morell wrote:We wouldn't know, because half the players that have played well in the magpies still don't get a call up. There are plenty of people that do go to Magpies games that very much agree with my viewpoint - you also don't need to go to Mars to know it's red.Booney wrote:By your own admission you don't watch the Magpies, perhaps do yourself and those who read your posts on here a favor. Get out there and watch a match and then tell me who deserves to come up into the AFL ranks, if not, your opinion isn't an educated one IMO. It's one built on half a picture and that's not sufficient enough to make judgement calls on. Not in my view.
It's been proven countless times how form in one doesn't always correlate to form in the other. There have been numerous times where Hinkley could have brought in player x or player y after a solid week or two and he chose to back the status quo. Some players have the skill set to dominate at SANFL level but have no upside to improve at AFL level. Some players are the exact opposite, they will lift and play at whatever level they're playing at.
Howard should have been played.
Eddy should have been played.
Neade should never of been played.
Frampton should have been played.
Pittard should have never been bought back in.
Houston should never have been dropped (x2).
Austin should never of been played.
These examples continue on for days.
There have been structural, selection, cultural and mental issues at Port all season. Many posters have tried to explain this to you and others but have routinely been told that all is well. It's not. Change is needed - Hinkley, Nicks and Voss out to start.
"Howard should have been played" - Where would you have played him?
