One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: Judge Roughneck on September 10, 2013, 02:11:11 AM

Title: jolly
Post by: Judge Roughneck on September 10, 2013, 02:11:11 AM
Better than orren
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: WilliamPowell on September 10, 2013, 07:01:53 AM
Yes but Darren Jolly isn't going to agree to a Rookie spot & a rookie wage, he will want a senior list spot and would demand big $$$$

Not an option
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Francois Jackson on September 10, 2013, 07:05:13 AM
Demand big $$

Now I've heard it all

At his age he shouldn't be demanding  anything
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: WilliamPowell on September 10, 2013, 07:09:05 AM
Demand big $$

Now I've heard it all

At his age he shouldn't be demanding  anything

daniel, never said I agreed with it just pointing out the obvious

He's been on $500-$600k+ at the Pies he will looking at least $400k that's big $$ for a 31yo. And someone will pay it 



We shouldn't be using that sort of $$ on Jolly and if the meda are right regarding our salary cap we couldn't afford it anyway  ;D
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: TigerMonk on September 10, 2013, 07:35:52 AM
As WP said the club can't afford him & who wants a old ruckman. l think Stephenson does ok.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: WilliamPowell on September 10, 2013, 08:33:26 AM
As WP said the club can't afford him & who wants a old ruckman. l think Stephenson does ok.

The thing about Stephenson is he is prepared to remain as a rookie and as a rookie who cost us nothing I agree he does OK
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Rampstar on September 10, 2013, 08:33:59 AM
no to jolly
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Loui Tufga on September 10, 2013, 08:53:50 AM
We must make a big play at Longer. There are stuff all rucks in this years draft or certainly nothing that's worth a first or second round pick. That means any ruck man from this years draft would be a very long term prospect at best. Belchambers, Longer, Zac Clarke, would be the three I would be moving heaven and earth to get.
Ide be sticking with stepheson for now and try to recruit a middle aged ruckman from another list. Jolly is to injury prone, he'll end up at Geelong anyway ;)
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: rogerd3 on September 10, 2013, 09:18:32 AM
No thanks.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: dwaino on September 10, 2013, 09:21:29 AM
We must make a big play at Longer. There are stuff all rucks in this years draft or certainly nothing that's worth a first or second round pick. That means any ruck man from this years draft would be a very long term prospect at best. Belchambers, Longer, Zac Clarke, would be the three I would be moving heaven and earth to get.
Ide be sticking with stepheson for now and try to recruit a middle aged ruckman from another list. Jolly is to injury prone, he'll end up at Geelong anyway ;)

Massively agree on Longer  :clapping two years in the system already and with Maric and TV it will sure up our ruck situation for the next 4-5 years and beyond depending on who we get later. Unless we move now on somebody we're going to miss the boat and be up poo creek regarding rucks for several years.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Andyy on September 10, 2013, 10:49:21 AM
Nobody old.

Get a bloke who will play 5+ years.


I've been saying for MONTHS we should try to get Warnock. And people should see why now. Has destroyed us the last two games. 206cm tall. Experienced.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: tigs2011 on September 10, 2013, 11:20:38 AM
As WP said the club can't afford him & who wants a old ruckman. l think Stephenson does ok.

The thing about Stephenson is he is prepared to remain as a rookie and as a rookie who cost us nothing I agree he does OK
That and he's at least as good as broken down Jolly. What's the point in having a constantly injured back-up. He's done. Only person who hasn't realised is Jolly himself.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: tony_montana on September 10, 2013, 05:43:42 PM
did Currie at Nought sign a one or 2 year contract? I'd go hell for leather for him if hes now out of contract. He looked very impressive and ready to go in the nob cup, just couldn't get a sniff bc of Goldstein and then injury.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: eliminator on September 11, 2013, 06:36:33 AM
 :banghead
Better than orren
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: TigerMonk on September 11, 2013, 07:15:31 AM
Majak Daw, someone who looks scary   :lol
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: tigs2011 on September 11, 2013, 09:46:20 AM
did Currie at Nought sign a one or 2 year contract? I'd go hell for leather for him if hes now out of contract. He looked very impressive and ready to go in the nob cup, just couldn't get a sniff bc of Goldstein and then injury.
1 but just signed a 2 year extension.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: one-eyed on September 11, 2013, 03:08:14 PM
After Sundays loss to the blues. Richmond are wanting a couple of quick fix players. They are at the front of the cue for Delisted Magpie Darren Jolly.
Is this a good move by the tigs?

https://www.stuff.com/AflTradeRumours
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Francois Jackson on September 11, 2013, 03:24:38 PM
rubbish idea. Another short cut

how about we start finding some younger ruckman like everyone seems to do



Title: Re: jolly
Post by: TigerMonk on September 11, 2013, 03:49:54 PM
rubbish idea. Another short cut

how about we start finding some younger ruckman like everyone seems to do

That's right Daniel, Why would the club bother when he couldn't even make the skunks senior side last weekend. He cant even get himself up this year let alone next year lol. Pre Season would destroy him.
Would be better to take a chance on the Maffra FC ruckman Brent Connelly who is about 24 yrs & 202cm maybe more & playing good footy. Was good at TAC & drafted to Dockers & got homesick. Goes well against some big rucks & gets around the ground very well. He be better than Jollywog
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: the claw on September 11, 2013, 05:00:19 PM
once again im happy to be the one who disagrees here.

there is absolutely nothing to suggest jolly cannot get back to real good form. 

why cant we take a good mature ruckman one whos good enough to force ivan out of the side if hes fit and playing well.
why cant it be for just one yr .
why cant we take 28plus yr olds its not as if we are overflowing with oldies.
why cant we pay him just above the average afl income which is close to 350k.
why cant we target billy longer while we are at it  id even go as far as rookieing another as well. theres nothing wrong with having 4 genuine ruckmen on your list.

was ben hudson a bad choice for collingwood?  did he stop kids (yes collingwood actually have yoiung genuine ruckmen on their list) from developing? hell no.

derickx is gone or he damn well should be. stephenson is not up to the standard it leaves just ivan. to properly address list needs for GENUINE 1ST  ruckmen we should probably   take 3 if possible.

rookie 18  19 yr old junior.  your project ruckman for the next 3 or 4 yrs.
longer 21 yr old junior/development. exactly what it says hes a junior but well into development will be ready to take over in 12months time.
maric 27 yr old mature. hes the incumbent but he does struggle with injury and he needs a hand.
jolly 31 yr old veteran . a superb ruckman who is a ready made replacement for ivan he would enable the club to rest the big fella hes good enough to even force ivan out of the side.

for those who want warnock i have no problems but remember ivan turns 28 in jan.  warnock turns 27 in january  taking warnock would mean we still have to find a very good junior ruckman to cater to the long term.

finally im going to say it one more time.
there is absolutely nothing wrong with taking mature/vets  players  at no cost in picks. take em as f/a, psd, late nd  or rookie. so long as you look after the long term as you go,  by useing your better picks on kids in the nd or trading those better picks on 18 - 21 yr olds. ie taylor adams for pick 12  etc.

balance your trade/draft out  ie by taking say 5 kids and 4 mature players.

the question im asking myself atm is how do we get adams and longer/lycett to the club.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Yeahright on September 11, 2013, 06:34:34 PM
Can't have Jolly and Maric, two broken down ruckman ::)
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Andyy on September 11, 2013, 07:23:59 PM
I don't mind 28+ players who could give us 3 years of service. But 30+ players who would be lucky to give us one whole year of service is a bad investment.

At any rate if the club wants to pursue him you can be sure they'll put him through medical tests to ensure he can play good footy again.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Loui Tufga on September 11, 2013, 11:21:11 PM
Jolly only missed 5 Games for the year, he's been injury free for the last 6 weeks but has been playing in the VFL. Not sure where the broken down part comes in?
With the lack of ruck an in this years draft he would certainly fill a hole for the next couple of years.
My preference would be to chase Longer or Belchambers but if we don't succeed there the Jolly would be a very handy backup IMO
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: tony_montana on September 11, 2013, 11:34:27 PM
Jolly hasn't played bc he peeed off some players and the coach by writing that article and dissing josh Fraser earlier in the season. Also apparently a bit of a prick around the joint.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Andyy on September 12, 2013, 12:54:09 AM
Heard that too. Article about Fraser was very poor form from Jolly IMO.

Not the kinda bloke you wanna pick up.
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: yellowandback on September 12, 2013, 05:54:16 AM
Heard that too. Article about Fraser was very poor form from Jolly IMO.

Not the kinda bloke you wanna pick up.

Fair call if true. He's not good enough for the club to make an allowance for being a grade A knob
Title: Re: jolly
Post by: Yeahright on September 12, 2013, 03:53:53 PM
Jolly only missed 5 Games for the year, he's been injury free for the last 6 weeks but has been playing in the VFL. Not sure where the broken down part comes in?

That's just wrong? He only played 9 games.