AA team

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:36 pm

B: N Bassett (Ade) D Glass (WC) L Gilbee (WB)
HB: C Bolton (Syd) J Bowden (Rich) A McLeod (Ade)
C: S Goodwin (Ade) S West (WB) A Goodes (Syd)
HF: A Didak (Coll) B Hall (vc) (Syd) R O'Keefe (Syd)
F: B Johnson © (WB) B Fevola (Carl) N Riewoldt (St.K)
R: B Lade (PA) C Judd (WC) B Cousins (WC)
INT: S Burgoyne (PA) D Cox (WC) J McDonald (Melb) M Pavlich (Fre)

Post by **Jazz_84** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:41 pm

when was the last time an Essendon player wasn't a part of the AA team?

Gossy7 · Post by **Gossy7** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:06 pm

Pretty fair team.

Kane Cornes?

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:11 pm

Bowden in front of Clement and Fletcher?

Thats a ****** joke and why I never followed the Hybrid game or any of the shit they put on display.

The fact that Bowden has been AA more than Fletcher is a blight on teh selection panel and tey should all be taken out teh back and shot.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:20 pm

Is this the 'official' AA team???

bombercol · Post by **bombercol** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:21 pm

Very good side.

I personally would have put Whitnall in at CHB instead of J Bowden.

Would have also found a spot on the bench for Andrew Raines too, but of course you can't fit 23 into 22 spots.

Sad to see no Bombers in there, but that's an indication of our season and although a couple of players have stood out, on form it would have been harsh to put them in over the team picked.

Gossy7 · Post by **Gossy7** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:23 pm

Yeh i think its the official side Jimmy.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:28 pm

Gossy7 wrote:Yeh i think its the official side Jimmy.

Ta. No real surprises, just a few disappointments (such as not getting any Essendon players there). But as has already been said, that's indicative of the season we had. Only McVeigh or Lucas had any real claims in the first place, but when you look at who's there in their positions you can't really be too critical of the selections.

lozza89 · Post by **lozza89** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:29 pm

Interesting that Cox is named on the bench before Lade. I thought he would of been in the starting 18.

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:31 pm

jimmyc1985 wrote:
Gossy7 wrote:Yeh i think its the official side Jimmy.
Ta. No real surprises, just a few disappointments (such as not getting any Essendon players there). But as has already been said, that's indicative of the season we had. Only McVeigh or Lucas had any real claims in the first place, but when you look at who's there in their positions you can't really be too critical of the selections.

Would like to get a comparison of Glass vs Fletcher vs Bowden

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:42 pm

Rossoneri wrote:
jimmyc1985 wrote:
Gossy7 wrote:Yeh i think its the official side Jimmy.
Ta. No real surprises, just a few disappointments (such as not getting any Essendon players there). But as has already been said, that's indicative of the season we had. Only McVeigh or Lucas had any real claims in the first place, but when you look at who's there in their positions you can't really be too critical of the selections.
Would like to get a comparison of Glass vs Fletcher vs Bowden

Bowden at CHB is silly, because we all know he doesn't have the defensive skills expected of a CHB. Putting him at CHB reflects the fact that, with Leppitsch gone and a few others going down hill, there is a paucity of quality CHB's going around at the moment. My suspicion is that Croad would have got the gong had he not been injured for so much of the year.

Glass is a bit of a scragger, but he has been pretty good this season. Put it this way - i think he's more deserving of the FB position than Rutten; i'm glad the selectors didn't go for him, because he gets more of a chop-out than any other full-back in the game. I'd qualify Fletcher's exclusion by saying that if he had played 22 games he would have got a guernsey, but he only played 16 games. Selectors have to reward consistency throughout the entire season.

Post by **Jazz_84** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:25 pm

lol gossy7 is having troubles with getting in BT but he tells me Alan Didak had a bit to drink before he got annouced in the team and was slurring a bit haha

bueller · Post by **bueller** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:38 pm

You can't begrudge the forwards that got a spot however Lucas deserved to be slotted in there somehow.
He kicked 67 goals in a team that won only 3 games for the season.

I think Ryan O'Keefe should've got a pat on the back for his efforts this season and given a gold star but also a "maybe next year".
He was pretty good but to me not a real stand out.
However i like the fact that he's not a "name" player and was recognised for his efforts. Lucas though shouldv'e got a spot in the pocket with Reiwoldt on a flank where he leads out to most of the time.

Speaking of "name" players i disagree with McLeod and Cousins inclusions who - the former especially, have been just "good" players in a great side.
Why didn;'t Marty Mattner get in? or Daniel Kerr? Who i consider to be the two players in each side that have been better in those respective positions.

As for CHB - i can't believe Bowden got it.. It totally degrades the definition of the position and what the past great CHB's have done for the game. He was a flanker at best and had a great season accumulating possessions while not worrying what his opponent did the other way.
A joke.
Whitnall deserved it over him, but then again you can't give the wooden spooners two spots in an AA side - especially if they are Carlton!!!!

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:24 pm

I think Lucas shoudl have been on the bench. He carried the side and kicked as many goals as Hall. If Fevola can get in, the (Your team couldn't win), isn't a valid reason.

Boyler_Room · Post by **Boyler_Room** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:22 am

bueller wrote:Speaking of "name" players i disagree with McLeod and Cousins inclusions who - the former especially, have been just "good" players in a great side.
Why didn;'t Marty Mattner get in? or Daniel Kerr? Who i consider to be the two players in each side that have been better in those respective positions.

As for CHB - i can't believe Bowden got it.. It totally degrades the definition of the position and what the past great CHB's have done for the game. He was a flanker at best and had a great season accumulating possessions while not worrying what his opponent did the other way.
A joke.
Whitnall deserved it over him, but then again you can't give the wooden spooners two spots in an AA side - especially if they are Carlton!!!!

I was thinking the same thing about Daniel Kerr. For a good portion of the year he stood out amongst that stellar midfield as the key. Surprised he didn't get a guernsey.

Joel Bowden.. pfft. That's a disgrace for him to be named CHB. He's not a CHB. He gets cheap possessions off that HB line chip passing and going the 1-2 as he runs past a team mate or kicks backwards.

For mine, the "[Team] didn't win enough games" excuse is pure rubbish. If a player is deserving of a spot then they should get a spot. Fevola in FF I can understand. They guy played out of his skin for most of the year in a crap team that got the spoon. Fevola won the Coleman Medal though. Lucas finished 4th on the goal kicking table in a team that finished 15th... and even managed to spend some time in the backline. Was Lucas ever going to get the gig over Hall? Not a chance in hell. Hall plays for Sydney, the AFLs current "project" team with Premierships being designed for them (much the same way that Brisbane won 3 flags IMO).

If Stanton improves his disposal, and Watson learns how to kick a footy over the off season/pre season... expect to see those 2 names in the middle next year.

robrulz5 · Post by **robrulz5** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:37 am

Does Hall even play at CHF?

Dizzy_69 · Post by **Dizzy_69** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:43 am

robrulz5 wrote:Does Hall even play at CHF?

Between CHF & FF as he put it

Madden · Post by **Madden** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:55 am

Nothing wrong with Bowden being named. He has had a stellar year. I understand the query on the position but i don't think its too big a deal.

The big ones for me were Ryan O'Keefe (WTF?) and James McDonald (ditto). Oh, and Matthew Pavlich should have been on the ground. To have him on the bench is a disgrace. If anything, he should have been at CHF and Barry Hall / Riewoldt should have been on the bench.

Bueller, i cannot believe you could disagree with Cousins' inclusion. That absoltely staggers me. He's had a fantastic year. Who would you have fill the position of Rover in his place?

Ossie · Post by **Ossie** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:59 am

Staggy wrote:The big ones for me were Ryan O'Keefe (WTF?) and James McDonald (ditto).

Those two stood out for me too. Would have thought Clement was an absolute shoo-in too.

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:26 pm

I may not like him, but I can't understand how Jeff Farmer missed out on a HFF possie. He kicked more goals (over 50) than both Didak (41) & O'Keefe (27) and was a driving force in the dockers improvement.

He tackled hard and helped keep the ball inside freo's forward 50.

Way better that the other two!