Reset Rants

[madbluboy]

Which of these smaller players who are lightning quick would have you included? Cunningham was omitted for not being defensive when playing HB, Garlett omitted for not playing well. You say you would have played MacReadie and who would you get rid of for him? Rowe, Jones, Plowman or Marchbank?

Shaw could not get a game last season at Gold Coast and was delisted, but he's the answer on Bontempelli?

It's fine to sit back after a crap game and say I would have done this or that, and looking at your suggestions I doubt if they would have helped.

If you read the pre-game thread half of the forum questioned the selections and why we dropped two small pressure forwards and replaced them with an inside midfielder and another half back flanker.

Just like the suns game when we replaced Kreuzer with a small, that left Casboult in the ruck.

Terrible selections that cost us both games before they even began.

[PaulP]

I guess we could settle this once and for all by hosting a "Talking Tactics" session between Bolton and forum members. I give each member 5 minutes before they get shot down in flames.

It's nonsense to think that the MC isn't cognisant of the issues being discussed here wrt team selections. They won't always get it right, and I think there are many occasions when selections are a gamble. You don't have to agree or like their decisions, but they have reasons behind who's in and out, which we may not even know exist.

Our skill errors, poor decision making, youth, and lack of leadership are what kill us, and all the team selection theory in the world can't save you from that.

[madbluboy]

I guess we could settle this once and for all by hosting a "Talking Tactics" session between Bolton and forum members. I give each member 5 minutes before they get shot down in flames.

The Gold Coast shot us down in flames.

[PaulP]

The Gold Coast shot us down in flames.

I'm quite aware of what happened in the various games this season.

[Thryleon]

I'm a little confused about the argument that we should wait until some of these kids make it to 50+ games before we make a firm judgement about them.


... why then have we made judgements and let go so many players that haven't managed that number.

I think its hard to compare.

Where we are at means its hard to get a read on players and their abilities because of how few experienced heads we have in the team.

In the past, where a Kane Lucas or a Matthew Watson joined a rather settled lineup, they looked like they had no idea what they were doing and didn't display even a snippet of the ability that half of these guys do.

Our kids all have shown something (except Polson who is the only real worry).

Now its about how we develope them as a unit and as individuals.

[LP]

Our kids all have shown something (except Polson who is the only real worry).

Polson looks OK at VFL level, I think if he was at a club surrounded by the right type of player he is capable of doing a Caleb Daniel type role at AFL level. He's probably easily the smartest of the smalls we have drafted, but he doesn't have any natural physical advantage.

[deags]

I liked his tackling efforts in the game a couple of weeks ago. He seemed to make a few stick which is unusual for our team.

[LP]

I liked his tackling efforts in the game a couple of weeks ago. He seemed to make a few stick which is unusual for our team.

Yes, I can easily see him in the Wright role in years to come, the small, reliable, consistent, smart, tackling forward who does the right thing and makes the right decisions. He won't just be on the end of someone else's good work like a couple of the others we have drafted appear to be, he'll be creating opportunities for team mates.

I'm not convinced by small forwards, or forwards in general, who goal from out the back cheapies. I'll be impressed when I see a couple of them doing the Rioli type stuff and creating an opportunity from nothing, either for themselves or for someone else!

[Lods]

I think its hard to compare.

Where we are at means its hard to get a read on players and their abilities because of how few experienced heads we have in the team.

In the past, where a Kane Lucas or a Matthew Watson joined a rather settled lineup, they looked like they had no idea what they were doing and didn't display even a snippet of the ability that half of these guys do.

Our kids all have shown something (except Polson who is the only real worry).

Now its about how we develope them as a unit and as individuals.

If we look back at some of the threads of the past though, you'll find that many of 'our kids' of the past all had games where there was some genuine excitement...where they showed something.

http://www.carltonsc.com/index.php?topic=1375.0

http://www.carltonsc.com/index.php?topic=945.0

...and one of the most insightful comments from the Buckley thread was this one.

No light, no tunnel, just a drop of positivity in an ocean of bullcrap expectations.

One rising star nomination doesnt make a player.  He has effectively been picked as one to watch moving forward as he has a future.

That should be the minimal expectation that we have on our youngsters.  Instead, we seem to have the opposite.  We are so entrenched in failure we have no idea how to recognise success.

You wont see a proper club patting a bloke on the back for a rising star nomination.  They will simply give the guy a pat on the back and on we go.

"Games into kids" isn't as important as "games into kids together" and at the moment circumstances (injuries, selections) are preventing that on many occasions.

[LP]

"Games into kids" isn't as important as "games into kids together" and at the moment circumstances (injuries, selections) are preventing that on many occasions.

Yes, that together word is usually omitted but it is crucial.