Bondi my so called scathing and unbalanced opinion of Setanta is no worse than the unbalanced opinion others have of his ability- Some of the comparison drawn up about him are bordering on ridiculous.

I keep hearing upside - X factor - Skills - athleticism - but we don't see it - We get little cameo's here and there like we saw on Friday and nothing much else. Given the games he has been given the positions he has been tried in and the patience that has been afforded him by the club I want more out of him. He is 199cm he should be imposing him self on the game - not spilling marks in the goal square then recovering to soccer it off the ground . Not failing to get to the drop of the ball and have a lucky bounce head his way . The two shots he had in the first he should have nailed - He is not a 20 year old playing his first year .

If Cloke , Wiggins , Fisher , Russell and whoever had of missed they goals they would have been the first points mentioned in the Pros and cons thread . That shank kick off his instep that resulted in a turn over and a goal to StKilda would have added 12 pages to the Russell thread .

If I seem scathing towards him it is I am just trying to bring a bit of balance back towards our assessment of him

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

This is exactly the point I am trying to get across now we a drawing comparisons with Roughead

It is just crazy stuff

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

At the start of the year it would have been a definite no.
At the moment he has a chance because others he is competing for a spot have given it up to him. Whilst he is playing in the seniors he is giving himself the best opportunity to get another contract. Will he get it? The ball is firmly in Setanta's court.

im not comparing him to roughead at all

just trying to say that setanta played a more than adequate game on friday night and if his name was something else ( eg roughead ) then we all would have been rapt with it

_________________
*(grow - fun - gah)

Yeah but whatabout your whataboutism.

You are the only poster who suggest that Setanta has been given a chance. Everyone else knows that from the dawn of the Pagan era he has been thrown to the wolves and as a result was underdeveloped.

He has never been given anywhere near the game time in each match afforded (and imo wasted on) Cloke, Wiggins, Fisher.

All everyone is saying is that he's worth giving a chance, and he is showing something recently, and its admirable. He efforts in the last 2 weeks have not been as bad as you suggest. What I would suggest is that his efforts in the last 2 weeks were better than the efforts of Cloke and Wiggins were in their last 4-5 games. They deserved to be dropped imo...we really were carrying them.

Setanta isn't a liability whilst we have no better option at CHF. In fact, the MC are selecting him and the commentators were saying that Setanta was really presenting against the Saints, in fact they said his efforts in the 2nd helped Carlton make up the 5 goal defecit. I never heard anything like that about Cloke and Wiggins in their last 4-5 games.

You say "I keep hearing upside - X factor - Skills - athleticism - but we don't see it ". The answer to that is that you don't see those qualities, but nearly everyone else does (I don't recall anyone denying he has those qualities). You seriously can't see the athleticism? Improvement with his disposal? Ability?

Don't worry so much if you think that other posters are totally unbalanced in their view of Setanta. You'd think that it should not be a reason for you to do the same.

Give him a fair go; that's all. It's easy.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Yes you did - you were suggesting that he was as good as Roughead - "If Setanta was called Roughead" - is a direct comparison

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

ie if he was someone else and played the exact same game we would be happy

ie - there is setanta prejudice

i know what i meant

_________________
*(grow - fun - gah)

Yeah but whatabout your whataboutism.

I have given him a fair go - more so than what other supporters have done with Cloke and Russell and Wiggins

At the start of the year people were saying Cameron had gone past Travis -after the shots were fired at his brothers house his form went down hill and put in a couple of bad ones

4 weeks back there was an article in The Hun saying the CHF had returned an it was Wiggins and Wiggins took it upon himself to get up Fev over his effort in Sydney.

these blokes are not world beaters by any means but neither is Santy.

Go through his games piece by piece over the last two weeks pretend it is not number 17 on his back and it is 28 or 34 and then tell me if you seriously think he deserves his place in front of others

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

read the whole thing, then think, then post

apart from that, funny post

I see...........

so we've got Roughead..............!


kindest regards tommi














that's TWO rougheads in the forward line.................!

_________________
that'siti'mnotchangingthistagain......!

Adam Hartlett is three years younger than Setanta - If you want to talk about chances given to some and not others - He and Setanta were put on the Senior list the same year

I wonder if we bit the bullet now and selected Hartlett - give him 50 games in 2 to 3 years what he would be doing playing the same position in 3 years time

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

I think it's pretty clear what you meant grrro, and I think it's safe to say Carlos will be around next year, Rats rates him, he's over his injuries and we've got bugger all KPP behind him.

Hartlett does't even dominate at VFL level ... something Santy has done regularly either up forward or in the ruck. Santy can play ruck and forward and even back at a pinch (preferably not!) and gives the team flexibility ... Harts can play ??? hhhmm ... back if the forward doesn't lead hard? Not a great comparison ... Harts doesn't get opportunities becuase he doesn't show enough to merit his inclusion.

_________________
"It was like calling your ex girlfriend after a night on the booze, just a really bad decision".

So three years ago at the age of 23 Santy was dominating Bullants games was he ???

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

You recall that Santy kicked 7 goals in a Bullants match in his first year, right? He was elevated to the senior list on the back of that and would have debuted in his first year (the intention being to play him against the Crows the week following his elevation) if he hadn't sustained a stress fracture caused by overdoing his training.

Fisher kicked 6 in a low scoring losing side on the weekend
Should he come straight in ?? and if he does who misses out - bare in mind Thornton will come straight in

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

I'd keep him as a depth player.

Reading this thread is almost enough to make me think there must be three of him. There's the awesome one who can't be matched up on, the crap one who makes heaps of mistakes and has no idea, and the one I see each week who is an average player whose good and bad points roughly balance out.

_________________
"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds." - Frank Zappa

So, having disposed of your point, you're trying to shift ground now, SB? Amazing. This is a bit like the Romans/Aqueducts skit out of Life of Brian.

Anyway, suggesting that there is some unfairness in Santy and Harts receiving different amounts of games despite coming to Carlton at the same time is pretty farcical. Those of us without Alzheimers remember that Harts' first 3 years were blighted by injury, and he had to develop a body in any event that was much less mature than Santy's. Then Santy had the "luck" to be the only tall guy capable of rucking a couple of year ago and that secured him a full year, though that was definitely a mixed blessing.

Age is pretty immaterial. The problem for Harts is not that Santy's in the team - it's that Harts hasn't shown that he can cut it at AFL level. Santy has, and he makes the team not only for what he might do in future but for what he's been able to achieve already. You refuse to acknowledge the fact that he's done jobs on some very good forwards and has voted in the B&F as a result. I reckon he's already racked up some votes this year in the Bulldogs game and this one. If Harts can convince the MC that he has the ability to give us 5 years at the top level, there's no way he'll be delisted. But a dominating performance at Bullants level is what he needs to press his claim. As he's playing as a defender, he has to work his way past Aussie.

The ability to play at the top level is really important. Take Sam Stosur as an example. She's now 25. But despite the fact that she's taken an eternity to come on, very few doubted that she had the weapons to do so. And hey presto, at the age of 25 she makes the SF of a Grand Slam with Wimbledon to follow. I'm sure that Tennis Australia realised she had the ability to succeed even though they were frustrated that she hadn't fulfilled her potential. Though it may be sad from a fairness point of view, she would always have been further up the food chain with Tennis Australia than others who had been getting the most of their limited abilities for extended periods. Is Harts a potential star? The answer to that at MC level will determine his fate.

Next couple of weeks should decide his fate. Friday was a nice improvement but we wouldnt want to settle for that.
Hopefully with a bit of confidence he will rise to the challenge.

The game against the Bombers will be a crunch game. The Bombers are trying to exploit their pace and they are a pretty attacking team. That should enable Santy to find some space in the forward line.

Who will they put on him? He's probably too quick for Fletcher, but if he were to find Fletcher coming to him then he'd be expected to drag him out of the F50 to keep him from zoning off in front of Fev. Playing as a decoy would naturally limit his opportunities. McPhee might be his opponent as he has the mobility if not the height to go with Santy. But if it's not Fletcher, he'll have the opportunity to exploit a lack of height, experience and zoning. On the big MCG, that should work to his advantage. If he puts in a big one, that should finally shut up a few of the anti-Santies.