Cooney out Smith in

[Twodogs]

Just as it says. Cooney hasnt come up and Smith will be the sub.

[anfo27]

didn't Smith play yesterday?

[bornadog]

I thought Pearce was rested yesterday, this is weird

[LostDoggy]

This is a ridiculous decision. Smith struggles to run out a half of football let alone 2 games in 2 days.

What happens if we get an early injury?

[westdog54]

This is a ridiculous decision. Smith struggles to run out a half of football let alone 2 games in 2 days.

What happens if we get an early injury?

Beat me to it.

I'm all for getting games into Smith but this is a bad one

[Twodogs]

I thought Pearce was rested yesterday, this is weird


Maybe Pearce was injured? I'm not saying that he was or wasnt, I'm just puttng forward an alternative.

[LostDoggy]

Adam did look a bit sore when he came off , obviously given a late fitness test and still a bit sore , his kneecap has to managed otherwise he won,t see out the season properly , I,d rather see him rested

.

[bornadog]

Maybe Pearce was injured? I'm not saying that he was or wasnt, I'm just puttng forward an alternative.

Did Pearce play yesterday. If so, I didn't evenm see him touch the ball:eek:

As it turned out, Smith had one disposal which was a mongrel shot at goal.

[azabob]

Did Pearce play yesterday. If so, I didn't evenm see him touch the ball:eek:

As it turned out, Smith had one disposal which was a mongrel shot at goal.

Pearce did not play yesterday.

[Cyberdoggie]

Mac said in the press conference that they decided on playing Smith because of his more mature body.

Perhaps Pearce will get to go to Darwin.

[Raw Toast]

Mac said in the press conference that they decided on playing Smith because of his more mature body.

Perhaps Pearce will get to go to Darwin.

He also said that Smith had only played 40m or so on the Saturday (and he must have pulled up ok) and you can understand choosing a player of Smith's type for a sub against North where you want someone who can come on and impact the contest.

I'd like to see Pearce get a go in Darwin but we'd want to be confident in his fitness.

[Twodogs]

He also said that Smith had only played 40m or so on the Saturday (and he must have pulled up ok) and you can understand choosing a player of Smith's type for a sub against North where you want someone who can come on and impact the contest.


It must have been an impressive 40 minutes!


BEST
Williamstown: Smith, Jong, Carr, Hoghton, McNamara


From http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/135617/default.aspx

[divvydan]

According to stats on AFL site, in the foxtel cup game, smith had 17d, 6 marks, 8 tackles, which if for 40minutes, would be a near insane number.

[ledge]

Did Pearce play yesterday. If so, I didn't evenm see him touch the ball:eek:

As it turned out, Smith had one disposal which was a mongrel shot at goal.

And 4 tackles i believe , on for less than a qtr, fair effort for an 18 yo.

[bornadog]

And 4 tackles i believe , on for less than a qtr, fair effort for an 18 yo.

If we are all happy with the sub getting one disposal, then our standards have dropped considerably.

As I said, I think Smith is going to be good, but at age 18 he has a long way to go.

[Cyberdoggie]

If we are all happy with the sub getting one disposal, then our standards have dropped considerably.

As I said, I think Smith is going to be good, but at age 18 he has a long way to go.

I don't we were happy with it but i guess due to the late scratching of Cooney we were left with the option of a lightly framed first gamer or Smith to come on as a sub, in what would likely be a fast finishing close and hard fought last quarter.

I can understand their reasonings, albeit it is a strange decision to pick a player as the emergency and not be comfortable in having them play if required.


I think Macca is doing an excellent job and he is setting some solid ground rules amongst the players in what is expected of them, but i still think the one area where we have been a little poorly prepared is the sub decisions. We started the year picking the wrong players as sub options and although we are getting the type right, we are still making some strange decisions in this area.

[Maddog37]

I am happy to go on the record and say Smith will be an absolute beast after a year or two in the system. Kicking will always be his knock but the good will far outweigh the bad. He will be a gun.

[bornadog]

I don't we were happy with it but i guess due to the late scratching of Cooney we were left with the option of a lightly framed first gamer or Smith to come on as a sub, in what would likely be a fast finishing close and hard fought last quarter.

I can understand their reasonings, albeit it is a strange decision to pick a player as the emergency and not be comfortable in having them play if required.


I think Macca is doing an excellent job and he is setting some solid ground rules amongst the players in what is expected of them, but i still think the one area where we have been a little poorly prepared is the sub decisions. We started the year picking the wrong players as sub options and although we are getting the type right, we are still making some strange decisions in this area.

With your comments, have you actually read this thread about Smith? No one was having a go at Smith for being the sub. There was an earlier comment on how well Smith played when he came on and I don't think he did. He threw himself into the game, but one disposal is not a good game.

[1eyedog]

If we are all happy with the sub getting one disposal, then our standards have dropped considerably.

As I said, I think Smith is going to be good, but at age 18 he has a long way to go.

He got to a number of contests and did what he needed to do off the ball or without getting the ball. He did a nice smother too in that final quarter and his tackle in our forward line when they had the ball had to stick otherwise they were away and it did.

It's certainly not always about getting the ball, especially as a sub playing their 3rd or 4th game. His desire was very good and so was his pressure on the opposition. His tackles resulted in 3 contested situations and turnovers which enabled us to maintain possession during the second half of the last quarter, so there you go, four possessions for the last quarter and four tackles and a nice smother.

[Ghost Dog]

With your comments, have you actually read this thread about Smith? No one was having a go at Smith for being the sub. There was an earlier comment on how well Smith played when he came on and I don't think he did. He threw himself into the game, but one disposal is not a good game.

Put away your stat sheet for just a minute.
How long was he out on the ground for?
Did he not play the day before?
Did the coach not give him a mention in the press conf?
Not having a good game is different from not having much of a go.

12 minutes FFS! Not a good game???

[Ozza]

Why is Smith's game even a talking point? He was on the ground for about 15 minutes. It was a non-event.

[BulldogBelle]

12 minutes to be exact

[bornadog]

He got to a number of contests and did what he needed to do off the ball or without getting the ball. He did a nice smother too in that final quarter and his tackle in our forward line when they had the ball had to stick otherwise they were away and it did.

It's certainly not always about getting the ball, especially as a sub playing their 3rd or 4th game. His desire was very good and so was his pressure on the opposition. His tackles resulted in 3 contested situations and turnovers which enabled us to maintain possession during the second half of the last quarter, so there you go, four possessions for the last quarter and four tackles and a nice smother.


Put away your stat sheet for just a minute.
How long was he out on the ground for?
Did he not play the day before?
Did the coach not give him a mention in the press conf?
Not having a good game is different from not having much of a go.

12 minutes FFS! Not a good game???

All well and good. Your standards are different to mine.

[1eyedog]

All well and good. Your standards are different to mine.

But you are so quick to contradict yourself and protect the ordinary when it suits you. Next time you do I'll use it as an example for you.

[bornadog]

But you are so quick to contradict yourself and protect the ordinary when it suits you. Next time you do I'll use it as an example for you.

That's utter BS

I don't understand what your problem is here.

[1eyedog]

That's utter BS

I said that BAD was naive but I don't believe that is true.

[bornadog]

Naive too.

I really don't know what your problem is.

[1eyedog]

Apologies for the last comment, it's not accurate.

As a generalisation I feel some of your posts in the past have over-protected some of the senior players from scrutiny which is at odds with the way you have judged Smith's last quarter effort as sub against the Roos. You of all people should know how important one percenters and team orientated acts (smothers, tackles) are in a defensive sense, but Smith's efforts also gave us the opportunity to keep possession late in the last. His game wasn't good, but he made a good contribution.

Given you are one of the more astute spectators on the forum I thought you may have appreciated his efforts (he is only 18), as most others who saw his last quarter have done. I'm not trying to censor you from your opinion but it is my feeling that you have been much less hard on more senior players who have provided less in an entire game than what Clay did in one quarter last week. Just my opinion. I know you weren't having a go at him directly in any form but I am surprised that you couldn't find a positive in his efforts. Sometimes you don't get the ball or are unable to get the ball and there can be a tendency to drop off, but he did what he was able to control and that was hunt the man and he did it very effectively.

As mentioned that tackle he stuck late in the last was a beauty and critical to the point in play because North were well set up to score and get within 12 points. I'm just surprised that you would be driven by the accumulation of raw stats rather than the impact Smith's defensive work had on the micro-context of the game. But yes, we all have different standards and that's fine.

[bornadog]

As a generalisation I feel some of your posts in the past have over-protected some of the senior players from scrutiny .

Your right that is a generalisation and without examples I can't comment.


Smith's efforts also gave us the opportunity to keep possession late in the last. His game wasn't good, but he made a good contribution. .

Yes the tackles were a good contribution.


I'm not trying to censor you from your opinion but it is my feeling that you have been much less hard on more senior players who have provided less in an entire game than what Clay did in one quarter last week. Just my opinion. I know you weren't having a go at him directly in any form but I am surprised that you couldn't find a positive in his efforts. .

So when I had a go at Boyd for his bad kicking that's not being critical? I don't comment on every single player in a match. I just give my opinions which obviously differ to yours.



As mentioned that tackle he stuck late in the last was a beauty and critical to the point in play because North were well set up to score and get within 12 points. I'm just surprised that you would be driven by the accumulation of raw stats rather than the impact Smith's defensive work had on the micro-context of the game.

ok it was a great tackle, pity the kid can't kick. Hopefully he will improve this aspect of his game in the future.

[DragzLS1]

Pressure acts are not a stat and I think are very important. If I recall he had 4 tackles or attempts. I like smith and think he done enough when he came on. Hopefully this week he get more time on and get a few disposals under his belt aswell.

[Ghost Dog]

Apologies for the last comment, it's not accurate.

As a generalisation I feel some of your posts in the past have over-protected some of the senior players from scrutiny which is at odds with the way you have judged Smith's last quarter effort as sub against the Roos. You of all people should know how important one percenters and team orientated acts (smothers, tackles) are in a defensive sense, but Smith's efforts also gave us the opportunity to keep possession late in the last. His game wasn't good, but he made a good contribution.


It wasn't even a full quarter of footy! Watched him like a hawk for the entire 12 minutes or whatever it was. He played well, no doubt.

[Desipura]

Saw young Clay during my lunch break at the Newport Bakery on Monday, was tucking into some stir fry, had the open shirt showing of his tattoo on his chest.

[Ghost Dog]

Saw young Clay during my lunch break at the Newport Bakery on Monday, was tucking into some stir fry, had the open shirt showing of his tattoo on his chest.

What's the tatt?

[G-Mo77]

What's the tatt?

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2011/11/19/1226199/779535-clay-smith.gif

Live the Dream

[1eyedog]

Your right that is a generalisation and without examples I can't comment.



Yes the tackles were a good contribution.



So when I had a go at Boyd for his bad kicking that's not being critical? I don't comment on every single player in a match. I just give my opinions which obviously differ to yours.




ok it was a great tackle, pity the kid can't kick. Hopefully he will improve this aspect of his game in the future.

Thanks for the measured response. It's good to see some acknowledgement of his output other than just disappointment at his disposal tally.

[Mantis]

The greatest area of concern regarding his performance was that he only scored 10 SC points which did nothing to increase his price. ;)

[LostDoggy]

the greatest area of concern regarding his performance was that he only scored 10 sc points which did nothing to increase his price. ;)

THIs! :D

[Sedat]

As mentioned that tackle he stuck late in the last was a beauty and critical to the point in play because North were well set up to score and get within 12 points.
I'm really, really concerned about his kicking but one thing I have no problem at all with is his appetite for the contest. You can tell that he thrives on body contact and loves the contested situation, either with ball in hand or without. For someone with only half a pre-season to his name and with little core strength, that tackle was an absolute ripper and completely nailed someone who took him on and is a good 2-3 pre-seasons ahead of him in terms of core strength and physical development.

I really hope his kicking can be improved because my great fear is that opposition clubs will peel off him, isolate him in space and sweat on the next passage in anticipation of a turnover. We don't need him to become Jarman or Bayes, just safe with his disposal by foot. Right here and now, he is very dicey by foot.

[LostDoggy]

I really hope his kicking can be improved because my great fear is that opposition clubs will peel off him, isolate him in space and sweat on the next passage in anticipation of a turnover. We don't need him to become Jarman or Bayes, just safe with his disposal by foot. Right here and now, he is very dicey by foot.

A Boyd clone in so many ways. He needs to just learn his limitations and play within them.

Scott West wasn't a great kick in the second half of his career but it never limited his effectiveness. Smith just needs to get smart -- doesn't need to learn decision making from his captain!

[Remi Moses]

The captain of Essendon at one stage didn't want to kick the ball.
Looking on the outside only, but he's character looks one of someone who will work at it.

[EasternWest]

A Boyd clone in so many ways. He needs to just learn his limitations and play within them.

Scott West wasn't a great kick in the second half of his career but it never limited his effectiveness. Smith just needs to get smart -- doesn't need to learn decision making from his captain!

Yes and no. Boyd's always had the ability to penetrate with his kicks, which at least means he can get some decent distance. Smith seems to scoop the ball up.

[1eyedog]

I'm really, really concerned about his kicking but one thing I have no problem at all with is his appetite for the contest. You can tell that he thrives on body contact and loves the contested situation, either with ball in hand or without. For someone with only half a pre-season to his name and with little core strength, that tackle was an absolute ripper and completely nailed someone who took him on and is a good 2-3 pre-seasons ahead of him in terms of core strength and physical development.

I really hope his kicking can be improved because my great fear is that opposition clubs will peel off him, isolate him in space and sweat on the next passage in anticipation of a turnover. We don't need him to become Jarman or Bayes, just safe with his disposal by foot. Right here and now, he is very dicey by foot.

Yes he is but we can play to his strengths until he improves in this area. He will need support around the ball so when he does win it he has options by hand. Easier said than done I know but this means he will always need to be brought to the contest, which is his strength anyway. He's a ball hunter and it is harder to isolate these guys in space. If he has support he will have options by hand.

I'm not sure whether he is a good instinctive decision maker but his kicking deficiency will be reduced if he can find a quick short option (ala Cross). There is a lot of upside as you have stated and a lot of time for improvement. He's got the basics in place he just needs to lower his eyes every time he gets the ball for a while.

[stefoid]

Do you make him start again from a new action or try to get his 'natural' action more precise?

[1eyedog]

Do you make him start again from a new action or try to get his 'natural' action more precise?

My opinion is that you can never weed out 100% of the old action and when you try to supersede it with a new one you get a blend of the two, and then uncertainty occurs when its not working for you.

Make the best of the natural one, with a few tricks and tips for improving it (i.e working on releasing the hand slightly later, head over the ball, don't roll the shoulders back through the action etc.

Imaginary laser lines from my boot to the goals worked really well for me with set shots, Steve Hocking when he was at Newtown FC showed me this one.

[Mofra]

Is Smith's whole action bad or just his ball drop?

His ball-drop looks ridiculous and working on that aspect alone should do wonders for his kicking. I know everyone harps on about Jobe Watson's kicking improvement, but for mine Mitch Wallis has shown alot of improvement in just 12 months - much greater penetration this year. An example closer to home and showing rapid improvement.

[LostDoggy]

My opinion is that you can never weed out 100% of the old action and when you try to supersede it with a new one you get a blend of the two, and then uncertainty occurs when its not working for you.

Make the best of the natural one, with a few tricks and tips for improving it (i.e working on releasing the hand slightly later, head over the ball, don't roll the shoulders back through the action etc.

Imaginary laser lines from my boot to the goals worked really well for me with set shots, Steve Hocking when he was at Newtown FC showed me this one.

Golf coaches make a living off this stuff. You never reinvent a swing from scratch.. there are already embedded mechanics in every action that you can't force change on, things where forcing change would create more harm than good, damaging confidence and increasing potential of injury.

It's a matter of modifying existing mechanics so that the change feels completely natural. It also takes a hell of a long time to do properly, and things often get a lot worse before they get better.