AFL Rd 1 2024 Post Game Prognostications Carlton vs Richmond

[Lods]

I do think you have a bias towards and against some players.
We all do.
So that's no biggie.
It only becomes an issue when we believe that we are the only ones who are 'right' and everyone else is a bit thick and doesn't really understand the points we're making.
What may seem a good assessment at the time might look a bit short sighted 12 months down the track.
I think we'd all be a touch embarrassed if we had a look at some of the things we wrote 4 or 5 years ago.

I'm biased
I favour the hard worker, less skilled player.
I'll prefer them over a more talented player who doesn't always go at full effort.
I'll give them credit and comment on them, knowing at the same time they'll likely be rubbished because others see them as a liability.
I like to see the little positives and their little wins.
It may be as simple as a Wiggins shepherd for Judd.

The last person to recognise our bias is ourselves.
In in-game threads you can almost predict when someone with bias will step in with the negative comment.
You won't hear the same from that poster if the player does something well.
A lack of bias shows when we give mention to both the positive and the negative.

The thing is these are all different viewpoints.
Because football is a complex game.
And it's a team sport
The champion player is often only able to do the things they do because the support is there for them to perform.
It's all so full of variables like development, playing position, form, injury etc.

You made good points on the Silvagni v TDK issue. I understood them. I could see merit in them.
But looking big picture/future what was the best option.
Who had the most upside-Tom or Jack.
Which player did we think was going to end up the better and more valuable player?
Who needed game time at senior level?

[kruddler]

You made good points on the Silvagni v TDK issue. I understood them. I could see merit in them.
But looking big picture/future what was the best option.
Who had the most upside-Tom or Jack.
Which player did we think was going to end up the better and more valuable player?
Who needed game time at senior level?

What is the end game though Lods?
If we are an under 15's side and we are trying to develop everyone, then sure.
If we are genuine finals contendors, then sorry, now is not the best time for development.
We 'developed' people in the prelim final.
IMO, we didn't pick the best team to actually win the game. I said as much before, and after.......and all throughout the year too.
I even said that i would've left Harry or Pittonet out of that prelim side and 100% would've played TDK.
Do you remember that? No, nobody does. They remember the other stuff i said throughout the year though.

I want what is best for the club.
If that means TDK needs to increase his output or kick off the dew in the 2's, so be it.
If that means Pitto never plays again, so be it.
If that means Jack is picked and has to tough it out as a ruckmen for the rest of his career, so be it (for the record, people fixate on Jack, but i always talked about any other option, be that Charlie, Harry or Cripps. The 2nd ruck, needs to be a non-ruck...or be capable of holding down another position on his own merit).

In the best 22 threads this year, i've picked TDK and left out Pittonet. Do people remember that? No, i'm still anti-TDK though.

People talk about my bias' over the years, bring up carrazzo, scotland....whoever. Do they remember what i was saying? No, they just remember that i was 'anti' them.
I always said we wouldn't win a flag with Carrazzo/Scotland in our bests. I was right.
Doesn't mean they couldn't play, just that we needed more a-grade talent and elite ball users.

I can argue both sides of the coin. I often take a contrary view for arguments sake. People who know me in real life know my real thoughts on the matter. People on here get a snippet of me that is shaped by opposing views on here.

[Lods]

I did remember what you said about the preliminary final side.
I think that it also had a bit to do with expectations.
I thought our race was run, we'd done well but that it was a bridge too far on a foreign field, and that ended up being the case.
I kind of remember you had the opposite view and even posted that you couldn't see why we couldn't go all the way.
Was it team selection...or did we just run out of steam.
We'll never know.
We both have different opinions as to why we lost.

I also recognised that now you have elevated Tom above Pittonet.
Bias can be positive or negative, strong or weak and that's my perception of where we're at at the moment.
You still haven't completely warmed to Tom, but for now consider him a better option than Pittonet.
On the other hand I probably have a 'postitive' bias and maybe see him as our standout number one going forward...but yep still with some improvement to come.

I really can't see Pittonet playing a lot of senior football this year and in that respect your one ruck plus back-up is probably how we'll play most of the season.
But if Pittonet starts dominating and Tom get's injured or drops off considerably who knows what the end of season games will look like.

[RiverRat]

If Young's teammates lack confidence in him, why would they short pass to him?

Presumably they feel confident that he will take an uncontested mark if he is standing on his own.

Having said that, I am not a critic if Lewis Young.  I thought he was worth a regular place in the team in his first season but that he regressed last year after seeming to lose confidence.

[pinot]

Marchbank will be delisted at years end and shouldn't be on our plans. Too unreliable from the point of view of getting on the park.

He's a restricted free agent this year so any club can pick him up for peanuts.. maybe North as they need defenders and can pay his hospital bills

[cookie2]

But Weiters enables rebounding from defence by his individual defensive efforts, his defensive generalship, his ability to be a target when we get possession and his creative use of the ball.  Weiters may not run and carry himself but he enables his teammates to run and carry.

There's no point having an attacking defender if he can't beat his opponent and Kemp will struggle against Larkey or Coleman-Jones and Treacy or Amiss the following round. 

In short,  the whole is the sum of its parts. The best overall balance is what is most important over journey.

[ElwoodBlues1]

Young has done the job for us in both games and deserves to keep his place.
Agree with DJ on Kemp...need to find appropriate matchups and remember he isn't a true key defender but more of a fill in out of necessity and with Weitering and Young in the team they get the KP defensive responsibilities first.

[Thryleon]

Yeah yeah, you think i'm very biased against TDK, i get it. I disagree, but you would expect me to say that.
Its hard to keep track of a particular posters thoughts on an issue on here, ironically, similar to your take on here.
Observation - some posts you might not read. Some posts you might not comprehend, or at least not fully understand....and part of that could be on me for not explaining well enough.

Statistics - a lot of 'negative' posts by me gets attention, but thats because they end up in a thread of arguments because there might be a lot of people who disagree. Whereas the positive stuff gets glossed over because its the same as everyone else.

Bias - Similar to the above, but you look for the negative and ignore the positive, or at least focus on that more.

Its funny, the whole TDK debate took 2 shapes.
1. Pittonet > TDK in pure rucking ability.
2. TDK < Silvagni (or others) around the ground.

1. People debated that 1 didn't matter. So Pittonet shouldn't play as hitouts don't matter.
2. People ignored the fact that Silvagni (or others) did better around the ground.....although slightly less in the ruck.....which people decided didn't matter anyway.

People wanted it both ways. Its why the argument kept going round in circles.

All of this was off the back of my contention that the team only needs 1 ruck to reach peak performance. Some disagreed with that, which is fine, but results seem to prove otherwise (when taking opponent into account).

You're clever in your arguments but myself and MBB kept saying that if we only play one ruckman it should likely be TDK in a tandem with Silvagni.

That's moot now.

We couldn't afford to lose a ruckman last season and TDK's emergence doesn't change that, it's still true.  Which is why we picked up another youngster mid season.

[Baggers]

I would say admirably rather than adequately.

When I write 'adequately' in reference to Young, it's actually a compliment, of sorts. To perform adequately in a very good defence, is doing your job. 'Impressively,' for moi, is another step. Weiters does his job impressively, as does Saad, McGovern and Newman (in our defence). Kemp and Boyd are also doing an adequate job, and we all want them to be better.

As with most of us, if Young was to recapture and even improve upon his form of 2022, I'd be rapt. And I hope he does. But we can only judge him on what he is producing right now and we can't help but compare now to his form of 2022... when he was impressive.

[Milhanna13]

Individually, we had our fair share of blokes down, well down - Fantasia, Hollands, Cuningham.

Saw a stat that had Cunningham our 4th best "rated" player on the ground..........  not sure i even noticed him out there