DC2 wrote:this thread is deceiving. It comes across like stants already had a 2 year deal sown up., but it appears this is not the case at ll. Apparently the club has done what most here wanted and stood firm with 1 year and thats it.
Gimps wrote:Whilst he is still a better player than 20 others on the list, you can begrudge the club for keeping him. There's blokes on the list that have never shown enough, and likely never will. Get rid of them and bring in someone that will compete for Stanton's spot. That's the real issue, not Stanton being on the list.
This.
And what Boncer said above.
And what Windy said about other teams hack players.
And what someone said about him not being our club's biggest problem. Not even in the top 10 biggest problems, so until there's 10 guys better, he earns his place.
And, as Jack Dyer would have said - he's a good ordinary footballer.
Every team needs them. They play a role. And it's most notable and effective when they have a proper functioning team around them. It's a team game. Didn't hear complaints when the team were OK. He was the guy running up and down the ground finding space, when the team's ball movement permitted it.
How about we compare him to Zaharakis? I can't be bothered finding the stats but I bet it would be enlightening, yet Zaka cops hardly any criticism.
As for Dempsey, much the same really, in that it's about the team. He was good a couple of seasons ago. Injury problems played a role. And then so did Hird and his fanatacism for defence. Dempsey isn't a true defender. Let him run. Yet, to his credit, when challenged to be a defensive player I thought he did pretty well trying to adapt. Not perfect of course, far from it, but the change and improvement in that area was noticable.
I'll be very surprised if Woosha doesn't give Dempsey more licence to run and be creative next year.
Again, far from our worst.
I'm happy they're both staying on.
LOL
At least Zakka has won a B & F, an Anzac Day medal, and won games off his boot. And he's only played half the amount of games Stanton has...
Stantons last game of 2015 didn't happen I guess.
What about it? Is that an achievement for his CV??
I don't normally keep my eyes on a player when I'm at the footy. Just watch the flow of the ball and concentrate on the contest for it. But once, and only once, did I concentrate on one player for about 3 minutes of play this season.
Essendon v Geelong.
It was the start of the 2nd Q and I planted my eyes on B. Stanton and S. Motlop on the wing in front of me. Standing side by side. Ball is bounced, Stanton races off in the direction of the ball on the outer side - forward of centre. Motlop jogs into his forward 50. A minute later, Motlop is on the end of a forward 50 entry - BANG. Goal.
Back to the centre. B. Stanton standing beside S. Motlop. Ball is bounced and Stanton runs towards the direction of the ball just forward of our centre. Motlop jogs into his forward 50 again. Guess what happens about a minute later? BAAAAAAAAAAAAAANG! Goal to Motlop.
That's all it took for me. Could not be f***** keeping my eyes on that shit anymore. Don't know if the exact same thing happened after that, but Motlop ended up with 4 goals. Stanton might have been shifted. Dunno. Don't give a f***. He should have been dragged after those two instances and given a bake. Should have been dropped. Piss poor, unaccountable junk.
But that's ok. "He gets the pill". "He runs". "He creates space".
Yeah, and in the mean time, his opponent is running amok.
Gimps wrote:Whilst he is still a better player than 20 others on the list, you can begrudge the club for keeping him. There's blokes on the list that have never shown enough, and likely never will. Get rid of them and bring in someone that will compete for Stanton's spot. That's the real issue, not Stanton being on the list.
This.
And what Boncer said above.
And what Windy said about other teams hack players.
And what someone said about him not being our club's biggest problem. Not even in the top 10 biggest problems, so until there's 10 guys better, he earns his place.
And, as Jack Dyer would have said - he's a good ordinary footballer.
Every team needs them. They play a role. And it's most notable and effective when they have a proper functioning team around them. It's a team game. Didn't hear complaints when the team were OK. He was the guy running up and down the ground finding space, when the team's ball movement permitted it.
How about we compare him to Zaharakis? I can't be bothered finding the stats but I bet it would be enlightening, yet Zaka cops hardly any criticism.
As for Dempsey, much the same really, in that it's about the team. He was good a couple of seasons ago. Injury problems played a role. And then so did Hird and his fanatacism for defence. Dempsey isn't a true defender. Let him run. Yet, to his credit, when challenged to be a defensive player I thought he did pretty well trying to adapt. Not perfect of course, far from it, but the change and improvement in that area was noticable.
I'll be very surprised if Woosha doesn't give Dempsey more licence to run and be creative next year.
Again, far from our worst.
I'm happy they're both staying on.
LOL
At least Zakka has won a B & F, an Anzac Day medal, and won games off his boot. And he's only played half the amount of games Stanton has...
Stantons last game of 2015 didn't happen I guess.
What about it? Is that an achievement for his CV??
You said he doesn't win games. 30 odd touches and 3 goals in a win less than a goal doesn't count?
Essendon Football Club- We arent arrogant, just deluded.
boncer34 wrote:Wait so Stanton went to the ball and Motlop sheepdogged over the top?
Wait, Stanton ignored his opponent (knowing he's a dangerous goal sneak) and went to the ball where he failed to influence any contest and consequently allowed his man to be free to slam some goals.
boncer34 wrote:Wait so Stanton went to the ball and Motlop sheepdogged over the top?
Wait, Stanton ignored his opponent (knowing he's a dangerous goal sneak) and went to the ball where he failed to influence any contest and consequently allowed his man to be free to slam some goals.
Unaccountable junk.
Hindsight is awesome...if gets the pill, pumps it forward, he looks a genius and Motlop looks like Stants.
That said, to do the same thing repeatedly for the same result
Fool me once...
boncer34 wrote:Wait so Stanton went to the ball and Motlop sheepdogged over the top?
Wait, Stanton ignored his opponent (knowing he's a dangerous goal sneak) and went to the ball where he failed to influence any contest and consequently allowed his man to be free to slam some goals.
Unaccountable junk.
Hindsight is awesome...if gets the pill, pumps it forward, he looks a genius and Motlop looks like Stants.
That said, to do the same thing repeatedly for the same result
Fool me once...
This is a case where the opposition coach just says, "let Stanton run around because he won't hurt us". And he'll put the most attacking player on him as Stanton won't pay any attention to him.
boncer34 wrote:Wait so Stanton went to the ball and Motlop sheepdogged over the top?
Wait, Stanton ignored his opponent (knowing he's a dangerous goal sneak) and went to the ball where he failed to influence any contest and consequently allowed his man to be free to slam some goals.
Unaccountable junk.
Hindsight is awesome...if gets the pill, pumps it forward, he looks a genius and Motlop looks like Stants.
That said, to do the same thing repeatedly for the same result
Fool me once...
This is a case where the opposition coach just says, "let Stanton run around because he won't hurt us". And he'll put the most attacking player on him as Stanton won't pay any attention to him.
Nah Benny you f***** up with this argument. In fact you've reinforced everyone elses.
Motlop and Stanton did the same thing. Motlops teammates are able to carry him doing that. Stantons weren't.
Again. Stanton is a good solid player. He is what he is.
The fact you expect him to be a star is your expectations at fault not Stanton as a player. If Motlop had been wearing our jumper that night and Stanton wearing the Cats then Stanton would've kicked the goals.
Essendon Football Club- We arent arrogant, just deluded.
boncer34 wrote:Wait so Stanton went to the ball and Motlop sheepdogged over the top?
Wait, Stanton ignored his opponent (knowing he's a dangerous goal sneak) and went to the ball where he failed to influence any contest and consequently allowed his man to be free to slam some goals.
Unaccountable junk.
Hindsight is awesome...if gets the pill, pumps it forward, he looks a genius and Motlop looks like Stants.
That said, to do the same thing repeatedly for the same result
Fool me once...
This is a case where the opposition coach just says, "let Stanton run around because he won't hurt us". And he'll put the most attacking player on him as Stanton won't pay any attention to him.
Nah Benny you f***** up with this argument. In fact you've reinforced everyone elses.
Motlop and Stanton did the same thing. Motlops teammates are able to carry him doing that. Stantons weren't.
Again. Stanton is a good solid player. He is what he is.
The fact you expect him to be a star is your expectations at fault not Stanton as a player. If Motlop had been wearing our jumper that night and Stanton wearing the Cats then Stanton would've kicked the goals.
What the lovin' f*** are you on about?
The boy was exposed. Probably has been his entire career. But you think it's great. In fact, you blame his teammates for it lol.
Wally wrote:You can't completely gut a club of it's long serving players (regardless of their standards) and expect instant success to walk in the door. Just look at Melbourne - has worked wonders for them !!
Yeah, we'd have no experience left without Stanton.
boncer34 wrote:Stanton is a good solid player. He is what he is.
Cool. I don't see why we'd keep a good solid 29 year old player when we just finished fourth last.
As opposed to holding on to blokes that are shitful, and don't look remotely likely to step up? There's a good 10 of that type on the list that deserve to go before Stanton.
BenDoolan wrote:
What the lovin' f*** are you on about?
The boy was exposed. Probably has been his entire career. But you think it's great. In fact, you blame his teammates for it lol.
Who said it was great?
I've never said he was great.
You have said Motlop sheep dogged forward. It came off for him.
Why? Because his teammates were able to carry him.
You really don't understand that?
Yeah, I understand it. The opposition planned it. They know it will work for them. Why? Because Stanton doesn't hurt going our way, and they know they'll hurt us going the other way. Don't blame Stanton's teammates for that. Blame Stanton.
BenDoolan wrote:
What the lovin' f*** are you on about?
The boy was exposed. Probably has been his entire career. But you think it's great. In fact, you blame his teammates for it lol.
Who said it was great?
I've never said he was great.
You have said Motlop sheep dogged forward. It came off for him.
Why? Because his teammates were able to carry him.
You really don't understand that?
Yeah, I understand it. The opposition planned it. They know it will work for them. Why? Because Stanton doesn't hurt going our way, and they know they'll hurt us going the other way. Don't blame Stanton's teammates for that. Blame Stanton.
Lol.
Two players both ran forward.
Came off for one not the other.
Therefore makes one a dud and one good. Also apparently makes the fact that one blokes teammates got him the ball and the others didn't completely irrelevant.
Yeah nah Benny that doesn't make a lick of sense and you know it. Your hatred of the bloke is making you say crazy things.
We'll agree to disagree.
Essendon Football Club- We arent arrogant, just deluded.
