5 areas where we need to improve the most, on the field

[DeadlyAkkuret]

So play some of the kids and the ones that are overwhelmed in their first week or two are back to the 2s?

Or tell Eski that he's so far off his form of the year before that there's no way he'll be playing seniors for a while?

Or, for that mater, tell Leo that he can't jump anymore and not having anyone better to play in his place is no reason not to drop him?

This seems like a bizarre post.

Are we not playing kids now because they might be scared of the big boys?

When Did I include Eski as one of the players getting a free ride? You obviously didn't read the OP.

Leo is a tough one, and I did mention that he announced 2009 as his last season so at least he knows when his time is up. Having said that, if he becomes a hinderance midway through the season then a tough call will need to be made, but you can bet Roos would go easy on him because it's his last season.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

I cannot agree with your point about the leadership group protecting their own backsides. Matthews hardly got a game last year. The WHOLE team changed little in 2006-7. Most of those who continued to get a game were not even part of the leadership structure - Everett, LRT, Mcveigh (before he came good), Fosdike, Crouch (until injured), Bevo etc etc.

You're right TBC, things improved markedly in that area last year and it was so good to see, but it has to continue.

2005 credits are finished, or they at least should be, which means Roos has to pick the best 22 each week without thinking back to our flag. I believe the credits are slowly wearing thin and I'm optimistic that the trend of 2008 will continue in 2009.

We have some good kids, some have potential to be great kids, but the risks need to be taken. You don't just play youth for the sake of it, but if a kid is on par with a senior player then the younger player needs to be given the chance.

[ShockOfHair]

Agree goal-kicking has been ordinary, but field kicking has been third-rate. It's the one area where we really are embarrassed by comparison with the Cats and the Hawks. If we can pass as immaculately as those two sides and find targets consistently over 30, 40, 50 metres we could even be a threat to the top four.

The beauty of strong footskills is you move the ball with speed and confidence. Wasn't it great to see Hall one out in the forward line in the final against North? And how often did we see that last year?

[Go Swannies]

This seems like a bizarre post.

Are we not playing kids now because they might be scared of the big boys?

When Did I include Eski as one of the players getting a free ride? You obviously didn't read the OP.

Leo is a tough one, and I did mention that he announced 2009 as his last season so at least he knows when his time is up. Having said that, if he becomes a hinderance midway through the season then a tough call will need to be made, but you can bet Roos would go easy on him because it's his last season.

No - I was pointing out the error in saying that Roos should always pick the best 22 on form. With the kids (including a young Craig Bolton) Roos has said that he has to tell them they will make errors and that's okay, they'll stay in the team and let them grow into the role - even though others may be able to play their role better until they get on top of the senior pace.

I think there were weeks this year when Eski would not have been in our best 22 but Roos left him there. It'd be a bummer to go through what he had and then get dropped as he gets back on top of his game (even if it takes most of a season to get there).

And sometimes we need seniors to fill a role even though a kid could fill the role. Crouch is now well off the Crouch best but he still offers a lot to the team - as did Mathews at times. We can play a kid instead of Leo on a gorilla and take the resulting loss as "redevelopment". Perversely, I think one player who has got a few games on "premiership credits" is Barry hall. Even when he's way off his game and ruins our forward structure (esp. at the end of 2007) he still gets a run if he's fit enough to take the field.

And your last point on Leo being likely to get an easy run towards retirement certainly wasn't the case for Stuey Maxfield, even when he was the captain.

[BSA5]

Leo is a tough one, and I did mention that he announced 2009 as his last season so at least he knows when his time is up. Having said that, if he becomes a hinderance midway through the season then a tough call will need to be made, but you can bet Roos would go easy on him because it's his last season.

Hasn't Leo said that he knows he won't be an automatic selection next yeat?

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Hasn't Leo said that he knows he won't be an automatic selection next yeat?

That doesn't necessarily mean Roos shares that view.

In response to Go Swannies, I don't think you're giving Malceski enough credit for his performances last year. He most certainly was in our best 22, when fit, and I didn't feel there were any obvious replacements.

I should also add that a drop in form is more of a concern for someone who's actually playing. Eski was playing great footy before he was injured, he wasn't in poor form and there would be no reason not to play him once he's fully fit again. His inclusion probably did come too early and he should have played in the reserves for a couple of weeks like anyone else, but for the most part he was in our best 22 after he returned.

[BSA5]

That doesn't necessarily mean Roos shares that view.

I would say that it is highly likely Leo is only expressing that view because Roos and co said as much during contract negotiations.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

You make a good point there.