List Mgmt. Tom Lonergan recommits to Geelong after chase by the Bulldogs

[Baudolino]

It's a matter of preferences.

I prefer a defender to be able to actually defend. And stay within the same postcode as his man occasionally too.

To what degree would you say James Kelly's first quarter in the North Melbourne final was representative of his year as a whole?

 

[Partridge]

I don't see why you think Kelly and Bews are playing off for a spot with each other. As I posted before, I don't think kelly is a backman as&*hole and was being played out of possession. Should be in the midfield/Wing or Rooke type role in the forward and bash and crash when the ball hits the ground.

Because for the bulk of 2014, and certainly in both finals, Kelly played as a small defender. Absolutely agree, if Kelly is moved elsewhere and Bews comes in that's much better for our defence. I don't think Kelly is up to playing anywhere anymore. He's lost what little pace he ever had and his reflexes are now going with it.

 

[Partridge]

To what degree would you say James Kelly's first quarter in the North Melbourne final was representative of his year as a whole?

It was the most recent game we played. I'd say that's the most important thing.

Do you think he should stay in our backline for 2015? If not, where else does he play, and who in the midfield does he push out?

 

[geelong_boy]

It's a good thing Scott has given some games to our younger KPDs, just in case the Frawley deal fell through and something like this happened... That way, we wouldn't have a kid with no AFL experience whatsoever coming into the side completely green...

If he gave said games to those youngsters and those games resulted in loses would you be praising Scott?

 

[Baby Duck]

What the hell? I can't see this happening given the history Lonergan has with the club, but seriously wtf? I come home from work and it would appear the club is falling apart at the seams. This makes me sad.

 

[Partridge]

If he gave said games to those youngsters and those games resulted in loses would you be praising Scott?

They're going to have to get games eventually. You can either have them on 40-50 games when the veterans retire or 5-7. I know what I'd prefer.

 

[Baudolino]

It was the most recent game we played. I'd say that's the most important thing.

My issue is that you seem to consider it the only thing relevant to any discussion about Kelly.

Do you think he should stay in our backline for 2015? If not, where else does he play, and who in the midfield does he push out?

I've said elsewhere that my preferred option would be to move him back in to the midfield and give him 12-18 games rotating in and out of the side. For structural and tactical reasons I would move Guthrie back in to defence. Kelly doesn't "replace" anyone per se, since no one needs to be dropped to accommodate him. He just provides added depth.

 

[Willo_]

At the end of the day he is contracted, dogs can offer him all they like but unless they can pony up a trade which actually makes it worthwhile (which means paying overs) we won't do shit.

Swans did it with O'Keffe years back didn't they? If he has to stay then it's not really the end of the world for him.

 

[vinum coupe]

As you know, I agree in principle that we need to restructure the backline. But we can do that both without losing Lonergan and without compromising short-term success. We don't need circumstantial imperatives such as the exit of a KPD to force our hand in that regard. We just need to be more tactically flexible and open to the idea that we cannot play three KPDs.

Thats the problem, I can't see them doing it unless it is forced on them.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

They're going to have to get games eventually. You can either have them on 40-50 games when the veterans retire or 5-7. I know what I'd prefer.

Whilst I agree. You've missed the point being made to Biggy.

 

[Varcoe2Motlop]

Direct swap for Will Minson - Make it happen.

Minson can ruck all day. Blicavs to replace Lonergan / 2nd ruck.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

If he gave said games to those youngsters and those games resulted in loses would you be praising Scott?

I don't know if I'd be praising Scott for doing what he should be doing, but I'd acknowledge that giving games to younger players who have shown the potential to play a role and develop with experience in order to accelerate their growth under the tutelage of the veterans would be the right move, even if it meant a few poorer performances overall. In hindsight, what did we accomplish in years like 2013 and 2014? As I have said, after they went down the path of trading out the veterans in Chapman and Pods, it was clear that the chances of a premiership in the near future were gone, so there should have been a greater emphasis on youth integration and development. If the young players are showing promise, I have no problem at all. However, they should not be gifted games and shouldn't be kept in the side if they look so short on confidence that they're unable to contribute at all, or so short on ability that they'll clearly never be at the standard.

I'll give you two examples to illustrate what I'm saying here.

Jed Bews should have been kept in the side and given more games. I'm not sure exactly which games he played in, but I know he played in at least a loss, perhaps more. I had no problem with him in the side, and he should have been rewarded with more for his effort. He is a small defender who can grow into an effective negating player for us down back, which is what we lack. Our backline was also very old, so introducing youth is paramount.

George Burbury, on the other hand, continually struggled in his AFL appearances early in the year. There reached a point where, only after one deplorable game, was he dropped. Still, initially playing him wasn't a problem, but keeping him in the side after he had consistently struggled and evidently lost all confidence was. And now he's delisted.

Now that we have chosen to go down the road of pissing on older players and throwing them out, I have no problem with the introduction of youth, provided playing them in the AFL actually looks to be helping their development and they can contribute somewhat to the team. If we lose a few more games in a year like 2014, then that needs to be accepted as the punishment you cop when you throw away guys like Chapman. Scott is trying to have it both ways. Wants to throw out the older players, but has shown little willingness to ease in the youth in all areas of the ground as he should. Playing some more young players in some of the losses sustained this year, for instance, would have made little difference to the result, but would have been good experience for them in the AFL environment.

 

[Seeds]

It was the most recent game we played. I'd say that's the most important thing.

Do you think he should stay in our backline for 2015? If not, where else does he play, and who in the midfield does he push out?

club has come out and said Kelly was injured in that final and shouldn't of played. it may not be the best representation of his ability. he was quite good for most of the year, although was played out of position on occasion.

 

[Seeds]

At the end of the day he is contracted, dogs can offer him all they like but unless they can pony up a trade which actually makes it worthwhile (which means paying overs) we won't do shit.

Swans did it with O'Keffe years back didn't they? If he has to stay then it's not really the end of the world for him.

A contracts a contract and given his age we have nothing to lose in keeping him.

 

[The rabbi]

Direct swap for Will Minson - Make it happen.

Minson can ruck all day. Blicavs to replace Lonergan / 2nd ruck.

Blicavs would get murdered at full back by the AFL's best forwards.

 

[El Dubya]

My issue is that you seem to consider it the only thing relevant to any discussion about Kelly.



I've said elsewhere that my preferred option would be to move him back in to the midfield and give him 12-18 games rotating in and out of the side. For structural and tactical reasons I would move Guthrie back in to defence. Kelly doesn't "replace" anyone per se, since no one needs to be dropped to accommodate him. He just provides added depth.

I don't think Kelly can cut it in the midfield anymore, and that means less time on the ball for GHS or Guthrie. Kelly is incredibly lucky to be contracted next year.

 

[Mooneyman]

Hi all, long time no posts. I think we need to remember a few things, Lonergan has not stated nor has his manager that he wishes to leave. Geelong have not said that they will trade him to the doggies and The cats clearly see him as a required player, hence the contract extension last year. Unlike the bundy situation, the cats aren't really forced to make a move. Apparently because 3 names are mentioned for a "possible" move away from Geelong, people (biggyboy) are questioning the culture of the club and the way Scott is running things, which is absolute bollocks. Scott coached this team to a flag in 2011 and has played finals footy since. Don't lose faith in the cats, because no doubt, whatever comes of this trade period, we need to trust the club to do the right thing.

keep calm
Trust in Balme

 

[El Dubya]

Hi all, long time no posts. I think we need to remember a few things, Lonergan has not stated nor has his manager that he wishes to leave. Geelong have not said that they will trade him to the doggies and The cats clearly see him as a required player, hence the contract extension last year. Unlike the bundy situation, the cats aren't really forced to make a move. Apparently because 3 names are mentioned for a "possible" move away from Geelong, people (biggyboy) are questioning the culture of the club and the way Scott is running things, which is absolute bollocks. Scott coached this team to a flag in 2011 and has played finals footy since. Don't lose faith in the cats, because no doubt, whatever comes of this trade period, we need to trust the club to do the right thing.

keep calm
Trust in Balme

Are the Bulldogs dumb enough to declare an interest in a player before they know they'll get him? I know we are.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Are the Bulldogs dumb enough to declare an interest in a player before they know they'll get him? I know we are.

Is their coach going to start doing the media rounds, making pitches and imploring him to come to the club?

 

[Varcoe2Motlop]

Blicavs would get murdered at full back by the AFL's best forwards.

He's full of surprises.

 

[El Dubya]

Blicavs would get murdered at full back by the AFL's best forwards.

I think it would end up Taylor at full back Blicavs CHB, where he's still unlikely to set the world on fire.

 

[Boxhead_31]

You Should be red carded for that comment.

Just trying to introduce a little humour to a humourless day

 

[vinum coupe]

Just trying to introduce a little humour to a humourless day

Pick 35?

 

[The rabbi]

Are the Bulldogs dumb enough to declare an interest in a player before they know they'll get him? I know we are.

But neither the Bulldogs nor the Cats are dumb enough to list a best 22 that contains a player from another club before they know that they have got him.

 

[The rabbi]

I think it would end up Taylor at full back Blicavs CHB, where he's still unlikely to set the world on fire.

He may set a few opposition CHF's on fire though.