Author Topic: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm  (Read 8018 times)

Offline Coach

  • Hardly A Prude
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8719
  • Depend on Schulzy
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #45 on: February 15, 2013, 06:44:42 PM »
If O'Hanlon is better than McGuane then why didn't he kick more goals and play more games? So instead of playing O'Hanlon, Ricky Petterd might be the difference? ;D

Also, Morton poos on any of our players outside our best 22. He's still better than a number inside our 22

can you explain why you think that  :huh

Think what? Learn to address posts properly. If you're talking about O'Hanlon/Macca, clearly McG had more impact on games last year. I'm not a big fan but he was fairly serviceable in most games apart from a few stinkers. His output was actually a lot better than Ty Vickery who has basically become an injured champion the longer he's been out. O'Hanlon struggled to impact on games. Not unusual for a 1st year player. Right now McG is streets ahead.
If you're referring to Morton then I will explain my thoughts. He is a poo hot forward on his day. He was our best forward for a while. Anyone who says they don't believe Morton is in our best 22 is either BJ or a one of those supporters who can't admit players improve after their Richmond days. Morton is fit, he's playing with intensity and he's worked hard on his defensive effort. They were his problems at Richmond and those problems no longer exist. He is a good hit up forward

O'Hanlon was never a replacement for Vickery. Miller & McGuane played the support role, O'Hanlon is a half forward. Fact is you will only beat poo teams if you need to rely on blokes like Picky.R, Lonergan and Stephenson. Somehow they might help us to finals but she'll be ugly if we travel interstate for a final with those blokes strutting around

They're depth players..  not in the best 22

Yeah, no poo dude. Who said that wasn't the case? Do you think a clubs best 22 is fit for an entire season? Most clubs will play 30+ players during a season.

O'Hanlon was never a replacement for Vickery. Miller & McGuane played the support role, O'Hanlon is a half forward. Fact is you will only beat poo teams if you need to rely on blokes like Picky.R, Lonergan and Stephenson. Somehow they might help us to finals but she'll be ugly if we travel interstate for a final with those blokes strutting around

Why do you so critical of everything.. do you actually say anything positive

Awww. What have I been critical of? I've disagreed with you on Chaplin being an "A Grade defender with great leadership, great skills and decision making". I've grinned ;D when people squash Martin rumours by using Jon Ralph as a good source. I take the mickey out of Jack but if people have been reading over the journey then they know I believe he's a fantastic player. I've also had debates on Rancer but check last years OER Tiger of the year votes to see if I think he's a dud.


do you actually say anything positive

Wait until we lose a game. You will think I am a saint

Offline Bengal

  • Premiership Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 468
  • Its Tiger Time
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #46 on: February 15, 2013, 07:09:32 PM »
If O'Hanlon is better than McGuane then why didn't he kick more goals and play more games? So instead of playing O'Hanlon, Ricky Petterd might be the difference? ;D

Also, Morton poos on any of our players outside our best 22. He's still better than a number inside our 22

can you explain why you think that  :huh

Think what? Learn to address posts properly. If you're talking about O'Hanlon/Macca, clearly McG had more impact on games last year. I'm not a big fan but he was fairly serviceable in most games apart from a few stinkers. His output was actually a lot better than Ty Vickery who has basically become an injured champion the longer he's been out. O'Hanlon struggled to impact on games. Not unusual for a 1st year player. Right now McG is streets ahead.
If you're referring to Morton then I will explain my thoughts. He is a poo hot forward on his day. He was our best forward for a while. Anyone who says they don't believe Morton is in our best 22 is either BJ or a one of those supporters who can't admit players improve after their Richmond days. Morton is fit, he's playing with intensity and he's worked hard on his defensive effort. They were his problems at Richmond and those problems no longer exist. He is a good hit up forward

O'Hanlon was never a replacement for Vickery. Miller & McGuane played the support role, O'Hanlon is a half forward. Fact is you will only beat poo teams if you need to rely on blokes like Picky.R, Lonergan and Stephenson. Somehow they might help us to finals but she'll be ugly if we travel interstate for a final with those blokes strutting around

They're depth players..  not in the best 22

Yeah, no poo dude. Who said that wasn't the case? Do you think a clubs best 22 is fit for an entire season? Most clubs will play 30+ players during a season.

O'Hanlon was never a replacement for Vickery. Miller & McGuane played the support role, O'Hanlon is a half forward. Fact is you will only beat poo teams if you need to rely on blokes like Picky.R, Lonergan and Stephenson. Somehow they might help us to finals but she'll be ugly if we travel interstate for a final with those blokes strutting around

Why do you so critical of everything.. do you actually say anything positive

Awww. What have I been critical of? I've disagreed with you on Chaplin being an "A Grade defender with great leadership, great skills and decision making". I've grinned ;D when people squash Martin rumours by using Jon Ralph as a good source. I take the mickey out of Jack but if people have been reading over the journey then they know I believe he's a fantastic player. I've also had debates on Rancer but check last years OER Tiger of the year votes to see if I think he's a dud.


do you actually say anything positive

Wait until we lose a game. You will think I am a saint

i agree with you on McGuane, Morton not so much.. i dont think he's improved much at all, still a downhill skier. Mitch has the skill but has no team ethos, with Mitch its all about Mitch. 5 goals in 5 games is not a great output even if he did kick 70 odd goals in the 2's. Which is a very poor league.  Mitch got lucky, right place right time.

The comment about being critical was tongue in cheek

We need the footy back

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #47 on: February 15, 2013, 09:29:19 PM »

Wait until we lose a game. You will think I am a saint
:lol :clapping
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways my ways,” says the Lord.
 
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts."

Yahweh? or the great Clawski?

yaw rehto eht dellorcs ti fi daer ot reisae eb dluow tI

Offline RedanTiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #48 on: February 15, 2013, 09:36:17 PM »
Problem last season was when we had players go down with injury, we only had untried kids to call up to AFL level, and it cost us games.


TOTAL CRAP.
Load of rubbish excuse made up by the football department (Cameron and Hardwick) to excuse the fact that our poor senior players have been there for years and have never been good enough as replacements.

When Vickery went down it was Graham, Browne and Derickx who were not good enough not Elton or Griffith.
When Foley went down it was White, Webberley, Connors and Nahas who were not good enough not Conca, Ellis or Helbig.
When Grimes went down we had no-one since Moore, Astbury and Griffith were injured or too young and thankfully Batchelor and Morris (two young players again) filled holes.

Just because Cameron or Hardwick say something doesn't make it the truth.
Try using some judgement and avoid given credence to self-serving excuses.


Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #49 on: February 15, 2013, 09:43:55 PM »
bottom line they didnt have the players that could go close to stepping up when injury/suspension hit, mature or young
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways my ways,” says the Lord.
 
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts."

Yahweh? or the great Clawski?

yaw rehto eht dellorcs ti fi daer ot reisae eb dluow tI

Offline RedanTiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #50 on: February 15, 2013, 09:48:47 PM »
Agreed al, but don't use the deflection of young players to excuse the fact that the senior players were poor recruiting decisions who were kept on the list and were not developed into what they should have been  - mature players ready and able to fill the breach.

Offline JVT

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1834
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #51 on: February 15, 2013, 11:05:11 PM »
TOTAL CRAP.
Load of rubbish excuse made up by the football department (Cameron and Hardwick) to excuse the fact that our poor senior players have been there for years and have never been good enough as replacements.

When Vickery went down it was Graham, Browne and Derickx who were not good enough not Elton or Griffith.
Total crap my behind, you've listed a bunch of spuds who never impacted games at AFL therefore backing my own point. Elton and Griffths show more than those 3, hence why 2 are gone with the other soon to follow. Elton, as promising as he is, is not ready for AFL level, so has as little impact as the others but 100 fold more upside. None of them were the answer (bar Griffiths who played well), but for different reasons. If Vickery was to go down again, instead of calling any of Gus, Browne, Derrickx or Elton (none of who could impact a game, Elton rightly so at the moment at 19), we now have Edwards who has actually played well at AFL level before. Regardless if you like him or not, he has more skill the Gus, Browne and Derrickx combined.

When Foley went down it was White, Webberley, Connors and Nahas who were not good enough not Conca, Ellis or Helbig.
I agree once again, hence Webbers and Connors gone. Not saying Conca, Ellis and Helbig won't be good enough, but they were all 2nd or 1st year players. They shouldn't have to take that load or be expected to produce Foleys output. This is why the inclusion of bigger experienced bodies is important, ones that once again have played and impacted games at AFL level, not guys like Webbers and Connors (goneski) and White who will be gone at years end.

When Grimes went down we had no-one since Moore, Astbury and Griffith were injured or too young and thankfully Batchelor and Morris (two young players again) filled holes.
and you nailed it here for me, this is exactly what I am saying. Lucky Batch, Morris and Griffiths (prior to injury) played well enough. Griffiths is big enough to play at AFL level and Morris is a mature aged player.

Your arguing something different to what I am. I am saying instead of calling on untried 18yo kids, we needed players who HAVE played at AFL level AND IMPACTED games, not the crap we have hoarded from prior DImma in Gus, Browne, Webbers, Post, Connors, Moore et al.

Pettard, Edwards, Lonergan, Knights and even Stephenson (lucky he and Cam Wood were all tat had played AFL) can at least be competetice when called in, which is something that the 'senior players' you listed could never do. I hardly consider those blokes senior, simply dead wood that couldn't even perform when they needed to. That's why it was left to our first and second year players, because we had no decent backup options. Now we do.

Just because Cameron or Hardwick say something doesn't make it the truth.
Try using some judgement and avoid given credence to self-serving excuses.
and just because they say something doesn't mean it's a cover up to some list clogging conspiracy. Try look at the situation and rationalize as to why they would do what they have now done with our rookie list (not even senior) as opposed to jumping up and down as if they drafted Hislop with our National Draft selection in place of a kid. Storm in a tea cup, and if you still can't see what I'm saying I guess we will agree to disagree.

To reiterate, I don't disagree our 'senior players' you listed were not good enough, they were absolute shizen. That's why they had to throw in our 1st and 2nd year players. At least now we have options if required that can actually fill the gap instead of throwing in the 18 and 19yo boys against men. Options that have shown something before, unlike last year.

Apologise if spelling is off, using an iPad.

Offline JVT

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1834
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #52 on: February 15, 2013, 11:13:02 PM »
If O'Hanlon is better than McGuane then why didn't he kick more goals and play more games? So instead of playing O'Hanlon, Ricky Petterd might be the difference? ;D

Also, Morton poos on any of our players outside our best 22. He's still better than a number inside our 22
Surely your taking the pee, you'd delist O'Hanlon over McG would you? O'Hanlon will be twice the player that Luke is, at minimum I expect O'Hanlon will be able to kick a goal from 50cms out at age 25 after being in the system for 7 years.

Don't disagree with you on Morton, he is a class act on his day. Can also be worse than Nahas bout to kick on his left (or lack of) though too. Morton obviously has other issues which is why he is gone. BTW, he isn't a better player at Sydney then what he was at Richmond, exactly the same player, no better no worse.

Offline Coach

  • Hardly A Prude
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8719
  • Depend on Schulzy
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #53 on: February 15, 2013, 11:45:08 PM »
If O'Hanlon is better than McGuane then why didn't he kick more goals and play more games? So instead of playing O'Hanlon, Ricky Petterd might be the difference? ;D

Also, Morton poos on any of our players outside our best 22. He's still better than a number inside our 22
Surely your taking the pee, you'd delist O'Hanlon over McG would you?

How on earth have you come to the conclusion that I'd want to delist O'Hanlon over McGuane? McGuane played key forward last year and was reasonable for the most part. O'Hanlon played HFF and struggled. You said O'Hanlon came in as Vickery's replacement which is a blatant lie. McGuane quite clearly played the support role whereas Brett played in a completely different role. How you have translated that into "O'Hanlon should be delisted" has me stuffed.

If O'Hanlon is better than McGuane then why didn't he kick more goals and play more games? So instead of playing O'Hanlon, Ricky Petterd might be the difference? ;D

Also, Morton poos on any of our players outside our best 22. He's still better than a number inside our 22
O'Hanlon will be twice the player that Luke is, at minimum I expect O'Hanlon will be able to kick a goal from 50cms out at age 25 after being in the system for 7 years.

You don't know that. McG has played close to 100 games. O'Hanlon hasn't even had a mention in the best players at Coburg yet and he could quite easily get delisted in one or two seasons. I would hope not as he has some potential but he certainly hasn't shown anything that suggests he is a certain 100+ gamer.

If O'Hanlon is better than McGuane then why didn't he kick more goals and play more games? So instead of playing O'Hanlon, Ricky Petterd might be the difference? ;D

Also, Morton poos on any of our players outside our best 22. He's still better than a number inside our 22
Don't disagree with you on Morton, he is a class act on his day. Can also be worse than Nahas bout to kick on his left (or lack of) though too. Morton obviously has other issues which is why he is gone. BTW, he isn't a better player at Sydney then what he was at Richmond, exactly the same player, no better no worse.

Morton has a good non. Was watching a game from 2008 the other day where he took a nice mark, played onto his left and laced a leading forward with a beautiful 35 metre pass. It was against the Hawks early in the season but I can't mention the player who marked it as Willy says I talk about him too much  ;D Also seen Mitch get onto that left and snap good goals with it.
Morton is a better all round player now. He was a liability at times defensively but he was very good with his efforts last season. He won't always have big games but he will be a much better player at Sydney if he continues with those efforts.

gerkin greg

  • Guest
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #54 on: February 16, 2013, 12:05:24 AM »
I thought mitchy's defensive efforts were no better than his last year with us. His problems are still there. Would have got a game far earlier in the season had he actually improved there. Watched a bit of him in the reserves and he strutted around pointing at people and not chasing, laying soft tackles and blowing up after 30 seconds when made to play outside the f50. And I'm a fan  ;D

Offline Coach

  • Hardly A Prude
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8719
  • Depend on Schulzy
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #55 on: February 16, 2013, 12:07:44 AM »
he strutted around pointing at people and not chasing, laying soft tackles and blowing up after 30 seconds when made to play outside the f50.

Who are you really talking about ;D

That's what I used to do back in the day.


Offline JVT

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1834
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #56 on: February 16, 2013, 12:09:00 AM »
Is it? TV last game was R11, McG didn't play till R15 . . . OH played in R11, R12 etc. So whether or not he played the exact role TV did or not, he was more likely the replacement than McG. Was he a better replacement, no.

Obviously OH wasn't capable of competing at AFL level and making an impact straight away, McG did perform better, but that's to be expected based off experience etc. Doesn't change the fact McG is a spud.

The delisting comment was more to see who you think was better, extreme example yes. We know what McG gives and it isn't good enough unless we are up by 6-7 goals, that's when he will kick a few. OH hasn't done anything, but clearly has more skills than McG and a better footy brain. He'll be a better player. Delisted in 2 seasons or not, it speaks volumes of how poor our side was that McG is close to 100 games.

Morton still hasn't got a defensive game. Has a lot of talent, but seems to only go one way. If they can get him to improve his defensive work, then they'll have a player for their best 22. Until then he'll just be a backup option who will play in the event of injury. I guess he wont care either way as he was part of their GF win.

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #57 on: February 16, 2013, 12:40:22 AM »
Lloyd made good points whether we like it or not we could have taken some kids instead and added to our depth of kids.

1. Matt L is bias, and a wanker. Not very smart. Often he clearly display his lack of brain. If you are.on the roofs, maybe give dank $5000 fine.and everyone.moves on. Go dons
  ::)

2. My understanding is we took the most equal most 17/18 yoga out of any clubs.

3. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_AFL_Draft. Someone please go thou the.rookie draft. And find me the hidden gem kids were over looked

Offline Yeahright

  • Moderator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9394
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #58 on: February 16, 2013, 12:51:17 AM »
Is it? TV last game was R11, McG didn't play till R15 . . . OH played in R11, R12 etc. So whether or not he played the exact role TV did or not, he was more likely the replacement than McG. Was he a better replacement, no.

Obviously OH wasn't capable of competing at AFL level and making an impact straight away, McG did perform better, but that's to be expected based off experience etc. Doesn't change the fact McG is a spud.

The delisting comment was more to see who you think was better, extreme example yes. We know what McG gives and it isn't good enough unless we are up by 6-7 goals, that's when he will kick a few. OH hasn't done anything, but clearly has more skills than McG and a better footy brain. He'll be a better player. Delisted in 2 seasons or not, it speaks volumes of how poor our side was that McG is close to 100 games.

Morton still hasn't got a defensive game. Has a lot of talent, but seems to only go one way. If they can get him to improve his defensive work, then they'll have a player for their best 22. Until then he'll just be a backup option who will play in the event of injury. I guess he wont care either way as he was part of their GF win.

Is anyone ever going to admit McG actually had a decent year? Not great, but decent?

The delisting comment was the stupidest thing I've ever seen on this forum. P.S O'Hanlon will be a spud

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Footy Classified Special - Thurs 9.30pm
« Reply #59 on: February 16, 2013, 01:18:37 AM »
Mcgaune was not decent


He was two or three / 10