Analysis Selection Integrity

Remove this Banner Ad

The Old Dark Navy's

The Old Dark Navy's

Moderator
Veteran 10k Posts 30k Posts HBF's Milk Crate - 70k Posts BeanCoiNFT Investor Zombie Lover Carlton Blues - Matthew Kreuzer Sponsor 2016 Carlton Blues - Matthew Kreuzer Sponsor 2015
Nov 8, 2000
94,884
121,088
Wherever I am
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Nottingham Forest
This one is a little bit List Management, a little bit Development, a little bit of the Voss thread. I couldn't quite decide what thread it belonged in. This is something that comes up regularly. We can alter the title to Selection Committee or however it develops over time.

We hear about favourite players not being dropped, VFL players not being ready etc. Let's keep the discussion going in here wherever possible.

To start off with, I have just gone through the 18 AFL teams' lists. This is the list of current AFL players yet to debut.

11 Carlton, Geelong
10 GWS
9 Essendon
8 Port, Richmond, Sydney, West Coast
7 Brisbane, Gold Coast, Hawthorn, North, St Kilda
6 Collingwood, Fremantle, Bulldogs
5 Adelaide, Melbourne

Obviously, a heap of these are first year players. I would expect teams that have been struggling to be debuting players more often to find the right combination. Then there are injuries.

I have to think that some teams throw caution to the wind and try out a new player here or there, just to see how they go in the big time. Give them exposure, give them a taste so they know what to strive for. If Carlton's issue is genuinely that players do not deserve a call up, then we have to look at recruiting, because other teams don't seem to have that issue.
 
Now this is a good thread.

This has been an issue at the club in my personal (non SOC) opinion for more than 20 years.

In the premiership years of the club we always had a strong match committee, by strong I mean a diverse range of very good football opinions each with a vote on selection.

I've heard stories of match committee meeting lasting for hours with heated debate in the 80s and 90s.

In the last couple of decades the match committee has gone by the wayside and become more of a one man show. Namely whoever the senior coach is at the time.

This is both unfair and inneficient in my opinion.

It is unfair to the coach as it does not share the responsibility and pressure around. It creates a situation where the senior coach will go for what they see as the safest options rather than the calculated risk.

This is why we have gone year after year without 'exploring' our lists.

My classic example is Clinton Benjamin. Never given a senior game in two years. IMO he was brilliant at reserves level and should have been given at least one chance. There are many more.

I think it would be beneficial for the club to reinstate the old proper match committee model and spread the responsibility around, football board members, head of footy, team leaders, line coaches etc, give them all a vote.

Even though it takes power away from the senior coach it also takes pressure off the senior coach as well.

Team selection should be a team process.

(again, personal opinion, not SOC, please do not conflate this particular post, this is all I will post, not going to debate, just my personal opinion right or wrong) Thanks :)
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Gointocarlton said:
You'd expect it to be all the coaches, HP and Brad Lloyd. Maybe Crippa as well?
Click to expand...

Don't think HP needs to be there - they should be classifying players prior to selection as either fully fit/available, recommended for managed minutes in the reserves, or unavailable. The MC then select based on that availability report.

I think Voss and Hansen are a given as Senior Coach and Senior Assistant. Hamill, Clarke and Russell are borderline for me - similarly to how I feel about HP, I reckon these three could be asked to provide a brief report prior to selection on players from their line that they have particularly strong feelings about. Could be Hamill saying he's done with Gov and wants him out ASAP, or Clarke saying he's got concerns about Walsh's role and would prefer to see him moved to a wing, or Russell saying he wants to see a more aggressive forward 50 lineup rather than selecting so many defensive role players etc. Don't think they need a seat at the table as such, to add noise to every selection discussion, but just an opportunity to put forward their thoughts for consideration.

Power and Ebert almost certainly the same - quick report on the VFL performances from the previous week and an update on who they think is ready for senior elevation/who they think needs to be left in the 2s for further development.

I'd then want the Head of Football involved, not to make every decision, but to weigh any disagreements between Voss and Hansen and make a tie-breaker call if consensus can't be reached. Also, to ensure that due consideration is being given to the requests/feedback provided by HP, Line Coaches and VFL/Development.

TL/DR:

HP, Line Coaches and VFL/Development provide notes/requests/feedback via written submission prior to selection.
Voss and Hansen handle the bulk of the Selection choices, but with oversight from the Head of Football to ensure the feedback from other departments is being given due consideration, and to make a "captains call" if Voss and Hansen can't come to a consensus on any given decision.
 
Obviously some favourites have been picked ahead of others over the last few years
Remember when Hewett got dropped last year? Or Cottrell ruched back for the gws game (how did that go??)
Or even pitto coming back to play 50% game time vs crows (who ended up beating us, when TDK had been doing great solo).
Arrogant team selection decisions burnt us last year.
Club going no where fast, tough list and selection calls need to be made but won’t be.
 
I'll preface this post by saying I'm assuming we have clearly defined "standards" that players are encouraged/coached to uphold on the field.

Quite a few senior players need dropping for not upholding standards, the most emblematic of which, for me, is McGovern. I don't want to start a witch hunt but most of his game this year has been terrible, soccers off the ground in D50 into an opponents hands, dropping regulation marks, the number of mixups this guy is involved in really cooks me. I think this is a huge issue with the MC, standard you walk past is standard you accept and all that.

Would like to see the senior players that need it getting a spell in the twos, humbling themselves, working on their deficiencies and setting an example for the younger blokes.
 
I think people need to realise that the level of omissions resorted to these day to "discipline" players, or get them to find form in the 2s, across the competition is not like what it used to be in the good old days. Player management has flipped to coaching players through their problems and into form (with exceptions of course). In the old days, players, even stars, got dropped for shits and giggles the minute they had a bad game or two. That simply doesnt happen these days (or at least it's rare).
Can I also add that I dont subscribe to the notion that "favourites" are played, never have never will. They may be tireless trainers, follow the role (albeit a lesser one) given them to a T and they may well get them selected. But "favourite" as in teachers pet (and they are in poor form)? Sorry but I dont this happens in 2025 IMO.
Just saying.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Bit of recruitment integrity wouldn't go astray either

Recruiting a great half back for his midfield potential who now plays forward when he can stay on the ground (OK Williams might still be our best small forward still but that's an indictment of the recruiting and development teams).

Recruiting a forward who is now attempting to play defensive despite regular brain explosions when he can stay on the ground.

Seriously if they can't play their position drop them instead of trying to squeeze them in elsewhere. Docherty is a back and if he can't play he shouldn't get a game. Who would you rather have in the midfield Docherty or Kennedy??

Get Cripps out of the damn ruck and back to resting in the forward line
 
Gointocarlton said:
You'd expect it to be all the coaches, HP and Brad Lloyd. Maybe Crippa as well?
Click to expand...
From experience the HC will have meetings with these people but the selection committee will generally be the captain/ maybe one more from player leadership the HC and another senior coach or two. All the rest just provide info for them to use before that
 
This couples with list management. We are so bereft of KPS depth that Gov is allowed to get away with repeated $hite performances because there's no available alternative for his role.

Our small forward conglomerate is a merry go round mess where the same faces get recycled through. Motlop has had a better fortnight. Fogarty is the only one close to ticking the defensive forward pressure box but doesn't do much else. Evans, well, i don't wtf his role is other than to make our other very average small forwards look better than what they're delivering.

The big test is to see how they manage Doc at the selection table. We already have enough passengers based on performances across the first 3 rounds that we can ill afford to carry him on current form. He'll be starting against the Pies given the occasion. But if he pulls another stinker then he has to become sub (at best) the following week.

It was so flipping disheartening that it took an injury crisis at the back end of last year for us to bring in a few fresh faces in the second last round, only to eventually drop them in favour of underdone players.

The knocks on Moir are that he can't get through a full game. Can he really do any worse than some of the players stinking it up in the seniors? Probably not. MC seem so bloody conservative and scared that they think playing a newbie will somehow be the difference between winning and losing. Fact is, a newbie will not be the difference. It will be the bottom 8 players that have been repeatedly stinking it up.
 
Gointocarlton said:
I think people need to realise that the level of omissions resorted to these day to "discipline" players, or get them to find form in the 2s, across the competition is not like what it used to be in the good old days. Player management has flipped to coaching players through their problems and into form (with exceptions of course). In the old days, players, even stars, got dropped for shits and giggles the minute they had a bad game or two. That simply doesnt happen these days (or at least it's rare).
Can I also add that I dont subscribe to the notion that "favourites" are played, never have never will. They may be tireless trainers, follow the role (albeit a lesser one) given them to a T and they may well get them selected. But "favourite" as in teachers pet (and they are in poor form)? Sorry but I dont this happens in 2025 IMO.
Just saying.
Click to expand...

It's not necessarily "favourites", but more guys with runs on the boards who are horribly out of form but remain in the side when they should probably be pushed back to find form. This does 2 things, allows a seasoned player to help guide the younger players in the VFL and gives an opportunity to a younger player to have a taste of AFL.

I feel we are a " break glass in case of an emergency" selection panel, where our reserves are given a crack when the injuries mount up.

Last season, Ollie went through a nightmare 4-5 weeks and should have been given a spell and Binns was performing well in the twos and should have been given a crack, opportunity missed. Cotters, after 5 weeks off last season through injury, straight back in, seriously, Cotters is an automatic selection, and we were travelling well at the time too?

Sometimes guys just need to be given an opportunity at the higher level and they rise to the occasion, just take a look at Sam Davidson the other night, I think a few on here spoke of him last year as a pick up for a 3rd tall? Got his opportunity on a wing at the Dogs and so far has been a great pick up and boy can he run.
 
RAPPA said:
It was so flipping disheartening that it took an injury crisis at the back end of last year for us to bring in a few fresh faces in the second last round, only to eventually drop them in favour of underdone players.

The knocks on Moir are that he can't get through a full game. Can he really do any worse than some of the players stinking it up in the seniors? Probably not. MC seem so bloody conservative and scared that they think playing a newbie will somehow be the difference between winning and losing. Fact is, a newbie will not be the difference. It will be the bottom 8 players that have been repeatedly stinking it up.
Click to expand...

100 per cent, we did the same the year before, injuries forced their hand. It was disheartening as a supporter of the club watching that side play in the prelim after watching the effort of the 2 previous weeks of football. Imagine how those players felt?

If that is the knock on Moir, how come we some time select players coming back from injury to be our sub?
 
Voss played favourites and very much backed in the veterans while with the Lions - partially leading to the go home 5 - and he's broadly continued that with Carlton. Maybe not as stringent as he has given Hollands & Moo extended and consistent runs and lately Motlop, but broadly over the journey the veterans get picked and picked again over youth.

Then if youth does get a chance, seemingly at the first chance they're out again. Moir showed spark in his 2 games last yr and looked every bit a creative and dangerous medium/small fwd, albeit as sub, yet hasn't been seen since. Binns dominated the VFL and won VFL player of the yr (for the Blues iirc), still didn't and doesn't get a go.

Meanwhile Franky Evans walks in off the street, played about the worst game for years at Carlton, dropped, plays just a mediocre game in the 2s, brought straight back in to have yet another poor game. Make it make sense.
 
LemmingMaster said:
Reading the VFL report, Evans had a good game. Maybe he is actually a better option than what we have running around in the 2's.
Click to expand...
It's not really as straight forward as that. We know, for a fact, that Evans isn't taking us anywhere. 2 other clubs already told us that, we tried anyway and he's shown us in 2 games they were right.

Some guys need to pep and/or spark of playing senior footy to ignite things. We need to see if anyone can make the step up. Even if they can't I'd rather see the kids tried than a journeyman we know isn't going anywhere.

The worst thing it can do is expose them to what elite level footy is and know what they directly need to work on. Give them the taste and they might work for more. I can't imagine how Moir, Binns & co. must feel seeing guys signed up last minute and given multiple goes ahead of them.
 
Coops93 said:
Voss played favourites and very much backed in the veterans while with the Lions - partially leading to the go home 5 - and he's broadly continued that with Carlton. Maybe not as stringent as he has given Hollands & Moo extended and consistent runs and lately Motlop, but broadly over the journey the veterans get picked and picked again over youth.

Then if youth does get a chance, seemingly at the first chance they're out again. Moir showed spark in his 2 games last yr and looked every bit a creative and dangerous medium/small fwd, albeit as sub, yet hasn't been seen since. Binns dominated the VFL and won VFL player of the yr (for the Blues iirc), still didn't and doesn't get a go.

Meanwhile Franky Evans walks in off the street, played about the worst game for years at Carlton, dropped, plays just a mediocre game in the 2s, brought straight back in to have yet another poor game. Make it make sense.
Click to expand...
While I agree with the sentiment in general, I'm not sure how you rate Evans' game worse then Motlop's in Round 1, considering he kicked a goal, and Motlop didn't, and somehow managed to avoid the axe despite playing his worst game for the club.

But yeah, Favorites and Self preservation is Voss' number it seems.
 
Youth for youth sake as a selection criteria is as dumb as experience for experience sake.

If players are ready and ( most importantly) will add value, they should be considered of course.

Likewise, if dropping certain players will reduce value, why do it?

Surely our players are beyond being “sent a message” at this stage.

Pick the best team to win this week.
 

Analysis Selection Integrity


Write your reply...
Back
Top