Bird hasn't resigned. Hyphens still matter.
Bird hasn't resigned. Hyphens still matter.
Gee, somehow Horse managed to fit Parker, Bird, Kennedy and Mitchell/Mitchill in the best 22 at the start of the year.
Just opinions. A couple of points that leads me to this thinking:Originally Posted by Flying South
- Late last season we played a midfield of Kennedy, Bird, Parker, Mitchill and ROK. That's five slower paced midfielders, inside contested midfiders. It worked against poor and middle rank teams, but did not work against Geelong, Fremantle and the -Hawks. Longmire since that time has talked more about pace.
- Early this season we played Kennedy, Bird, Parker, ROK and Mitchell. We lost 3 out of the first 4. Longmire took Mitchill and ROK out and since that point has played Kennedy, Parker and Bird as his three slower paced inside midfielders. It's worked with all the subsequent wins. ROK and Mitchill have not got another opportunity as Longmire has played the pace of Lloyd, B.Jack and Towers in the fringe player positions.
If not exactly certain about the pace of all those guys, but I would think that Parker is quicker than Bird and Kennedy. Hanners may be quicker than medium pace.
Longmire didn't take Mitchell out in Round 5. He had an ankle injury. Can you please stop posting things that are untrue?
He did have an ankle injury, but I thought he was rested after the North Melbourne game. Sorry if I got that detail incorrect.
In any event, he probably on form deserved to come back in after the 64 possession game in Canberra. Longmire elected to go with the balance of Kennedy, Bird and Parker and has not altered that balance since the North Melbourne game. Only quicker players have come in since then.
Beg to differ, but when a player is returning from a recurring injury, it is common practice at many elite football clubs, to play a number of ressies games to ensure both form AND that there isn't a chance of re-injury. Especially when it isn't essential that the player return to the seniors. Mitchell certainly had form, but re-injured soon after (justifying such a cautious approach). There were others that could cover his role until he's fit to safely return, not necessarily that Tom isn't part of Horse's seniors plans. Unless, of course John personally told you his plans for Tom, Joey, Craig & Luke, in which case I withdraw my objection.
Not to mention he had a restricted preseason due to ankle surgery. It makes sense that they would be very cautious. The fact of the matter is that Matt80 is trying to manufacture a case that Tom a Mitchell is out of favour with Longmire. As we've seen Horse is loathe to change a winning team unless forced to by injury. Unfortunately, when spots did open up, Tom was not available due to injury or inadequate reserve time. Those are the facts according to both reality and unambiguous statements from Longmire himself.
I didn't realise we initially only signed Laidler for 1 year. He has improved so much compared to the first couple of games so I am happy we have signed him up.
I reckon Laidler would be pretty happy about that as well
The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.
Great news ,no one wants to leave all happy ,and know whats coming?
I'm not trying to manufacture a case that Tom Mitchell is out of favour with Longmire. I have no doubt that if one of Kennedy, Bird or Parker are injured or rested after the Port game then Tom Mitchell would be straight back into the starting 21, as long as his form and fitness are in good order.
Tom would come into the system and play a great role as part of the three slower inside midfielder paced system. He would feed great handballs out to the likes of Jetta and McGlynn, win plenty of contested ball and deliver 6-10 tackles.
I don't know where this myth comes from that Mitchell is slow. Certainly not the opinion of his coach.
Longmire put any question on Mitchell leaving to bed yesterday
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks