Skando

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9666
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Re: Skando

Post by Yossarian » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 7:21 am

I don't think Skando had a bad game - he was solid enough - but I'd think Fifita and/or Moors offer better choices off the bench. I realise Fifita is not fit at the moment so you come down to a question of props and whether there is anyone else to pick. Gower is leaving at the end of the year so I guess Sheens doesn't have a huge amount of options with Cayless still suffering from the worst boil ever and at the moment Skano is the low risk option.


Citizen Tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 659
Joined: Sat 18 Jul, 2009 10:10 am

Post by Citizen Tiger » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 9:45 am

coop wrote:
Citizen Tiger wrote:
coop wrote:Just a tip everyone.

If you're unhappy with Skando being chosen, that's fine be unhappy with the person who chose him.

But Skando doesn't deserve the disrespect some posters here are throwing at him. He has always given everything he has and has never, ever let us down.

He did exactly what was expected of him last night.

Disrespect? Well that takes unreality to an entirely new level. He's a player, like any other, that attracts opinions. The weight of opinion and indeed the stats suggest he is still the journeyman he was 12 years ago. If some want him to remain an icon, fair enough, he can be your Kevin Hardwick or Kerry Hemsley, both much loved, for their persistence and loyalty, nothing else
Firstly, that post was aimed at one poster. He knows who.

Secondly, as has been pointed out, he was chosen to play by the coach, rightly or wrongly. He didn't pick himself.

Thirdly, as I pointed out earlier, he averaged more per metre in 9 hit ups than most of the current pack, made 18 or 19 tackles without missing one, didn't make an error and didn't give away a penalty. All in 33 minutes.

Do you actually think his game warranted criticism based on that?

I don't care if the bloke is 80, if he does the job the criticism is unwarranted. Criticise the decision to pick him, sure. Criticise the bloke for accepting the offer to do a job for his team and doing it well...?

I guess if he has played the '99 season for Balmain, this thread would be a bit different.

Well, the 99' Balmain team didn't have anyone with the longevity that Skandalis has displayed. That pack contained O'Neill, O'Donnell, Senter etc and I would rate Skandalis' contribution over a long period of time above any of those players.

User avatar
Love the WestsTigers
Member
Member
Posts: 3223
Joined: Wed 21 Jul, 2010 12:03 pm
Location: Ex Ctown Resident Now Qlander

Post by Love the WestsTigers » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 12:56 pm

He is there to steady the ship .With Gareth Ellis out you need a workhorse and Chris Heighington can only do so much on his own.Todd does his bit to inspire too but we need a brick and Skando was there when GE wasnt.
I must admit he did get bounced around a bit and found the turf more than others but his courage cant be questioned.I'm happy for him to be picked over Fitzy but not over Fafita.
All that said he is a great servant for our club and we all have high respect for him.

User avatar
bonstonker
Member
Member
Posts: 1420
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 2:14 am
Location: Louisiana,usa

Post by bonstonker » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 2:20 pm

hybrid_tiger wrote:
Mate I am not turning it into anything, I am judging with my own eyes and from where I was sitting he was dominated in nearly every tackle. If someone wants to provide some stats, go for it - I don't think he offers more than Moors or Fifita could at the moment.

I love Skandalis as much as anyone, but we are in 2010 - he should not be playing ahead of better, more deserving options.
then go watch a replay,
he wasn't dominated at all.
early in his first stint made a great one on one tackle on webb .stopped him in his tracks and locked up the ball in a situation webb more often than not gets the off load away.
was busy in defense and prepared to be the 3rd man in to bring someone down and get straight back in the line instead of sliding to marker.nobody got an offload from one of his tackles.
did exactly what any coach would want in defense.
tell me what your eyes saw from him in defense.


he also worked in attack.
did you notice that after we scored he took the 3rd and 5th hitup of the set.
again,just what the coach wants after you score.


skando was not great and he wasn't poor or showed up because of his age.
he was simply rock solid.
how that is a negative is beyond me.

User avatar
Centaur
Member
Member
Posts: 1572
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 2:35 pm

Post by Centaur » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 2:25 pm

It is negative because we have players who can play better.


User avatar
smeghead
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
Posts: 9451
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 11:56 pm

Post by smeghead » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 2:33 pm

Centaur wrote:It is negative because we have players who can play better.

+1

No problems with Skando as a p[layer and he will try hard and give his all. Problem is he is not better than Moors who has done the same in terms of effort and commitment in every game he has played for Wests Tigers.

The selector is the issue, not the selected
Image

User avatar
bonstonker
Member
Member
Posts: 1420
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 2:14 am
Location: Louisiana,usa

Post by bonstonker » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 2:37 pm

Centaur wrote:It is negative because we have players who can play better.
this is about the player and his performance.
judged on the minutes he played.

and those same players can play worse than what skando did monday night.
they already have multiple times this year.

User avatar
Fraze23
Member
Member
Posts: 1913
Joined: Thu 15 Jul, 2010 4:21 pm
Location: Cambridge United Kingdom

Post by Fraze23 » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 2:43 pm

What game did you all watch? Skandalis was one of the best forwards on the park

william rodgers
Member
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat 17 Apr, 2010 10:53 am

Post by william rodgers » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 5:10 pm

Does it matter if he played for wests or balmain? sheens picked him to do a job & he did it. some of you wouldnt be happy if we had ingliss in the team you would still be un-happy, hopefully we beat manly on the weekend & keep winning.

User avatar
senexx
Member
Member
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 12:39 pm
Contact:

Post by senexx » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 7:06 pm

Anyone here disrespecting Skandalis' game or the reasoning behind his choice has never played in a team, has never understood what one respected individual can add to a team, can never understand how that person can be an inspiration no matter how they're playing.
Courage in my Blood
And Stripes across My Heart
- senex tigris

User avatar
senexx
Member
Member
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 12:39 pm
Contact:

Post by senexx » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 7:08 pm

Let me add everyone praising Moors is overrating him.
He's had one good game. The last one he played.
Courage in my Blood
And Stripes across My Heart
- senex tigris

User avatar
Love the WestsTigers
Member
Member
Posts: 3223
Joined: Wed 21 Jul, 2010 12:03 pm
Location: Ex Ctown Resident Now Qlander

Post by Love the WestsTigers » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 7:11 pm

smeghead wrote:
Centaur wrote:It is negative because we have players who can play better.

+1

No problems with Skando as a p[layer and he will try hard and give his all. Problem is he is not better than Moors who has done the same in terms of effort and commitment in every game he has played for Wests Tigers.

The selector is the issue, not the selected
This is a 50/50 call .
In terms of Skando being picked i dont blame the Selector
In terms of Ftizy being picked i do agree and blame the selector.
Moors might put in the same effort but its the attitude that is different. Skando is like Hindmarsh and Ellis , might be busted but will take the next hit up or tackle the next bloke.Others shy away when injured and clutch everything they can but our loyals stay to fight the battle.Hodgo was another example.Worst decision the club ever made to let one of their favourite sons go.

Muffstar
Member
Member
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 12:20 pm
Location: Port Macquarie

Post by Muffstar » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 7:51 pm

Love the WestsTigers wrote:
smeghead wrote:
Centaur wrote:It is negative because we have players who can play better.

+1

No problems with Skando as a p[layer and he will try hard and give his all. Problem is he is not better than Moors who has done the same in terms of effort and commitment in every game he has played for Wests Tigers.

The selector is the issue, not the selected
This is a 50/50 call .
In terms of Skando being picked i dont blame the Selector
In terms of Ftizy being picked i do agree and blame the selector.
Moors might put in the same effort but its the attitude that is different. Skando is like Hindmarsh and Ellis , might be busted but will take the next hit up or tackle the next bloke.Others shy away when injured and clutch everything they can but our loyals stay to fight the battle.Hodgo was another example.Worst decision the club ever made to let one of their favourite sons go.
Skando's time is up, no issues with his dedication, but when your time is up, your time is up. I believe we have better players in Skando who are younger and more dynamic. If you want him on the field get him to run the drinks out and bark instructions to the players, bit like Joey at SOO.

User avatar
innsaneink
Member
Member
Posts: 28883
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....

Post by innsaneink » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 8:35 pm

I could understand "his time is up" comments if he was embarrasing himself on the field, letting the team down or some similar nonsense.....but with a tick over half an hour on the park in season 2010...with none of the above occurring, these comments are just plain bullshyte

User avatar
smeghead
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
Posts: 9451
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 11:56 pm

Post by smeghead » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 8:45 pm

If it brings us closer to Sheens being shown the door I am rapt Skandalis & Fitzy are back.
Image

User avatar
coop
Member
Member
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun 23 May, 2010 12:00 am

Post by coop » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 6:46 am

Muffstar wrote:
Skando's time is up, no issues with his dedication, but when your time is up, your time is up. I believe we have better players in Skando who are younger and more dynamic. If you want him on the field get him to run the drinks out and bark instructions to the players, bit like Joey at SOO.
If that was a game that showed his time was up, I'm a dutch astronaut.

User avatar
barra
Member
Member
Posts: 2319
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 12:54 pm
Location: Sth Coast

Post by barra » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 10:12 am

Many posts here remind me of earlier (justified) Cayless threads... Skando seems to have been selected for same sort of role, but he played better than Cayless did in any of his games so shouldn't be copping the same sort of criticism so quickly.

Throughout his career Skando has been more about consistency than barnstorming/enforcer/mega-metre minutes. He knows what needs to be done and usually manages to do it and I thought he did quite okay for us last Monday and played similar to how he always has although Manly will be a bigger test for him. But right or wrong he has been named over Moors/Fafita and if he plays, lets at least get behind him - he deserves at least that much.

Citizen Tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 659
Joined: Sat 18 Jul, 2009 10:10 am

Post by Citizen Tiger » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 1:17 pm

barra wrote:Many posts here remind me of earlier (justified) Cayless threads... Skando seems to have been selected for same sort of role, but he played better than Cayless did in any of his games so shouldn't be copping the same sort of criticism so quickly.

Throughout his career Skando has been more about consistency than barnstorming/enforcer/mega-metre minutes. He knows what needs to be done and usually manages to do it and I thought he did quite okay for us last Monday and played similar to how he always has although Manly will be a bigger test for him. But right or wrong he has been named over Moors/Fafita and if he plays, lets at least get behind him - he deserves at least that much.

For God's sake, the tears of sentimentality are ridiculous, they could wash away a small village. Is he Mother Theresa or Mary McKillop in disguise? The issue is one of recruitment, that's what utterly lost in this admiration fest

Post Reply