Doyle probably; Davis not yet

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by swantastic
NMW havnt you ever herd that before its true if you are look/busy the boss/coach will notice.

Of course I have and it's a load of @@@@.

Even if you are 20 goals up shouldnt you still be doing the 1%'s,a winning team is a ruthless team dont just kill em bury em as well.

For what purpose?

[NMWBloods]

Re: Re: Davis Not To Play Against Dees

Originally posted by JF_Bay22_SCG
...but was still rather disinterested in chasing opponents out of defence.

If that is the case then he does NOT deserve a place in the seniors.

Hall, MOL, Kennelly, and Richards are hardly outstanding at chasing opponents down and tackling them.

[swantastic]

Davis

[swantastic]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Of course I have and it's a load of @@@@.

For what purpose?

We will have to agree to disagree.The purpose of it is to show that you have no mercy.Thats why good teams turn in to great teams Bribane Lions/Australian Cricket team under Steve Waugh.Even when the opposition are down you have to kick em in the guts.

[NMWBloods]

the Swans' match committee is loath to make too many changes to a team that has won its past three games

Yes, that winning formula to beat Essendon, Richmond and Port is something you don't want to lose...

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by swantastic
We will have to agree to disagree.The purpose of it is to show that you have no mercy.Thats why good teams turn in to great teams Bribane Lions/Australian Cricket team under Steve Waugh.Even when the opposition are down you have to kick em in the guts.

It's Reserves!!!! It's like making sure you destroy a couple of 9 year olds when playing Monopoly!!

The most likely outcome of intense tackling when the game is done and dusted is for Davis to get an injury.

[hammo]

I agree with Roos on the point you don't want to make too many changes at once.

However if Phillips continues to get a game ahead of Davo then the match committee must be smoking some weird stuff in those selection meetings.

[Tuco]

I think the symmetry of Davis finding favour and returning to play the team that he triumphed against in 2005 - but this time fully understanding that he alone did not beat Geelong (despite appearances) - is great.

Pick him next week Roosey, and all this nonesense can finally end!

[Lucky Knickers]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Yes, that winning formula to beat Essendon, Richmond and Port is something you don't want to lose...

He shoots he scores!

I have to trust that Roos knows what he is doing with Davo and the team structure. I don't understand it and I'm having a hard time suspending reality and believing that Davis really isn't in our best 22 right now.

I want to win. I want to bury the Dees, the Cats, the Lions and the Blues.

THEN - I want to lose to Adelaide in the QF at AAMI, play Freo at home in the next QF and spank them, take on and knock out St Kilda in the PF (again) - then have a rematch against the Eagles on the Big Day and show them that WE ARE THE BIG BIRDS OF THE BIG GAME.

(sorry for the loss to Adelaide but we are better playing every week of the finals IMO)

I don't know about you, but my confidence in executing this plan is not as high without Davis. IMO the opposition are far more scared of Nick Davis lurking in our forward line than they are of Reg and Ted.

[Snowy]

Bevan must have some compromising photos of important people if he is to retain his place yet again. Especially after attaining 18 points on Champion Data stats last week. That's really hard to do and it measures effectiveness.

[Danzar]

Davis is a finals player. I've said this before - keep him on a short leash until the right time then let him go.

I think Roos is simply timing Davis' run. Tuco may have a point RE: Geelong game. It's as good a time as any to unclip the leash.

Don't forget - the Dees are less than a full strength outfit this week, whereas Geelong will see Ablett, Mooney and Rooke back next week, with game time against the Saints already up their sleeve.

Add Skilled Stadium to the equation......

It's a punt, sure, but I'd keep him back until the Cats. If Roos doesn't play Davis then, well, something's wrong sister!

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Tuco
I think the symmetry of Davis finding favour and returning to play the team that he triumphed against in 2005 - but this time fully understanding that he alone did not beat Geelong (despite appearances) - is great.

No individual player alone can win a football match simply because there are 18 players on the field.

However, without Davis we quite simply would not have won and would not have the 2005 premiership. There are not too many players in our side you can say that about!

There seems to be a rush at times to try to downplay Davis' contribution to our win.

Sure, players like Crouch and Kirk kept pumping the ball into the forward line, but the forward line was completely ineffectual and without Davis we looked unlikely to kick even a couple of goals. It was his individual skill that won us that game.

[Matt79]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
No individual player alone can win a football match simply because there are 18 players on the field.

However, without Davis we quite simply would not have won and would not have the 2005 premiership. There are not too many players in our side you can say that about!

There seems to be a rush at times to try to downplay Davis' contribution to our win.

Sure, players like Crouch and Kirk kept pumping the ball into the forward line, but the forward line was completely ineffectual and without Davis we looked unlikely to kick even a couple of goals. It was his individual skill that won us that game.

Bloods I do wholeheartedly agree that Nick Davis won us that game against Geelong last year, no doubt.

There is also no doubt that a healthy and fit (both mentally and physically) Nick Davis is in our best 22.

I do question though why so many people here are so adamant they know what is going on within the club and seemingly think Paul Roos is stupid enought to a) drop Davis for no reason and b) make him a scapegoat for no particular reasons.

Lets look at the facts...

*ND admitted that he had hit the KFC a bit and was over his playing weight and was getting some advice from a jockey somewhere - why play someone who is over their playing weight mid season and breaking team rules?

* He publically questioned his axing when there are team rules (rightly or wrongly) and he knew full well his reasons for his axing.

IMO his form back in the reserves has not been outstanding as a player of his class should reflect. I think he should be kicking more than 3 goals in these types of matches and getting more possies but that is my opinion.

I am completely trusting of the match committee and ND will gai his place back in the side when he is fit and ready and following team protocol.

NO indiviudal player is worth more than the team. (Collingwood would disagree with tarrant and Johnson though!)

Cheers,
Matt

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Matt79
I do question though why so many people here are so adamant they know what is going on within the club and seemingly think Paul Roos is stupid enought to a) drop Davis for no reason and b) make him a scapegoat for no particular reasons.

Possibly because the information from Roos and the Swans on this has been mixed and confusing and contradictory.

Lets look at the facts...

*ND admitted that he had hit the KFC a bit and was over his playing weight and was getting some advice from a jockey somewhere - why play someone who is over their playing weight mid season and breaking team rules?

He may be a bit over his playing weight, but he was hardly the worst player in the side. And does he need an indefinite stretch in the Reserves to regain his playing weight?

We have no idea of what team rules, if any, he broke, and what effect that has. Sometimes clubs get a bit precious over their team rules as if they are conducting a finishing school for boys. Yes they're important, but winning football is more important. Good team rules help with this but don't make it happen. I think Malthouse's attitude last week was very sensible.

* He publically questioned his axing when there are team rules (rightly or wrongly) and he knew full well his reasons for his axing.

We don't know if he knew the reasons for his axing given that a range of different reasons have been cited. Sure, you'd think that they would tell him the truth, but if so his response was rather unusual. And so what if he makes a simple comment to say he's disappointed with being axed.

IMO his form back in the reserves has not been outstanding as a player of his class should reflect. I think he should be kicking more than 3 goals in these types of matches and getting more possies but that is my opinion.

He's getting >20 possessions and kicking about 3 goals a game. That would suggest he is getting involved and not trying to take over.

I am completely trusting of the match committee and ND will gai his place back in the side when he is fit and ready and following team protocol.

NO indiviudal player is worth more than the team. (Collingwood would disagree with tarrant and Johnson though!)

Winning is most important. If an individual player helps with that then they should be in the side. If a team plays better when a guy is in the side, but that guy continues to go out and drink, who cares!

I'm not completely trusting of the match committee. They're not geniuses and can make mistakes. Who is to say they have or have not in this case. As someone pointed out here very aptly a few weeks ago, Roos and his guys were a few seconds from an ignominious finals failure last year. People wouldn't be quite so trusting if that had been the case.

[Matt79]

Originally posted by NMWBloods


Winning is most important. If an individual player helps with that then they should be in the side. If a team plays better when a guy is in the side, but that guy continues to go out and drink, who cares!

With ND out of the team we have 1L and 3W and the loss was to WC in Perth by 2 points so we cannot say put him back in because we are losing.