Team Rd 1

[Crow-mo]

Unless he's not fit, I'd be appalled if we left Knights out of our side. He was arguably our most important player in 2009.

incidentally if you believe champion data, there was no argument.

further if you believe me, there was no argument

 

[Crows Feet]

Stevens has the attributes to make a very handy sub IMO. Capable of playing forward or back, KPP or flank. Also handy in the starting 21. No star, but a very handy player in a lot of positions.

Yeah, that's why I nominated Stevens, Sellar and Moran. All three are quite flexible and could fill most slots if a player went down. For Sellar the sub position might actually increase his likelihood of getting picked.

A lot of who gets picked in the sub position will depend on how Craigy uses it. Will the sub be guaranteed game time regardless of injury to others or will he be used as an in-game emergency?

 

[KUNG FU]

A junior player will most likely occupy the sub position. All this nonsense about having a particular type of player in the sub is getting a bit too tricky or delusion. You don't deliberately keep a best 21 player out for most of the game, just because they will be a flexible replacement.

The sub will be subbed in when (1) a player is injured for the remainder, or at least a major portion of the match (2) towards the end of the 3rd quarter for an under-performing player. I can't see it being used any other way. The team will adapt, whoever is brought in for whom.

 

[Crow-mo]

A junior player will most likely occupy the sub position. All this nonsense about having a particular type of player in the sub is getting a bit too tricky or delusion. You don't deliberately keep a best 21 player out for most of the game, just because they will be a flexible replacement.

spot on

 

[cmndstab]

incidentally if you believe champion data, there was no argument.

further if you believe me, there was no argument

I'm certainly convinced

 

[Slippery Pete]

You don't deliberately keep a best 21 player out for most of the game, just because they will be a flexible replacement.
.

That's JUST the type of thing we would do, unfortunately.

 

[ringo200]

That's JUST the type of thing we would do, unfortunately.

At least give them the chance to make the mistake before you criticize them for it.

 

[Slippery Pete]

At least give them the chance to make the mistake before you criticize them for it.

Sorry, but I'm still smarting from Phil Davis being dropped.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

At least give them the chance to make the mistake before you criticize them for it.

Yep, Neil Craig has a long list of idiotic things he’s done wrong and clearly he’s not learning from them.

• Starting the second half with the 3 senior players on the bench vs. WCE in the 06 preliminary final
• Leaving Kris Massie on Franklin.
• Leaving Luke Jericho on in the NAB final
• Dropping Davis after our most inspirational victory for the year when he was in the top 5 players on the ground.

Hopefully this isn't another learning experience he will test the water's on.

 

[Geoffa32]

Symes Rutten Otten
Johncock Davis Doughty
Mackay Thompson Sloane
Knights Walker Porps
Henderson Tip Dangerfield

Jacobs Vince Van Berlo Dougie

I/C Maric Reilly Stevens

Sub Youngish Player, ie Petrenko/Talia/McKernan or maybe Tambling.

 

[Truck25]

I would think Tambling may push out Symes in your list.
I also think Moran will line up as sub or push out Maric.
I was watching some games from '09 an Moran really impressed me.
He's quick and agile for a 200cm player, he's had a full 12mnths off so he should be fit and he can pinch hit forward or back, will probably have to improve as a backman to cement a spot.

 

[Dangarman]

This year the Crows have 39 players on the senior list with Doughty as the only veteran.

6 of those players are yet to debut - James, Lyons, Shaw, Smith, Talia and Luke Thompson. Certainly they can't be considered best 21, but will possibly get opportunities with injuries to others.

5 are ruckmen - Maric, Jacobs, Moran, Sellar, McKernan (Is that right? Do we really have 1 out of 8 players on our list fighting for 1 spot in 21? Or are some of these guys good for other things too?)

19 (IMO, at least) are best 21 when fit: Dangerfield, Davis, Doughty, Douglas, Henderson, Johncock, Knights, McKay, Otten, Porplyzia, Reilly, Rutten, Sloane, Tambling, Thompson, Tippett, Van Berlo, Vince, Walker.

The rest are fringe players: Stevens, Symes, Petrenko, Cook, Jaensch, Armstrong, Martin, Gunston, Young.

So, assuming everyone is fit, the best 21+1 will be the 19 above, plus a ruck (jury is still out on #1) and a fringe player.

Given that some posters consider Stevens and Symes to be starting players, I guess the question is who of the 19 is actually a fringe player?

Can anyone mount an argument as to why any of the 19 I have named shouldn't be best 21? (not trying to say I've got it right, but looking for discussion. e.g. Players like Hendo, and Sloane may not have fully staked their claim; Porps was horribly out of form last year - but not alone in that!; Tambling hasn't actually lined up for us yet). Could it actually be we have more than 21 players with valid best 21 claims?

 

[KUNG FU]

Personally, while I have few doubts about Hendo & Sloane long term, I don't quite have them in my best 19 yet. I'd probably add Stevens to the core group and expect Jaensch & Martin in particular to be competing strongly from the fringe.

 

[Vader]

Agree with that. Stevens is in the 19 automatic selections. Henderson & Sloane would be in the fringe player group, hoping to become automatic selections by the end of 2011.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Agree with that. Stevens is in the 19 automatic selections. Henderson & Sloane would be in the fringe player group, hoping to become automatic selections by the end of 2011.

This is why we will struggle to make the top 8 again. We need to cut our losses with middle of the road players who are taking us nowhere.

 

[Marine Boy]

Does anyone else think that Moran ( fit and in form ) is a better bet at CHB than Davis. Davis still looks small and the big CHF will push him aside easily I would think. He might be gutsy but has a long way to go to play key position.

 

[WALL-e]

Moran doesn't have the footy IQ to play a full game in the back line at the moment.

He'll be able to help out there in my opinion, but Davis is a much better option at the moment.

 

[Campbell's Chunky]

This sub rule is so bad it's not funny. If it was 4 men on the pine + a sub it'd be fine, but 3 men is just stupid.

Here's a scenario...

SMACK is named as sub. At half time Scott Stevens is replaced by SMACK. 2 minutes into the 3rd quarter Ben Rutten goes down with a hammy. We now are left with only 2 on the bench, a severely depleted backline meanwhile Scott Stevens is perfectly fit sitting in the stand eating Four 'n Twenties and chatting up other players WAGS...

 

[Dangarman]

This sub rule is so bad it's not funny. If it was 4 men on the pine + a sub it'd be fine, but 3 men is just stupid.

Here's a scenario...

SMACK is named as sub. At half time Scott Stevens is replaced by SMACK. 2 minutes into the 3rd quarter Ben Rutten goes down with a hammy. We now are left with only 2 on the bench, a severely depleted backline meanwhile Scott Stevens is perfectly fit sitting in the stand eating Four 'n Twenties and chatting up other players WAGS...

I can't see coaches bringing on the sub until the last quarter unless a player is clearly not going to take any further part in the game.

Personally I think it is a good rule. There was a time when only 2 players sat on the bench....

 

[Vader]

I can't see coaches bringing on the sub until the last quarter unless a player is clearly not going to take any further part in the game.

Personally I think it is a good rule. There was a time when only 2 players sat on the bench....

And if you go even further back, you'll find that all interchange players were substitutes only. It's almost a case of going back to the future..

 

[Coopers]

SMACK is named as sub. At half time Scott Stevens is replaced by SMACK. 2 minutes into the 3rd quarter Ben Rutten goes down with a hammy. We now are left with only 2 on the bench, a severely depleted backline meanwhile Scott Stevens is perfectly fit sitting in the stand eating Four 'n Twenties and chatting up other players WAGS...

I don't personally see him doing too well. I figure the only chance he's got is with Sauce's missus, she might see it as an upgrade, although even he's not too bad for a Ranga.

 

[Vader]

Does anyone else think that Moran ( fit and in form ) is a better bet at CHB than Davis. Davis still looks small and the big CHF will push him aside easily I would think. He might be gutsy but has a long way to go to play key position.

I have my concerns about Davis, but I don't think that Moran is the man to replace him. Davis' biggest problem in 2010 was his lack of offensive output. He was very, very good at negating his opponent - particularly his ability to spoil legally despite being badly out of position. What he lacked was any run or movement when Adelaide were in possession of the ball.

As pointed out by Wall-e, Moran just doesn't (and will never) have the football IQ required to hold down CHB or FB. He is, however, very handy as a tall player dropping back in defence as part of the zone.

We have plenty of other young bucks who would be fighting for Davis' position in defence, most notably Talia, Sellar and Young.

 

[TheLeftFist8]

Does anyone else think that Moran ( fit and in form ) is a better bet at CHB than Davis. Davis still looks small and the big CHF will push him aside easily I would think. He might be gutsy but has a long way to go to play key position.

I also have doubts over Moran at CHB. Agree he wouldn't have the combined 'ability/defensive footy IQ' to match up on the best eg Pavlich types. Conversely Davis has had some promising defensive games. Having said that Moran could match up well on a 'less than top tier forward' ok.

For pure performance from R1 our best option at CHB would be Stevens.

However, I'd be happy to go with the future and leave Stevens elsewhere.

For typical tall options (aside from Stevens), I'd go in order of:

1. Davis
2. Sellar (though a good PS could see him challenging Davis)
3. Moran
4. Young (though he'd be above Moran for FB/BP)
5. McKernan
6. Talia (got a long way to go in the one-on-one contest from the limited amount of PS training I've seen...could be a 3rd tall option?)

That's not forgetting we could go with a smaller/mobile option if match-ups allow (eg Andy Otten).

 

[crowsarethebest]

I don't see what the worry about Davis is. He's one of the most promising young backman in the game, his main job is to nullify his opponent and he did that very well last year for a 2nd year player. He showed in the SANFL in his first year that he has the ability to be an attacking outlet from down back as well, I think this year we will see him get a lot more of the ball and give some run off the backline as well just like Bock did.

 

[sliver member]

F porplyzia tippett henderson

HF knights walker dangerfield

C vince van berlo douglas

HB doughty stevens otten

B davis rutten Johncock

IR Jacobs mackay thompson

INT sloane,tambling,reilly,caillian


i think caillian will be promoted before round 1 for a injured player and will play most of the season.

maric will slip out of 21 and sub becuase he does not make as good as forward as sam jacobs making him less flexbility. Jacobs will be able to pinch hit as a key forward in the goalsquare for 5-10mintutes to have break with tippett or henderson rucking allowing the bench to be use for smaller players only.

shaun mckernan i reckon could skip ahead of maric as the no 2 ruckmen if he plays consisent footy for south adelaide because he can play in the ruck and the forward line very well giving neil more options and i don't rate james sellar at all.