One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on October 26, 2016, 02:54:12 AM
-
“Clearly now we’ve got some good ruck depth,” Dan Richardson said.
“Ivan (Maric), importantly, we signed on for another year . . . and Shaun Hampson, we know, had a really solid year.
“We certainly see Toby being able to complement those guys.
“And throw in Ivan Soldo, who’s still young and developing, and Ben Griffiths, who’s capable of playing that forward-ruck role as well.
“Competitions for spots will be tough in that area of the ground, but that’s a good thing for us.”
Tigers’ Tall Timber
Player Name Ht Wt
Ivan Soldo 204 103
Shaun Hampson 201 106
Ivan Maric 200 102
Ben Griffiths 200 101
Toby Nankervis 199 106
Mabior Chol 198 78
Todd Elton 197 101
Full article: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2016-10-25/toby-to-bolster-tigers-tall-timber
-
:facepalm and lmao
-
And not a single decent ruckman (currently) amongst them
-
:banghead
-
And not a single decent ruckman (currently) amongst them
Well i must say that hampson improved 100% this season, had a high number of taps but often read better by the opposition
-
100% of nothing is still nothing
-
Clearly
-
Quality over quantity please Dan
-
100% of nothing is still nothing
:clapping
-
Tigers’ Tall Timber
Player Name Ht Wt
Ivan Soldo 204 103
Shaun Hampson 201 106
Ivan Maric 200 102
Ben Griffiths 200 101
Toby Nankervis 199 106
Mabior Chol 198 78
Todd Elton 197 101
Well Soldo is a rookie.
Maric is past it and just a "break glass in emergency" type for 2017.
Griffith is REALLY needed at CHF.
Choi is both a rookie and a third tall.
Elton is a third tall.
It is just a hopeful guess as to how Nankervis will go in 2017.
So we have Hampson and Nankervis.
I was hoping that we could have got Tom Downie as part of the Lids deal but probably the pick 50 is a better deal.
From what I've heard he really wants out of GWS back to Victoria.
-
If Dan the Man's seriously counting Elton, Chol & Griffiths as "ruck depth" than we actually have one less ruckman with the departure of Vickery & McBean and the arrival of just Nankervis ...
-
Unbelievable the lengths people and organisations will go to, to spin a situation into a positive. Like dioc mentioned above, if we're going to start counting those guys we're actually a man down to what we were last season. Dumb stuffs
-
If Dan the Man's seriously counting Elton, Chol & Griffiths as "ruck depth" than we actually have one less ruckman with the departure of Vickery & McBean and the arrival of just Nankervis ...
Soldo too.
*place big stuffn spew gif here*
-
Soldo is in his third year now isn't he? He ought to come good soon you would think. Good enough to get a game or two this year anyway when we are 5 and 15.
-
Eh maybe not he only 21 this year and he has been signed for 3 years as a rookie. So he has another year after this one. Let's hope he gets a game
-
Maric is taking the spot of a young kid. So that makes his spot another self indulgence of the club.as stated, the rest are key position players with 3 exceptions.
Soldo is a guess, Hampson is a known liability and that leaves us with Nankas as our only option to give our mids first use
-
Dan hasn't got much idea
Has lost the plot
-
Ivan Soldo 204 103 Rookie, long way off it. Maybe 5% chance to make it.
Shaun Hampson 201 106 LOL worst senior ruckman in the league by a long way too
Ivan Maric 200 102 was gone 2 years ago. Still the 2nd best ruckman at the club due to lack of options.
Ben Griffiths 200 101 not a ruck
Toby Nankervis 199 106 good addition to the list. 4th choice at the swans, 1st choice at Richmond ...
Mabior Chol 198 78 Rookie, long way off it. Maybe 5% chance to make it.
Todd Elton 197 101 not a ruck
Outside of the Nanna, Vickery would have been our best ruck options if he were still here just about :lol :gotigers
-
Outside of the Nanna, Vickery would have been our best ruck options if he were still here just about :lol :gotigers
This is true. Nank is just a replacement for Vickery who was older and had more experience. So, if anything our ruck depth has gone backwards.
-
Outside of the Nanna, Vickery would have been our best ruck options if he were still here just about :lol :gotigers
This is true. Nank is just a replacement for Vickery who was older and had more experience. So, if anything our ruck depth has gone backwards.
your joking arent ya. We got rid of a bloke who shat his pants every time he had to take a centre bounce for a bloke who competes is prepared to cop pain and will give second and third efforts.
Mate im only 185cm and i would have given a better contest than pea herart vickery. WHY Because at the very least i would/was prepared to cop the knocks with playing the role.
-
Outside of the Nanna, Vickery would have been our best ruck options if he were still here just about :lol :gotigers
This is true. Nank is just a replacement for Vickery who was older and had more experience. So, if anything our ruck depth has gone backwards.
your joking arent ya. We got rid of a bloke who shat his pants every time he had to take a centre bounce for a bloke who competes is prepared to cop pain and will give second and third efforts.
Mate im only 185cm and i would have given a better contest than pea herart vickery. WHY Because at the very least i would/was prepared to cop the knocks with playing the role.
Yep. Vickery was one of the worst rucks we've ever had. He could take a grab up forward and kick straight but that's it. He was lazy and scared about body contact. Nanka loves competition and throws is weight around. He is a huge upgrade in our ruck stocks.
-
Hopefully he knocks Hampson out
-
Outside of the Nanna, Vickery would have been our best ruck options if he were still here just about :lol :gotigers
This is true. Nank is just a replacement for Vickery who was older and had more experience. So, if anything our ruck depth has gone backwards.
your joking arent ya. We got rid of a bloke who shat his pants every time he had to take a centre bounce for a bloke who competes is prepared to cop pain and will give second and third efforts.
Mate im only 185cm and i would have given a better contest than pea herart vickery. WHY Because at the very least i would/was prepared to cop the knocks with playing the role.
I was joking to some degree. But the point is that Vickery is a known commodity (he kicked goals but his efforts were very haphazard). Nankervis is big and competitive but is an unknown. To say we have good ruck depth on the basis of Nankervis in and Vickery out is nonsense
-
I think Dan missed the mark with his statement, it should have been "Clearly now we've got some ruck depth"
Using the market as a guide our best ruckman (Hampson) would get us a pick 30.
Nankervis would get us pick 46
Maric would get us zip
Soldo would get us a pick 60? guess
Chol would get us a pick 60? guess
Soldo and Chol are two seasons off.
Not what you would call "good" ruck depth.