Author Topic: Tom Derickx [merged]  (Read 30194 times)

Offline bojangles17

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5618
  • Platinum member 33 years
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #225 on: May 30, 2014, 08:09:49 AM »
With TD ripping it up, just imagine what vickers would be playing like for someone else. He actually has some talent, moves like a gazelle when as a  follower , be warned  :shh
RFC 1885, Often Imitated, Never Equalled

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #226 on: May 30, 2014, 08:12:47 AM »
Tyrone is still a baby


Needs at least two more years before being expected to compete with a grade ruckman

Offline Mr Magic

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 6887
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #227 on: May 30, 2014, 10:06:26 AM »
Sydney can't afford to pay anyone decent to play in the ruck. It's not Tom D why they won by 100 points last night.

Offline 1965

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5580
  • Don't water the rocks
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #228 on: May 30, 2014, 10:13:45 AM »

It does show that you do not need to win in the ruck to win.

Just be competitive.

This is where Maric excels.

 :thumbsup

Offline Dice

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1357
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #229 on: May 30, 2014, 10:18:38 AM »
When Derickx dropped that mark I don't think anyone envisioned that even we could somehow manage to eventually replace him with someone not only even worse but also at a greater cost, yet here we are.

 :lol

I shouldn't laugh really but that is funny.
Tanking has put the club where it's at - Paul Roos

Offline lamington

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2812
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #230 on: May 30, 2014, 10:39:26 AM »
He's playing crap for Sydney but he gets noticed more by most of us because of where he came from and we have a stick to measure his performance by.  He might have improved slightly from his RFC days but he is still crap and wouldn't be even close to a senior game if Sydney hadn't stuffed up by getting rid of Mumford.

TD will be back in the seconds the moment Mike Pyke is back. RFC made the right call in dropping him. He would not be the first ruckman in any team given his current form.

tony_montana

  • Guest
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #231 on: May 30, 2014, 05:45:38 PM »
When Derickx dropped that mark I don't think anyone envisioned that even we could somehow manage to eventually replace him with someone not only even worse but also at a greater cost, yet here we are.

 :lol

I shouldn't laugh really but that is funny.

It was a goodun  ;D

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #232 on: May 30, 2014, 05:48:44 PM »
He's playing crap for Sydney but he gets noticed more by most of us because of where he came from and we have a stick to measure his performance by.  He might have improved slightly from his RFC days but he is still crap and wouldn't be even close to a senior game if Sydney hadn't stuffed up by getting rid of Mumford.

TD will be back in the seconds the moment Mike Pyke is back. RFC made the right call in dropping him. He would not be the first ruckman in any team given his current form.

The question is

A. How much better is hampson than derickx

B. How good was the secound pick potentially

the claw

  • Guest
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #233 on: May 30, 2014, 06:52:01 PM »
He's playing crap for Sydney but he gets noticed more by most of us because of where he came from and we have a stick to measure his performance by.  He might have improved slightly from his RFC days but he is still crap and wouldn't be even close to a senior game if Sydney hadn't stuffed up by getting rid of Mumford.

TD will be back in the seconds the moment Mike Pyke is back. RFC made the right call in dropping him. He would not be the first ruckman in any team given his current form.

The question is

A. How much better is hampson than derickx

B. How good was the secound pick potentially
C. What were the other options and did we even explore them. no we didnt.

D. which player was hampson supposed to replace and is he a better option. i thought we got him to play second ruck so vickery could play full time fwd. hamspud is an infinately better ruckman than vickery.

E, What were the risks in taking hampson.and did we weigh them up. id say no. we totally ignored his previous track record  and our own development record thinking we could turn him around.

F. SHOULD WE BE USEING 2ND ROUND PICKS ON 26YO UNPROVEN PLAYERS. hell no.

G What was  the true state of our ruck stocks and did we need to target a mature ruckman. the simple answer to that was our ruck stocks were poor still are. there was a need to find a mature ruckman 23 24 yo who could fill in for ivan but with steohenson there it was not a must. we really still needed to put a junior even two on our list.

our ruckmen
maric 28yo and starting to cop injuries. may only have 2 or three yrs left surely a list management strategy would be to have a player enter his prime 24 25yo when ivan retires.
hampson 26yo  ordinary player. in three yrs he too will be 29 with his track record we must have other options in our system.
stephenson 32 yo  should never have been kept when we got hampson. his rookie spot should have gone on a kid. it still needs to.
we need to cut stephenson, hunt for a 22 23 yo mature ruckman and also look to rookie a kid.

fwd rucks.
vickery 24yo neither good in the ruck or good up fwd will never be a 1st ruck,
griffiths 22yo looks a lot like vickery to date. hes definately more a kpp than ruckman.
mcbean 19 yo club claim hes going to be a ruckman i see another vickery situation to date. it can be asked will he ever be a decent ruckman. will he be a decent fwd.
there is  absolutely no need for this club to keep three 200cm fwd rucks.  we should be looking to cut/trade one of them.
vickery and griffiths are clearly not #1 ruck options  who knows with mcbean but it doesnt look likely with him either.

Online Chuck17

  • The Shaun Grugg of OER
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13183
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #234 on: May 30, 2014, 10:29:46 PM »
Crikey thought he would go to Z

the claw

  • Guest
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #235 on: May 31, 2014, 05:04:34 PM »
Crikey thought he would go to Z
did i say i was finished ;)

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 95683
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Sydney ruckman Tom Derickx says he holds no grudge against Richmond after being delisted

    Warwick Green
    Herald Sun
    June 18, 2014 7:03PM


HE MANAGED just two AFL games in three seasons at Punt Road, and has since played 11 on the trot with premiership contender Sydney.

But ruckman Tom Derickx holds no animosity towards Richmond’s decision to cut him over summer.

“I spent three years there and didn’t do a hell of a lot, so I think they were pretty pleased to see me go to be honest,’’ the 26-year-old said.

“I didn’t get that opportunity that I’ve since got at Sydney, there were a lot of guys ahead of me, so obviously I guess you never know what might have happened if I did get that chance in the ruck.’’

The 204-centimetre played two matches for Richmond in 2012: his Round 15 debut against Melbourne as a forward/back-up to Ivan Maric, and the following week in the backline against Gold Coast.

“I was drafted as a ruckman but never really played a senior game in the ruck at Richmond, so it’s only at Sydney that I’ve got that responsibility,’’ Derickx said.

“It’s amazing how that responsibility can make you a better player and give you that extra bit of confidence. Especially when the coaches show that faith in you. You feel like you owe it to them.’’

Derickx believes he has “matured a lot as a player’’ and has no issue with the way he was treated by the Tigers.

“Richmond were good to me. They looked after me for three years even when I had injuries,’’ he said.

“I sort of knew, and the club sort of knew that it was time to move on. I think they knew pretty early on that they were going to get Shaun Hampson, which obviously squeezed me out.’’

If he plays at the MCG on Friday might, Derickx will almost certainly find himself staring across the centre circle at Hampson at some stage.

“I don’t feel like I have a point to prove to (Richmond), more a point to prove to myself,’’ he said.

“If I get to play against the Tigers I’ll enjoy it. I’ve got a lot of good mates there — guys like Reece Conca, Dave Astbury, Dustin Martin and Shane Edwards — and there will probably be a few jokes flying around I’d say.’’

Just possibly the punchline might be about the Tigers discard who is a chance to play in a Swans premiership.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/sydney-ruckman-tom-derickx-says-he-holds-no-grudge-against-richmond-after-being-delisted/story-fni5f9jb-1226959101212

Offline Mr Magic

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 6887
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #237 on: June 19, 2014, 08:05:13 AM »

“I spent three years there and didn’t do a hell of a lot


Gold Coast dropsy.

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279

Just possibly the punchline might be about the Tigers discard who is a chance to play in a Swans premiership.

Wouldn't be the first one and like Morton in recent times, it was a case of right place and right time.  Just because they make a premiership side means squat, neither of them were/are any good but if Derrickx jags a flag then bloody good luck to him.  A lot of champions never get the opportunity and guys like Morton and Derrickx are just the other side of that coin of fortune.

Offline lamington

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2812
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Tom Derickx [merged]
« Reply #239 on: June 19, 2014, 10:30:34 AM »
But Mitch Morton kicked 2 goals in a grand final. Wasn't BOG but wasn't a complete passenger.