Preview Rd 5 - Brisbane Lions v Melbourne

[dlanod]

I DID mention the fact that he lowers his eyes unlike some of our more experienced players. DE% is not misleading at all. You either kick to advantage or hit your target directly. Karnezis did that 78% of the time in the Round 1 game.

It is misleading. Karnezis had 19 disposals in Round 1, but 12 of those were handballs - it's a lot easier to get a high DE% if you're handballing a lot because they're short passes to a nearby teammate. They aren't as damaging as kicks, and they count as effective as long as your teammate is there - if you handball to a teammate who is already under pressure or flatfooted or otherwise not improving the situation, that's still an effective diposal.

 

[Harris Specter]

While I agree that Karnezis deserves to play in the seniors, I don't see where he'd fit him in. He prefers Lester because of his ability to play forward and defence and even provide a solid body in the midfield. Karnezis doesn't have a defensive game, as much as I've seen anyway, and it's one of the trump cards Lester has over him. One thing that may favour Karnezis is the lack of match practice Lester has had over the past 2 weeks.

 

[Triple R]

Loves him so much that he included him in the team against Adelaide despite not playing a game the week before.

60% of the time, it works every time.

 

[Harris Specter]

Loves him so much that he included him in the team against Adelaide despite not playing a game the week before.

So what's his excuse for dropping him after he did a commendable job? Loves him too much? I think your love for Karnezis is starting to overshadow other players pushing for the same spot.

 

[Haso]

Loves him so much that he included him in the team against Adelaide despite not playing a game the week before.

It couldn't have been that they were trialling him in that position to keep that end of the structure up? The part of the structure that Maguire had filled?

He didn't keep him in the following week, because it didn't work. Do you think that Voss is 100% responsible for team selection, or that maybe he chats to a few people about it? Do you think that he would be made accountable if he selected Lester purely on man-love?

Bato it's alright to be wrong, but continuing to argue your point obstinantly is not constructive and leads the conversation around in circles.

 

[Triple R]

No Ace? geez going to have a small forward line this week.

Have a look on the AFL website and see where Ace is named before you jump to conclusions.

When someone like Docherty the week before and Clark this week are named on the ground I think it is fair to assume that they are playing.

 

[Ironmonger]

I seriously wonder whether Lester is 100% fit. I think they will still play him even if he's at 80% - since Vossy's love for the bloke has never been stronger.

I'd say he is probably our most hard done by player this season. He was given one game, an impossible job which he did admirably, and was then dropped.

 

[bato]

So, when you ignore a player completely free in the middle of the centre square and go long to a 50/50 on the boundary, you should be rewarded in a statistical sense? What if we have a player unmarked inside 50 and the man with the ball doesn't use him? What about chipping the ball in the backline when you are goal or two down and need to make the play?

Defensive players and very outside midfielders always lead the DE% stakes. It rewards conservatism, punishes players who get the footy under the most pressure and is generally a poor reflection on how good a player is at kicking and handballing.

You're not rewarded if that's the case. If it's a kick to a one-on-one, and your player marks the ball, only then is it an effective disposal. If you kick or handball to advantage (kick it to an open space and someone runs into an open goal) then that is also effective.

Also, I don't think any of our boys would ignore a completely free player in the middle of the centre square. The fact of the matter is that the whole team has been guilty of bombing the ball into the 50, apart from a few. (Rocky, Hanley, Karnezis and 2012 Richy).

 

[WhiteLionFeva]

Some of our better wins last year coincided with Rocky going forward for periods. He plays taller than he is and it takes a key defender to match him and takes some pressure off our talls. I would like to see him doing that more and possibly Zorko and Green taking some time in the middle. Would be more likely to happen if Lester plays though.

 

[POBT]

I think your love for Karnezis is starting to overshadow other players pushing for the same spot.

And Voss gets accused of playing favourites......

I've never really understood favouring one player so much that you actually hope another player doesn't get selected or doesn't play well. Any disappointment I feel about one player being left out is almost always balanced by the excitement that someone else gets the opportunity. It takes a lot for me to get to the point of actually hoping a player is dropped (Polks being the most recent example and I think we all can agree that that was an extreme example!)

I admit to having been a Lester fan since his debut and think he gets underrated by many.

 

[bato]

I'd say he is probably our most hard done by player this season. He was given one game, an impossible job which he did admirably, and was then dropped.

I agree, he shouldn't have been dropped after the Adelaide game, which surprised me seeing as though he had a solid game despite being mismatched.

I was referring to 2012 when he played 19 games.

 

[bato]

It couldn't have been that they were trialling him in that position to keep that end of the structure up? The part of the structure that Maguire had filled?

He didn't keep him in the following week, because it didn't work. Do you think that Voss is 100% responsible for team selection, or that maybe he chats to a few people about it? Do you think that he would be made accountable if he selected Lester purely on man-love?

Bato it's alright to be wrong, but continuing to argue your point obstinantly is not constructive and leads the conversation around in circles.

That's interesting seeing as though I've stated that he did a decent job in the Adelaide game and was surprised with his dropping.

Sheldon ring a bell? Collier? Think again before accusing me of being wrong. There are serious double standards at our club and it needs to be fixed ASAP.

 

[Triple R]

I think Billy might play back as we'll this week, Max Gawn is 204cm and Sauce struggles against the really tall guys. Billy will be used as our Mr fix it IMO

When has Billy ever played back???

Did you watch Gawn on the weekend? He doesn't really lead hard at the ball, he just stands there and waits for the ball to drop on his head. He uses his height and strength to out mark his opponent. Strength is something Sauce has in spades, and he may be playing on a guy who is inexperienced and beatable by Sauce's high standards.

I just don't understand where you get Billy going back from? Because he is over 200cm tall? He isn't strong enough to deal with a forward that size let alone a forward (he is a ruckman, resting forward). Will Minson (199cm 106gk) is an absolute ball of agression and muscle and pushed Billy aside quite easily. What do you think Gawn will do at 208cm and 106kg?

 

[bato]

And Voss gets accused of playing favourites......

I've never really understood favouring one player so much that you actually hope another player doesn't get selected or doesn't play well. Any disappointment I feel about one player being left out is almost always balanced by the excitement that someone else gets the opportunity. It takes a lot for me to get to the point of actually hoping a player is dropped (Polks being the most recent example and I think we all can agree that that was an extreme example!)

I admit to having been a Lester fan since his debut and think he gets underrated by many.

I like the idea of closing a door and opening another for a talented youngster. However, I don't rate Lester and you do. That's how it is I guess.

 

[POBT]

You're not rewarded if that's the case. If it's a kick to a one-on-one, and your player marks the ball, only then is it an effective disposal. If you kick or handball to advantage (kick it to an open space and someone runs into an open goal) then that is also effective.

Also, I don't think any of our boys would ignore a completely free player in the middle of the centre square. The fact of the matter is that the whole team has been guilty of bombing the ball into the 50, apart from a few. (Rocky, Hanley, Karnezis and 2012 Richy).

You've missed the point. An efficient disposal statistically can constitute a poor option. An efficient disposal does not take into account the pressure the player is under or the game setting that the disposal is effected in. An efficient disposal can be to the detriment of the team and still be a positive statistic. It is an ordinary, misleading statistic that favours some and not others, with no reflection of how effective players truly are with their disposal.

If you are hung up on DE%, then Lester's 94.7 DE% in his one game of the year should have you salivating.

 

[JasRulz63]

Isn't every kick over 40m to a contest considered an effect disposal? Doesn't take into account that there might be a 3 on 1 in favour of the opposition.

 

[Haso]

That's interesting seeing as though I've stated that he did a decent job in the Adelaide game and was surprised with his dropping.

Sheldon ring a bell? Collier? Think again before accusing me of being wrong. There are serious double standards at our club and it needs to be fixed ASAP.

Both of those players have been delisted, and Sheldon in particular was was more than likely played so much because of a paucity of players of his type. Again structures played a part.

Of course there are double standards in the club. Everybody is different, and some players respond differently to smoe measures than others. That's just the way people work. The combination of this and the structure thing I believe plays a part in the difference seen in the past between the treatment of Polkinghorne and Cornelius.

And then there's players who have earned quite a lot of credit and deserve to get a few rounds to get their act together again, like Adcock and Redden. This again is a double standard.

There is no such thing as 100% equality in a context like this one.

 

[3KZ is Football]

Sometimes I feel like we have this mental image of a player's strengths which doesn't always correlate with reality. A prime example was always Travis Johnstone who it took the footy world the best part of 10 years to cotton onto the fact that, for an elite kick of the footy, he turned the ball over too much. (Then, of course, the phrase "worst best kick in the comp" entered the lexicon and became almost a cliche for Johnston). As a spectator, it felt like TJ was a brilliant kick because he'd do some remarkable stuff. And then he'd choose to try and pinpoint a teammate with half a dozen opponents in the vicinity and the ball would be turned over.

Travis had silky skills, but there were attitudinal issues that were apparent, particularly when it came to his preparedness to run hard and present. Looking back, the biggest problem with Travis Johnstone was that he was a "downhill skier" and unfortunately we seem to have too many players who are displaying the same lack of drive and commitment this year. Angus Johnson nailled it last year when he said:

"I think there's a few players at the Brisbane Lions who really need to have a long, hard look at themselves and ask themselves, are they making the commitment that's needed to be successful in the AFL," Johnson said.
"I'm not convinced that everyone on our list understands what you need to do to be an elite footballer.

"It's one thing to make skills errors and it's one thing to turn the ball over ... that is going to happen. I'm talking about blokes who don't show commitment for the whole four quarters of the game.
"The one area that we are not going to compromise on is commitment.
"What we expect from our players is to show absolute commitment, 100 per cent of the time."

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...-lift-or-be-axed/story-e6frepf6-1226354265290

The problem is that our senior group, with the exception of Tom Rockliff and Andrew Raines is really letting us down and the worst possible thing that could happen to us would be for the Lions to beat Melbourne and then adopt a complacent view that one win means we are back on track. Our less than impressive performance against the Gold Coast demonstrated the dangers of that sort of approach.

Whatever happens against Melbourne (and lets hope it is a strong win) our senior players need to step up for the rest of the year and if they do not, I suggest we actually have a "fair dinkum" rebuild at the end of this year. I'd rather that we endure a bit of pain over the next few years if there is a sense the club is going somewhere. At this stage 2013 is just a re-run of 2012, 2011 and 2010.

 

[brenjay]

It is misleading. Karnezis had 19 disposals in Round 1, but 12 of those were handballs - it's a lot easier to get a high DE% if you're handballing a lot because they're short passes to a nearby teammate. They aren't as damaging as kicks, and they count as effective as long as your teammate is there - if you handball to a teammate who is already under pressure or flatfooted or otherwise not improving the situation, that's still an effective diposal.

Also suggests that Karnezis runs to the right spots, and knows how to spread. We are missing these 'linkmen'; and given our lack of targets up forward, these 'linkmen' become even more valuable...

 

[bato]

You've missed the point. An efficient disposal statistically can constitute a poor option. An efficient disposal does not take into account the pressure the player is under or the game setting that the disposal is effected in. An efficient disposal can be to the detriment of the team and still be a positive statistic. It is an ordinary, misleading statistic that favours some and not others, with no reflection of how effective players truly are with their disposal.

If you are hung up on DE%, then Lester's 94.7 DE% in his one game of the year should have you salivating.

It CAN but it doesn't apply for Karnezis in round 1 this season if you actually watched his delivery into the 50. That was the whole issue from the beginning, wasn't it? He does NOT bomb the ball, he lowers his eyes and finds a target - simple! He may miss a few targets, but hey, the whole team has been missing targets all year long.

 

[dlanod]

Also suggests that Karnezis runs to the right spots, and knows how to spread. We are missing these 'linkmen'; and given our lack of targets up forward, these 'linkmen' become even more valuable...

Yep, I don't think anyone would dispute that.

 

[POBT]

Travis had silky skills, but there were attitudinal issues that were apparent, particularly when it came to his preparedness to run hard and present.

Wasn't intending to open the door on old #4 3KZ. More just making the point that what we think we see and what is reality don't always correlate. eg it took me probably half of Browny's career to realise what a great field kick he is. I had him as "good...for a key forward" but he was probably closer to elite at his best.

 

[POBT]

It CAN but it doesn't apply for Karnezis in round 1 this season if you actually watched his delivery into the 50. That was the whole issue from the beginning, wasn't it? He does NOT bomb the ball, he lowers his eyes and finds a target - simple! He may miss a few targets, but hey, the whole team has been missing targets all year long.

Then don't use DE% when you are trying to argue that someone else is wrong. It adds nothing to what you've written above.

 

[Triple R]

Also suggests that Karnezis runs to the right spots, and knows how to spread. We are missing these 'linkmen'; and given our lack of targets up forward, these 'linkmen' become even more valuable...

Much like Mayes has been able to do for us since his inclusion. Hopefully he and Karnezis can fill these roles for us along with Paparone from the forward line.

 

[bato]

Then don't use DE% when you are trying to argue that someone else is wrong. It adds nothing to what you've written above.

DE% may not be everyone's friend, but it was a good indication of Patty's game in round one. His delivery was quality, and for the 7 kicks he had, I can only re-call one kick that was a shocker. That is what I have been saying right from the get-go.