#47,#11 Jarryd Blair
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
For: Can be a real contributor. He was heroic against GWS and has had other good games from time to time. Good clubman and nice bloke, apparently.
Against: Only plays well against weak sides and goes missing against better opponents. Only has one good game in about six. All-Australian Champion at pulling faces to show how hard he is trying while he ineffectually chases an opponent who has beaten him for the ball again.
Summary: . Reached his ceiling five years ago and has not improved at all since then despite many opportunities. No apparent potential for further improvement.
Executive summary: list-clogger.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
 |
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Is there a cap on that? Cos by Nicks the last few days, only PENDLES, sidey and beams should stay.
Why don't we just bring Leroy and Neon back?
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I'll give you Sidey, TP. Less certain about the ongoing worth of the other two you mention, going forward. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Seriously, we all know that Blair has significant limitations. We also know that the principal aim of the recruiting over the last two years has been to bring high-quality draft talent into the Club. In another thread yesterday, I identified 10 kids who've been recruited in that time. A number of them we haven't even seen on the park, yet. The problem is that the talented kids have to reach the point where the standard of their game compels their inclusion ahead of Blair. So far, I think we've all identified the problem (ie, Blair won't be in the next premiership team) but the solution has not yet announced himself.
Thus, earlier in the season, there were repeated calls for Kyle Martin to be given Blair's spot. Most of those calls subsided after Kyle played a little in the seniors. Perhaps he wasn't given enough of a chance but it appears from this distance that the Club doesn't think he has what it takes, either.
Over time, as the team improves generally, this will take care of itself. If the team doesn't improve enough, we have a much wider problem. Blair is a courageous, hard-working, desperate little fellow who bleeds black and white. Ultimately, that isn't enough - but I am constantly saddened to see him being blamed for the fact that the Club has no-one ready, yet, to take his place. |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | Seriously, we all know that Blair has significant limitations. We also know that the principal aim of the recruiting over the last two years has been to bring high-quality draft talent into the Club. In another thread yesterday, I identified 10 kids who've been recruited in that time. A number of them we haven't even seen on the park, yet. The problem is that the talented kids have to reach the point where the standard of their game compels their inclusion ahead of Blair. So far, I think we've all identified the problem (ie, Blair won't be in the next premiership team) but the solution has not yet announced himself.
Thus, earlier in the season, there were repeated calls for Kyle Martin to be given Blair's spot. Most of those calls subsided after Kyle played a little in the seniors. Perhaps he wasn't given enough of a chance but it appears from this distance that the Club doesn't think he has what it takes, either. WY
Over time, as the team improves generally, this will take care of itself. If the team doesn't improve enough, we have a much wider problem. Blair is a courageous, hard-working, desperate little fellow who bleeds black and white. Ultimately, that isn't enough - but I am constantly saddened to see him being blamed for the fact that the Club has no-one ready, yet, to take his place.
|
The club obviously thinks martin is a dud.
The trouble is blair is a dud
So try someone else.
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The team gets picked with 22 in it. At the moment, I reckon the 'Pies field about 16 senior-standard players each week. The revolving door selection policy seemed to happen for 2 reasons. First, a number of the young talents weren't demanding selection (injury, indifferent form etc) and secondly, apart from Frost, Langdon, Witts and Broomhead, none did enough when they came up to warrant retention.
I don't think an anyonebutblair strategy is useful. I think Karnezis will get that spot next year, if he stands up physically, but I'd like it to be because his form demands it and because his fitness base has reached the standard required to play senior footy, week in, week out. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw, you are making excellent sense. I don't think any amongst the more intelligent of us are blaming Blair - as you say, he bleeds black and white and does his best within his limitations.
However, it seems quite pointless to continue selecting a not-quite-there player with no future upside when we could be selecting a kid who might or might not make the grade.
Your example of Martin is as good a case as any. Quite possibly, given a dozen senior games, Martin will turn out not to be an upgrade on Blair. Call that a 50-50 chance. He's unlikely to be much of a downgrade - with the bar set at three kicks in four quarters against Hawthorn there isn't room to contribute much less. So we have a 50% chance of getting an upgrade, and a 50% chance of getting nothing.
On the other hand, what are the odds on Blair being an upgrade on Blair? Pretty much zero.
PS: the season is over now but, looking back, I'm thinking we might have done just as well to have used Marty Clarke in Blair's spot. Doubtful he would have done a lot less, and might just have done a fair bit more. In both cases, of course, there isn't a lot of future in the ploy. If a player has reached his peak and isn't up to standard, there is no purpose in selecting him. time to roll the dice and look to the future.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
neil 
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | Seriously, we all know that Blair has significant limitations. We also know that the principal aim of the recruiting over the last two years has been to bring high-quality draft talent into the Club. In another thread yesterday, I identified 10 kids who've been recruited in that time. A number of them we haven't even seen on the park, yet. The problem is that the talented kids have to reach the point where the standard of their game compels their inclusion ahead of Blair. So far, I think we've all identified the problem (ie, Blair won't be in the next premiership team) but the solution has not yet announced himself.
Thus, earlier in the season, there were repeated calls for Kyle Martin to be given Blair's spot. Most of those calls subsided after Kyle played a little in the seniors. Perhaps he wasn't given enough of a chance but it appears from this distance that the Club doesn't think he has what it takes, either.
Over time, as the team improves generally, this will take care of itself. If the team doesn't improve enough, we have a much wider problem. Blair is a courageous, hard-working, desperate little fellow who bleeds black and white. Ultimately, that isn't enough - but I am constantly saddened to see him being blamed for the fact that the Club has no-one ready, yet, to take his place. |
Excellent post
For someone to take Blairs position they must offer more than Blair does.
The lack of experience of the team means a young player must offer a lot in order to justify their lack of games played.
Remember all young player are inconsistent and make mistakes and a team with a lot of kids makes a lot of errors as we saw this year.
The lack of on field leadership has been discussed and dropping a 100 gamer simply because some kid may do better is not a good idea.
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
mel_kay39
PIES PREMIERS 2010
Joined: 28 Aug 2007
Location: www.webs.com/mel_y_kay
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| magirl wrote: | It is a sad reflection that singling out one player each season to be the brunt of so called fans dissatisfaction with the teams ability to satisfy their need to be supreme occurs every year. Who will it be next year. I shudder to think even Pendles or Swan will fit the bill eventually. Thought our motto was side by side. That goes for the good and the bad. It is easy to say this in good times. need to follow through in the harder times. Blair was not the worst player in our team this year. I would go so far as to say he would be in the top half performed of our team this year. I expect to be howled down, but my opinion is my own.
We need to encourage and get behind all of our players. Anyone does better when this is the case. |
GOLD.
Oh and someone in one of the other threads mentioned trading Swan. So he had a poor year by his standards - he is still our only Brownlow medallist. Why the hell would you trade him?! But hey, while we're getting rid of ALL our experienced players, why not throw Swan out with the bathwater?!
_________________
A Pie for Life. |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| mel_kay39 wrote: | | magirl wrote: | It is a sad reflection that singling out one player each season to be the brunt of so called fans dissatisfaction with the teams ability to satisfy their need to be supreme occurs every year. Who will it be next year. I shudder to think even Pendles or Swan will fit the bill eventually. Thought our motto was side by side. That goes for the good and the bad. It is easy to say this in good times. need to follow through in the harder times. Blair was not the worst player in our team this year. I would go so far as to say he would be in the top half performed of our team this year. I expect to be howled down, but my opinion is my own.
We need to encourage and get behind all of our players. Anyone does better when this is the case. |
GOLD.
Oh and someone in one of the other threads mentioned trading Swan. So he had a poor year by his standards - he is still our only Brownlow medallist. Why the hell would you trade him?! But hey, while we're getting rid of ALL our experienced players, why not throw Swan out with the bathwater?! |
Why did we get rid of shaw?
It was part of the rebuild stupid.
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
King Monkey
Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Location: On a journey to seek the scriptures of enlightenment....
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | Pies4shaw, you are making excellent sense. I don't think any amongst the more intelligent of us are blaming Blair - as you say, he bleeds black and white and does his best within his limitations.
However, it seems quite pointless to continue selecting a not-quite-there player with no future upside when we could be selecting a kid who might or might not make the grade.
Your example of Martin is as good a case as any. Quite possibly, given a dozen senior games, Martin will turn out not to be an upgrade on Blair. Call that a 50-50 chance. He's unlikely to be much of a downgrade - with the bar set at three kicks in four quarters against Hawthorn there isn't room to contribute much less. So we have a 50% chance of getting an upgrade, and a 50% chance of getting nothing.
On the other hand, what are the odds on Blair being an upgrade on Blair? Pretty much zero.
PS: the season is over now but, looking back, I'm thinking we might have done just as well to have used Marty Clarke in Blair's spot. Doubtful he would have done a lot less, and might just have done a fair bit more. In both cases, of course, there isn't a lot of future in the ploy. If a player has reached his peak and isn't up to standard, there is no purpose in selecting him. time to roll the dice and look to the future. |
You really don't understand the way footy's played these days do you??
Go to any games this year?? Or just 774ABC Grandstand descriptions??
Kyle Martin is a better footballer than PLENTY of blokes running around at AFL level at the moment. And I don't just mean for Collingwood. He would've been a superstar in the 90's. This we probably agree on.
But unfortunately, that doesn't really matter in 2014, he can't cover the ground quick enough to defend the way the modern game demands.
(I hate this, hate the modern game, but "it is what is"  )
Marty Clarke can cover the ground as well as most in that sense, problem with him though - he can't really play footy.
_________________
"I am a great sage, equal of heaven.
Grow stick, grow.
Fly cloud, fly.
Oh you are a dee-mon, I love to fiiight." |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | | magirl wrote: | It is a sad reflection that singling out one player each season to be the brunt of so called fans dissatisfaction with the teams ability to satisfy their need to be supreme occurs every year. Who will it be next year. I shudder to think even Pendles or Swan will fit the bill eventually. Thought our motto was side by side. That goes for the good and the bad. It is easy to say this in good times. need to follow through in the harder times. Blair was not the worst player in our team this year. I would go so far as to say he would be in the top half performed of our team this year. I expect to be howled down, but my opinion is my own.
We need to encourage and get behind all of our players. Anyone does better when this is the case. |
You obviously like losing.
I don't.
He is a dud afl player.
Good luck to him making 100 games.
I just hope he doesn't play one more game.
But im definitely wrong there. |
Just played game 102. I'm sure he'll appreciate your best wishes even if your a few weeks behind. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Do you think robots can do to say this in good times. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | Seriously, we all know that Blair has significant limitations. We also know that the principal aim of the recruiting over the last two years has been to bring high-quality draft talent into the Club. In another thread yesterday, I identified 10 kids who've been recruited in that time. A number of them we haven't even seen on the park, yet. The problem is that the talented kids have to reach the point where the standard of their game compels their inclusion ahead of Blair. So far, I think we've all identified the problem (ie, Blair won't be in the next premiership team) but the solution has not yet announced himself.
Thus, earlier in the season, there were repeated calls for Kyle Martin to be given Blair's spot. Most of those calls subsided after Kyle played a little in the seniors. Perhaps he wasn't given enough of a chance but it appears from this distance that the Club doesn't think he has what it takes, either. WY
Over time, as the team improves generally, this will take care of itself. If the team doesn't improve enough, we have a much wider problem. Blair is a courageous, hard-working, desperate little fellow who bleeds black and white. Ultimately, that isn't enough - but I am constantly saddened to see him being blamed for the fact that the Club has no-one ready, yet, to take his place.
|
The club obviously thinks martin is a dud.
The trouble is blair is a dud
So try someone else. |
So you keep saying but to date your yet to offer 1 realistic alternate option. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | Pies4shaw, you are making excellent sense. I don't think any amongst the more intelligent of us are blaming Blair - as you say, he bleeds black and white and does his best within his limitations.
However, it seems quite pointless to continue selecting a not-quite-there player with no future upside when we could be selecting a kid who might or might not make the grade.
Your example of Martin is as good a case as any. Quite possibly, given a dozen senior games, Martin will turn out not to be an upgrade on Blair. Call that a 50-50 chance. He's unlikely to be much of a downgrade - with the bar set at three kicks in four quarters against Hawthorn there isn't room to contribute much less. So we have a 50% chance of getting an upgrade, and a 50% chance of getting nothing.
On the other hand, what are the odds on Blair being an upgrade on Blair? Pretty much zero.
PS: the season is over now but, looking back, I'm thinking we might have done just as well to have used Marty Clarke in Blair's spot. Doubtful he would have done a lot less, and might just have done a fair bit more. In both cases, of course, there isn't a lot of future in the ploy. If a player has reached his peak and isn't up to standard, there is no purpose in selecting him. time to roll the dice and look to the future. |
He's no world beater, but i think he's in at the creation of more goals than he gets credit for. It's surprising to me how often our scoring aroses from a Blair handpass out of a pack. They say that premierships are made from who has the best bottom 6. I see Blair as that kind of player. The trouble is that the class around him is still mostly in primary school.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
