#8 Marty Reppin' Gleeson - is “stoked to be back”

Difference of opinion. You say dropping him for the last few games has been the reason for his form reversal, I’m saying playing 16 games instead of 6 last year as a run-with midfield tagger is what is leading to his form reversal in 2015. Last year was a Bomber T education for him on his defensive side, something which he will appreciate in future years, even though it’s obvious he prefers Hird as coach.

Anyway…Gleeson will have a bad run in 2016 or 17 or 18, & I’ll be the first to back him, while someone like DP will be calling for him to be dropped asap.

What a disaster it would have been given an extra few seconds. shudders

Quoted Post

If anybody should have had a hard tag, or even be double teamed, with 15 seconds to go in a match, it's Rioli.

We know this. We should know it double now.

CYRIL.

while hill was being dug out of the ground gleeson ran up to the stoppage to see what what jobe wanted to do with the spare man created by hill going off. Jobe sent him back and he seemed to take baguley’s man while baguley then floated. I was actually concerned hill was doing the rope a dope and was going to drift out the back without a man. i think we made a number of errors at that stoppage given the situation:

  • Our first and most obvious goal is to force another stoppage
  • to that end tbell needs to neutralise the ruck contest, even to the point of giving away a free and forcing a slow play,
  • next we should be making sure we out number them at the stoppage, them having a spare back doesn’t matter at this point because if they win the clearance an kick backwards they lose.
  • we should be man on man at the stoppage with our spare number at the ruckmen’s feet ready to force a secondary
  • if we have another spare they should be 10 to 15 meters defensive side so he can react to a clean running clearance or 3rd man up getting the ball going their way.
  • we should preferably have an extra number down back too (really they could have had 3 defenders to zero inside our 50 for all i care with 15 seconds to go).
  • a high ball should be treated the same as a stoppage, we should be forcing another stoppage. get the ball out or to feet and lock it in. no crumbers should be allowed to run through the front and square at pace, block block block.
  • don’t fly 3 against 1 in the air, read the contest, if hurley and hooker are in the pack already having another small or medium defender fly is probably not going to make a difference.
  • in the event that the role any spare defenders up to the stoppage or forward obviously we sacrifice our spares to go man on man.

we pretty much failed on every ■■■■■■ count

Quoted Post

Quoted Post
Quoted Post
Have you tread the Melksham thread?

Not that I want to get into this crappy debate, but what did Bomba do to Melksham at the end of last year?

And how is he playing now?

Yes but he persisted with him a lot longer than most on here wanted. Bomber T knew he was a good player, tried to teach him to have a defensive side which wasn't always successful then, but now we are reaping the benefits.

And funnily enough, we reaped benefits after he was dropped, not during his 6-10 games to find form. (Just like 2013, after he got dropped for Anzac Day)

Look, I’m normally all for taking pot shots at DP, but I’ve always agreed with him on Melksham, and it certainly hasn’t been proven wrong. I’d argue it was pretty accurate.

Calling for people to be dropped doesn’t always mean they are rubbish and should be delisted. In fact, in Melkshams case, quite the opposite. I bet missing that final burnt at him all pre season.

Anyway… Gleeson!

Barnes thread 3.0

Quoted Post

Quoted Post
I like the boy. I've watched the last few minutes about a dozen times, and I slowed down the last seconds to see exactly what people were talking about. It seems to me he and Breust were running full tilt back to the marking contest and Breust just beat him there. At no point was he ever in front of him, at no point could he have done anything other than run as fast as he could to the contest. And Breust was doing the same. Breust had a metre on him when Rioli kicked it, and beat him to the contest by three. I've seen comments suggesting he could have taken his run or done something else to prevent him getting the ball, I think you're looking at the Hooker contest, and that's exactly what he was doing.
It's all in reference to what was shown on 360 last night. They had Goddard talking about it and could show some up the ground camera angles that highlighted it. As Goddard said, it was just a little bit of inexperience, he allowed his player to get goal side and then was ball watching a little bit. I don't think the main play shows it anywhere near as much.

Turned out (luckily) ok, and he and the team will learn from it.


The mistake that could’ve killed us was Watson on Rioli at the throw in on the wing. Watson balled watched and left Rioli 5 metres in the clear. With hindsight, it was critical for that clearance to be neutral or a win.
Watson wasn't "caught ball watching"... the ball came out of the contest, Watson charged at it, Hawks player managed to kick it, it went past Watson to Rioli.

If anybody should have had a hard tag, or even be double teamed, with 15 seconds to go in a match, it’s Rioli.

We know this. We should know it double now.

Wannabe, are you demented or something? DP was saying move him up to the wing & that he made the same mistake as last season on Cyril, doesn’t sound like he is saying give him a chance to develop.

And maths is obviously not your strong point; I said give good players 6-10 games to turn form around, he would probably say 3 or 4.

And when did I say anything about coaches having any rules like ‘guaranteed to play 6-10 games’ - it’s my rule, not any coach.

Quoted Post

I like the boy. I've watched the last few minutes about a dozen times, and I slowed down the last seconds to see exactly what people were talking about. It seems to me he and Breust were running full tilt back to the marking contest and Breust just beat him there. At no point was he ever in front of him, at no point could he have done anything other than run as fast as he could to the contest. And Breust was doing the same. Breust had a metre on him when Rioli kicked it, and beat him to the contest by three. I've seen comments suggesting he could have taken his run or done something else to prevent him getting the ball, I think you're looking at the Hooker contest, and that's exactly what he was doing.
It's all in reference to what was shown on 360 last night. They had Goddard talking about it and could show some up the ground camera angles that highlighted it. As Goddard said, it was just a little bit of inexperience, he allowed his player to get goal side and then was ball watching a little bit. I don't think the main play shows it anywhere near as much.

Turned out (luckily) ok, and he and the team will learn from it.


The mistake that could’ve killed us was Watson on Rioli at the throw in on the wing. Watson balled watched and left Rioli 5 metres in the clear. With hindsight, it was critical for that clearance to be neutral or a win.

Quoted Post

Have you read the Melksham thread?

Nah mate, I’m in the Gleeson thread, and a few posts above yours the guy you were bagging was talking about giving Gleeson (who the thread is about) a chance to develop, so you can imagine how stupid your post looked.

And you contradict yourself about Melksham. You say half a dozen games isn’t enough, but 6-10 is ok in your book? Then you say 3-4 isn’t enough. Splitting hairs maybe?

As if any coach has a rule like “You will play 6-10 games no matter what your form is”.

Gleek style

I’m still gonna stick with “The Gleek!”

The Gleesemeister

Gleeso.

Slippery Eelson.

You know how many people quote DP?

Quoted Post

Quoted Post
Have you tread the Melksham thread?

Not that I want to get into this crappy debate, but what did Bomba do to Melksham at the end of last year?

And how is he playing now?

Yes but he persisted with him a lot longer than most on here wanted. Bomber T knew he was a good player, tried to teach him to have a defensive side which wasn't always successful then, but now we are reaping the benefits.

But in DP’s eyes, he should of only played half a dozen games last year, not the 16 or 17 he did play, cause we had so many good players running around in the 2nds racking up possessions week after week. I give players at least 6-10 games to find form, DP gives them 3 or 4 at most, then cares to ignore them when they do have a good game (eg Stants games against the Hawks was completely ignored by him, but watch out for his next quiet game).

You do have an Ignore function you know?

Quoted Post

Have you tread the Melksham thread?

Not that I want to get into this crappy debate, but what did Bomba do to Melksham at the end of last year?

And how is he playing now?

Website Design