 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| While Cox, White and Moore continue to play well and work together as a unit, I can't see a spot for Cloke at all. He may well have to rely on injuries to get a spot back in the seniors. Given his shocking goal kicking routine, it's entirely possible he has played his last senior game for us. At his best, 2011-2013, he'd be an automatic selection, but that sort of form has not been seen for 3 years and I can't see it returning. |
|
|
|
 |
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
His goal kicking routine worked last night. 4 straight. 
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | There is simply no plausible basis for selecting Moore ahead of Cloke beyond player development. Moore hasn't had a single good game this year (although he did have a reasonable second half against Carlton after failing to get a kick in the first half). Cloke was dropped after 2 games in succession in which he had more of the ball than Moore has had in any game this season. That could have been done (and no doubt was) for all sorts of reasons - but one of them wasn't that Moore was playing better. In fact, the stats show that in those 2 games, Cloke had 24 kicks - precisely, as fate would have it, 3 times the 8 Moore had over those 2 games. If you count handballs, Cloke only had twice as many disposals as Moore but he did kick 4 times as many goals. |
Quoted from another thread. There is clearly something more to the Cloke story than meets the eye, as his form against Richmond and Melbourne didn't look at all bad, to me, and as a key forward you'd think that Travis would worry opposition coaches more than Darcy for the reasons P4S clearly explains.
He could have been omitted for team balance and player development reasons, but that does not really square with Buckley's statement that he neds to go back to "rediscover his hunger and enjoyment of his footy" (or words largely to that effect). I'd say his demotion has something to do with a perceived attitude or commitment problem, either on-field or off. I find it hard to believe that it's just about developing Darcy, important though that is.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | There is simply no plausible basis for selecting Moore ahead of Cloke beyond player development. Moore hasn't had a single good game this year (although he did have a reasonable second half against Carlton after failing to get a kick in the first half). Cloke was dropped after 2 games in succession in which he had more of the ball than Moore has had in any game this season. That could have been done (and no doubt was) for all sorts of reasons - but one of them wasn't that Moore was playing better. In fact, the stats show that in those 2 games, Cloke had 24 kicks - precisely, as fate would have it, 3 times the 8 Moore had over those 2 games. If you count handballs, Cloke only had twice as many disposals as Moore but he did kick 4 times as many goals. |
Quoted from another thread. There is clearly something more to the Cloke story than meets the eye, as his form against Richmond and Melbourne didn't look at all bad, to me, and as a key forward you'd think that Travis would worry opposition coaches more than Darcy for the reasons P4S clearly explains.
He could have been omitted for team balance and player development reasons, but that does not really square with Buckley's statement that he neds to go back to "rediscover his hunger and enjoyment of his footy" (or words largely to that effect). I'd say his demotion has something to do with a perceived attitude or commitment problem, either on-field or off. I find it hard to believe that it's just about developing Darcy, important though that is. |
Darcy Moore has cemented his spot and is getting better each game. The same might just about be said for Cox and White. Cloke is now 4th in line for a key marking forward spot. Just as Josh Fraser lost his senior spot in 2010, so too has Cloke in 2016. Who knows, he might win his spot back, but it wouldn't surprise me if he never plays for our senior team again. |
|
|
|
|
eddiesmith 
Lets get ready to Rumble
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Location: Lexus Centre
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| And 5 years ago Rudeboy you were saying you hoped he never played for Collingwood ever again... |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| eddiesmith wrote: | | And 5 years ago Rudeboy you were saying you hoped he never played for Collingwood ever again... |
That's right. Under the influence of Demir no doubt, his public posturing about considering an offer to play for Carlton, was the last straw for me. At the time I would have been happy to have traded him. I still think we should have, because I don't think his performances since then have been worth almost $4 million over 5 years. Still, once the club gave him his contract I've hoped he would deliver the goods. Sadly, whether its due to injuries, confidence, poor technique, a lack of footy smarts or a lack of hunger for the game, he has been something of a passenger for most of the past 2 years. You, no doubt see it differently, but that's how I've seen him - a great talent in serious decline since 2013. |
|
|
|
|
Woods Of Ypres
Joined: 27 May 2003
Location: Yugoslavia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| If he cant get back into the side this year I would say he'd be off to Richmond for sure. all depends on the injury/form of the current forwards. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| RudeBoy wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | There is simply no plausible basis for selecting Moore ahead of Cloke beyond player development. Moore hasn't had a single good game this year (although he did have a reasonable second half against Carlton after failing to get a kick in the first half). Cloke was dropped after 2 games in succession in which he had more of the ball than Moore has had in any game this season. That could have been done (and no doubt was) for all sorts of reasons - but one of them wasn't that Moore was playing better. In fact, the stats show that in those 2 games, Cloke had 24 kicks - precisely, as fate would have it, 3 times the 8 Moore had over those 2 games. If you count handballs, Cloke only had twice as many disposals as Moore but he did kick 4 times as many goals. |
Quoted from another thread. There is clearly something more to the Cloke story than meets the eye, as his form against Richmond and Melbourne didn't look at all bad, to me, and as a key forward you'd think that Travis would worry opposition coaches more than Darcy for the reasons P4S clearly explains.
He could have been omitted for team balance and player development reasons, but that does not really square with Buckley's statement that he neds to go back to "rediscover his hunger and enjoyment of his footy" (or words largely to that effect). I'd say his demotion has something to do with a perceived attitude or commitment problem, either on-field or off. I find it hard to believe that it's just about developing Darcy, important though that is. |
Darcy Moore has cemented his spot and is getting better each game. The same might just about be said for Cox and White. Cloke is now 4th in line for a key marking forward spot. Just as Josh Fraser lost his senior spot in 2010, so too has Cloke in 2016. Who knows, he might win his spot back, but it wouldn't surprise me if he never plays for our senior team again. |
On direct form comparison? That's just not correct. Even this season Cloke has performed better than our other tall forwards and Moore has been our second worst ahead of Gault.
I agree with Mugwump, this was not a decision made only on form. It's a commitment issue or a breakdown in the relationship. Cloke's form was at it's best just as he was dropped. Clearly, despite performing better than the other tall forwards he's not doing what the coaches require of him, either on or off field.
Whatever the reason for his demotion, we need him back in the team to be at our best, our other tall forwards don't come close to matching him.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | RudeBoy wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | There is simply no plausible basis for selecting Moore ahead of Cloke beyond player development. Moore hasn't had a single good game this year (although he did have a reasonable second half against Carlton after failing to get a kick in the first half). Cloke was dropped after 2 games in succession in which he had more of the ball than Moore has had in any game this season. That could have been done (and no doubt was) for all sorts of reasons - but one of them wasn't that Moore was playing better. In fact, the stats show that in those 2 games, Cloke had 24 kicks - precisely, as fate would have it, 3 times the 8 Moore had over those 2 games. If you count handballs, Cloke only had twice as many disposals as Moore but he did kick 4 times as many goals. |
Quoted from another thread. There is clearly something more to the Cloke story than meets the eye, as his form against Richmond and Melbourne didn't look at all bad, to me, and as a key forward you'd think that Travis would worry opposition coaches more than Darcy for the reasons P4S clearly explains.
He could have been omitted for team balance and player development reasons, but that does not really square with Buckley's statement that he neds to go back to "rediscover his hunger and enjoyment of his footy" (or words largely to that effect). I'd say his demotion has something to do with a perceived attitude or commitment problem, either on-field or off. I find it hard to believe that it's just about developing Darcy, important though that is. |
Darcy Moore has cemented his spot and is getting better each game. The same might just about be said for Cox and White. Cloke is now 4th in line for a key marking forward spot. Just as Josh Fraser lost his senior spot in 2010, so too has Cloke in 2016. Who knows, he might win his spot back, but it wouldn't surprise me if he never plays for our senior team again. |
On direct form comparison? That's just not correct. Even this season Cloke has performed better than our other tall forwards and Moore has been our second worst ahead of Gault.
I agree with Mugwump, this was not a decision made only on form. It's a commitment issue or a breakdown in the relationship. Cloke's form was at it's best just as he was dropped. Clearly, despite performing better than the other tall forwards he's not doing what the coaches require of him, either on or off field.
Whatever the reason for his demotion, we need him back in the team to be at our best, our other tall forwards don't come close to matching him. |
The selectors and I disagree with you inky. |
|
|
|
|
3rd degree 
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Location: John Wren's tote
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| eddiesmith wrote: | | And 5 years ago Rudeboy you were saying you hoped he never played for Collingwood ever again... |
Look Out Eddiesmith throwing cut lunches!
_________________
" Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".
www.facebook/the hybernators |
|
|
|
|
Killbot
Joined: 14 Oct 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Day of mourning in the Cloke household today
The Dakota Bar in Ringwood burnt down
The place where the Cloke brothers were constantly BOG |
|
|
|
|
3rd degree
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Location: John Wren's tote
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Killbot wrote: | Day of mourning in the Cloke household today
The Dakota Bar in Ringwood burnt down
The place where the Cloke brothers were constantly BOG |
Allegedly the same insurers as The Tree Fallen Mciwaber tavern in belgrave.
_________________
" Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".
www.facebook/the hybernators |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| RudeBoy wrote: | | The selectors and I disagree with you inky. |
Not too sure why the reality is so hard for some to accept... Compare their last 2 games at senior level...
Travis Cloke:
R3 16 disposals; 2 goals 1 behind
R4 15 disposals; 2 goals 0 behinds
Darcy Moore:
R8 7 disposals; 1-1
R9 12 disposal; 1-1
And their season to date...
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/...d2=5&type=A&pid1=4023&pid2=1521&fid1=S&fid2=S
If we're playing Moore ahead of Cloke it is purely based on longer term potential but it is costing us at the moment. The sooner Cloke is back the better but that doesn't have to occur at the expense of Moore. |
|
|
|
|
Lazza
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | RudeBoy wrote: | | The selectors and I disagree with you inky. |
Not too sure why the reality is so hard for some to accept... Compare their last 2 games at senior level...
Travis Cloke:
R3 16 disposals; 2 goals 1 behind
R4 15 disposals; 2 goals 0 behinds
Darcy Moore:
R8 7 disposals; 1-1
R9 12 disposal; 1-1
And their season to date...
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/...d2=5&type=A&pid1=4023&pid2=1521&fid1=S&fid2=S
If we're playing Moore ahead of Cloke it is purely based on longer term potential but it is costing us at the moment. The sooner Cloke is back the better but that doesn't have to occur at the expense of Moore. |
OK I'll ask the question then. Out of the current team, who will you drop for Cloke if not Moore?
_________________
Don't confuse your current path with your final destination. Just because it's dark and stormy now doesn't meant that you aren't headed for glorious sunshine! |
|
|
|
|
Brenny
Joined: 05 Apr 2011
Location: Westpac Centre
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ IMHO, Cox will start to get the No.1 defender soon enough. It could mean he loses a bit of form and may get rested.
Nothing wrong with that as he's a first year player. These things happen.
So far it doesn't look that way, but people were calling for Moores head a few weeks ago and saying give Cox a game.
Cloke will come back sooner or later. It's a matter of time. Last week was a good step forward for him.
I see massive upside in the three we have. All three tall forwards can ruck some, they can lead and move very well. None of them have Clokes tank and where he is very handy is as a high CHF/wing. Which is where I think he is best.
_________________
Heeeeeeeeeeeeeey, we want some Bayley! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
