Silk

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • sharp9
    Senior Player
    • Jan 2003
    • 2508

    Silk

    Okay a couple of days have gone past and I refuse to totally concede that we are stuffed for all time.

    All we need is some silk....all the good teams have some, why don't we?

    Particularly midfield silk.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't teams need five midfielders?

    Three of them need be solid, tough and reliable
    Two of them need to be fast, powerful and SIIIIILKY SKILLED!!!

    Another two midfielders are needed on the bench, one outside, one inside.

    How far off are we?

    Added to this a great team in 2005 needs a VERY creative player distributing play from half back. At the risk of pissing off the traditionalists (who have won us so many flags lately) a team needs a designated quarter back....PARTICULARLY if a loose man is played in defence. He must be the third man up...or first to the fall in the D50, but also fast and skilful enough to direct the following attack.

    Over the last few weeks we have been embarrassed by MacLeod and Johnson. Obviously this player should be Tadgh Kennelly. To do the job he must be explicitly freed from being a DEFENDER.

    In the midfield we have Kirk, Bolton and Ablett doing a satisfactory job. Good enough to win a premiership if the silk is around.

    The silk should be Davis and Goodes. Davis' hands, vision and kick are exemplary. Goodes has wonderful hands, is very strong with ball in hand, great vision and...really importatntly, is unpredictable.

    On the other side we need a quarter forward, nominally a HFF who actually is an outside midfielder always presenting in space, making the delivery from in tight that much easier for the lesser skilled in tight midfielders, and then creating or scoring goals from his possessions.

    Williams

    That's it, really. Problem solved.

    Bench midfielders would be from Silks in training (McVeigh, Willoughby, Sundqvist, Fosdike) or Solid Reliables in training (Buchanan, Bevan, Fixter, Schmidt, Malceski, Potter)

    I cannot see how Spriggs can fit into this at all. He is an outside player with appalling skills. He did get a few clearances against the Dees so maybe he could become an in and under with clean hands...as long as he has easy options for disposal.

    Schneider can't play midfield at all. Mathews cannot play outside and though tough inside cannot get to the ball first let alone get it to a team mate. At least we know that Fosdike can deliver a good kick... as long as he doesn't have to win his own ball or pick up a bouncing ball! Or handball out of defence!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    IMO we need to play 2 of Willoughby, Schmidt, Moore and Malceski next week to begin the process of seeing who can handle the pressure.

    We lost by 40 against the Roos, 50 against the Eagles, 30 against the Dees, 40 against Adelaide and were down by 30 at 3/4 time against Brisbane.

    So far the players dropped have been....

    Actually none. We haven't dropped a single player this year. Spriggs and Dempster were selected ahead of Schneider and McVeigh after the Roos (from memory). But they came straight back in with injuries. That's the only change that could be considered a player being omitted.

    That's beyond extraordinary is it not?
    "I'll acknowledge there are more talented teams in the competition but I won't acknowledge that there is a better team in the competition" Paul Roos March 2005
  • giant
    Veterans List
    • Mar 2005
    • 4731

    #2
    Davis in forwd line = silk; Davis in mid field = sow's ear

    So swap Davis & Williams for '05 at least. Otherwise some thoughts of merit.

    Comment

    • sharpie
      On the Rookie List
      • Jul 2003
      • 1588

      #3
      Re: Silk

      Originally posted by sharp9
      We lost by 40 against the Roos, 50 against the Eagles, 30 against the Dees, 40 against Adelaide and were down by 30 at 3/4 time against Brisbane.

      So far the players dropped have been....

      Actually none. We haven't dropped a single player this year. Spriggs and Dempster were selected ahead of Schneider and McVeigh after the Roos (from memory). But they came straight back in with injuries. That's the only change that could be considered a player being omitted.

      That's beyond extraordinary is it not?
      This is definitely a worrying point that a few of us have made in the last few weeks.

      And dont expect us to change this week, because Roosy has used the excuse that the weagles were just too good anyway, and the next few games are "must win", so he'll stick with what he knows instead of gambling with some new guys.
      Visit my eBay store -

      10% off for mentioning RWO when you buy. Great Christmas presents!

      Comment

      • hammo
        Veterans List
        • Jul 2003
        • 5554

        #4
        Re: Silk

        Originally posted by sharp9


        So far the players dropped have been....

        Actually none. We haven't dropped a single player this year. Spriggs and Dempster were selected ahead of Schneider and McVeigh after the Roos (from memory). But they came straight back in with injuries. That's the only change that could be considered a player being omitted.

        That's beyond extraordinary is it not?
        McVeigh was dropped. It still confuses me why.
        "As everyone knows our style of football is defensive and unattractive, and as such I have completely forgotten how to mark or kick over the years" - Brett Kirk

        Comment

        • dimelb
          pr. dim-melb; m not f
          • Jun 2003
          • 6889

          #5
          Good post Sharp. Add Moore to the mix and it's worth a try.
          He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)

          Comment

          • liz
            Veteran
            Site Admin
            • Jan 2003
            • 16778

            #6
            Ditto - good post trying to be constructive rather than just taking pot shots at players.

            I'd like to add that good players make other players around them play better. Add a fit Williams, keep Jude and Kirky playing as they are and add one more classy midfielder and the likes of Crouch, Mathews, even the hobbits will probably start to resemble the solid, consistent, hardworking supporting crew that they have been in recent years.

            Comment

            • Snowy
              On the Rookie List
              • Jun 2003
              • 1244

              #7
              Kirk's playing well but gee many of his disposals are super ordinary. There isn't one bloke in the midfield who has the polish at the minute.
              LIFE GOES ON

              Comment

              • liz
                Veteran
                Site Admin
                • Jan 2003
                • 16778

                #8
                Originally posted by Snowy
                Kirk's playing well but gee many of his disposals are super ordinary. There isn't one bloke in the midfield who has the polish at the minute.
                Hence Kirk will never be the "silk" but that doesn't diminish his value. He makes up for it in so many other ways and seems to understand his limitations pretty well. There have been plenty of very effective midfielders with less than perfect disposal - Cressa is a classic example.

                As Sharp9 was suggesting though, it's all about getting the mix right.

                Comment

                • Schneiderman
                  The Fourth Captain
                  • Aug 2004
                  • 1615

                  #9
                  Originally posted by giant
                  Davis in forwd line = silk; Davis in mid field = sow's ear

                  So swap Davis & Williams for '05 at least. Otherwise some thoughts of merit.
                  I agree with the swap but also that Davis should continue to get a run in the midfield. He wants to be there, and IMO has the skills to be there. Just needs more time and experience.
                  Our Greatest Moment:

                  Saturday, 24th Sept, 2005 - 5:13pm

                  Comment

                  • BonBon
                    BMT2144
                    • Jul 2004
                    • 2190

                    #10
                    What about some pure Italiano silk?
                    Vicky Pollard: Oh my god I so can't believe you just said that this is like the time I threw Anita's nokia in the canal as a joke and she's like you have well got to buy me another one and I'm like get over it and then Paul came over who's adopted anyway and started saying that I fancy Mark Bennett but oh my god just because I have sex with someone doesn't mean I fancy them.

                    Comment

                    • Schneiderman
                      The Fourth Captain
                      • Aug 2004
                      • 1615

                      #11
                      Originally posted by BonBon
                      What about some pure Italiano silk?
                      ?? Italian = leather, Egyptian = cotton, Thai = silk.

                      A Thai midfielder. Mmmm...
                      Our Greatest Moment:

                      Saturday, 24th Sept, 2005 - 5:13pm

                      Comment

                      Working...