#17 James Stewart


#2609

After one down year? The only reason he hasn’t been getting a game is that his form fell off a cliff and moving to a club with less tall forwards isn’t going to change that.

If he’s going to make it as a player he’ll use the disappointment of this season to drive him to the next level. And of course if he does want out, then he’s too soft to be of use to us anyway.


#2610

Don’t care if he hasn’t been travling that well in the seconds comes in against the Saints we lacked a second tall target since Smack got injured,


#2611

Which part of not picked for the last few months have you missed?


#2612

Oh yes, of course. The best thing for every player’s development is always to play them in the 1’s every week.


#2613

When did I say anything remotely like that? The fact that he was a late withdrawal from the VFL is irrelevant to the fact he’s not been picked to play seniors for 9 weeks & whether or not that is in any way connected to the possibility he wants to leave.

I believe he should have come back in when Smack got injured. I accept that his form may not have warranted it but for team balance I believe we needed him. We gave Colyer a re-call when he didn’t deserve it so why not at least pick a player who fills an obvious need?


#2614

This might sound crazy but has he been considered as a back option? Got the height and athletic ability and long reach. I prefer him over Brown but obviously Brown has more consistent form.


#2615

I don’t think he has been available for selection since Smack got injured. Smack got injured against Freo (?), and IIRC Stewart hasn’t played the last 2 in the seconds, which encompasses 3wks including the VFL bye. I could be wrong, but that is how I recall it.


#2616

He’s 24. Get the feeling he’ll be a late bloomer and play solid footy at 27/28


#2617

He played the VFL game before the bye so has only missed this week. He wasn’t listed as injured last week or going into selection this week so I have to assume he was available for selection.


#2618

But not worth coming in according to the coaches. I tend to agree with them but hope he turns it around because we can use him right atm. But he is not a marking forward so that isn’t going to make a huge difference in the way we want. If Dea is available then you might find Hooker goes forward.


#2619

Exactly -I believe they got that wrong. Going into a game against Hawthorn in particular without a bigger bodied tall forward was a mistake I believe. At a minimum we should have brought in Hartley (who was our best in the VFL the previous match) or even Ridley who is more a replacement for Dea which would have allowed us to play Hooker forward. Having to switch out Stringer in the ruck is also a bad move I believe. I can’t see how bringing in 2 of our shortest players was ever going to be the right move, we gave up any & all flexibility.


#2620

Didn’t he go down injured?


#2621

Bone bruising, not sure if it was pre match or in the match?
His form hasn’t been demanding a gig either, particularly given there was a bye in there too.

And I’m a huge fan.


#2622

The thing is, the game wasn’t lost because of selection or because we missed a tall, we still kicked 16 goals for the game and scored a 100 points. The problem came down to the playing group as a whole having an poor game. I thought the coaches did well to help them not drop their bundle and keep fighting it out to the point that we only just lost the game. We weren’t thrashed (4 points), in the end it came down to an off game from a lot of players, especially the backline which was basically all out of sorts and all belted. Hurley beat Buddy then got towelled up by Gunston.


#2623

Just as well you know 9/10 of fark all about football.
Makes ignoring your more imbecilic posts so much easier.


#2624

Yes he was injured in the 1st qtr. Are you suggesting we knew that was going to happen & didn’t pick him because of this?


#2625

No thought it was the week before that’s all.


#2626

More like you don’t was ■■■■■■ obvoius last week that we were lacking a 2nd tall target Alir wouldn’t have taken so many intercept marks if Stewart was playing and again this week we didn’t go with another tall.

Bet if Stewart played Stratton wouldn’t have had a field day


#2627

You can see it differently but I firmly believe it was the lack of a key tall forward that effected the way we brought the ball forward. You may not have noticed Stratton taking 11 marks or believe it effected the outcome but I think he was a massive factor that we had nothing to counter with.

Just to add, the fact the coaches threw Hooker there late showed they could see the problem & that move was almost the match winner. Our selections restricted our flexibility.


#2628

How do you work which ones are more imbecilic?