Bolton named as CHB in Mike's TOY

[liz]

Given that strong arguments can always be made for about 35 players in any AA team, I reckon this one is pretty good. Goodes is obviously in it too, while Hall and O'Keefe are named as near misses. All pretty reasonable.

Will be interesting to see whether Bolton or O'Keefe squeeze their way into the official AA team. I doubt both will but given that they often reward consistency over a couple of years, each has a decent chance, particularly if they're looking to raise the quota of a top 4 side beyond just one. (Hall will probably just miss given he's been in it for the last couple of years and this year is on a pretty similar level to another 3 or 4 tall forwards).

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,20371746%255E20123,00.html

[BigBadBarryNo1]

As per usual, a lot of that Melbourne media just goes by the big names, and most of them Melbourne teams who haven't even made the 8, let alone the top 4.

Craig Bolton is the most under-rated defender in the comp, along with Crouchy last year among the best in the league..

He's also had an outstanding year which he took the scalps of many.. and kept many afar quiet..

[NMWBloods]

I think that's a very good team Sheahan has picked.

As for the usual Melbourne media mafia anti-interstate paranoia, 13 players of the 22 are from interstate sides!

[ugg]

Sheahan really likes Bolton, he's also had him in his Top 50. However, could you really call him our CHB? Perhaps 2 years ago, or even at times last year but now LRT is definitely been picking up the opposing CHF. Still, it is an accolade that is well deserved.

It seems that picking a CHB for the AA team will be quite difficult. If Joel Bowden is named there I will eat my Swans cap.

[Jeffers1984]

Originally posted by ugg


It seems that picking a CHB for the AA team will be quite difficult. If Joel Bowden is named there I will eat my Swans cap.

If Joel Bowden aka Wayne Campbell mkII makes the AA team at all it would be a joke. Cheap possession getter if i've ever seen one.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by BigBadBarryNo1
As per usual, a lot of that Melbourne media just goes by the big names, and most of them Melbourne teams who haven't even made the 8, let alone the top 4.

Craig Bolton is the most under-rated defender in the comp, along with Crouchy last year among the best in the league..

He's also had an outstanding year which he took the scalps of many.. and kept many afar quiet..

Don't you think there's a reason why they are big names? Plus where a team finishes on the ladder should be irrelevant when picking individuals for AA.

Agree re Bolton, tho'. Very solid defender.

[peterss]

C. Bolts is a great player...From an opposition point of view ive always rated him.

Good to see Glassy in Sheehans team as A FB.....He deserves it

[liz]

Originally posted by Agent 86
Plus where a team finishes on the ladder should be irrelevant when picking individuals for AA.

Don't agree with that statement. Last year I think the Hawks had 4 or 5 named in the AA team, plus another couple considered to be "unlucky". If you have that many players considered to be amongst the best 22 performed in the land yet a team has only won a handful of games, does that not suggest that the criteria used to identify the best performers is flawed? - ie too much emphasis on stats and not enough on the things that actually lead to success.

This year 3 Port players look like making the team - Lade, Burgoyne and Cornes. Similar argument applies, even though individually you can find justification. (Personally I'd leave Cornes out - don't really think he's had much on an impact over the whole season, notwithstanding the odd brilliant game.)

I don't have a problem with the odd individual from a poorly performed team making it - ala Fevola this year - but when lots do, something is being missed.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by peterss
Good to see Glassy in Sheehans team as A FB.....He deserves it

Yep. Pretty awesome team & a big wrap for B2.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by liz
Don't agree with that statement. Last year I think the Hawks had 4 or 5 named in the AA team, plus another couple considered to be "unlucky". If you have that many players considered to be amongst the best 22 performed in the land yet a team has only won a handful of games, does that not suggest that the criteria used to identify the best performers is flawed? - ie too much emphasis on stats and not enough on the things that actually lead to success.

This year 3 Port players look like making the team - Lade, Burgoyne and Cornes. Similar argument applies, even though individually you can find justification. (Personally I'd leave Cornes out - don't really think he's had much on an impact over the whole season, notwithstanding the odd brilliant game.)

I don't have a problem with the odd individual from a poorly performed team making it - ala Fevola this year - but when lots do, something is being missed.

Yes, too many from a lower side does seem wrong. However, the AA team is an individual award. Teams are successful usually because they play as a team. A team with 4 stars and 18 also-rans who don't gel are likely to finish near the bottom, but the 4 stars could still make AA.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by liz
If you have that many players considered to be amongst the best 22 performed in the land yet a team has only won a handful of games, does that not suggest that the criteria used to identify the best performers is flawed?

Yes. But I thought this was about Sheahan's team.

Originally posted by liz
This year 3 Port players look like making the team - Lade, Burgoyne and Cornes. Similar argument applies, even though individually you can find justification. (Personally I'd leave Cornes out - don't really think he's had much on an impact over the whole season, notwithstanding the odd brilliant game.)

I'd have Burgoyne in my team.

Originally posted by liz
I don't have a problem with the odd individual from a poorly performed team making it - ala Fevola this year - but when lots do, something is being missed.

Sure. Still can't see where we differ.

[SimonH]

The team is very good, and CBolt (as with every year he's played for us) has very strong claims for AA selection: I marvel at the fact that the guy just never seems to make a mistake. But Sheahan's stated reason for preferring him over Chad Cornes is just bizarre:

"My colleagues have Chad Cornes at CHB and I certainly wouldn't quibble with Cornes in the team of the year, but Cornes simply didn't spend enough time at CHB this year."

Not only is CBolt never named at CHB in the listed team, but in practice he very rarely plays on the opposition CHF either. Particularly as LRT has grown in confidence, CBolt's allocated job is almost invariably on the opposition's 3rd tall(ish) forward.

[liz]

Originally posted by SimonH
I marvel at the fact that the guy just never seems to make a mistake.

He had a handball smothered last week...

[SimonH]

Originally posted by liz
He had a handball smothered last week...

Also gave up a goal with a short pass in the backline to Nick Davis that fell short, against the Roos. Creative licence.

[giant]

Nitpickers...

Davey & Pavlich look the odd men out to me. Think Jolly is a bit stiff too tho admittedly his first half wasn't exceptional.