Ok, enough is enough... Raines IS

[Punt_Road_Roar]

A quality HB can either quickly sum up the best attacking option (which may well be a one or even two-on-one situation) and deliver to it with relatively consistent precision, OR quickly run, carry, and draw opponents to them, opening up better options in the process.

Raines is not and will never be a player capable of doing either. If he was a good shutdown small defender you'd forgive him the above and be grateful he had one genuinely positive attribute to offer. Sadly, he's not capable of that either.

So in simple terms he needs to pull a rabbit out of his arse? LMAO

 

[HARKER]

SHIT!!!

(ok l'm under an alias), but for **** sake. How many times are we going to see him have a brain fade trying to work out what to do with the pill.

He is a NUFFY!!!!!!

Special mention to Richard Tambling who is not a footballers arse hole.

Sorry, a piss weak yellow card prevents me from saying what l really feel. If Richmond moderators ban this, your not Richmond.

WOW
I must have been out on a toilet break.
He was as good as anyone last night and even looked like his old man playing.

 

[HARKER]

This thread is excellent proof that alternative parallel universes do exist. The opinions expressed relate to notionally identical people and events but have diametrically opposed meaning. The question that arises is how is it possible that people who exist in such separate universes are connected by this forum?

For the record, I live in the Universe where Raines played a reasonably good game.

No worries, Professor Stephen Hawking.
Now get out of your wheel chair and do the dishes

 

[_RT_]

Thats bullshit Sante. Christ, l'd love to see your starting 22 for round 1, your favourite players are the achilles heel of our club.

And your comment about supporters just following the media hype, you couldnt be more wrong. I'm watching the game as l type and they're in love with Raines game, although not acknowledging how many positive plays that Raines possessions have actually turned into.

You my friend, just keep investing in rubbish. Everyone is special in your mind and we continue to not deliver.

Who's right? The facts say l'm closer to the solution than you.

So who would you have take Raines spot then? Ranies has been quite good in the 2 games we've played so far. Not sure what people expect from him to actually say that he has played a decent game.

 

[RECORDS!]

Wally Matera on a yellow card? should we call you Balls of Steel?

Very sharp Suds

 

[Wally Matera]

So who would you have take Raines spot then? Ranies has been quite good in the 2 games we've played so far. Not sure what people expect from him to actually say that he has played a decent game.

Are you joking... at the moment, he doesnt have a spot. He didnt play at all last year, we're playing 26 man squads, that dont include Bowden, Tuck, Cotchin, Connors, Coughlan, McGuane and even Schulz who are all on the team sheet before him.

He may play round one, but only by default. Kingy was found out last year, Raines will be found out this year - if it hasnt already happened.

 

[_RT_]

Are you joking... at the moment, he doesnt have a spot. He didnt play at all last year, we're playing 26 man squads, that dont include Bowden, Tuck, Cotchin, Connors, Coughlan, McGuane and even Schulz who are all on the team sheet before him.

He may play round one, but only by default. Kingy was found out last year, Raines will be found out this year - if it hasnt already happened.

You sure you're still not intoxicated Wally or are you just taking the piss and winding everyone up.

Raines has been very good in both games so far this year as the stats show. 50 odd possessions of which only 4-5 have been counted as clangers. Might be wise for some people to read the definitions I put up at the bottom of the previous page that explain what effective and efficient disposals are. Because it seems quite clear to me that any player who can perform at 91.5% efficiency over the last 2 games, as Raines has, is clearly a very good ball user and while I'll admit that some stats are rather pointless, a good efficiency rating isn't one that can't really be argued against.

 

[Madtiger2006]

Raines seems to slow the team down a bit. Don't like the way he runs in circles and I worry where his kicks will go. He's good but I'd prefer him as back up. Come in from coburg in case of injury. Same with Mcmahon, we can do without the occasional poor turnovers. Polo, Newman and Tambling are the small defenders I'd use

 

[_RT_]

Raines seems to slow the team down a bit. Don't like the way he runs in circles and I worry where his kicks will go. He's good but I'd prefer him as back up. Come in from coburg in case of injury. Same with Mcmahon, we can do without the occasional poor turnovers. Polo, Newman and Tambling are the small defenders I'd use

Whats are you worrying about where Raines' kicks may end up? He has a 91.5% disposal effeciency over the last 2 games, which means 9/10 disposals hit their target and are to the advantage of the team. Can understand the criticism of McMahon who made some terrible choices last night, but really don't see how the Raines bashing is warranted.

 

[Madtiger2006]

Raines seems to slow the team down a bit. Don't like the way he runs in circles and I worry where his kicks will go. He's good but I'd prefer him as back up. Come in from coburg in case of injury. Same with Mcmahon, we can do without the occasional poor turnovers. Polo, Newman and Tambling are the small defenders I'd use

None of Raines' kicks were under much pressure. But anyway, we can't have raines and mcmahon in the same team. Gotta have 1 or the other at most

 

[CoggaRules]

Whats are you worrying about where Raines' kicks may end up? He has a 91.5% disposal effeciency over the last 2 games, which means 9/10 disposals hit their target and are to the advantage of the team. Can understand the criticism of McMahon who made some terrible choices last night, but really don't see how the Raines bashing is warranted.

to true RT. I for one have paid out on him. His disposal by foot wasnt the problem, it was that he didnt even get to dispose of it, because of his brainlessness that was. Thought he looked like he has regained the composure from his rookie runner up days. Looked to have filled out even more. Good unit now. Pumps it out of danger a long way as well.

 

[Wally Matera]

Whats are you worrying about where Raines' kicks may end up? He has a 91.5% disposal effeciency over the last 2 games, which means 9/10 disposals hit their target and are to the advantage of the team. Can understand the criticism of McMahon who made some terrible choices last night, but really don't see how the Raines bashing is warranted.

Here we go, the resident Marcia Hines. I'd love to live in a world where everything is as rosy as you put it.

Those stats are out-n-out bullshit mate. He can have all disposal efficiency he wants mate, but it means **** all when he handballs it to someone that is continually 'hot' or he's given off to someone without really looking if there were better options, or he holds onto the ball so long that everything is dried up.

Once all those scenarios have taken place, Raines dishes off to anyone. It may be a successful dish, but its done **** all for the team. He may have 100% disposal efficiency, but he continually gives it off to a bloke that gets put out to dry.

Come on Paula Abdul, not everyone is special and faultless mate. I got pretty drunk last night, and actually thought to myself, did l shoot my gob off too early. I watched the replay again today and l was absolutely spot on.

 

[Tigermick17]

Here we go, the resident Marcia Hines. I'd love to live in a world where everything is as rosy as you put it.

Those stats are out-n-out bullshit mate. He can have all disposal efficiency he wants mate, but it means **** all when he handballs it to someone that is continually 'hot' or he's given off to someone without really looking if there were better options, or he holds onto the ball so long that everything is dried up.

Once all those scenarios have taken place, Raines dishes off to anyone. It may be a successful dish, but its done **** all for the team. He may have 100% disposal efficiency, but he continually gives it off to a bloke that gets put out to dry.

Come on Paula Abdul, not everyone is special and faultless mate. I got pretty drunk last night, and actually thought to myself, did l shoot my gob off too early. I watched the replay again today and l was absolutely spot on.

I'm surprised people read what you have to say. I know the ten minutes I spent reading your junk is ten minutes of my life I'll never get back.

 

[_RT_]

Here we go, the resident Marcia Hines. I'd love to live in a world where everything is as rosy as you put it.

Those stats are out-n-out bullshit mate. He can have all disposal efficiency he wants mate, but it means **** all when he handballs it to someone that is continually 'hot' or he's given off to someone without really looking if there were better options, or he holds onto the ball so long that everything is dried up.

Once all those scenarios have taken place, Raines dishes off to anyone. It may be a successful dish, but its done **** all for the team. He may have 100% disposal efficiency, but he continually gives it off to a bloke that gets put out to dry.

Come on Paula Abdul, not everyone is special and faultless mate. I got pretty drunk last night, and actually thought to myself, did l shoot my gob off too early. I watched the replay again today and l was absolutely spot on.

I suggest you go and read the definitions I provided previously. You'll clearly see that a player wont get credited with an efficient disposal if the disposal is not to the advantage of the team i.e. puts a teammate under pressure or forces them into a contest. Sorry Wally but its time to admit you're wrong on this one.

There is nothing you can say that would even get me to think about possibly changing my opinion on this one and as most would know, I fairly adaptablt to changing my opinion if the evidence suggests I've got it wrong.

 

[Rayzorwire]

Most Richmond supporters on here either have no idea about Football or follow the media's hype (good and bad) or over-react.

'The Media' hype up Raines' nothing games the exact same way they hyped up Bowden, Campbell and Johnson's neverending succession of nothing games - 'never makes a mistake', 'always does something with the ball' etc.

The 'something' = absolutely nothing in terms of getting the ball forward quickly to the right target. I spent a decade watching those cheating footballers Campbell and Bowden (and Chaffey and the others) taking 30 seconds looking like stranded goldfish, then chip 10m along the boundary to players who can't kick the footy like the Kellaway and Gaspar, who then take another 30 seconds to chip the ball 10m further up the line back to another Campbell or Bowden - last year we were finally rid of that non-productive, self-defeating, individual stats and lack of mistakes before team, SHIT FOOTBALL.

Raines' return and his possession counts have managed to single-handedly resurrect that style of non-existent rebounding, chip or handball short and slow bollocks, so you blokes can talk him up the same way you think all those past cheating footballers were champions instead of individual first cheats who robbed us week after week, but I'm going to call a spade a spade thanks very much.

Sorry Rayzor, but I'm going to take you to task on this. Last week you raved on about Jacksons game because he had a good Supercoach score which proves that his ball usage was better than many suggested. Last night Raines had better scores than McMahon and I'm not sure about Newman. So how is it that Raines' efforts are unacceptable but Jacksons are considered fine?

You obviously didn't read what I wrote very closely RT, because I explained it a week ago when I wrote what you're referring to.

Jackson played as a genuine inside midfielder last week. The criticism which is so often levelled against him is that he freezes under pressure and doesn't dispose well quickly. In the first-half alone he fired out a dozen possessions under the utmost pressure, they practically all hit the target as perfectly as could have been managed under the circumstances (three of them coming from Raines handballs putting him under the pump), and his kicking (the other possessions) was excellent. It's extremely difficult to rack up decent SC scores playing inside-midfielder roles, which is why a bloke like Daniel Cross - who I have the utmost respect for as a highly effective inside midfielder - seldom scores much above his DT score in SC. He lives under the pump and does brilliantly under the circumstances he's presented.

Considering his past performances, Jackson showed very solid improvement and played an excellent game, all adding up to a superb effort.

Raines has played a virtual loose man in defense role the last two weeks, the role where you get zero pressure and a lot of cheap possessions by default, but the expectation from playing that role is not that you get 22 possessions and do bugger all with them with high efficiency, it's that you take the game on, use the ball quickly and well, setting up fast rebounds and getting us into attack before we're staring a 20-man flood in the face in order to score.

A majority of Raines' first half possessions last night were handballs to nothing - check the stats if you doubt it. Highly 'efficient' handballs to nothing. Jackson's were genuine contested situations and clearances - the hard stuff which sets up fast, positive ball movement. When he wasn't in traffic he was kicking the ball long, again very well.

The idea of a backwards handball or a quick one in traffic is to get a player in space so they can dispose quickly, long and effectively. Raines starts in that space, mucks around, runs himself into trouble, then dishes off a backwards handball, a quick one because he's attracted his own traffic, or a dodgy one to a player who now has an opponent up their arse because Raines has wasted so much time.

Nobody should have to ask me to explain this, it's really obvious.

Secondly according to the Prospectus, which is ran by Champion Data, the same people who do the Supercoach scoring they give the following definition of efficiency - The total effective statistics divided by the total statistics for said catergory.

Looking further into it they then give definitions for effective kicks and handballs.
Handball Effective - A handball to a teammate that hits the intended target.
Handball Ineffective - When a handball is not advantageous to the team but doesn't directly turn the ball over to the opposition.
Kick Clanger - When a player kicks directly to an opponent who either takes an uncontested mark or gains an uncontest possession.
Kick Ineffective - A kick less than 40m to a contest or a kick of more than 40m to a worse than 50-50 contest. The ball is in dispute and has not improved his teams chances.

Looking at all of that, I'm wondering just how you can claim that Raines possessions are nothing possessions? Surely if they are nothing possessions using the definitions provided above Raines' effeciency rating would be nowhere near as high as it is. It would appear that his possessions are in fact meaningful possessions that are to the advantage of the team and not just nothing possessions, which are doing nothing but putting his teammates under pressure, as you claim.

Taking 15 seconds to run around in circles then end up handballing to nowhere and to someone under equal pressure is an 'effective handball' - and a totally nothing possession.

All you've succeeded in doing is wasting 20 seconds and passed the buck to a player with more confidence and courage in their skill to bail you out.

Half-decent rebounding HBF's need to do that infinitely less often than Raines does. If there's nothing ahead then use the loose players 50m away from you with a long direct kick to switch the ball to the other side of the ground. It's really very simple.

SC scores (and thereby Champion Data ratings) are somewhat flawed in that they reward the effective time wasting handball to nothing (the classic Raines possession), while punishing the effective handball in traffic which creates space (punish by giving each the same points to each unless it's a clearance), and also punishing the fast and direct 39m kick which hits our forwards' hands, but they drop the mark and it's deemed a contest because their opponent is hot on their heels (both of the above being classic Jackson possessions, and the type of ball movement we want to see).

Ironically, I was criticised last week for using SC stats to illustrate a point, but you've managed to exclusively use the biggest flaw from SC point scoring, to defend the indefensible (Raines' last two games).

Finally, as a general response to multiple posts, stop deluding yourselves with the romantic notion that just because Raines runs like his father and looks a million dollars running and delivering to nowhere or the bleeding obvious target, that he is capable of playing football anywhere near the same standard Geoff could.

He can't, he never will. Actually watch where the ball ends up. Sit there with pen and paper and tally up how many Raines rebounds end up transferring to fast break attacks inside our forward-50. The only time it ever happens is when other players run hard to take his responsibility away from him. He may as well be a mechanical ball dispenser where the rest have to come and get it at close range, or give him a 30m space margin to kick to them unmarked and waiting impatiently for his floater to finally arrive.

 

[JimmyRecard]

The reason why raines has to stop so often and wait for an option is hes so quick at breaking lines he has to wait for the wingers and half forwards to present. i like how raines is takign his time, even if you just handball it sideways, the more time we get the better and its better than just an astray kick to the flank.

 

[tony_montana]

running around in circles?
he did that when there was nothing to give to, at least we maintain possession that way. for the most part he goes hard and direct to our advantage. Look im not a big raines fan and actually didnt miss him at all last season, but hes been pretty good thus far, dont know what more you can ask. McMahon who im a fan of needs to pull the finger out.

Jacko on the other hand i lost count of the times he sent it fwd only for it to come out dbl quick. poor decision making and execution again especially when the heat grew in the final stanza

deledio went long to a 2 on 1 several times and we all know he is an elite user of the ball and decision maker even he found it hard to go long and direct with accuracy, it was a shocking game of soccer

 

[Rayzorwire]

The reason why raines has to stop so often and wait for an option is hes so quick at breaking lines he has to wait for the wingers and half forwards to present. i like how raines is takign his time, even if you just handball it sideways, the more time we get the better and its better than just an astray kick to the flank.

He doesn't break lines FFS. Breaking lines by definition means leaving the opponent immediately in front of you (and hopefully others along the line) in your wake, either by pace or disposal, and doing so quickly enough that no more lines form ahead of you.

Raines can't do it and never will.

running around in circles?
he did that when there was nothing to give to, at least we maintain possession that way.

Useless possession Tony. The sort of possession which ultimately relies on someone taking a contested mark or picking off a brilliant crumb in a horribly flooded forward line - no easy leads, no space opened up by fast ball movement. Good HBF's create attacking 80m-100m plays at least occasionally, not sit there like automatic ball dispensers waiting for someone to mop up their persistent inabilities.

Either he has the agility and pace to burn his opponents, or the skills and poise to get it forward quickly, or he has absolutely no business playing loose on the HBF.

McMahon and Newman (flawed as they are) can step sideways time and time again then deliver to a leading target with comparitive precision.

Raines is like a headcase raffling inbred ferrets in terms of what any teammate can expect him to do with the ball. His instinct is to run and beat players, but he doesn't have the pace and someone else has to clean up afterwards. We'd be better off long term playing JON there; at least he does have the pace to burn opponents, and he's surely just as capable of copping out time after time and handballing the pressure to someone else.

Jacko on the other hand i lost count of the times he sent it fwd only for it to come out dbl quick. poor decision making and execution again especially when the heat grew in the final stanza

We played him mostly outside this week, probably because he kicked so well last week and we wanted to give the likes of Thomson a crack inside.

Effectively, what you're doing is having a go at Jackson for attempting what Raines, Johnson and Bowden never do - kick the ball long into attack quickly. I saw lead after marginal lead where our attacker had no gap on his opponent and Jackson had a very slim margin of error to kick to.

I'd so much rather see him having a go at threading the eye of a needle 40-50m away quickly and the ball coming back out when our mids are still in the middle of the ground, than the Raines rebounding version, which very slowly gets everyone on the field into our heavily flooded forward-50, and sees the ball coming back out anyway with the opposition having an entire field of space to work into.

Raines is a month older than Jackson. The reason he's not in the midfield instead of Jackson is that he's a much lesser player in all respects. Not as fast, not as strong, not as hard at the ball, not as much endurance, not as good overhead, far worse kick, similar average handball, marginally worse decision maker (though to Jackson's enormous credit he is improving and always trying to move the ball quickly, while Raines is proven to be beyond redemption).

Jackson or Tuck would absolutely rip it up on the HBF, but we can't afford to play either there - that's (sadly) the part of the ground for the failed or failing midfielders like Raines, Newman and McMahon (who both actually deserve a spot there for their kicking skills), nowhere men like Schulz, and perhaps ultimately, Tambling and Edwards.

 

[markfarmer]

SHIT!!!

(ok l'm under an alias), but for **** sake. How many times are we going to see him have a brain fade trying to work out what to do with the pill.

He is a NUFFY!!!!!!

Special mention to Richard Tambling who is not a footballers arse hole.

Sorry, a piss weak yellow card prevents me from saying what l really feel. If Richmond moderators ban this, your not Richmond.

Geeezz Raines simply takes them on. And many times, because he gets it so quick and everybody has flooded back..,..he has no-one to kick it to.....even with that he then takes off and runs.....I think he has shown lots of promise in the 2 games I saw.. very quick.

Tambling, is obviously a slow starter......better in the 2nd game.... with low game time...

 

[chrisjie]

RAINES > McMahon

One problem. McMahon is one a huge contract so we're forced to play him.

 

[_RT_]

You obviously didn't read what I wrote very closely RT, because I explained it a week ago when I wrote what you're referring to.

Jackson played as a genuine inside midfielder last week. The criticism which is so often levelled against him is that he freezes under pressure and doesn't dispose well quickly. In the first-half alone he fired out a dozen possessions under the utmost pressure, they practically all hit the target as perfectly as could have been managed under the circumstances (three of them coming from Raines handballs putting him under the pump), and his kicking (the other possessions) was excellent. It's extremely difficult to rack up decent SC scores playing inside-midfielder roles, which is why a bloke like Daniel Cross - who I have the utmost respect for as a highly effective inside midfielder - seldom scores much above his DT score in SC. He lives under the pump and does brilliantly under the circumstances he's presented.

If Raines had of handballed to Jackson 3 times under pressure as you claim and the rest of his possessionswere also putting teammates under pressure how could he have possibly got an efficiency rating above 90 last night? The answer his he couldn't have, because Champion Data's own definition of effective/efficient disposals are those that don't put a teammate into a contest/under pressure. So I fail to see just how you can continue to claim his disposals are nothing handballs/kicks.

Raines has played a virtual loose man in defense role the last two weeks, the role where you get zero pressure and a lot of cheap possessions by default, but the expectation from playing that role is not that you get 22 possessions and do bugger all with them with high efficiency, it's that you take the game on, use the ball quickly and well, setting up fast rebounds and getting us into attack before we're staring a 20-man flood in the face in order to score.

Not sure how much attention you were paying early on but the Pies had only 1 forward for most of the first half and it had nothing to do with Raines taking his time with the ball and them pushing into defence. They would kick in hope into their forward line and would then sit back and wait for us to try and rebound it out.

A majority of Raines' first half possessions last night were handballs to nothing - check the stats if you doubt it. Highly 'efficient' handballs to nothing. Jackson's were genuine contested situations and clearances - the hard stuff which sets up fast, positive ball movement. When he wasn't in traffic he was kicking the ball long, again very well.

Sorrydis Rayzor Champion Data's own definitions prove your claims. For the simple reason that his efficiency rating wouldn't be that high if he they were simply nothing handballs which put teammates under pressure. His disposals were to the advantage of the team whether they go backwards/sideways or 30m forward he allows us to maintain possession until such time where we can find a target that can really hurt the opposition. Again I would much rather that occurs than a blind kick downfield which falls into the arms of the opposition who then fast break and send the ball over the heads of our defenders who were all streaming forward at the time one of their mates just hacked it forward.

What gets us into trouble more often than not is when we do try to play that ultra fast flip it around game that you seem to be advocating. When we take the time to choose the best option not necessarily the first option we look a much better outfit.

The idea of a backwards handball or a quick one in traffic is to get a player in space so they can dispose quickly, long and effectively. Raines starts in that space, mucks around, runs himself into trouble, then dishes off a backwards handball, a quick one because he's attracted his own traffic, or a dodgy one to a player who now has an opponent up their arse because Raines has wasted so much time.

Nobody should have to ask me to explain this, it's really obvious.

Perhaps you should be looking down the field to see why Raines is running around in circles sometimes. Last night I made a point of doing just that and more often than not found that there was no player who was in position to maintain possession without being under the hammer and this is where the Raines bashers would then claim, why doesn't he hold onto the ball instead of kicking it to a teammate under pressure. That was what Raines was doing in 07. Charging out of defence, like you want him to and then blazing downfield only to then watch the ball sail back over his head because the opposition had forced a turnover. Perhaps you would prefer he went back to that style of play, because then you could get stuck into him for panicing and not picking the safe option and maintaining possession. Seems to me that Raines is damned no matter what he does.

Taking 15 seconds to run around in circles then end up handballing to nowhere and to someone under equal pressure is an 'effective handball' - and a totally nothing possession.

Read CD's defintions and you will see just how wrong that statement is. To help you along I'll provide the defintion of an ineffective handball: Handball Ineffective - When a handball is not advantageous to the team but doesn't directly turn the ball over to the opposition.
Quite simply if Raines is handballing to a teammate under pressure it isn't advantageous to the team, which makes it ineffective, therefore it isn't efficient. Which would lead to Raines having a much lower effciency rating than what he ended up with. To put it another way he had 23 disposals last night, to get a 91% efficiency rating 20 of those disposals had to be to the advantage of the team. Means that the only ineffective disposals he had last night were the 3 handballs you said he gave to Jackson, yet you claim that most of his disposals are to a teammate under pressure. Logic says something isn't quite right here. Either CD's stats are wrong or you are.

All you've succeeded in doing is wasting 20 seconds and passed the buck to a player with more confidence and courage in their skill to bail you out.

Half-decent rebounding HBF's need to do that infinitely less often than Raines does. If there's nothing ahead then use the loose players 50m away from you with a long direct kick to switch the ball to the other side of the ground. It's really very simple.

Haven't watched the replay yet, but believe Raines did do this on occasions last night and in the Freo game.

SC scores (and thereby Champion Data ratings) are somewhat flawed in that they reward the effective time wasting handball to nothing (the classic Raines possession), while punishing the effective handball in traffic which creates space (punish by giving each the same points to each unless it's a clearance), and also punishing the fast and direct 39m kick which hits our forwards' hands, but they drop the mark and it's deemed a contest because their opponent is hot on their heels (both of the above being classic Jackson possessions, and the type of ball movement we want to see).

Actually Rayzor they don't award the 'classic Raines possession' because if his handballs were putting a teammate under pressure it isn't to the advantage of the team which is a key part of what they use to decide what is an effective disposal and what isn't.

Ironically, I was criticised last week for using SC stats to illustrate a point, but you've managed to exclusively use the biggest flaw from SC point scoring, to defend the indefensible (Raines' last two games).

Finally, as a general response to multiple posts, stop deluding yourselves with the romantic notion that just because Raines runs like his father and looks a million dollars running and delivering to nowhere or the bleeding obvious target, that he is capable of playing football anywhere near the same standard Geoff could.

He can't, he never will. Actually watch where the ball ends up. Sit there with pen and paper and tally up how many Raines rebounds end up transferring to fast break attacks inside our forward-50. The only time it ever happens is when other players run hard to take his responsibility away from him. He may as well be a mechanical ball dispenser where the rest have to come and get it at close range, or give him a 30m space margin to kick to them unmarked and waiting impatiently for his floater to finally arrive.

I don't believe in some romantic notion that Andrew will be as good as his father. What I believe is that with Andrew displaying a bit of maturity and experience he is now taking time to assess his options and choosing to maintain possession of the ball by picking a good option rather than trying to break the game open all the time and picking a more riskier option. As I said above Rayzor if Andrew was to revert to the 07 style of play he would be picked apart by the posters here for being another turnover king ala McMahon/Johnson.

Answer me honestly Rayzor, what would you prefer a backman who chooses a safe option which keeps possession of the ball or one who just sprints out of the backline for 15-20m and then blazes away blindly downfield 40-50m only to watch the ball sail back over his head as the opposition gains possession from his poor choice?

Because the first part is what we have now with Raines playing the way he is this year, the second part is what we had in 07 and every man and his dog tore him a new one back then for doing exactly that.

 

[Wally Matera]

Geeezz Raines simply takes them on. And many times, because he gets it so quick and everybody has flooded back..,..he has no-one to kick it to.....even with that he then takes off and runs.....I think he has shown lots of promise in the 2 games I saw.. very quick.

Tambling, is obviously a slow starter......better in the 2nd game.... with low game time...

You rate him so highly, then make us an offer. Lets see how highly you rate him now.

 

[Wally Matera]

I'm really glad Balls of Steel started this thread, wasnt so silly after all.

 

[tony_montana]

Rayzor Im not a big fan of Raines and in the past have found him to be largely ineffective and overated, but the last 2 games i've noticed a marked difference, kicks it longer and more accuratelyto a target and generally has offered more burst running out of the back than anyone else the first 2 NAB cup games.

I dont consider him to be of the bowden and johnson ilk where they slow it down and look sideaays and backwards before looking fwds, he looks fwds and then if theres nothing he'll go sideways or backwards. In just 2 NAB games I have definitely noticed his peripheral vision and ability to size up situations is much improved since he was last out there.

You're right he'll never be a midfielder, hell this might just be a case of it being a NAB game and therefore the heat isnt as great as a H&A game which is making him look slightly better and hiding deficiencies. time will tell

The reason I am being hard on Jacko is this: i dont doubt his long kicking skill, his speed, strength, endurance, mongrel, not to mention will to work his arse off, what i doubt is his football nous to play midfield full stop. I disagree with a point you made, when your 70-80 metres out and can run an extra 10 or dish off a handball or kick it short by all means do it and hold onto it, dont go for 55 metre pinpoint passes where we are down 6 on 2. Just felt that my fears about him were confirmed, when the game goes up in intensity his decision making lets him and us down too much.

I have always felt he was a born backman in the clement mould, with Moore taking off it makes it harder for him to get in there, but the more i think about it the more I fel theres a spot on HB for Jacko, he'd definitely be a trade up back there, and would give our backline even more flaxibility/versatility with 4-5 players agile and strong enough to play small/medium tall.

Polo, Thompson and Edwards are 3 players I fully expect to be good enough to figure prominantly in our midfield rotation.

Thats just my take

 

[OFFtheBALL]

Raines is the only one providing run in the back line and actually going forward for once, unlike the rest of us ! He has come back very well in my opinion and is building some on-field leadership.