.


I'm not reduced to tears by the criticism motlop has copped, but its completely unwarranted at this point, so I feel obliged to say something.

I'm astounded that people still think hes playing terribly, almost as astounded as I am at criticism about Troy Chaplins hardness.

Motlop's form has been unacceptable. It's not just about stats it's his decision making, his body language and his second efforts which are also important. Motlop is to be judged against a higher level than a first year player because we know what he is capable of. He is exactly the sort of player who needs to be made a lesson of and dropped to send a stern message that the gold passes are no longer valid in this team.

KT - worst posts going around in this thread. Your simple minded attitude of "support da team and say nuffing bad" tells me exactly what sort of person you are...one incapable of critical analysis which is exactly what this thread is about. Constructive criticisms of the club are to be encouraged and Ash has done exactly this.

 

[Northalives]

Personal issues are just that, PERSONAL! and they should not be in the public domain.
I find it quite disgusting that coaches/players/commentators, when referring to Motlop's bad form, say "...and we all know that Daniel has personal problems...". Go and get **** ed!! We only know about Daniel's "personal problems" because of you insensitive, pretentious arse holes!
**** I'm angry.
I am by no means enamoured with Daniel Motlop as being the right type of player for Port Adelaide but I cannot handle people bringing up Daniel's "personal issues" for whatever reason - Daniel is entitled to a private life like anyone else.
M. Williams should have kept his mouth shut instead discussing Daniel's private life in public and he and the selectors, should definitely have not picked him to play when his mind is on everything but football.
The absolutely pompous manner in which Choco and others said that it was "good' for Daniel to be playing in order to "help" him with his "personal issues" was nothing short of ridiculous - they are not qualified to make decisions on what is good or bad for Daniel in his private life and they should have, as a matter of course, directed him to a professional counselor and not even contemplated playing him until his "issues" were under control/resolved.

 

[Surjan]

but I'd be happier if he had a couple more good games to prime him for trading to Gold Coast for a young player of a type we desperately need.

 

[Macgonagle]

Personal issues are just that, PERSONAL! and they should not be in the public domain.
I find it quite disgusting that coaches/players/commentators, when referring to Motlop's bad form, say "...and we all know that Daniel has personal problems...". Go and get **** ed!! We only know about Daniel's "personal problems" because of you insensitive, pretentious arse holes!
**** I'm angry.
I am by no means enamoured with Daniel Motlop as being the right type of player for Port Adelaide but I cannot handle people bringing up Daniel's "personal issues" for whatever reason - Daniel is entitled to a private life like anyone else.
M. Williams should have kept his mouth shut instead discussing Daniel's private life in public and he and the selectors, should definitely have not picked him to play when his mind is on everything but football.
The absolutely pompous manner in which Choco and others said that it was "good' for Daniel to be playing in order to "help" him with his "personal issues" was nothing short of ridiculous - they are not qualified to make decisions on what is good or bad for Daniel in his private life and they should have, as a matter of course, directed him to a professional counselor and not even contemplated playing him until his "issues" were under control/resolved.

To play devil's advocate, how do you know that the PAFC didn't make these statements with Motlop's informed consent?

In any case, I must say that I don't have an issue with people talking about Motlop's "personal issues" in a generic way because there is a clear and obvious link to his performance which therefore gives it public interest value. If it wasn't affecting his performance then I would agree with you, Northalives, that it should not be reported. I'm glad however that the details haven't been revealed because I don't see those as having any public interest value.

By way of example, the ridiculous hoo har this week about Cousins and the excruciating detail in which the matter has been reported has gone way beyond the genuine public interest value. I was appalled to hear Tim Watson and Andrew Maher on the Morning glory on SEN say that they wanted to hear more detail about the type of pills, the frequency with which they were taken and other ridiculous details which clearly amount to an invasion of privacy. This information may sell papers and improve radio ratings but that does not automatically mean that it has public interest value. Unfortunately too many media outlets these days, News Ltd comes immediately to mind, are all too ready to lower the quality of their reporting and stoop to nothing more than gossip mills. Employing people such as Hutchy and Jon Ralph is proof that this kind of gutter reporting is encouraged by those organisations.

 

[Northalives]

To play devil's advocate, how do you know that the PAFC didn't make these statements with Motlop's informed consent?

In any case, I must say that I don't have an issue with people talking about Motlop's "personal issues" in a generic way because there is a clear and obvious link to his performance which therefore gives it public interest value. If it wasn't affecting his performance then I would agree with you, Northalives, that it should not be reported. I'm glad however that the details haven't been revealed because I don't see those as having any public interest value.

By way of example, the ridiculous hoo har this week about Cousins and the excruciating detail in which the matter has been reported has gone way beyond the genuine public interest value. I was appalled to hear Tim Watson and Andrew Maher on the Morning glory on SEN say that they wanted to hear more detail about the type of pills, the frequency with which they were taken and other ridiculous details which clearly amount to an invasion of privacy. This information may sell papers and improve radio ratings but that does not automatically mean that it has public interest value. Unfortunately too many media outlets these days, News Ltd comes immediately to mind, are all too ready to lower the quality of their reporting and stoop to nothing more than gossip mills. Employing people such as Hutchy and Jon Ralph is proof that this kind of gutter reporting is encouraged by those organisations.

Mac, I agree with you about the media - they are a bunch of pimps selling trash to a ready made market of voyeurs.
As for the club maybe getting consent from Daniel, I don't think it matters one iota whether they got consent or not. Our club should not in anyway divulge what is happening in any of our players' lives nor any other of the machinations that may or may not be happening at or about our club.
If Daniel wants to spill his guts to the media, then he can and after he does, the club should decide what action it takes.
To use his personal issues as to why he is playing badly is absolutely absurd. If you are playing badly then you should not be picked.

 

[Macgonagle]

Mac, I agree with you about the media - they are a bunch of pimps selling trash to a ready made market of voyeurs.
As for the club maybe getting consent from Daniel, I don't think it matters one iota whether they got consent or not. Our club should not in anyway divulge what is happening in any of our players' lives nor any other of the machinations that may or may not be happening at or about our club.
If Daniel wants to spill his guts to the media, then he can and after he does, the club should decide what action it takes.
To use his personal issues as to why he is playing badly is absolutely absurd. If you are playing badly then you should not be picked.

yup Ok I see your point.

If he's playing then it should be because he's cleared as physically and mentally fit and there should be no excuses or mentioning of "personal issues". I accept that.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Get over these gold pass system comments. Motlop has earned his spot in the last two weeks.

Didn't say he hadn't, that comment wasn't supposed to be directed towards Motlop. But KT's attitude is exactly the type of attitude that leads to gold passes prevailing. If we as a club simply ignore the negatives, then they'll never go away.

We all support the club, and we want to see what's best for the club. If that involves change, then we'll call for change. I really don't understand how this incredibly simple point is going over the head of some people.

 

[edgie]

That would be an OK result, but I'd be happier if he had a couple more good games to prime him for trading to Gold Coast for a young player of a type we desperately need.

He is not going to in our next premiership side, and Gold Coast could probably do with a showpony.

He was a solid and contributing player to our last Grand Final side. He's our showpony, and when he is back on his horse, for either us or wherever he goes IF traded, would you still prefer a generic young midfielder over a freakish livewire who can find the goals? Has everyone forgotten the Essendon game so soon?

 

[Portia]

He's our showpony, and when he is back on his horse, for either us or wherever he goes IF traded, would you still prefer a generic young midfielder over a freakish livewire who can find the goals?

Yes.

BIG EDIT BELOW

I should just point out that this has been my party line since before we traded for him. He's good at what he does, but does not contribute to a solid premiership structure, and has to many issues to waste time dealing with (over his entire career, not just this year).

Remember when we got Motlop and Lonie for Pickett and our first round pick? I do. I also remember reading a post here about a month ago about how we need a Grant Birchall type. He's the guy we gave up in our mad bid for Motlop (pick #14 in 2005). Birchall plays his 100th game next round.

Now you could argue that the club didn't see a need for a player of his type at the time. Of course, we then drafted Paul Stewart with an early pick the next year, when pretty much everyone here agreed we should've been aiming for a key forward with one of our first round picks. And just last year we picked up Jasper Pittard to play the same role.

So what did we get out of this? An undoubtedly talented forward flanker, capable of explosive football, who is completely unsuitable to building a forward line around - which is what we need right now.

If we can tart him up for trade, I think there is no downside, same as there wasn't when we offloaded Pickett when he was just about to drop off. Maybe this time we won't use what we get to throw the house at a player of a type we don't need.

 

[tribey]

He, Ebert and Westhoff were the new Beaumont Children in our last Grand Final side.

Added a smidgeon of reality to your post.

 

[Portology]

He was a solid and contributing player to our last Grand Final side. He's our showpony, and when he is back on his horse, for either us or wherever he goes IF traded, would you still prefer a generic young midfielder over a freakish livewire who can find the goals? Has everyone forgotten the Essendon game so soon?

Funny you should mention Essendon. Zaharakis and Melksham have delivered more to them this year per game than Motlop has to us, and probably cost them a lot less than Motlop does us. So, yeah. Give me the last 2 years' 'generic young midfielders'. No need to even go to the depth of Porthos' fair Birchall argument.

Freakish livewire doesn't make sense. Freakish means achieving the improbable more often than mere mortals (which still only means not very often). Livewire means constantly dangerous, more than just an occasional bright shower of sparks.

At best he'll kick an average 2.5 improbable goals per game for a final ~50 goal 'Indian Summer' in 2011, earn a 2012 deal and between himself and Ebo, frustrate two of Butcher, Stewart and Salter out of our forward line and into GC/GWS forward lines for 2012. The downside of Motlop is greater than his value to us from now on. Cam's impersonation of Motlop on friday night when someone (who?) didn't use him really pissed me off. Ebo at least brings zero negatives off field or from an on field work ethic point of view and doesn't show any risk of not fitting into the new regime, whatever it is.

 

[Peck]

Didn't say he hadn't, that comment wasn't supposed to be directed towards Motlop. But KT's attitude is exactly the type of attitude that leads to gold passes prevailing. If we as a club simply ignore the negatives, then they'll never go away.

We all support the club, and we want to see what's best for the club. If that involves change, then we'll call for change. I really don't understand how this incredibly simple point is going over the head of some people.

I don't think anyone ignores the negatives completely, but when there are posts flying around calling people gutless worms and dogs and so on, people standing up for the person under fire may seem like they are ignoring the negatives. They aren't ignoring them though, they are just trying to keep people's heads in the right place.

This isn't the case, while I did think keeping motlop in the side was a good idea, I understand that many would have thought he should have been dropped. It was clear that he was kept in the side because of what he could produce rather than what he was producing (although he did win us the game against essendon). Maybe that isn't the best approach, but once we commited to letting him play a couple of games we were kind of forced to keep him playing, yeah?

Now that he is playing ok football, he deserves his spot, so why complain about him now?

If everyone here just complained about things, there wouldn't be much discussion and I don't think many people would want to hang around with all the negativity. While the same can be said if everyone keeps a positive outlook, I just don't think some things are necessary.

When people throw the word gold pass around at anyone they disagree with it annoys me.

IMO Warren Tredrea has a gold pass, Motlop has a gold pass, Danyle Pearce has a gold pass. Brent Harvey has a gold pass, so would players like Abblett and Reiwoldt. This means that if they will be carried through a few bad weeks because we know what they can produce on the other side of it. This is how it is, the top players at the club need to be performing for a side to be at its best, and IMO you only really want to drop them if they are really underperforming for an extended period. Simply because if they refind their form they will be a huge boost.

 

[ploppy]

i would keep motlop in the side he is starting to find form. He missed one he should have kicked friday night then kicked one noone else could from outside 50 into the wind. we havent go anyone better to put in the forward line anyway. We just have to work on him performing at his best. Set some rules for him like dont kick checkside when you are straight infront of goal

 

[ash_78]

I don't think anyone ignores the negatives completely, but when there are posts flying around calling people gutless worms and dogs and so on, people standing up for the person under fire may seem like they are ignoring the negatives. They aren't ignoring them though, they are just trying to keep people's heads in the right place.

This isn't the case, while I did think keeping motlop in the side was a good idea, I understand that many would have thought he should have been dropped. It was clear that he was kept in the side because of what he could produce rather than what he was producing (although he did win us the game against essendon). Maybe that isn't the best approach, but once we commited to letting him play a couple of games we were kind of forced to keep him playing, yeah?

Now that he is playing ok football, he deserves his spot, so why complain about him now?

If everyone here just complained about things, there wouldn't be much discussion and I don't think many people would want to hang around with all the negativity. While the same can be said if everyone keeps a positive outlook, I just don't think some things are necessary.

When people throw the word gold pass around at anyone they disagree with it annoys me.

IMO Warren Tredrea has a gold pass, Motlop has a gold pass, Danyle Pearce has a gold pass. Brent Harvey has a gold pass, so would players like Abblett and Reiwoldt. This means that if they will be carried through a few bad weeks because we know what they can produce on the other side of it. This is how it is, the top players at the club need to be performing for a side to be at its best, and IMO you only really want to drop them if they are really underperforming for an extended period. Simply because if they refind their form they will be a huge boost.

The thread was about his poor form being excused by coaches and commentators because of off-field issues. If those issues are affecting him so much, I am suggesting he needs / needed time away from the pressure environment to resolve them, and shouldn't be picked until he's in a suitable state of mind to play - otherwise those off-field factors shouldn't be used as an excuse.

You've confused that with "he's playing like crap and needs to be dropped". His form is just another issue on top of it.

As Macgonagle and others have pointed out, the main gripe with Motlop is not raw stats - it's petulence and a failure to do the team thing. These issues he's had seem to have put him in a headspace where far too many of those types of incidents are happening, and they've been killing us. On top of that, his form was terrible (I agree it's improved somewhat). When you've got both those factors together in an environment where his team is getting smashed and there's an attempt to focus everyone on doing the team thing, clearly someone has to make the tough call and drop him, no matter how good he is at his best. Or he's a destructive influence in an environment where we can't afford any further destruction.

I'm repeating myself anyway. That's as clearly as I can state my point - it's up to you if you want to try and understand the angle I'm coming from, or you disagree entirely. But I haven't seen anything in your posts that suggests you get my main point.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Memo King_Tredrea: If you want to get a point across, post like Lurk3r just did, not the random abuse of anyone being realistic that comes from your keyboard.

I don't think anyone ignores the negatives completely, but when there are posts flying around calling people gutless worms and dogs and so on, people standing up for the person under fire may seem like they are ignoring the negatives. They aren't ignoring them though, they are just trying to keep people's heads in the right place.

I don't disagree, but that's not what this thread was about. IMO you'd be well within your rights to go into the old 'Daniel Motlop = Dog' thread and have a go at the OP. But this was a thread with a logical reason why Daniel Motlop shouldn't be selected in our side right now for both the good of Motlop and of the club with no malice intended. KT's response was completely unwarranted.

This isn't the case, while I did think keeping motlop in the side was a good idea, I understand that many would have thought he should have been dropped. It was clear that he was kept in the side because of what he could produce rather than what he was producing (although he did win us the game against essendon). Maybe that isn't the best approach, but once we commited to letting him play a couple of games we were kind of forced to keep him playing, yeah?

I haven't watched either of our last two games due to outside commitments, but for the record I wanted him dropped after the Sydney game. He gave away a 50 metre penalty and an 100 metre penalty. That sort of shit should NOT be tolerated. But after he played reasonably well in the North game (which was the last one I watched), I didn't want him to be dropped for the Freo game.

I wouldn't say we were forced to keep him playing though. Every player should be made to earn their spot every week. That's how you breed a successful culture. That's how the PAFC was a powerhouse in the SANFL.

IMO Warren Tredrea has a gold pass, Motlop has a gold pass, Danyle Pearce has a gold pass. Brent Harvey has a gold pass, so would players like Abblett and Reiwoldt. This means that if they will be carried through a few bad weeks because we know what they can produce on the other side of it.

As others have said, there's a difference between 'bad weeks' and what Motlop was producing. I'm happy to carry a quality player who has underperformed for a couple of weeks, as long as they're still trying their hardest and showing the right attitude. I never called for Pearce to be dropped when he had his bad run earlier this year, because you could tell he was still giving his all and he still cared about not only his own performance but the performance of the team. I'm not sure you could say the same about Motlop during his awful run a few weeks ago. As I said before, I haven't seen the last two games so I won't comment on them.

 

[Portology]

I don't think anyone ignores the negatives completely, but when there are posts flying around calling people gutless worms and dogs and so on, people standing up for the person under fire may seem like they are ignoring the negatives. They aren't ignoring them though, they are just trying to keep people's heads in the right place.

This isn't the case, while I did think keeping motlop in the side was a good idea, I understand that many would have thought he should have been dropped. It was clear that he was kept in the side because of what he could produce rather than what he was producing (although he did win us the game against essendon). Maybe that isn't the best approach, but once we commited to letting him play a couple of games we were kind of forced to keep him playing, yeah?

Now that he is playing ok football, he deserves his spot, so why complain about him now?

If everyone here just complained about things, there wouldn't be much discussion and I don't think many people would want to hang around with all the negativity. While the same can be said if everyone keeps a positive outlook, I just don't think some things are necessary.

When people throw the word gold pass around at anyone they disagree with it annoys me.

IMO Warren Tredrea has a gold pass, Motlop has a gold pass, Danyle Pearce has a gold pass. Brent Harvey has a gold pass, so would players like Abblett and Reiwoldt. This means that if they will be carried through a few bad weeks because we know what they can produce on the other side of it. This is how it is, the top players at the club need to be performing for a side to be at its best, and IMO you only really want to drop them if they are really underperforming for an extended period. Simply because if they refind their form they will be a huge boost.

Good post. Gutless worm kills me every time I read it, WTF is left when you take the guts out of a worm ?

On gold pass, your comparisons aren't valid. Why would an underperforming side have 3 gold pass holders yet from Kangas you list Boomer who rarely has 3 bad ones in a row. Boomer, Abblet & St Nick 'underperform' at a level Motlop can only dream of. ok, we find it harder to identify other clubs gold pass holders, and IMO if there's no one else to fits spot X sometimes you don't have a choice eg Roughead, Koschitzke, Schulz types, but that's a choice for a very specific role. Pearce earned his spot in the first 6 weeks, has been up and down since. Motlop has been up and down on a quarter by quarter basis, my point about Melksham and Zaharakis is that Motlop may be playing ok on average but not good value for what you expect from a senior player. Brogan plays when 70% because ATM he performs better than the next available option, ok right or wrong a conscious choice based on performance. Chad, no currently not at AFL level let alone senior player level and there are alternatives. Wazza has the sole real gold pass I'd be prepared to issue at this club and anyway has been contributing to the structure when he was there this year. But you can't have 3-4 open gold passes for senior players at an underperforming club, personal reasons or not.

 

[King_Tredrea]

i have no problem with constructive critisicm but it seems there are only personal attacks on players without any positive thoughts atm, thread after thread after thread using terms such as "weak" and "dog" etc.

having said that my posts could have been worded a lot better and more thought out so for that i do apologise. we are all PAFC supporters and we should all stick together. i personally cant think negatively about football and am admitedly quite delusional about it, but oh well thats just me.

 

[ash_78]

i have no problem with constructive critisicm but it seems there are only personal attacks on players without any positive thoughts atm, thread after thread after thread using terms such as "weak" and "dog" etc.

Choose your targets. This thread was a pretty intelligent discussion without any personal attacks - that is, until you came along and made a whole lot of them.

 

[Peck]

The thread was about his poor form being excused by coaches and commentators because of off-field issues. If those issues are affecting him so much, I am suggesting he needs / needed time away from the pressure environment to resolve them, and shouldn't be picked until he's in a suitable state of mind to play - otherwise those off-field factors shouldn't be used as an excuse.

You've confused that with "he's playing like crap and needs to be dropped". His form is just another issue on top of it.

I can't say what you intended the thread to be about. But what I saw was people complaining about motlop's form, and how his personal issues couldn't excuse such terrible form.

Not saying hes been stellar in recent weeks, but to say he shouldn't be picked when he plays bad just because he has played well in the past(not saying that you specifically said this btw), and then to turn around three weeks later and say that he should be dropped because he was playing badly three weeks ago is silly.

As Macgonagle and others have pointed out, the main gripe with Motlop is not raw stats - it's petulence and a failure to do the team thing. These issues he's had seem to have put him in a headspace where far too many of those types of incidents are happening, and they've been killing us. On top of that, his form was terrible (I agree it's improved somewhat). When you've got both those factors together in an environment where his team is getting smashed and there's an attempt to focus everyone on doing the team thing, clearly someone has to make the tough call and drop him, no matter how good he is at his best. Or he's a destructive influence in an environment where we can't afford any further destruction.

Hes been working hard for the team the whole time hes been in. Yes he has been unable to keep a cool head, but hes been getting much better in this particular area for mine.

Give the bloke a chance, perhaps he should have been dropped before now, but hes getting there, sure personal issues aren't a great excuse to use, but if playing is the only way to help him through them, the club has to weigh that up. Sure he hasn't proved anyone wrong just yet, but at least give him a go now that he is contributing.

Good post. Gutless worm kills me every time I read it, WTF is left when you take the guts out of a worm ?

On gold pass, your comparisons aren't valid. Why would an underperforming side have 3 gold pass holders yet from Kangas you list Boomer who rarely has 3 bad ones in a row. Boomer, Abblet & St Nick 'underperform' at a level Motlop can only dream of. ok, we find it harder to identify other clubs gold pass holders, and IMO if there's no one else to fits spot X sometimes you don't have a choice eg Roughead, Koschitzke, Schulz types, but that's a choice for a very specific role. Pearce earned his spot in the first 6 weeks, has been up and down since. Motlop has been up and down on a quarter by quarter basis, my point about Melksham and Zaharakis is that Motlop may be playing ok on average but not good value for what you expect from a senior player. Brogan plays when 70% because ATM he performs better than the next available option, ok right or wrong a conscious choice based on performance. Chad, no currently not at AFL level let alone senior player level and there are alternatives. Wazza has the sole real gold pass I'd be prepared to issue at this club and anyway has been contributing to the structure when he was there this year. But you can't have 3-4 open gold passes for senior players at an underperforming club, personal reasons or not.

I was just naming players that have proved themselves in the past, obviously the clubs would have different policies, for example I would say Baker from Saint Kilda would be played through bad form even though he doesn't appear to be that great. Pearce and Motlop haven't to the extent of the other players there, but Mark William's loved these guys, and he was the coach.

The best evidence of players being picked while in bad form have been that of Tredrea early last year, Pearce this year, Chad this year, and obviously Motlop this year.

Tredrea bounced back, Pearce sort of bounced back, Chad hasn't really bounced back, and may not, and motlop is improving slightly every week.

Some people would say Westhoff as well, but he was dropped after a few bad weeks. Yes, hes back in the side now, but who knows for how long.

 

[Macgonagle]

"Hes been working hard for the team the whole time hes been in. Yes he has been unable to keep a cool head, but hes been getting much better in this particular area for mine."

There is a conflict in what you are saying Lu3kr. He hasn't been working for the team if he has been losing his head. By definition his ill discipline is the exact opposite of working for the team. If you accept that then you accept he hasn't been working hard for the team "all the time".

Nothing gets up my goat more than poor discipline because it's entriely preventable if you have an iota of team ethos. This can be contrasted with poor form which, due to injury or other physical ailments or conditioning, might be more out of a player's hands.

If it was poor form alone from Motlop accompanied by a lot of visible effort then I think you would find the fans being a lot more forgivving.

 

[DaMan]

This is why we are on this topic:

Week 1: Motlop looks a bit rusty and should have kept it simple. He naturally tries to get the maximum out of every possession. Not working for him, Drops his head, frustration kicks in, before you know it media are all over it.

Week 2: He's looking dangerous but unlucky to score when a couple of standard grubbers hit the post. (The grubber being a hot topic at the moment) Suddenly the the commentators are making a big thing out of every possession he has.

Thats how this topic became what it is. Its human nature to only remember the bad things!

P.S. Highly regard for defensive efforts at port! A very selfless act!

 

[Peck]

There is a conflict in what you are saying Lu3kr. He hasn't been working for the team if he has been losing his head. By definition his ill discipline is the exact opposite of working for the team. If you accept that then you accept he hasn't been working hard for the team "all the time".

I don't there is any conflict in what i was saying. Hard work and keeping your cool are completely different things.

Nothing gets up my goat more than poor discipline because it's entriely preventable if you have an iota of team ethos. This can be contrasted with poor form which, due to injury or other physical ailments or conditioning, might be more out of a player's hands.

If it was poor form alone from Motlop accompanied by a lot of visible effort then I think you would find the fans being a lot more forgivving.

I hardly see how poor discipline is entirely preventable. Not sure if you've ever gotten angry in your life, but surely you would understand that when you are angry you can lose control of your actions very easily.

Yea the fans are definitely getting more upset over his performances due to the 50s hes been giving away, and his general demeanor on the field, but I think hes really starting to improve, and if he has a really great game that may be the start of the end of it. It all seems to be down to confidence for mine.

 

[wapower]

I don't there is any conflict in what i was saying. Hard work and keeping your cool are completely different things.

I hardly see how poor discipline is entirely preventable. Not sure if you've ever gotten angry in your life, but surely you would understand that when you are angry you can lose control of your actions very easily.

Yea the fans are definitely getting more upset over his performances due to the 50s hes been giving away, and his general demeanor on the field, but I think hes really starting to improve, and if he has a really great game that may be the start of the end of it. It all seems to be down to confidence for mine.

It's obvious that the difference in opinion is that some people believe Motlop is improving and should be persevered with and others don't believe he is improving and shouldn't be persevered with.

I'm coming around to the side that he is epically overrated by certain factions and has been his entire career because he can kick a sexy goal or take a spectacular mark. That's fantastic when he does it and creates a genuine buzz. I'd prefer him performing on a more consistent level and setting the right example for the juniors both on and off the field.

In my opinion the best thing that could have been done by Daniel Motlop was to send him on sick leave until he sorted out his personal issues and returned to work in the right frame of mind.

 

[Macgonagle]

Hit the nail on the head Wapower.

Agree with both your analysis of the two camps and your conclusion.