Nick Malceski

[Vivien]

I agree. Malceski in for McVeigh. He's had his chances, and admittedly, has done some good things, but much too inconsistent for my liking.

While I'm quite a fan of Dempster, I think LRT is the better defender, although the quality of his disposal is poor. I'd like to see Schaubs in the side, but I can't see it happening unless there's an injury to one of the other defenders. LRT certainly wont be dropped, Roos has invested too much in his development to dump him now.

[barry]

Originally posted by robbieando
and then move Dempster to take Kennelly's man and allow Kennelly to play on the wing and we drop LRT altogether.

Who's going to play CHB? Malceski ?, Dempster ?, Kennelly ?

[jenky28]

Originally posted by barry
Who's going to play CHB? Malceski ?, Dempster ?, Kennelly ?

My team would be leave it the same except bring schauble in to play on neitz and drop bevan. He didnt show anything on the weekend and he has had his chance now trial some others!

[ugg]

I think the fact you didn't notice that Bevan was dropped weeks ago says that he hasn't been contributing much anyway.

[Bleed Red Blood]

If Schuable is fit we drop LRT. I don't see him being needed without Miller.

Malkeski..Well, McVeigh looks the only possible. Since Mathews isn't droppable.

[Wil]

Why drop McVeigh for Malceski? McVeigh offers far more than Malceski does in the seniors at this stage of their careers.

Give McVeigh this season to help iron out his inconsistancy and let Malceski get more of a run next year.

[ScottH]

This reminds me of the "drop Ablett" from last year. He was given a go and now he is a valuable contributor most weeks, this year and hopefully will be an important membr of the attacking midfield next year.

So I think they should persist with McVeigh. Malceski will get his turn next yr, we hope.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by ScottH
So I think they should persist with McVeigh. Malceski will get his turn next yr, we hope.

Why? Why keep persisting with one player who is clearly not up to the standard yet, when you have another of similar age who is playing great? How does that help either player?

[NMWBloods]

McVeigh always looks like a little boy playing with the grownups!

[Wil]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Why? Why keep persisting with one player who is clearly not up to the standard yet, when you have another of similar age who is playing great? How does that help either player?

Ugh! This goes back to the "Scott McGlone should get a run in the seniors".

In the seniors; Malceski is NOT playing "great" and is NOT better than McVeigh. Yes "for his age" Malceski looks good and could be great. But he will do nothing for the squad at this stage in the season to the expense of McVeigh, even in the long run. If anything bring him in for Moore.

With Maxfield not playing I think the overall age of the team right now is just about spot on. I would like to see Vogels getting more senior time though.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
McVeigh always looks like a little boy playing with the grownups!

His 30m run and kick for goal that missed badly was a typical sign. How many times has he run into the 50 with the goals just a clean kick away, only to miss them badly? Just a confidence thing I reckon, and its time to give his spot up for one of the other up-and-comers like Schmidt, Malceksi and Willoughby.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by Wil
In the seniors; Malceski is NOT playing "great" and is NOT better than McVeigh. Yes "for his age" Malceski looks good and could be great. But he will do nothing for the squad at this stage in the season to the expense of McVeigh, even in the long run. If anything bring him in for Moore.

Disagree. He only missed out on his chance last year due to injury, and I think he has been FAR more impressive in his few games in the seniors than McVeigh. Granted McVeigh had a good start to the Freo game, but in the midfield he looks a touch of class below the others. Esky on the other hand, looks solid and his kicking has been far more reliable.

And I think you'll find Moore will be replaced by a tall anyway - maybe Saddo, Vogels or Schauba depending on the need.

[ScottH]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Why? Why keep persisting with one player who is clearly not up to the standard yet, when you have another of similar age who is playing great? How does that help either player?

Like Wil said it is like McGlone.

We have not seen enough of Malceski in the seniors to know he will do any better than McVeigh.

[Wil]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Disagree. He only missed out on his chance last year due to injury, and I think he has been FAR more impressive in his few games in the seniors than McVeigh. Granted McVeigh had a good start to the Freo game, but in the midfield he looks a touch of class below the others. Esky on the other hand, looks solid and his kicking has been far more reliable.

It happens so much on this board that people think when someone who has a big game in the reserves will make an immediate impact in the seniors. Or that a player that looks competent in their first game (or couple of games) is a better player than someone who has played 30+ games. Because you expect much more from the 30 gamer and nothing from the first gamer. That's just bias. I think Malceski should be in the team but not at the expense of another developing player (yes, who is a class below the others and is expected to be).

And I think you'll find Moore will be replaced by a tall anyway - maybe Saddo, Vogels or Schauba depending on the need.

Yeah it seems there is a bench space for "as needed" depending on the opposition. But isn't Malceski a tall? Or do you need to be 190cm+? Or a KPP type?

[ugg]

Originally posted by Wil

Yeah it seems there is a bench space for "as needed" depending on the opposition. But isn't Malceski a tall? Or do you need to be 190cm+? Or a KPP type?

Malceski isn't a tall because he doesn't play in the key positions. He's currently a winger/half-forward.

http://sydneyswans.com.au/default.asp?pg=insidetheclub&spg=reserves

Nick Malceski starred for the Swans with five goals and 44 possessions playing on the ball and forward and Tim Schmidt was also good on ball, kicking two goals, winning a majority of the ball and using it to his advantage.