inexperience vs experience?

[blx]

i remember someone on here mentioning how much we are gonna miss Campbos and Grahams experience out on the field.

As terry mentioned on WLF tonight. We fielded a very inexperienced side last friday and were missing alot of experience through injury.

If thats the result of not having enough experience on the field then bugger that notion of throwing the youngsters into the fire on mass.

 

[craig]

Yeah i saw that and i thought TWs comment was a cop out and i am serious i am not a TW basher but to hide behind such a weak excuse annoyed me.
Had Stafford Chaffey and Hall played on Fri night we woulda got belted by 130 points as we would have been even slower.
The kids were not the issue on Friday night, it was the lack of effort and commitment and composure of the so called senior group, sounds quite scary for mine that with 3-4 changes forecast this week it will probably be the kids who get it in the neck when 2 of em Lids and Raines were in our best with other proven duds to be promoted.

God we are going up and down in the one spot

 

[outcast]

would have to agree with Craig there( )

we had 6 players who turn 21 or under at the end of the year on friday night..
3 of those aquitted themselves fairly well so its only 3 who strugged..

bottom line is we had 16 players 23 or over in the side so it is a bit weak as far as excu err reasons go..

 

[craig]

would have to agree with Craig there( )

Nothin wrong with agreeing with me Outcast, i often have very salient points to make :hihi :hihi

 

[Scoop]

Yeah i saw that and i thought TWs comment was a cop out and i am serious i am not a TW basher but to hide behind such a weak excuse annoyed me.
Had Stafford Chaffey and Hall played on Fri night we woulda got belted by 130 points as we would have been even slower.
The kids were not the issue on Friday night, it was the lack of effort and commitment and composure of the so called senior group, sounds quite scary for mine that with 3-4 changes forecast this week it will probably be the kids who get it in the neck when 2 of em Lids and Raines were in our best with other proven duds to be promoted.

Yep agree with Craig, the kids were not the issue. 2nd tier and top tier let us down.

 

[Mr Brightside]

Even blend of both youth and experience would be good as long as the most deserving lead us on to the field

 

[the claw]

as i said on another thread ins hall knobel stafford and chaffey. outs more than likely 4 kids especially if the gods running the show stick true to form.

 

[blx]

yep agree with all those comments too. Can't really say after 1 game if either argument is true though but looking at the ins well you can't think stafford and hall would of done us much good.

im glad someone took the bait and ran with it anyway.

IMO our main fault (among many) was the inability to hit a target, whether that was bacause of pure lack of skill or because there simply were none.

too many coulncil workers in our team standing round (hip to hip with there marker, with the hands on the hips waiting for the ball to come to them. How many times this year (including pre-season) where you've seen the opposition marker lead our player to his ball then take a mark on the chest uncontested

 

[Tigerfan]

as i said on another thread ins hall knobel stafford and chaffey.  outs more than likely 4 kids

a question for the Claw: what do you think?

will the 'kids' develop better under Collins at Coburg (add gym work) with deliberate and controlled exposure to the real pressure of AFL while the seniors 'try to keep the boat afloat' so to speak until 'the kids can take over' ?

or will they be better off being 'fast tracked' as I suggested elsewhere, and just chuck them in and say 'You do it' - 'learn by doing' ?

 

[blx]

santa has been shouting from the rooftops about playing the kids so i think i know what his answer will be.

 

[Tigerfan]

Yes but what I'm looking for is an objective critical analysis of the question. Each choice has it's merits but what are they and how strong are they?

2500 words please.

 

[Jools]

Yes but what I'm looking for is an objective critical analysis of the question. Each choice has it's merits but what are they and how strong are they?

2500 words please.

2500 words from Claw? Could we please have paragraphs with that? ;D

 

[blx]

Yes but what I'm looking for is an objective critical analysis of the question. Each choice has it's merits but what are they and how strong are they?

2500 words please.

2500 words from Claw? Could we please have paragraphs with that?  ;D

i think ddt forgot the decimal point after the 5 ;D

 

[GR]

You don't drop anyone after just one (very) average performance, and especially not a kid. The younger guys need a bit more time to find thier feet.

The best thing that you can say to a young guy is... look, I'm going to play you for at least 4 weeks regardless, just play to the best of your ability and then we will re-look at things from there.

You don't want them looking over their shoulder after one week. If they are good enough to be picked for one game, then they should at least be able to play 4.

 

[BrisTiger24]

Yeah i saw that and i thought TWs comment was a cop out and i am serious i am not a TW basher but to hide behind such a weak excuse annoyed me.
Had Stafford Chaffey and Hall played on Fri night we woulda got belted by 130 points as we would have been even slower.
The kids were not the issue on Friday night, it was the lack of effort and commitment and composure of the so called senior group, sounds quite scary for mine that with 3-4 changes forecast this week it will probably be the kids who get it in the neck when 2 of em Lids and Raines were in our best with other proven duds to be promoted.

God we are going up and down in the one spot

To Terry's credit he did mention that Geelong was the most inexperienced 22 that took the field in round 1 and that they slaughtered the Lions. I can't recall the point that he was making but it goes to show that young enthusiasm will usually outdo experience.

 

[GoodOne]

would have to agree with Craig there( )

we had 6 players who turn 21 or under at the end of the year on  friday night..
3 of those aquitted themselves fairly well so its only 3 who strugged..

bottom line is we had 16 players 23 or over in the side so it is a bit weak as far as excu err reasons go..

Being over 23 doesn't automatically equal experience. When talking about experienced players in that context, to me it means players in their twilight having played many, many games and able to pass on their knowledge both on the field and off the field.

Cheers

 

[Ian4]

i remember someone on here mentioning how much we are gonna miss Campbos and Grahams experience out on the field.

As terry mentioned on WLF tonight. We fielded a very inexperienced side last friday and were missing alot of experience through injury.

If thats the result of not having enough experience on the field then bugger that notion of throwing the youngsters into the fire on mass.

it's a tricky one. i mean the last 5 premiership sides were teams with vast amounts of experience. and most people on PRE (including myself) agreed that we lacked leadership last week. but we have a young list and are playing for the future. where do you find the balance?