One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on June 10, 2010, 05:11:41 PM
-
Richmond
B: Chris Newman, Luke McGuane, Jake King
HB: Shane Tuck, Brett Deledio, Daniel Connors
C: Ben Cousins, Daniel Jackson, Shane Edwards
HF: Matt White, Jack Riewoldt, Ben Nason
F: Richard Tambling, Ben Griffiths, David Astbury
Foll: Angus Graham, Trent Cotchin, Dustin Martin
I/C (from): Mitch Farmer, Jeromey Webberley, Will Thursfield, Andrew Collins, Tyrone Vickery, Robin Nahas, Kelvin Moore
In: Moore, Jackson, Connors, Vickery, Griffiths
Out: Mitch Morton, Troy Simmonds (retired)
-
West Coast
B: Scott Selwood, Eric Mackenzie, Will Schofield
HB: Beau Waters, Beau Wilkes, Shannon Hurn
C: Andrew Embley, Matt Priddis, Bradd Dalziell
HF: Brad Sheppard, Josh Kennedy, Ben McKinley
F: Nic Naitanui, Mitchell Brown, Mark LeCras
Foll: Dean Cox, Brad Ebert, Tom Swift
I/C (from): Brett Jones, Quinten Lynch, Patrick McGinnity, Mark Nicoski, Matt Rosa, Adam Selwood, Lewis Stevenson
In: Lynch, Nicoski, Jones, McGinnity
Out: Sam Butler (foot)
-
Surprised Polak didn't get a call up to help Graham in the ruck after his performance at Coburg, Vickery must be playing
Also you'd think we'd need a taller defence to go up against Kennedy, Brown & Naitanui, Thursfield & Moore would have to be on the bench from those listed. This leaves only one spot for an extra midfielder.
-
Richmond
B: Chris Newman, Luke McGuane, Jake King
HB: Shane Tuck, Brett Deledio, Daniel Connors
C: Ben Cousins, Daniel Jackson, Shane Edwards
HF: Matt White, Jack Riewoldt, Ben Nason
F: Richard Tambling, Ben Griffiths, David Astbury
Foll: Angus Graham, Trent Cotchin, Dustin Martin
I/C (from): Mitch Farmer, Jeromey Webberley, Will Thursfield, Andrew Collins, Tyrone Vickery, Robin Nahas, Kelvin Moore
In: Moore, Jackson, Connors, Vickery, Griffiths
Out: Mitch Morton, Troy Simmonds (retired)
1st question; where is Foley?
2nd question; who will be our second ruckmen?
3rd question; does this mean Vickery will play?
4th question; which three will be omitted?
Moore has to play!
i would omit Farmer, Collins and Nahas.
however Nason is very lucky to be in!
:)
-
1st question; where is Foley? Reported earlier today as being doubtful that he would come up.
2nd question; who will be our second ruckmen? Vickery.
3rd question; does this mean Vickery will play? Definitely - see #2.
4th question; which three will be omitted? Nahas/Farmer (one of these will play), Collins and Moore (still injured I reckon).
-
Richmond
B: Chris Newman, Luke McGuane, Jake King
HB: Shane Tuck, Brett Deledio, Daniel Connors
C: Ben Cousins, Daniel Jackson, Shane Edwards
HF: Matt White, Jack Riewoldt, Ben Nason
F: Richard Tambling, Ben Griffiths, David Astbury
Foll: Angus Graham, Trent Cotchin, Dustin Martin
I/C (from): Mitch Farmer, Jeromey Webberley, Will Thursfield, Andrew Collins, Tyrone Vickery, Robin Nahas, Kelvin Moore
In: Moore, Jackson, Connors, Vickery, Griffiths
Out: Mitch Morton, Troy Simmonds (retired)
I am a bit :gobdrop :gobdrop
Better I make no comment - staggered by some of the "ins" but will hold judgement on the "Outs" until the team is finalised
So NO COMMENT
-
Better I make no comment - staggered by some of the "ins" but will hold judgement on the "Outs" until the team is finalised
So NO COMMENT
Which "Ins" WP? I would have thought Jackson, Connors and Griffiths were certainties, Vickery for Simmonds is logical and Moore is our best 'in form' defender?
-
Richmond
B: Chris Newman, Luke McGuane, Jake King
HB: Shane Tuck, Brett Deledio, Daniel Connors
C: Ben Cousins, Daniel Jackson, Shane Edwards
HF: Matt White, Jack Riewoldt, Ben Nason
F: Richard Tambling, Ben Griffiths, David Astbury
Foll: Angus Graham, Trent Cotchin, Dustin Martin
I/C (from): Mitch Farmer, Jeromey Webberley, Will Thursfield, Andrew Collins, Tyrone Vickery, Robin Nahas, Kelvin Moore
In: Moore, Jackson, Connors, Vickery, Griffiths
Out: Mitch Morton, Troy Simmonds (retired)
I am a bit :gobdrop :gobdrop
Better I make no comment - staggered by some of the "ins" but will hold judgement on the "Outs" until the team is finalised
So NO COMMENT
Better list of 'ins' than we have had over last few years
-
Which "Ins" WP? I would have thought Jackson, Connors and Griffiths were certainties, Vickery for Simmonds is logical and Moore is our best 'in form' defender?
Smokey, the Club said Vickery wouldn't play in the AFL again until after the break (it was in the HUN a couple of weeks back) because he needed a rest. He played last week for Coburg and was OK, his ruck partner in Browne was the better out of the 2 of them but Vickery is an "in" Browne misses out. Same applies to a degree with Polak
I have no problem with Griffiths coming back in but I do have a a bit of an issue with the other ones you've referred to as certainties.
Connors didn't play last week for Coburg but there were others who did and played well and they miss out but Connors gets a game - just don't like it
Regarding Jackson, I appreciate he is in the leadership group and the majority would say he is in the best 22 but the fact is he had a monumental "brain fade" against Hawthorn (and I include the challenging of the charge in the brain faide category BTW) and for that I just think he should have had play his way back into the team not just be handed his spot back
And just to see Farmer and Nahas named on the extended bench has me doing this :banghead
For someone who didn't want to make a comment I think I just have :-\ :P ;D
-
WP connors is getting a game based on his performances over the last 8 weeks, not the last one. He may have even been freshened up for this game.
-
WP connors is getting a game based on his performances over the last 8 weeks, not the last one. He may have even been freshened up for this game.
I understand that al, doesn't mean I agree with it. :thumbsup
The couple of games I saw him play he was good without being outstanding. I just think there are others who deserved to be in the squad this week that aren't (Rance, Taylor, BrownE)
-
I'm staggered Torch at you thinking Nason should be dropped. I know he had a bad one but that's one bad one out of 11. You can't drop a bloke based on one bad game. Are you not a fan of his?
-
I'm staggered Torch at you thinking Nason should be dropped. I know he had a bad one but that's one bad one out of 11. You can't drop a bloke based on one bad game. Are you not a fan of his?
nope, i am a fan.
just think he has been very inconsistant.
needs to go to Coburg for a few weeks.
:)
-
Including Connors, Jackson and Griffiths is a sensible move and strengthens the team. Connors off the half-back line allows Lids to move to the wing strengthening our midfield too and quality of our desposal into our F50.
Vickery used to match up on Natanui extremely well before they were drafted - in fact he used to beat him. This may be the reason they are bringing him back in over someone such as Browne, because it may help us during the game and give Vickery some much needed confidence in the process.
I would be surprized if Moore is included but if he is it would be as much for matchups as anything else.
I think white may be moved more into the midfield rotations than in the forwardline with us going taller including Griffiths.
Out - Farmer, Webberly, Morton and Simmonds
In - Connors, Jackson, Griffiths and Vickery
Stripes
-
maybe the match commitee feel browne would get horribly exposed around the ground by cox and natanui which I agree with and Polak is just giving away way too many inches to even compete as a 2nd ruckman so thats why I think they've gone back on their word and brought in vicks who will be able to run with them when they 'spread'...
Dont mind the other ins, connors showed he was a cut above at the burgers and looking fwd to seeing how we setup with him, Lids and Newman. Also interested to see how we go in midfeld and at the clearances with jacko back in alongside Tuck. Two players with questionable disposal around the stoppages, will it hurt us? bc we've been absolutely awesome in idfield the past 3 weeks. I guess what Im trying to say is looking to see if there will be any team balance issues
-
Which "Ins" WP? I would have thought Jackson, Connors and Griffiths were certainties, Vickery for Simmonds is logical and Moore is our best 'in form' defender?
Smokey, the Club said Vickery wouldn't play in the AFL again until after the break (it was in the HUN a couple of weeks back) because he needed a rest. He played last week for Coburg and was OK, his ruck partner in Browne was the better out of the 2 of them but Vickery is an "in" Browne misses out. Same applies to a degree with Polak
I have no problem with Griffiths coming back in but I do have a a bit of an issue with the other ones you've referred to as certainties.
Connors didn't play last week for Coburg but there were others who did and played well and they miss out but Connors gets a game - just don't like it
Regarding Jackson, I appreciate he is in the leadership group and the majority would say he is in the best 22 but the fact is he had a monumental "brain fade" against Hawthorn (and I include the challenging of the charge in the brain faide category BTW) and for that I just think he should have had play his way back into the team not just be handed his spot back
And just to see Farmer and Nahas named on the extended bench has me doing this :banghead
For someone who didn't want to make a comment I think I just have :-\ :P ;D
WP when was this opinion after the Port Adelaide loss when we gave a charity game to everyones best mate Troy Simmonds? It's the same thing, except we are coming off a loss to Saints compared to our first win and a gutsy 100% team effort against Port.
Jackson probably picks himself but I wouldn't disagree with a game down at Coburg. He has done his time 3 week suspension is decent lay off.
Connors getting a game after a fair few decent performances at Coburg and a huge pennance on the sidelines.
Can understand your feelings completely, and slilghtly agree yet I think the issue was alot bigger when we wave goodbye to """one of the greats""", who no1 could argue he deserved a spot in the 22 that week.
-
Including Connors, Jackson and Griffiths is a sensible move and strengthens the team. Connors off the half-back line allows Lids to move to the wing strengthening our midfield too and quality of our desposal into our F50.
Vickery used to match up on Natanui extremely well before they were drafted - in fact he used to beat him. This may be the reason they are bringing him back in over someone such as Browne, because it may help us during the game and give Vickery some much needed confidence in the process.
I would be surprized if Moore is included but if he is it would be as much for matchups as anything else.
I think white may be moved more into the midfield rotations than in the forwardline with us going taller including Griffiths.
Out - Farmer, Webberly, Morton and Simmonds
In - Connors, Jackson, Griffiths and Vickery
Stripes
Webberley enourmously stiff.. I hope he keeps his spot
Connors in for Farmer
Griffiths in for Morton
Vickory in for Simmonds (Didn't Polak make way for the celebrity Big Brother birthday cake farewell game.. He should walk back into the side. *Disgrace* IMO)
Jackson in for ? (Collins / King)
Moore in for ? (Thursfield?)
I'd hope to think Webberley would pick himself before a Jake King type. I'd also have Webberley slightly ahead of Collins.
-
WHAT IS THE STORY WITH NATHAN FOLEY ?
There was an article/Thread over a week ago entitled fit foley means tiger dilemma
Just curious.
-
Which "Ins" WP? I would have thought Jackson, Connors and Griffiths were certainties, Vickery for Simmonds is logical and Moore is our best 'in form' defender?
Smokey, the Club said Vickery wouldn't play in the AFL again until after the break (it was in the HUN a couple of weeks back) because he needed a rest. He played last week for Coburg and was OK, his ruck partner in Browne was the better out of the 2 of them but Vickery is an "in" Browne misses out. Same applies to a degree with Polak
I have no problem with Griffiths coming back in but I do have a a bit of an issue with the other ones you've referred to as certainties.
Connors didn't play last week for Coburg but there were others who did and played well and they miss out but Connors gets a game - just don't like it
Regarding Jackson, I appreciate he is in the leadership group and the majority would say he is in the best 22 but the fact is he had a monumental "brain fade" against Hawthorn (and I include the challenging of the charge in the brain faide category BTW) and for that I just think he should have had play his way back into the team not just be handed his spot back
And just to see Farmer and Nahas named on the extended bench has me doing this :banghead
For someone who didn't want to make a comment I think I just have :-\ :P ;D
vickery in his jnr days owned natanui, maybe thats why he is back
-
WP connors is getting a game based on his performances over the last 8 weeks, not the last one. He may have even been freshened up for this game.
I understand that al, doesn't mean I agree with it. :thumbsup
The couple of games I saw him play he was good without being outstanding. I just think there are others who deserved to be in the squad this week that aren't (Rance, Taylor, BrownE)
Taylor has been suspended for a week for high contact
-
Richmond
B: Chris Newman, Luke McGuane, Jake King
HB: Shane Tuck, Brett Deledio, Daniel Connors
C: Ben Cousins, Daniel Jackson, Shane Edwards
HF: Matt White, Jack Riewoldt, Ben Nason
F: Richard Tambling, Ben Griffiths, David Astbury
Foll: Angus Graham, Trent Cotchin, Dustin Martin
I/C (from): Mitch Farmer, Jeromey Webberley, Will Thursfield, Andrew Collins, Tyrone Vickery, Robin Nahas, Kelvin Moore
In: Moore, Jackson, Connors, Vickery, Griffiths
Out: Mitch Morton, Troy Simmonds (retired)
I am a bit :gobdrop :gobdrop
Better I make no comment - staggered by some of the "ins" but will hold judgement on the "Outs" until the team is finalised
So NO COMMENT
Totally agree :thumbsup
Why doesnt Polak get a game ? Where is Browne ?
The Vickery situation is poor, as he was poor at Coburg last week. What happened to earning your spot ?
My mail on Vickery is this, nah I better not say anything, but I will say that his dad John is highly respected and has a tough character, some at Punt Rd thought his son would have the same values( thus drafted him ), but it seems this aint the case.
-
Out - Farmer, Webberly, Morton and Simmonds
Gee, thats a tough call Stripes. Kid has done nothing wrong and been improving every week to the point of having a good game last week.
-
WP connors is getting a game based on his performances over the last 8 weeks, not the last one. He may have even been freshened up for this game.
I understand that al, doesn't mean I agree with it. :thumbsup
The couple of games I saw him play he was good without being outstanding. I just think there are others who deserved to be in the squad this week that aren't (Rance, Taylor, BrownE)
Fair enough
-
Out - Farmer, Webberly, Morton and Simmonds
Gee, thats a tough call Stripes. Kid has done nothing wrong and been improving every week to the point of having a good game last week.
Yes I know but it's hard to pick an underperforming player smokey - an amazing scenerio for us! I would normally have said King but he has been playing out of his skin the last couple of weeks but he still may be the player who makes way. Collins is the other player who may be dropped as he has had a few average games compared to others but I get the feeling they are keen to give him game time. That leaves Webberly who I have seen improve every week but like Collins hasn't really cemented his spot in the team as yet which is why I guessed it could be him.
Nice position to be in when no players stand out to be excluded :clapping
Stripes
-
Out - Farmer, Webberly, Morton and Simmonds
Gee, thats a tough call Stripes. Kid has done nothing wrong and been improving every week to the point of having a good game last week.
Webberley got a bit of the ball last week but was very Tuck-esque in his disposal
-
Disappointing Foley not back in side. Bring in Moore. Drop farmer. Bring in Vickery for Simmonds. Drop Nahas for Griffiths. Keep Will in side. Drop Collins and White. I know Morton is under performing but he has a good record against the eagles and their defence is suspect without glass
-
Richmond
B: Chris Newman, Luke McGuane, Jake King
HB: Shane Tuck, Brett Deledio, Daniel Connors
C: Ben Cousins, Daniel Jackson, Shane Edwards
HF: Matt White, Jack Riewoldt, Ben Nason
F: Richard Tambling, Ben Griffiths, David Astbury
Foll: Angus Graham, Trent Cotchin, Dustin Martin
I/C (from): Mitch Farmer, Jeromey Webberley, Will Thursfield, Andrew Collins, Tyrone Vickery, Robin Nahas, Kelvin Moore
In: Moore, Jackson, Connors, Vickery, Griffiths
Out: Mitch Morton, Troy Simmonds (retired)
I am a bit :gobdrop :gobdrop
Better I make no comment - staggered by some of the "ins" but will hold judgement on the "Outs" until the team is finalised
So NO COMMENT
Totally agree :thumbsup
Why doesnt Polak get a game ? Where is Browne ?
The Vickery situation is poor, as he was poor at Coburg last week. What happened to earning your spot ?
My mail on Vickery is this, nah I better not say anything, but I will say that his dad John is highly respected and has a tough character, some at Punt Rd thought his son would have the same values( thus drafted him ), but it seems this aint the case.
so Tyrone is soft?
-
Richmond v West Coast
Sunday June 13
MCG, 1.10pm
B: Newman, McGuane, King
HB: Tuck, Deledio, Connors
C: Cousins, Jackson, Edwards
HF: White, Riewoldt, Nason
F: Tambling, Griffiths, Astbury
Foll: Graham, Cotchin, Martin
I/C: Farmer, Collins, Vickery, Moore
EMG: Thursfield, Webberley, Nahas
In: Jackson, Moore, Connors, Griffiths, Vickery
Out: Simmonds (retired), Morton, Webberley, Thursfield, Nahas
-
Farmer in :ROTFL
it then proves my theory and is now official.
He is Hardwicks pet. :cuddles
there is alot of love shown by the coach here but farmer has shown nothing so far IMO.
-
Some week selections ...
Vickery shown nothing
Farmer shown very little
Astbury shown very little
Collins shown very little
Conners, when did this fruitloop become the messiah
King was ok last week, but God I hope they dont give him laCras and who the hell runs with Kennedy, why didnt Gourdis get promoted, easly the best Physical match for him.
Stop Lacras and Kennedy, stop the Eagles, not rocket science, hope this new match commitee isnt as week as the last 4 years
-
West Coast
B: Scott Selwood, Eric Mackenzie, Will Schofield
HB: Beau Waters, Beau Wilkes, Shannon Hurn
C: Andrew Embley, Matt Priddis, Bradd Dalziell
HF: Brad Sheppard, Josh Kennedy, Ben McKinley
F: Nic Naitanui, Mitchell Brown, Mark LeCras
Foll: Dean Cox, Brad Ebert, Tom Swift
I/C: Matt Rosa, Adam Selwood, Patrick McGinnity, Lewis Stevenson
Emg: Brett Jones, Quinten Lynch, Mark Nicoski
In: McGinnity
Out: Sam Butler (foot)
-
Not sure how they have been traveling but I am worried about Morton, I know they have said he is a big part of our future but gee it isn't looking that way at the moment.
-
Some week selections ...
Vickery shown nothing
Farmer shown very little
Astbury shown very little
Collins shown very little
Conners, when did this fruitloop become the messiah
Maybe that's the point
Remember... development
-
Some week selections ...
Vickery shown nothing
Farmer shown very little
Astbury shown very little
Collins shown very little
Conners, when did this fruitloop become the messiah
Maybe that's the point
Remember... development
& list management :rollin
-
this is the way i would have gone in a purely structural match up sense.to achieve this i dont know how many changes it would be. obviously form and other factors dictate the picked side but structurally i would be looking at the below side just by looking at the opposition and saying well if need be i can go man on man
B selwood 189/86 - mckenzie 196/94 - schofield 195/88.
morton 186/80 - griffiths 199/98 - astbury 195/81
HB waters 188/87 - wilkes 194/97 - hurn 186/96
nason - 179/75 - riewoldt 193/89 - cotchin 184/85
C embley 190/90 - priddis 184/84 - dalziel 184/82.
newman 183/84 - martin 187/88 - collins 186/78
HF sheppard 186/78 - kennedy 196/99 mckinlay 184/82
deledio 188/88 - post 195/89 - moore 190/ 85
F naitanui 201/95 - brown 194/95 - lecras 182/82
thursfield 191/85 gourdis 194/93 - connors 184/82
R cox 204/102 - ebert 188/85 - swift 191/85
graham 201/100 - tuck 189/90 - cousins 179/80
INT rosa 189/82 - s selwood 185/80 - mcginnity 184/80 - stevenson 185/80
jackson 188/90 - tambling 180/81 - ******* - ********
just an after thought they have plenty of poor kicks find a way to apply pressure to their players and the turn overs will come. its not often that i can actually say i think we are a better kicking side than the opposition well we would be with the above sides.
-
Vickery in is the wrong call, hope he has a blinder but Polak earned that spot
-
Some week selections ...
Vickery shown nothing
Farmer shown very little
Astbury shown very little
Collins shown very little
Conners, when did this fruitloop become the messiah
King was ok last week, but God I hope they dont give him laCras and who the hell runs with Kennedy, why didnt Gourdis get promoted, easly the best Physical match for him.
Stop Lacras and Kennedy, stop the Eagles, not rocket science, hope this new match commitee isnt as week as the last 4 years
No no Spock............... coaches pet (farmer) will get Lacras.
Agreed with most of your opinions here except you say Farmer has shown "very little". I think he's shown plenty.
he has shown he likes space and i mean lots of space.
he has shown he likes the uncontested ball.
he has shown he is very very scared.
-
good to see the trolls getting on so well
-
LOL Al I think it's just broken records gettin stuck in the same rut
-
good to see the trolls getting on so well
Your opinion on these player selections Al
-
Aint it a biatch when the usual whipping boys are gone and you have to hunt up new ones
-
Vickery in is the wrong call, hope he has a blinder but Polak earned that spot
I agree Polak earned the spot but I dont think Vickery is the wrong call as far as going foward. To me they are doing it as a match up for the Future
Vickery V Natinui (however you spell it) could be a match up for the next 10 years and I think they should run Gus against Cox. These guys will learn heaps with these match ups even though they will probably get beaten.
As far as farmer goes, well I dont think he has been as bad as some of you make out.
I do think Webberley was very very stiff though
-
Vickery in is the wrong call, hope he has a blinder but Polak earned that spot
Vickery V Natinui (however you spell it) could be a match up for the next 10 years and I think they should run Gus against Cox. These guys will learn heaps with these match ups even though they will probably get beaten.
When we were going to recruit Vickery I actually watched a lot of his tapes on the net. In the tapes he was pitted against Natinui heaps of times and during those games he killed him. He beat him in the air and on the ground, lets hope he can do that this time around!!
-
Vickery in is the wrong call, hope he has a blinder but Polak earned that spot
Vickery V Natinui (however you spell it) could be a match up for the next 10 years and I think they should run Gus against Cox. These guys will learn heaps with these match ups even though they will probably get beaten.
When we were going to recruit Vickery I actually watched a lot of his tapes on the net. In the tapes he was pitted against Natinui heaps of times and during those games he killed him. He beat him in the air and on the ground, lets hope he can do that this time around!!
I hope so too but I do believe that NN has progressed faster than Vickery and is ahead of him now. I realy hope that wont be the case in a year or so.
-
Vickery in is the wrong call, hope he has a blinder but Polak earned that spot
I agree Polak earned the spot but I dont think Vickery is the wrong call as far as going foward. To me they are doing it as a match up for the Future
Vickery V Natinui (however you spell it) could be a match up for the next 10 years and I think they should run Gus against Cox. These guys will learn heaps with these match ups even though they will probably get beaten.
As far as farmer goes, well I dont think he has been as bad as some of you make out.
I do think Webberley was very very stiff though
webberly is probably doing penance for repeatedly bombing the ball without looking. I think he was still in wet weather mode from the previous week.
good to see the trolls getting on so well
Your opinion on these player selections Al
It's really to early to write most of them off, or by the same token claim them as champs.
But from what little I have seen of them;
Vickery can take a mark and showed a couple of times last year that he is not afraid to put his body on the line doing so. wore a couple of hurtfull hits to his back for his troubles. Around the ground his strength appears to be finding players in space by hand, but his footskills seem reasonable. Has at times looked a bit lost and I can see why some are saying he is not agressive enough. My thoughts were maybe needs a bit of time at coburg but the line of thinking about his match up on nic nat has merit.
Farmer: anyone saying he doesnt go hard needs to stop drinking while they watch the games. That is his best feature. I havnt seen him shirk an issue. does appear to be a tad slow but disposal seems pretty good. Appears as if he is still coming to terms with the pace of the game.
Astbury: If this kid can make the grade I think we will have a goodun. when he gets the ball he looks like a natural footballer and is good at ground level. While not getting loads of the footy it doesn't look like it is affecting confidence. Although a different mould to Jack, I had a similal thought when I first saw him. Just has to get the ball more and do it consistently. Hopefully, like Jack, that will come with time.
Collins. too be honest not sure what to make of him at the moment. against port i thought he was exceptionally quiet, but looking at the stats he had a fair 14 disposals with 12 tackles. Again against St kilda I barely noticed him.The good thing about not noticing him so much is that it means he isn't making glaring mistakes.
Connors: showed some signs before being suspended. Rather than sook and feel sorry for himself he has set about rectifying his problems. While not having seen any of the coburg games all reports and stats point to him responding in the best way possible.
King: Not a player i have a lot of time for and I normally have a soft spot for the triers. In saying that has been reasonably solid recently. Has definitely improved under Hardwick.
As for their selections this week; I'm not so presumptuous to think that from watchin a dozen or less games that I would know more about how these guys follow Hardwicks instruction than he does. Nor do I turn my ignorance about his decisions around to think he is the stupid one.
What is apparent is that Hardwick places a strong emphasis on both team and individual development, even if it is at the expense of the chances of winning games, for now. At the moment I'm happy to just sit back and enjoy the ride rather than second guessing him at every turn. If he thinks that it is best long term to play these guys now then so be it.
Perhaps you could elaborate a bit more on your own simple generalisations about these players and their selections, as well as coming up with alternatives and why the alternatives will be more beneficial long term?
-
Aint it a biatch when the usual whipping boys are gone and you have to hunt up new ones
i find it very funny when you have people who think there are no below standard players on our list and then get all uptight when those below standard or poor performing players are pointed out.
very funny people can think this way when we have won just one game for the yr and are likely heading for a spoon.
-
What I find funny Claw are those intellectual giants who can pick poor players in a side that has been crap for a very long time.
I really hope it isn't too much of a strain for some
-
B: Newman, McGuane, King
HB: Tuck, Deledio, Connors
C: Cousins, Jackson, Edwards
HF: White, Riewoldt, Nason
F: Tambling, Griffiths, Astbury
Foll: Graham, Cotchin, Martin
I/C: Farmer, Collins, Vickery, Moore
First time we'll see our future 3 key forwards all together on hopefully a dry day.
-
Gunna be awesome isn't it! Am a bit excited :gotigers
-
Gunna be awesome isn't it! Am a bit excited :gotigers
Too right CUB :thumbsup
I'm heading off to the game now :gotigers