little_ripper wrote:Melksham runs 2nd in the comp to Buddy for Clangers.(who you can't really compare).
Equal to Fyfe. So yes I wouldnt on its own link it to bad performance.
but he doesnt get much of the pill, and his disposal efficiency is not great. he has maybe one or two noteable passes inside 50 a game.
He plays a negating game so he won't get much of the ball. His disposal has been crud. Just like 99% of the team. I would much rather persist with a bloke who applies pressure on the opposition rather than someone who allows his opponent to run amok. Any. Day. Of. The. Week.
And how well do you think he faired in that negating game last week? imo average to poor.
Selwood still picked up 26 good possies and kicked 2 goals.
Who has Jake been beating of late? He has some OK games, but he is very very middle of the road. One of the worst(IMO) 'best 22' mids in the comp.
little_ripper wrote:Melksham runs 2nd in the comp to Buddy for Clangers.(who you can't really compare).
Equal to Fyfe. So yes I wouldnt on its own link it to bad performance.
but he doesnt get much of the pill, and his disposal efficiency is not great. he has maybe one or two noteable passes inside 50 a game.
He plays a negating game so he won't get much of the ball. His disposal has been crud. Just like 99% of the team. I would much rather persist with a bloke who applies pressure on the opposition rather than someone who allows his opponent to run amok. Any. Day. Of. The. Week.
And how well do you think he faired in that negating game last week? imo average to poor.
Selwood still picked up 26 good possies and kicked 2 goals.
Who has Jake been beating of late? He has some OK games, but he is very very middle of the road. One of the worst(IMO) 'best 22' mids in the comp.
little_ripper wrote:Melksham runs 2nd in the comp to Buddy for Clangers.(who you can't really compare).
Equal to Fyfe. So yes I wouldnt on its own link it to bad performance.
but he doesnt get much of the pill, and his disposal efficiency is not great. he has maybe one or two noteable passes inside 50 a game.
He plays a negating game so he won't get much of the ball. His disposal has been crud. Just like 99% of the team. I would much rather persist with a bloke who applies pressure on the opposition rather than someone who allows his opponent to run amok. Any. Day. Of. The. Week.
And how well do you think he faired in that negating game last week? imo average to poor.
Selwood still picked up 26 good possies and kicked 2 goals.
Who has Jake been beating of late? He has some OK games, but he is very very middle of the road. One of the worst(IMO) 'best 22' mids in the comp.
His draft year are hitting their straps now.
OK, how well is Stanton's attacking game going? If he totally disregards his opponent (which he does), you'd expect some constructive and damaging didposals going forward i.e a good number of i50's (which Melksham got more of), or some goal assists, which Stants got none. Instead, his opponent has a f****** picnic going the other way. Jake has 130 games of shitness to catch up to Stants. So give him time.
little_ripper wrote:Melksham runs 2nd in the comp to Buddy for Clangers.(who you can't really compare).
Equal to Fyfe. So yes I wouldnt on its own link it to bad performance.
but he doesnt get much of the pill, and his disposal efficiency is not great. he has maybe one or two noteable passes inside 50 a game.
He plays a negating game so he won't get much of the ball. His disposal has been crud. Just like 99% of the team. I would much rather persist with a bloke who applies pressure on the opposition rather than someone who allows his opponent to run amok. Any. Day. Of. The. Week.
And how well do you think he faired in that negating game last week? imo average to poor.
Selwood still picked up 26 good possies and kicked 2 goals.
Who has Jake been beating of late? He has some OK games, but he is very very middle of the road. One of the worst(IMO) 'best 22' mids in the comp.
Sorry mate but Goddard and Howlett spent more time on Selwood than Jake.
little_ripper wrote:Melksham runs 2nd in the comp to Buddy for Clangers.(who you can't really compare).
Equal to Fyfe. So yes I wouldnt on its own link it to bad performance.
but he doesnt get much of the pill, and his disposal efficiency is not great. he has maybe one or two noteable passes inside 50 a game.
He plays a negating game so he won't get much of the ball. His disposal has been crud. Just like 99% of the team. I would much rather persist with a bloke who applies pressure on the opposition rather than someone who allows his opponent to run amok. Any. Day. Of. The. Week.
And how well do you think he faired in that negating game last week? imo average to poor.
Selwood still picked up 26 good possies and kicked 2 goals.
Who has Jake been beating of late? He has some OK games, but he is very very middle of the road. One of the worst(IMO) 'best 22' mids in the comp.
His draft year are hitting their straps now.
OK, how well is Stanton's attacking game going? If he totally disregards his opponent (which he does), you'd expect some constructive and damaging didposals going forward i.e a good number of i50's (which Melksham got more of), or some goal assists, which Stants got none. Instead, his opponent has a f****** picnic going the other way. Jake has 130 games of shitness to catch up to Stants. So give him time.
