TO HOT TO HANDLE
Senior List
NO we want to make the finals and until we cant we can.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Honestly, I reckon Hardwick would rather win than take the extra pick, especially when we're playing kids and that teaching the kids how to win games is, IMO, more important than adding an extra top 30 pick.pretty much my thinking. just a question though.
we are going into say rnd 20 we have won 4 games. we are to play two sides we are likely to lose against so we dont really need to change anything but one side we are a good chance to maybe win do we pick a side for that game that is structurally poor and unlikely to win thus ensuring a shot at a high quality pick and a bonus 2nd rounder or do we go all out.
i know what i would do. give me a shot at a possible martin type and the extra pick anyday.
It's not "experimenting" when you suddenly send your defenders to attack and your forwards to defense in the last quarter of Round 18. Melbourne's aim was not to figure out whether Petterd would make a good defender. It was to lose the match.Yes, Melbourne were getting as many games as they can into the kids last year. But it is clear as day they were tanking with how they decided to 'experiment' by playing players out of position when they looked like a chance of winning.
It's not "tanking" to give games to kids rather than veterans once you believe you can't make finals. If you're out of the running for 2010, you stop giving games to players who won't be with you next year anyway, get more conservative with managing injury, and focus on 2011. But on match day every one of your players and coaches wants to win that game.And you could say we have been tanking this year anyway.. Hardwick has said time and again that he is getting games into kids and testing players in various positions rather than playing the "best team" available.
You guys don't seem to realise we already have the draft picks, we just need to make sure they develop properly.
We don't need to go overboard with more top 10 picks, though we do need some quality players.
We already have Pick 1 (Lids), 2 (Cotch), 3 (Martin) and 4 (Tambling). The first 3 make up our starting midfield.
We need some more quality players, but as proven in the last draft which was supposedly very weak, we can get talent anywhere. We just need to develop them.
That said, I wouldn't be chasing cheap wins. I would rather us be competitive for the rest of the season and finish last, than be up and down and snag some wins against nothing opponents but finish 15th or 14th.
I want pick 4. I want one of the clear best players in the country because after the top 4 it gets a bit cloudy.
But we don't need to tank to do that as we aren't good enough to finish anywhere but last unless Adelaide or West Coast go on a massive tank mission.
We can beat West Coast, North, Adelaide and Port on the run home.
The other teams should have us covered if they play a reasonable game and at least one of those poorer teams we can beat will be better than us on the day depending on whether the good or bad versions of Port and North turn up.
3-4 wins. Pick four, priority pick, plenty of games being put into the kids and into them learning the game plan and we are well on our way. That's the realistic scenario.
In the last 3 games of this season we play against the Blues, Saints & Port. Now imagine going into those games with the following lineup:
B:Farmer Gourdis Moore
HB: Deledio McGuane Newman
C: Tambling Cotchin Jackson
HF: Astbury Griffiths Nason
F: Nahas Riewoldt Taylor
R: Graham Martin Foley
I/C: Vickery Tuck Edwards Webberley
absolutely, lets not get carried away this team still needs heaps of new talent
I really take issue with some of the definitions being used here.
It's not "experimenting" when you suddenly send your defenders to attack and your forwards to defense in the last quarter of Round 18. Melbourne's aim was not to figure out whether Petterd would make a good defender. It was to lose the match.
It's not "tanking" to give games to kids rather than veterans once you believe you can't make finals. If you're out of the running for 2010, you stop giving games to players who won't be with you next year anyway, get more conservative with managing injury, and focus on 2011. But on match day every one of your players and coaches wants to win that game.
Tanking is when you attempt to lose. RFC has never done this and I hope to god never will.
A question on this subject.
Can any one name a successful person or organisation, in any field, any where in the world, that achieved their success by doing anything, besides striving to be the best at all times?
Can you name a successful person or organisation, in any field, anywhere in the world that's forced to operate within a contrived system that rewards failure like the AFL?
I'd rather us get a few more wins over pick 4 any day of the week. Who's to say pick 4 is going to be better than say pick 6 8 15 etc...
I still think we can finish at least 14th people forget that the Crows Roo's and Eagles are just as ordinary as what we have been if not worse (seeing as they have more experienced players) than us this year.
Geelong Football Club
Fair enough regarding winning against the shit/middle of the road sides, but I want to put a different scenario to you and others.I hope the club doesn't think that way. Would be just so dumb and typical Richmond.
Winning meaningless games against other shit or middle of the round teams that have put the cue in the rack for the season that costs us better picks/more picks (P.P). We still have the worst list in the comp, 1 win doesn't change that. Some cheap wins later on in the season that hurt us long-term will do us no good. Just like 2008/2009. All that winning culture crap that people go on about is absolute B.S. It does nothing if you don't have the talent.
Fair enough regarding winning against the shit/middle of the road sides, but I want to put a different scenario to you and others.
This year from rounds 15-21 we play Freo(MCG R15), the Pies(MCG R17), the Saints(Dome R21) & Blues(MCG R20). All 4 are likely to be in the finals and when we play them there is no way they will have put the cue in the rack. Now lets for a moment assume that we find ourselves in a winning position in 2 of those matches, having entered the game with the following lineup:
B:Farmer Gourdis Moore
HB: Deledio McGuane Newman
C: Tambling Cotchin Jackson
HF: Astbury Griffiths Nason
F: Nahas Riewoldt Taylor
R: Graham Martin Foley
I/C: Vickery Tuck Edwards Connors
Would you prefer to see them fight out the game and walk off with a win and get a huge boost in confidence having beaten a couple of top 8 sides or would you prefer to see them get beaten just so we ensured that we maintained picks 4 & 27/28?
Given the make up of that side I know what I would prefer to see happen and that is a win.
I can't see us doing it either, but just wanted to find out if people who want us to get pick 4 & 27/28 would be prepared to forego a meaningful win or 2 to do so.In that situation I wouldn't be too pissed off if we managed to upset some good top 8 teams with a lot of kids playing but honestly IMO our list is so bad we must ensure we get the best possible outcome this year and next year at the draft - pick 4, extra 2nd round pick (P.P), next year extra first round P.P, etc.
I couldn't see us beating any good teams though even if we tried to, I'm more worried about bad/middle of the road teams who have put the cue in the rack (early surgery, resting, "experimenting", etc) and we snatch a win or 2 costing us long term.
I can't see us doing it either, but just wanted to find out if people who want us to get pick 4 & 27/28 would be prepared to forego a meaningful win or 2 to do so.