goodes

[vicburke]

so are you saying that im not allowed to post on this forum any sort of critism of our players unless you want to hear it?

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by vicburke
so are you saying that im not allowed to post on this forum any sort of critism of our players unless you want to hear it?

Unless it makes some sort of sense - ie not until you know **** from clay

[cruiser]

Originally posted by vicburke
so are you saying that im not allowed to post on this forum any sort of critism of our players unless you want to hear it?

Mate, what he's saying is that if you are gonna post radical opinions on here, you've gotta be prepared to cop some criticism back. Thats what happens when you publish your views - you cop reviews.

[Nico]

Originally posted by vicburke
so are you saying that im not allowed to post on this forum any sort of critism of our players unless you want to hear it?

Not at all, say what you like. I am entitled to have my opinion. If that does not agree with you're opinion then that is up to you to cope with.
The bit about the Tram is but a bit of humour. I have been called an Fwit, moron and fruitcake and told to just "shut up" amongst other things for my opinions, and as yet have not slashed my wrists, so don't take too much personally.

[cruiser]

Originally posted by Nico
The bit about the Tram is but a bit of humour.

Made me laugh

[dread and might]

roos and various players have made a habit of saying that we need most of the 22 players to put in if we want to win. sometimes one or two players can have minimal impact on a game and it can be covered for, e.g Nick Davis against the weagles. Goodes obviously didn't play well, but there were more than a handful of swans not pulling their weight against the saints. perhaps goodes' lack of accountability stood out more than usual because we got significantly spanked on the rebound, but i think others may have snuck under the radar compared to Goodesy. we expect a lot from him, and he didn't deliver on that occasion, neither did others. you can't single him out, it was a pi$$poor team effort.

[cressakel]

Originally posted by ROK Lobster
In short:
Goodes played poorly, no question. To say that he did not try is just a bit silly. What was his role last night? What were he and Roos trying to achieve? When has he ever played 'accountable' football? What good would McVeigh have done playing on a bloke 12" taller than him? Got dragged straight to the goal square and had 4 goals kicked on him in a Qtr? Were you at the ground or watching on tele like me? I cannot answer many of these questions because with the TV you cannot see much at all. And don't rely to much on Wallsy's comments. The man is a fool (but better than Huddo). I am sure that Goodes would be pretty disappointed with his game last night. I'd be pretty surprised if he didn't give 100%.
Glad you are not on drugs though...

Adam Goodes has been very very very very dissapointing as a TEAM player for his whole career at the Swans for the following reasons -

* He isn't accountable and therefore his opponent can cut him up if he is not playing well.
* He is one dimensional and can only play on the ball ie. Ruck, Ruck-rover, Rover or wing.
* He turns over the ball too often.
* He is mentally not strong enough and goes into a shell after a couple of undisciplined errors to the detriment of the team.
* He more often than not goes to the wrong option to the detriment of the team.
* He never ever ever goes hard enough at the man with the ball and is arguably our worst tackler in the team.

I think the above deficiencies in Goodesy's game after counter argued by one-eyed Swans supporters and the coaching staff by the fact that Goodesy can turn it on like no other player in the comp on a beautiful, calm, sunny day when all the stars are aligned, he isn't carrying an injury ( ie. broken fingernail ) and the opposition hasn't got a player to effectively man up on Goodes.

That said, talent is permanent but football is played 90% above the shoulders and, at this stage, Goodesy usually operates at 30% above the shoulders but can improve through serious psychological assessment over the summer period.

Let's hope Goodesy's gets his mind right as he is a delight to watch, improves the team 50% when on fire and makes spastics like Fosdike and Matthews look OK when he is on song.

[cressakel]

Originally posted by Nico
Strewth how many times does it have to be said. He has 2 crook knees, can't move laterally, yet still runs all day. His game against WCE was handy. Did anyone ever think that the reason he was off his man so often was because he was covering for midfielders who could not keep up with their opponents. It happened time and time again yet he was the one who had the guts to run to contests even with his injuries.

He is bloody brave and those that even suggest he is not a team player need their heads read. A non team player would have missed the rest of the season. Mad he may be, but not a team player, hardly.

At the very least he should get the player most courageous award for 2004 for the comp.

Burkie, you wouldn't know if a tram was up you until the bell rang.

Nico,

Number 1 rule of football according to Sam Newman ( who happened to be a very very very good 300 game player ) - Never leave your opponent to pick up another opponent. Every player is accountable for THEIR OWN PLAYER and, if you pick up another player, this situation confuses everyone.

Also, I was at the game and didn't see Goodes pick anyone up, including his direct opponent Blake, bar his shadow. Incidently, Goodesy's shadow " Gooder " was more effective on the night than Goodesy.