LRT v Vogels

[barry]

Originally posted by gilze
Saddington may have 'dropped some sitters' but considering he is coming back from a knee reconstruction I think the signs he has shown so far have been reasonably positive.

Saddington with 2 good knees wasnt anything special, I cant see sadington with 1 reconstructed knee eclipsing the old saddo. Handy utility, thats all.

Cast your mind back to the days Saddo got the pasting LRT is getting now on here.

I can't see Vogels getting enough game time to worry O'Keefe in the near future. Whilst Davis is used around the ground too much to take over the role as 3rd forward to Baz and Mick IMO

If Vogels doesnt get a full game next week after this weeks performance, I'd be amazed.

[gilze]

I hope your not being serious. he may get more gametime, but I wouldn't even start to think that you won't see him on the bench. I enjoyed his performance today but i doubt a 3rd gamer will play 120mins

[gilze]

prepare to be amazed!!!!

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by Sean
That's a pretty big call. He had 3 marks (same as LRT) and kicked one goal. Had less than 10 touches overall.

I guess if you had to pick a winner Morgan may just be ahead but it was close enough to call it a draw IMHO.

You can thank Nicks that that isn't 4 marks and two goals.

[TheHood]

Think ROK has tried really hard all season. He is now a known and targeted player and he's struggling in the hardest position in the game.

Confusingly, Roosy has not addressed the issue in an obvious way. This is either because he's a foil for Baz or another forward or because he's been neglected like a 52 year old public servant who's contract is over and no one know's who he reports to or what division he belongs to any more. ROK just keeps rocking up to work without any obvious role to play.

Still he's worked so hard in the packs. I almost think he's running himself in the ground and no longer presenting himself as an outside option. He should take my advice and run to the middle of the 50. We leave that space open like we don't want to disturb young grass from flourishing. Reckon the grass in the centre corridor after a Swans game is like the carpet under your lounge...perfect and undisturbed from passing traffic!

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by TheHood
ROK's been neglected like a 52 year old public servant who's contract is over and no one know's who he reports to or what division he belongs to any more. ROK just keeps rocking up to work without any obvious role to play.

you know way too much about me...

[monopoly19]

Originally posted by Sanecow
You can thank Nicks that that isn't 4 marks and two goals.

Yep. That was one case where LRT somehow lost Morgan in the forward line. Morgan ended up in very nearly taking a mark right in front about 2 metres out, spoiled at the last minute by a Nicks punch (who had a fairly good game himself, IMO).

[Nolie]

Originally posted by gilze
W l The one thing I like about Vogels so much more than LRT is the fact that he looks like an AFL player.

What a load of piffle.
What does your average AFL player look like?
Kirk himself exhibits traits that would not be regarded as "classical" AFL. Same with Leo Barry.

[liz]

Not quite sure what the point of comparing Vogels and LRT is.

They are at different stages of their careers.

They have travelled very different roads to get to where they are at the moment.

They are playing very different roles in the team at the moment.

They have different packages of attributes.

In fact, about the only things they have in common are height and blonde hair!

They are not really competing for positions in the team ATM, let alone places on the list. With a relative paucity of tall, strongly built young talent on the list there is plenty of room for both of them if they can continue to develop.

[Rob-bloods]

Seriously talented players struggle at CHB, LRT is not talented....seriously. He is an accident waiting to happen, if we strike a hot scoring side, say Geelong, what will happen to LRT?

I'd look at Schaubs for next week for LRT and Willo for? .....Not sure yet.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Sean
That's a pretty big call. He had 3 marks (same as LRT) and kicked one goal. Had less than 10 touches overall.

I guess if you had to pick a winner Morgan may just be ahead but it was close enough to call it a draw IMHO.

Well Nicks stopped one that was an easy mark and the two misses should have been goals, so Morgan could very easily have had 4. Given Morgan's not a key forward, that would have been a very handy return for the 'Dogs.

[sharpie]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Well Nicks stopped one that was an easy mark and the two misses should have been goals, so Morgan could very easily have had 4. Given Morgan's not a key forward, that would have been a very handy return for the 'Dogs.

Come on NMW, you of all people preach the greatness of stats and the devils of 'ifs'. So practice what you preach. Dont just argue for arguing's sake.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by sharpie
Come on NMW, you of all people preach the greatness of stats and the devils of 'ifs'. So practice what you preach. Dont just argue for arguing's sake.

I'm not at all. And as I've said numerous times, I don't preach stats out of context. Simply pointing out that as a defensive player he didn't really do a great job - other factors stopped his player from kicking a number of goals. That is just luck.

[sharpie]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I'm not at all. And as I've said numerous times, I don't preach stats out of context. Simply pointing out that as a defensive player he didn't really do a great job - other factors stopped his player from kicking a number of goals. That is just luck.

I accept you dont like LRT. Personally I think he is still worth giving a chance. And everyone has their own opinion on this matter.

Mostly you come up with relevant stats, but on some occasions, like the earlier comment, you lose grip of your stats and start with the 'should haves', 'could haves', 'ifs', 'would haves', etc that make it seem like you are just trying to win the argument by brute force and weight of numbers.

Your arguments are far more effective when you stick to what you're good at.

[Sean]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Well Nicks stopped one that was an easy mark and the two misses should have been goals, so Morgan could very easily have had 4. Given Morgan's not a key forward, that would have been a very handy return for the 'Dogs.

You are judging LRT according to what Morgan should have done - not what he did do?

If Morgan could "easily" have 4, how did he end up with 1? Sounds like he must have had a poor match - but he clearly beat LRT?

Sounds a bit harsh to me.