Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Cam wrote:Reading nothing into it. He's a two game player ffs.

Yes, but did you read the tea leaves?

I looked at the bottom of of a cup after breakfast. Looked like a bird. Couldn't tell if it was a crow or a magpie.

Can you describe the beak?

watt price tully wrote:

Cam wrote:Reading nothing into it. He's a two game player ffs.

Yes, but did you read the tea leaves?

I looked at the bottom of of a cup after breakfast. Looked like a bird. Couldn't tell if it was a crow or a magpie.

i think it was a different bird you were seeing. likely to have been a raised second finger.

I was in the "he'll stay" camp until now. I just don't agree that the reasons for his dropping are logical.

The only way for this speculation to end would be for Shazza to sign I guess. It's a distraction, albeit a small one.

scoobydoo wrote:I hope your right but I think he could have played instead of Sinclair

And made us instantly slower.

Just don't understand people jumping to the conclusion that he's leaving because he got dropped. In my view he wasn't even senior ready so he's exceeded his 2015 expectation by getting 2 games. For that matter, I still don't think Moore is AFL ready but that's another discussion.

I also don't understand how people continually say that player X could have played instead of player Y (yes I know X & Y aren't actually players on our list) without giving any consideration to team structures.

lo at the neuroticism.

^^ Is that even a word?

Admit I'm being a bit neurotic but I really don't understand him being dropped. Imo he makes us a better side and should be playing.

lo is a word.

what were the alternatives? play him as sub again or play him from the start and limit our sub options?

John Wren wrote:lo is a word.

what were the alternatives? play him as sub again or play him from the start and limit our sub options?

Or play him for the sake of playing him just because if might or might not sign for the next few years? WTF? Some sort of blackmail? Glad it doesn't work like that. Pick the best possible team for the opposition based on team structures and team balance. If a player wants to sook, let him...

who said he was sooking?

John Wren wrote:who said he was sooking?

Not me. Mine was a general comment about ANY player who wants to have a sook after they are dropped or whatever. Let them.

Played one Qtr, seems to be a regular pattern with the Pies with Players (especially young ones) who only get the one Qtr when a sub, no alarm bells, imagine there would have been many back room discussions going on prior to the decision and Scharenberg would have been well aware of all of them!

Darkstranger wrote:Played one Qtr, seems to be a regular pattern with the Pies with Players (especially young ones) who only get the one Qtr when a sub, no alarm bells, imagine there would have been many back room discussions going on prior to the decision and Scharenberg would have been well aware of all of them!

FFS, he played a full game the previous week. No-one owns a spot in our team, especially young developing players. We are now at the pointy end of the season, and because of our precarious position, we have to win all our remaining games if we are to make the finals. That means we must pick our best team each week, unless we lose a game and are out of the finals race. If that happens, by all means play a few kids and give them more experience, but until that occurs, players like Goldsack, Oxley and Maynard are probably ahead of Scharenberg in the queue for a senior berth.

RudeBoy wrote:

Darkstranger wrote:Played one Qtr, seems to be a regular pattern with the Pies with Players (especially young ones) who only get the one Qtr when a sub, no alarm bells, imagine there would have been many back room discussions going on prior to the decision and Scharenberg would have been well aware of all of them!

FFS, he played a full game the previous week. No-one owns a spot in our team, especially young developing players. We are now at the pointy end of the season, and because of our precarious position, we have to win all our remaining games if we are to make the finals. That means we must pick our best team each week, unless we lose a game and are out of the finals race. If that happens, by all means play a few kids and give them more experience, but until that occurs, players like Goldsack, Oxley and Maynard are probably ahead of Scharenberg in the queue for a senior berth.

Well why isn't Youngy been looked , he owns a spot in our team easily!