One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on January 31, 2013, 12:40:16 AM
-
Jake King up Richmond Tigers' sleeve
Jon Ralph
From: Herald Sun
January 31, 2013
RICHMOND energiser Jake King is on track for his first Round 1 match in five seasons after recovering from surgery to his foot, wrist and posterior cruciate ligament.
But the Tigers have all but ruled out Nathan Foley for the traditional Carlton blockbuster, despite his encouraging progress from achilles and calf issues.
Carlton and Richmond appear on track to meet in reasonable shape, given their minimal injury lists leading into the NAB Cup.
Defenders Troy Chaplin (knee) and Dylan Grimes (hamstring) are both still in the rehab group, with Port Adelaide recruit Chaplin touch and go for Round 1.
But Richmond says the amount of work it has been able to get into its core group over the off-season is highly encouraging.
Through suspension and injury, King has missed the past four Round 1 clashes with Carlton, but he will bring just the kind of aggression the Tigers have lacked in games against their arch rival.
The Richmond coaching department was amazed at his productivity last year despite being battered by several injuries.
Tyrone Vickery has completed a solid pre-season after he had both shoulders tightened up, while Brett Deledio has overcome minor knee surgery since the end of the season.
Foley, who signed a three-year deal last year, had season-ending achilles surgery in July.
Now he needs to build up his calf strength, but seems unlikely to play in Round 1.
Richmond head of football Craig Cameron said the Tigers were in good shape.
"We had a couple who were slowed with operations prior to Christmas but our rehab group is pretty small," he said.
"At the moment I would have thought nearly everyone would be knocking the door down at the moment."
Former North Melbourne forward Aaron Edwards, who was arrested for drunkenness before he arrived at the club, has impressed his new teammates with his track form. He could be a handy foil for Coleman medallist Jack Riewoldt.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/jake-king-up-richmond-tigers-sleeve/story-e6frf9jf-1226565455677
-
Not sure he's in the best side. Sub perhaps?
-
Not sure he's in the best side. Sub perhaps?
What do you think our forwardline will be against the Bluebaggers Mrakov? The only reason I think we may see him is for his attack on the ball and mongrel attitude to the opposition. He's also a favourite...
-
Wouldn't being our best 30...
-
Not sure he's in the best side. Sub perhaps?
What do you think our forwardline will be against the Bluebaggers Mrakov? The only reason I think we may see him is for his attack on the ball and mongrel attitude to the opposition. He's also a favourite...
HF: Knights Vickery A. Edwards
F:Nahas Riewoldt S.Edwards Sub: King
-
Not sure he's in the best side. Sub perhaps?
What do you think our forwardline will be against the Bluebaggers Mrakov? The only reason I think we may see him is for his attack on the ball and mongrel attitude to the opposition. He's also a favourite...
HF: Knights Vickery A. Edwards
F:Nahas Riewoldt S.Edwards Sub: King
I think Knights will be up on the wing or high half forward rather than a stay at home forward. Cotch, Lids and Martin will take up that spot while 'resting'. Nahas may be most at risk this year as he doesn't give the same defensive pressure as King but can pop up and score a few as a crumber. S. Edwards will also rotate more through the midfield this year is my guess perhaps rotating with the three I mentioned earlier too on occasion. Probably our only stay at home forwards will be Jack, Vickery and maybe A. Edwards with the last two pushing further up the ground or leading to the flanks/HF.
-
King will play, we will a bit short down back with Chapman and Grimes out, could really expose us, particularly if Kruz pushes forward. :-\
-
Bachelor. Grimes. Ellis.
Morris. Chaplin. RanceAlex.
Knights. Tuck. Grigg.
Cotchin. Griffiths. Martin.
Deledio. Riewoldt. Vickery.
Maric. Conca. Foley.
Vlastuin. SEdwards.
Newman. Houli.
-
King will play, we will a bit short down back with Chapman and Grimes out, could really expose us, particularly if Kruz pushes forward. :-\
How does having two tall backmen out ensure a small forward will play?
-
you know what he meant al ::)
;D
-
King will play, we will a bit short down back with Chapman and Grimes out, could really expose us, particularly if Kruz pushes forward. :-\
How does having two tall backmen out ensure a small forward will play?
Please don't tap on the glass :banghead
-
King will play, we will a bit short down back with Chapman and Grimes out, could really expose us, particularly if Kruz pushes forward. :-\
Is Grimes a certainty not to play. I would imagine that would leave us with Rance, Griffiths and perhaps Astbury. Not ideal but if they go tall to exploit this problem then they may have to. The other option is to play Batchelor instead of Astbury who can play tall if needed. In the past though it has been their small forwards that have hurt us not their talls.
-
:bow
you know what he meant al ::)
;D
Yes al, don't act stupid please.. :thumbsup
-
King will play, we will a bit short down back with Chapman and Grimes out, could really expose us, particularly if Kruz pushes forward. :-\
Is Grimes a certainty not to play. I would imagine that would leave us with Rance, Griffiths and perhaps Astbury. Not ideal but if they go tall to exploit this problem then they may have to. The other option is to play Batchelor instead of Astbury who can play tall if needed. In the past though it has been their small forwards that have hurt us not their talls.
Didn't they try going tall last year and kept going through Post's bloke? I thought it was a bit rough on Batchelor not to play, just because his Nob Cup was a bit average when they tried him in the midfield. Really rate him as a genuine footballer and handy as a med-defender to handle the odd tall player and back up the other defenders. I'm hoping Grimes is ready but from what I can tell he is 50/50 for round 1? Spewing about Chaplin. Will be a massive plus without bring a superstar but it sounds like we recruited him straight out of a car accident. Will be spewing if we're out both of them.
-
:bowyou know what he meant al ::)
;D
Yes al, don't act stupid please.. :thumbsup
not acting.
care to explain that sentence then?
-
:bowyou know what he meant al ::)
;D
Yes al, don't act stupid please.. :thumbsup
not acting.
care to explain that sentence then?
Not acting. Must mean you are then.. :whistle
-
so you cant, or wont explain that strange sentence?
-
Gonna agree with al here. How does King relate at all to Grimes or Chaplin?
-
so you cant, or wont explain that strange sentence?
Understand if you can, the only strange thing is you, others understood it, I was not relating King playing to our back line.
1. King will play!
2. I believe that if Grimes and Chap don't play our back line could be exposed..
FFS, Come back tomorrow and we can go through your ABC.
-
If you were not relating them to king, when why mention them in the same sentence, in a thread about king, (coming from the stay on topic copper?)
I'm happy to go through my ABCs, or more relevantly , grammar, the English language and how to clearly convey your thoughts.
Perhaps there is some merit to the 1000 monkeys theory after all?
-
so you cant, or wont explain that strange sentence?
Understand if you can, the only strange thing is you, others understood it, I was not relating King playing to our back line.
1. King will play!
2. I believe that if Grimes and Chap don't play our back line could be exposed..
FFS, Come back tomorrow and we can go through your ABC.
King hasen't played down back for 18 months and I doubt he ever will again..........McG will go back before King..
-
Blind Freddy could see bachelor is a natural defender.
King will play, we will a bit short down back with Chapman and Grimes out, could really expose us, particularly if Kruz pushes forward. :-\
Is Grimes a certainty not to play. I would imagine that would leave us with Rance, Griffiths and perhaps Astbury. Not ideal but if they go tall to exploit this problem then they may have to. The other option is to play Batchelor instead of Astbury who can play tall if needed. In the past though it has been their small forwards that have hurt us not their talls.
Didn't they try going tall last year and kept going through Post's bloke? I thought it was a bit rough on Batchelor not to play, just because his Nob Cup was a bit average when they tried him in the midfield. Really rate him as a genuine footballer and handy as a med-defender to handle the odd tall player and back up the other defenders. I'm hoping Grimes is ready but from what I can tell he is 50/50 for round 1? Spewing about Chaplin. Will be a massive plus without bring a superstar but it sounds like we recruited him straight out of a car accident. Will be spewing if we're out both of them.
-
Gonna agree with al here. How does King relate at all to Grimes or Chaplin?
It's Chapman FFS
-
If you were not relating them to king, when why mention them in the same sentence, in a thread about king, (coming from the stay on topic copper?)
I'm happy to go through my ABCs, or more relevantly , grammar, the English language and how to clearly convey your thoughts.
Perhaps there is some merit to the 1000 monkeys theory after all?
"We had the best of times, we had the blurst of times, you stupid monkey oh shut up"
-
King is in our best 22 for now, and his particular skills will be needed Rnd1. No question about it.
-
If you were not relating them to king, when why mention them in the same sentence, in a thread about king, (coming from the stay on topic copper?)
I'm happy to go through my ABCs, or more relevantly , grammar, the English language and how to clearly convey your thoughts.
Perhaps there is some merit to the 1000 monkeys theory after all?
"We had the best of times, we had the blurst of times, you stupid monkey oh shut up"
:lol
-
If you were not relating them to king, when why mention them in the same sentence, in a thread about king, (coming from the stay on topic copper?)
I'm happy to go through my ABCs, or more relevantly , grammar, the English language and how to clearly convey your thoughts.
Perhaps there is some merit to the 1000 monkeys theory after all?
"We had the best of times, we had the blurst of times, you stupid monkey oh shut up"
:lol
-
King is in our best 22 for now, and his particular skills will be needed Rnd1. No question about it.
YES!
-
King is in our best 22 for now, and his particular skills will be needed Rnd1. No question about it.
YES!
Best 22 maybe? Best back 6 NOT! If we're low on players in the back line King is the last guy that will be thrown back there :wallywink
-
King is in our best 22 for now, and his particular skills will be needed Rnd1. No question about it.
YES!
Best 22 maybe? Best back 6 NOT! If we're low on players in the back line King is the last guy that will be thrown back there :wallywink
Hope you had a great holiday TFT, BTW I never said to play him back, I said he will play, Hardwick loves him!
-
King will play, we will a bit short down back with Chapman and Grimes out, could really expose us, particularly if Kruz pushes forward. :-\
BTW I never said to play him back, I said he will play, Hardwick loves him!
Dude, your either seriously on drugs or your Jackstar! Maybe be both :lol :lol
-
Kingy is in the best 22 so long as he is fit and in form (pressure acts more than anything else). It will be up to others to take his spot from him....if they can.
-
I believe WAT. A full stop would have been handy though.
-
I believe WAT. A full stop would have been handy though.
Thank you CD. I actually thought the comma was enough but I hear you.
I now know I am not on drugs.. :lol
-
I believe WAT. A full stop would have been handy though.
Thank you CD. I actually thought the comma was enough but I hear you.
I now know I am not on drugs.. :lol
WAT, I don't mean to confuse you but although I immediately understood your post, I was on drugs at that time :bee
-
:lol
-
Not sure he's in the best side. Sub perhaps?
What do you think our forwardline will be against the Bluebaggers Mrakov? The only reason I think we may see him is for his attack on the ball and mongrel attitude to the opposition. He's also a favourite...
HF: Knights Vickery A. Edwards
F:Nahas Riewoldt S.Edwards Sub: King
I think Knights will be up on the wing or high half forward rather than a stay at home forward. Cotch, Lids and Martin will take up that spot while 'resting'. Nahas may be most at risk this year as he doesn't give the same defensive pressure as King but can pop up and score a few as a crumber. S. Edwards will also rotate more through the midfield this year is my guess perhaps rotating with the three I mentioned earlier too on occasion. Probably our only stay at home forwards will be Jack, Vickery and maybe A. Edwards with the last two pushing further up the ground or leading to the flanks/HF.
Reckon Nahas defensive pressure is underrated