Preview Rd 11 Geelong V GWS Sat 25th May 2024 434 pm @ KP

[goyoucatters]

I am not privy to the thinking of the brains trust at the club. I can only go on what I observe watching Hardie play in the VFL and the confirmation provided by votes cast by VFL coaches. Of course it is possible that, despite the obvious positive signs, there are reservations that the Geelong coaches have. However, it irks me when contributors to this forum state that he is not good enough because he has not yet been trusted at AFL level and suggest that you can put a pencil through him for now and the future. I find it hard to believe that these posters have any more inside knowledge than I do, and I have zero inside knowledge.

I understand what you're saying and agree with the sentiment. Fact is, though, my posting history will show that I am not one of those contributors when it comes to assessing Hardie. I absolutely don't know whether he'll make it or not. I'm simply open to the possibility that his continued omission from seemingly serious consideration for senior football at the moment isn't just wilful ignorance or manifest stupidity on the part of the GFC coaching panel.

 

[Finknottle]

We finally get to see Neale, Cameron and Hawkins playing together. It will be an interesting side show.

 

[Kobe Gryant]

I am not privy to the thinking of the brains trust at the club. I can only go on what I observe watching Hardie play in the VFL and the confirmation provided by votes cast by VFL coaches. Of course it is possible that, despite the obvious positive signs, there are reservations that the Geelong coaches have. However, it irks me when contributors to this forum state that he is not good enough because he has not yet been trusted at AFL level and suggest that you can put a pencil through him for now and the future. I find it hard to believe that these posters have any more inside knowledge than I do, and I have zero inside knowledge.

You make a very reasonable point, but I think it just comes down to trust.

We've seen this movie before. Horlin-Smith, Narkle, & Constable were exactly the same. Even Parsons to a degree.

Dominating on the stat-sheet every week, and to an untrained eye, you'd have to wonder how the likes of O'Connor, Zuthrie, and so on were getting promoted at the time off seemingly 'lesser form'.

The reality was these guys just weren't AFL standard, and although the club received huge criticism at the time for not rewarding their form (I think I might have even been one of those people), they were eventually vindicated.

You're right that that sounds like a bold statement, particularly when we haven't seen Hardie play at AFL level, but I'd trust that the club have the same reservations here that they had with the aforementioned names in the past.

In their minds, they don't have to see him at senior level, as they believe they already know what he is.

Being 27 this year would play a huge part in that too. If he was even just 3 or 4 years younger and putting up the same numbers, he would've been given a game months ago IMO.

Personally, I'd be happy to give him a game, just on rewarding persistence as much as anything, but I can understand why the club don't feel the need to.

As I mentioned earlier, we're in a 'quasi-rebuild' right now with the names who are playing week to week.

Dempsey, Holmes, Mullin, Conway, Neale, Clark, Bruhn, Henry, & SDK reads like a club in the midst of a rebuild, not a side sitting 3rd on the ladder in late May.

In the clubs eyes, getting games into these kids who they believe will be good AFL players in the long term makes more sense than playing the likes or Hardie & Mannagh for example.

From their POV, the difference in impacting results is miniscule...but the difference in scope for improvement is giant, which is understandable.

It's the same reason that Bews, Touhy, Stanley, & Rohan have found themselves out of the side at various points this year.

 

[ShaunWDT]

You make a very reasonable point, but I think it just comes down to trust.

We've seen this movie before. Horlin-Smith, Narkle, & Constable were exactly the same. Even Parsons to a degree.

Dominating on the stat-sheet every week, and to an untrained eye, you'd have to wonder how the likes of O'Connor, Zuthrie, and so on were getting promoted at the time off seemingly 'lesser form'.

The reality was these guys just weren't AFL standard, and although the club received huge criticism at the time for not rewarding their form (I think I might have even been one of those people), they were eventually vindicated.

You're right that that sounds like a bold statement, particularly when we haven't seen Hardie play at AFL level, but I'd trust that the club have the same reservations here that they had with the aforementioned names in the past.

In their minds, they don't have to see him at senior level, as they believe they already know what he is.

Being 27 this year would play a huge part in that too. If he was even just 3 or 4 years younger and putting up the same numbers, he would've been given a game months ago IMO.

Personally, I'd be happy to give him a game, just on rewarding persistence as much as anything, but I can understand why the club don't feel the need to.

As I mentioned earlier, we're in a 'quasi-rebuild' right now with the names who are playing week to week.

Dempsey, Holmes, Mullin, Conway, Neale, Clark, Bruhn, Henry, & SDK reads like a club in the midst of a rebuild, not a side sitting 3rd on the ladder in late May.

In the clubs eyes, getting games into these kids who they believe will be good AFL players in the long term makes more sense than playing the likes or Hardie & Mannagh for example.

From their POV, the difference in impacting results is miniscule...but the difference in scope for improvement is giant, which is understandable.

It's the same reason that Bews, Touhy, Stanley, & Rohan have found themselves out of the side at various points this year.

I'm fine if thats fundamentally the reason but why did we draft them then? Two list spots that could have gone to kids

 

[Kobe Gryant]

I'm fine if thats fundamentally the reason but why did we draft them then? Two list spots that could have gone to kids

Hardie is a MSD pick.

It's even worse than the rookie draft in terms of identifying talent, so it's hard to argue anybody else should have gone ahead of him, and you're not making long term decisions with those sorts of picks.

You just pick whoever you think has the best potential to play, or be valuable depth, like Jeka in the rookie draft. If we actually rated anybody long term, we would've picked them.

To answer your question though, Blitz, Rohan, Hawkins, Duncan, Guthrie, Stanley, Bews, & Touhy are all a realistic chance to be gone at the end of this year, or certainties next year.

A guy like Mannagh will be valuable off the back of that alone, he's likely going to go from approximately the 25-35th player on the list to the 18-23rd just by virtue of what is coming off the list.

It seems unlikely Hardie will be offered a contract extension, but I could see him being kept on for similar reasons.

On the surface level, you're right that it seems weird to pick mature players if they're not going to play.

In reality though, it's highly likely we just saw them as best available talent at the time, and/or handy depth to have on the list both in the long term and short term.

With the talent available being spread so thin across 18 clubs now, with speculative picks it's entirely possible that we just didn't rate anyone else available, and would rather have a guy who can play in an emergency, over another Hayball/ O Murdoch who never gets within a million miles of a debut

 

[The Casey Cat]

I don't get that impression at all. I'd say it's one (or a mixture) of all of these:

1. We're impressed with Neale, and want to get him games.

2. We're planning on using Cameron further up the ground again, and we need another big body down there with Tomahawk not at his best.

3. We're planning on playing all 3 of them forward to stretch GWS minus Buckley.

4. We want more ruck and forward support, particularly with Conway in the side, and we see this is the best mix going forward into the season.

Yep with Holmes and Myers in the midfield/guts Cameron will be in a wing/forward role and Hawkins will probably ruck more than usual. Neale getting another go is fine. Not sure about the lineup but also happy we're not going with the same setup that was so pathetic as last week. Bowes and Bruhn hopefully see with the Parf and O'Connor omissions they could be next and lift their game.

 

[FootyLad0]

I can understand parfitt being dropped, but I think Atkins has been in worse form this year.

I've been saying this since the start of the year. When is Ax gonna have a big game.
He's kind of lulled through the season.

 

[BIGANT]

Yep, similar to resting Bowes v Port. Just a couple of mids short.

On a positive note I will be staggered if Holmes doesn't play predominately mid.

I found that selection ludicrous resting Bowes on top of the changes due too injuries v PA, on top of danger already out.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Footy Smarts]

Have any of you guys who think Hardie is no good ever watched him play? The VFL games are streamed live on the AFL App. Are you aware he is leading the coaches voting in the VFL? There seems to be a total disconnect between what the coaches think and what several posters on this board think. If you can watch Hardie play then you may be in a position to judge him.

The coaches seem to think he's not at the level yet to make the transition. Do you reckon they have ever watched him play? Maybe if you sent them a link to the games and the coaches votes leaderboard they'd change their minds?

 

[MisterMarcus]

You make a very reasonable point, but I think it just comes down to trust.

We've seen this movie before. Horlin-Smith, Narkle, & Constable were exactly the same. Even Parsons to a degree.

Those guys at least got a few AFL games to show whether they had it or not, though. We eventually cut our losses on all those guys - but not before giving them some chances.

I guess it's just weird that we are clearly struggling and depleted in the midfield, and we have a midfielder who is killing it at VFL level.....and we're not even giving him one shot to see what he can do.

It's real "We've tried nothing and we're out of ideas!" territory....

 

[feelinfeline]

I always scratch my head when people say he is vanilla. Looks much more classy than Clark at VFL level

On the evidence of last week, I disagree. Clark missed a few targets but looked much more classy than Hardie.

Hardie is an accumulator but Clark has more flair and more tricks.

I don't think the MC have put a line through Hardie. Bruhn, Bowes and Atkins need to do more to ensure their place in the team.

The thing about Hardie is that he has shown an ability to improve at every level he has played at, so I wouldn't be writing him off just yet. But his age definitely goes against him.

 

[allrighty]

Booooo for not appreciating my deliberate mixed metaphor.

HA. Must have been win-o-clock. Again.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Dear Jeremy

Saturday's mission, should you choose to accept it

 

[cats_09]

You make a very reasonable point, but I think it just comes down to trust.

We've seen this movie before. Horlin-Smith, Narkle, & Constable were exactly the same. Even Parsons to a degree.

Dominating on the stat-sheet every week, and to an untrained eye, you'd have to wonder how the likes of O'Connor, Zuthrie, and so on were getting promoted at the time off seemingly 'lesser form'.

The reality was these guys just weren't AFL standard, and although the club received huge criticism at the time for not rewarding their form (I think I might have even been one of those people), they were eventually vindicated.

You're right that that sounds like a bold statement, particularly when we haven't seen Hardie play at AFL level, but I'd trust that the club have the same reservations here that they had with the aforementioned names in the past.

In their minds, they don't have to see him at senior level, as they believe they already know what he is.

Being 27 this year would play a huge part in that too. If he was even just 3 or 4 years younger and putting up the same numbers, he would've been given a game months ago IMO.

Personally, I'd be happy to give him a game, just on rewarding persistence as much as anything, but I can understand why the club don't feel the need to.

As I mentioned earlier, we're in a 'quasi-rebuild' right now with the names who are playing week to week.

Dempsey, Holmes, Mullin, Conway, Neale, Clark, Bruhn, Henry, & SDK reads like a club in the midst of a rebuild, not a side sitting 3rd on the ladder in late May.

In the clubs eyes, getting games into these kids who they believe will be good AFL players in the long term makes more sense than playing the likes or Hardie & Mannagh for example.

From their POV, the difference in impacting results is miniscule...but the difference in scope for improvement is giant, which is understandable.

It's the same reason that Bews, Touhy, Stanley, & Rohan have found themselves out of the side at various points this year.

Back in 2021 I remember watching our VFL curtain raiser versus North, ahead of the seniors also facing North

To me, there was 3 clear takings from that VFL match:
- Constable was an accumulator but not damaging. We had a comfortable win that day, and while Constable had 26 disposals, there was nothing screaming "pick me", and he was frustrating at times as he didn't seem on the same page as teammates, not that running forward with the momentum etc

- Holmes was the new draftee, but the way he moved in congestion, his clearances work etc, was signs that even early he was going to be too good for VFL and there'd be value in getting early senior games into him

- Zach Guthrie, was playing the Stewart type role where he was continually countering North's attacks, could see him reading what North was trying to do and just everywhere, especially defensively. He had an equal game high 11 marks, and you could tell he just needed the opportunity to play that similar role in the seniors


Come the end of 2021, Constable played 3 senior games, Holmes 12 games and Zach 13 games. One then ended up on the GC list, while the other two became mainstays in the seniors

Sometimes we just need to trust the coaches know what they're doing with team selection

 

[CatToTheFuture]

On the evidence of last week, I disagree. Clark missed a few targets but looked much more classy than Hardie.

Hardie is an accumulator but Clark has more flair and more tricks.

I don't think the MC have put a line through Hardie. Bruhn, Bowes and Atkins need to do more to ensure their place in the team.

The thing about Hardie is that he has shown an ability to improve at every level he has played at, so I wouldn't be writing him off just yet. But his age definitely goes against him.

The thing for me is watching Hardie I don't know how he's actually racking this numbers up. Every time I notice him it seems to be him getting involved in a chain that someone else starts, getting unpressured kicks that makes his impact look good. Don't know he ever gets that space at senior level with his pace.

After the game last week I read 28 next to his name and thought how? If you had asked me who got more touches him or Marcus Herbert I would have said Herbert no contest but he got 21.

I won't give up on him putting a case for a game together, but, I would almost put Willis ahead of him and I wouldn't be playing Willis.

 

[CHAWKTS]

Debunks my theory that Cats media pick the teams! A little unfortunate for Parf to be face of the game tomorrow!

 

[calder_daddy]

Have any of you guys who think Hardie is no good ever watched him play? The VFL games are streamed live on the AFL App. Are you aware he is leading the coaches voting in the VFL? There seems to be a total disconnect between what the coaches think and what several posters on this board think. If you can watch Hardie play then you may be in a position to judge him.

Considering the bloke who’s 1 vote behind him isn’t even on an AFL list just shows it means nothing to be AFL standard.

He’s a good footballer, people aren’t saying he isnt
He just doesn’t seem to have the AFL edge and it’s worrying with all our deficiencies in our midfield he isn’t even getting the slightest look in

 

[Footy Smarts]

Feels like we're pushing fast forward on this rebuild.

Guthrie, Danger and Rohan all out injured but we drop Parfitt and O'Connor. We're looking for players with higher ceilings than them. Understandable with Parfitt but a touch harsh on O'Connor I think. Hopefully this is a reset for him.

Also left out Bews and Stanley.

We've selected 7 under 22s who didn't play in the 2022 GF (Holmes would have) plus Mullin as inexperienced players.

 

[Warhorse]

Considering the bloke who’s 1 vote behind him isn’t even on an AFL list just shows it means nothing to be AFL standard.

He’s a good footballer, people aren’t saying he isnt
He just doesn’t seem to have the AFL edge and it’s worrying with all our deficiencies in our midfield he isn’t even getting the slightest look in

I like him and think he would be OK at AFL level - I can't see him being any worse than Parfitt or Clark for example. That last sentence tells me he that I'm probably wrong and the club does not rate him at all.

 

[Warhorse]

On the evidence of last week, I disagree. Clark missed a few targets but looked much more classy than Hardie.

Hardie is an accumulator but Clark has more flair and more tricks.

I don't think the MC have put a line through Hardie. Bruhn, Bowes and Atkins need to do more to ensure their place in the team.

The thing about Hardie is that he has shown an ability to improve at every level he has played at, so I wouldn't be writing him off just yet. But his age definitely goes against him.

I wouldnt consider Clark classy in anything he does (only considering performance as a mid) - and that is not even accounting for his butchery of the ball last week.

 

[feelinfeline]

I wouldnt consider Clark classy in anything he does (only considering performance as a mid) - and that is not even accounting for his butchery of the ball last week.

But you would Hardie? Each to their own.

 

[Pollywaffle]

I wouldnt consider Clark classy in anything he does (only considering performance as a mid) - and that is not even accounting for his butchery of the ball last week.

Yep. Classy is not a word I would use to define what I have seen from Clark.
Not saying he doesn’t have upside and won’t make it.
Regarding butchering the ball he is no Robinson Crusoe in our current setup.

 

[Mr Meow]

I wouldnt consider Clark classy in anything he does (only considering performance as a mid) - and that is not even accounting for his butchery of the ball last week.

He once helped an old lady across the street, which I thought showed at least a little class. But you're right, he wasn't officially in midfield when doing it.

 

[Footy Smarts]

I wouldnt consider Clark classy in anything he does (only considering performance as a mid) - and that is not even accounting for his butchery of the ball last week.

Some of the glimpses we've seen at AFL level have been dripping in class. Even last week in only a sub appearance he made the goal look simple and cut back into his left to hit Neale beautifully (who dropped a sitter). The step he put on JHF the week before followed by a 55m pass to Hawk was staggeringly good.

 

[Warhorse]

Yep. Classy is not a word I would use to define what I have seen from Clark.
Not saying he doesn’t have upside and won’t make it.
Regarding butchering the ball he is no Robinson Crusoe in our current setup.

I think Clark's kicking will improve

But you would Hardie? Each to their own.

I dont see Hardie as vanilla. I consider someone like humphries as classy for example. Smooth moving and the kicking action on both feet.

Some of the glimpses we've seen at AFL level have been dripping in class. Even last week in only a sub appearance he made the goal look simple and cut back into his left to hit Neale beautifully (who dropped a sitter). The step he put on JHF the week before followed by a 55m pass to Hawk was staggeringly good.

Are we referring to Clark's work in the forward line? Clark is good forward and I actually think he is excellent overhead from what I have seen as a junior.

When playing midfield he has shit his pants a few times and coughed up the ball at both VFL and AFL level - not exactly classy. It will come with time and he will be a very good player for Geelong.