| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Navy inquiry http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=28400 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | Navy Blue Horse [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Navy inquiry |
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/n ... 5894307922 Most of this is pretty fair I reckon, but far too harsh on Judd. Wouldn't mind seeing how he plays in Geelong's midfield. Quote: Is Judd still one of the AFL's 10 best?
THIS sounds sacriligious, but the answer is no. Substitute best for most valuable and the answer is still no. He is a one-man band, and carries a tag to the toilets at half-time in most games, but his ability to impact games is not what it used to be. He lacks support in the grunt area, and when he does win the hard-ball, he doesn't penetrate. Today's game means his efforts are then wasted with a 25m short kick - which may or may not hit the target. Yesterday he was at 43 per cent efficiency. For what it's worth, those above Judd include Hodge, Goddard, Sandilands, Swan, Lake, Montagna, Chapman, Selwood, Ablett, Bartel, Cyril, Cooney, Goodes (in the midfield). |
|
| Author: | wasthesonofapreacherman [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
But for Judd which is outrageous (he's doing everything on his own and it's grossly effecting his game), pretty spot on. The "recruiting heading" should really be named trading. Our recruiting has been decent. |
|
| Author: | aido [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
No mention of two significant players having sore groins (reason why this player efficiency is down), Murph has hip problem, Bower has missed majority of the year with quad problems and the fact that there is no understanding of a game plan (sorry had to chuck in a cheap shot) |
|
| Author: | bondiblue [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
I know Healy thinks the thought of Judd not in the top 10 is absurd; so do I. What a weak comparison with the other 10 players he mentions. Headline grabber; that's all. |
|
| Author: | get rid of the hacks [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
Amazing that it actually took 2 guys to write that. I hope they managed to whip up a lasagne or beef stroghanoff or do something remotely productive at the same time. |
|
| Author: | Ruckus [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
Hits the mark on just about every point, in my opinion - including Judd. With his much-deserved superstar reputation cast aside for one moment, and looked at purely objectively, Judd is currently more akin to Shane Tuck than the Chris Judd of old. |
|
| Author: | bluegirl72 [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
I guess Chris has caught the dreaded 'no confidence' virus too. Maybe with Mc Clean back, things will improve. |
|
| Author: | Effes [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
The words are bullshit but the stats in the hard copy of the article are very interesting. RD: 1-8; 9-16 Points 20 12 Percentage 119.18 90.5 Position 5th 11th I50 49.2 (10th) 52.5 (6th) Marks I50 14.1 (5th) 10.5 (14th) % Goals once I50 31.5% (2nd) 22.9% (15th) Points for 104.9 (4th) 83.4 (12th) The scary part of the stats above are that we've increased our number of inside 50s since the first eight games yet we're scoring less and taking less marks inside 50. Opposition coaches have worked out how to limit our scoring and it is up to the coaching staff to come up with a system when moving the ball inside 50 to increase our marks inside 50. In the first 9 games we appeared to be playing this counter attacking style where opposition defenders would be sucked up the ground to the wings and then we would use the pace of the three smaller forwards running back towards goal to score. Now these defenders are staying back in defence instead of coming up the ground. There is therefore little space for Betts, Yarran and Garlett to run into - they can't be relied on to take overhead marks yet given the numbers the opposition are putting in defence we are still going to them thinking that they can compete overhead with players who have a massive height advantage on them. |
|
| Author: | MIL [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
Sadly, a pretty accurate article. Wish it had come out 3 weeks ago. There are reasons Judd is down of course, but his influence is patchy these days, and that's the truth. Being the great player he is, I'm sure he can return to his best, but for that to happen, a lot of things need to change at Carlton (how good would he now be at the Filth by the way  ).Gibbs comments are spot on, and hopefully he'll pin this article to his locker. Age article is also a good 'un 
|
|
| Author: | missnaut [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
^ I saw Jeff go up for a contested mark on Sunday with two other Swans blokes who were both about a head taller than him.  I hope StatsRatts is paying attention to those stats - to be so low for marks and goals once i50 is really quite alarming even without considering the amount of entries. Completely agree on their assessment of Gibbs and Simmo though - always been a flag waver for Simmo though. I would say our trading has been dicey but our recruiting from the draft has been OK overall. get rid of the hacks wrote: Amazing that it actually took 2 guys to write that. I hope they managed to whip up a lasagne or beef stroghanoff or do something remotely productive at the same time. Well one was Mark Robinson so he probably ate an entire lasagne at the same time. 
|
|
| Author: | camel [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
I don't mind that article. I reckon (or perhaps that should be hope) the team will respond to some proper scrutiny, even if it might only be media humdrum.
|
|
| Author: | bluegirl72 [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
if only we were one of those teams that respond to media criticism...(please!!!) |
|
| Author: | blueboy23 [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
sorry but the article is spot on! pity it came from a total goose lets hope the blues look at this as motivation. |
|
| Author: | Nicko Carstairs [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
While I disagree about the Judd comment (top 10), the article is spot on. |
|
| Author: | cimm1979 [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
Take out the Judd ref and the article is 100% spot on. Even the Judd ref uses the undertone that he's working harder that a pit pony with NO HELP. Not sure Judds beneath Dane Swann or Goodes or Chapman. Put all three up for trade at the end of the season and see who'd get the most interest. It's about time the media gave us a bake and hopefully they ramp it up to breaking point. If these guy's can't beat the WCE (and I don't care if its at Subi) after being labelled soft then Ratts is a cooked chook. |
|
| Author: | missnaut [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
camelboy wrote: I don't mind that article. I reckon (or perhaps that should be hope) the team will respond to some proper scrutiny, even if it might only be media humdrum. Hopefully they do - not much else seems to have worked! 
|
|
| Author: | Koutamagic [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
agree completely with the article, especially the Judd comment. Until Judd improves his disposals, he will not be considered elite. granted he has not had much help from his team members and trying to take too much on himself. He gets the ball, wins the contest, but lets the team down with his disposals. I am still not convinced that he is as good as what everyone says he is but he is still one heck of a recruit. |
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
Koutamagic wrote: agree completely with the article, especially the Judd comment. Until Judd improves his disposals, he will not be considered elite. granted he has not had much help from his team members and trying to take too much on himself. He gets the ball, wins the contest, but lets the team down with his disposals. I am still not convinced that he is as good as what everyone says he is but he is still one heck of a recruit. Judd is already considered elite (you know brownlow, norm smith medal, that sort of thing) but like all elite sportspeople he has off periods and particularly in a team sport - struggles when those around him struggles. |
|
| Author: | woof [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
I think the saddest thing about of all this is that after 3 years at the club Judd is required to do more rather than less in the middle. 3 Years on and no one has put up their hand to give him a chop out on a consistent basis. |
|
| Author: | bondiblue [ Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Navy inquiry |
MIL wrote: Sadly, a pretty accurate article. Wish it had come out 3 weeks ago. There are reasons Judd is down of course, but his influence is patchy these days, and that's the truth. Being the great player he is, I'm sure he can return to his best, but for that to happen, a lot of things need to change at Carlton (how good would he now be at the Filth by the way ).Gibbs comments are spot on, and hopefully he'll pin this article to his locker. Age article is also a good 'un So you and all those who think the Judd reference in the article is accurate don't value clearances, hard ball gets and possessions. Judd rates higher than most of the top 10 listed in the article. I know what they are trying to say and do, and they certainly created a headline, alerted the public to an issue or two with the Blues, and they did that with seansationism attached to the Judd name. Weak as piss. Typical HUN and very typical Mike Sheehan. He wants to create noise and wants his noise to be the footy conversation. I can't buy crap. |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|