One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: WA Tiger on November 14, 2014, 03:20:49 PM

Title: Jack Lonie
Post by: WA Tiger on November 14, 2014, 03:20:49 PM
Later pick, get him, just what we need, he's probably bigger than old mate from Port and he kills it. Look at the highlights, has plenty to offer...get it done Tiges.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-09-10/jack-lonie-highlights
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Yeahright on November 14, 2014, 05:42:41 PM
Merge with the "Our later picks" thread please.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: big tone on November 14, 2014, 05:46:13 PM
Later pick, get him, just what we need, he's probably bigger than old mate from Port and he kills it. Look at the highlights, has plenty to offer...get it done Tiges.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-09-10/jack-lonie-highlights
As impressive as anyone else's highlights I have seen so far.
Beautiful kick of the footy, we'll balanced, knows where the goals are but the most impressive thing for me was how fast he wanted to move the footy on.
Where do they think this kid will go in the draft?
Could possibly be WA's best ever post  :thumbsup
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: WA Tiger on November 14, 2014, 08:41:42 PM
Merge with the c"Our later picks" thread please.

Kid deserves his own thread, just get on board... :thumbsup
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Rampstar on November 14, 2014, 10:04:56 PM
Looks like a quality young player. Looks like a 2nd round type selection to me and would be happy to have him at Richmond.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Hard Roar Tiger on November 14, 2014, 10:30:23 PM
Later pick, get him, just what we need, he's probably bigger than old mate from Port and he kills it. Look at the highlights, has plenty to offer...get it done Tiges.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-09-10/jack-lonie-highlights

Could be a good call WAT.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: yandb on November 15, 2014, 06:51:10 AM
Struggles to kick the ball more than 50mt. but makes up for it with quality kicks of 45 or less.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: 🏅Dooks on November 15, 2014, 07:24:45 AM
Um why does this guy get his own thread?
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Rampstar on November 15, 2014, 09:17:54 AM
Struggles to kick the ball more than 50mt. but makes up for it with quality kicks of 45 or less.

some of his kicks just get 50 metres but his kicking of the footy under 50 metres from say 20 to 45 is outstanding.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: WA Tiger on November 15, 2014, 09:46:54 AM
Play him close to goal where he is suited and very damaging, that's the tip. Short bursts out of the center to hit up key forwards on the lead would also be the key!!

50+ meter kicks don't come into the equation then!!
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Yeahright on November 15, 2014, 12:08:07 PM
Problem with going off a highlight reel is it makes his kicking look better than it is :shh
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: WA Tiger on November 15, 2014, 12:29:38 PM
Problem with going off a highlight reel is it makes his kicking look better than it is :shh

If it does that with kicking then it does that with every skill used and every player.

Why don't you just get on board!!!
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Rampstar on November 15, 2014, 01:04:28 PM
Problem with going off a highlight reel is it makes his kicking look better than it is :shh

I think what highlight reels show is what a player is capable of. At least we know he can kick to a really high level. Id rather go with a highlight reel of a player kicking in real action of a game rather than rubbish kicking test they have come up with where there is no heat. The kicking test at the combine is a waste of time IMHO.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: bojangles17 on November 15, 2014, 02:19:00 PM
Too small , who was that player from up Albury way we got ,number of years ago ,  now plays with fev, was champion junior and bush legend but didn't make it being too small
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: YellowandBlackBlood on November 15, 2014, 02:31:55 PM
Too small , who was that player from up Albury way we got ,number of years ago ,  now plays with fev, was champion junior and bush legend but didn't make it being too small
That is rubbish. Size has nothing to do with it. It is all about ability and application.  If you have the ability you will make it no matter what.  Case in point Boomer Harvey from North.

The most infamous example for Richmond is when a tiny kid called Thorold Merrett who was a mad tiger supporter went down to Punt road to try and get a game. Jack Dyer told him he was too small and he'd never make it. Merrett joined Collingwood and became one of their finest players. He terrorised Richmond for his entire career every time we played the pies. It was a decision that made the overlooking of Franklin look tame by comparison.

So if you are small e.g. Caleb Daniel you can still make it.  You just have to be really good and work hard at your game.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Rampstar on November 15, 2014, 02:40:40 PM
Caleb Daniel is gonna be really interesting on draft night. No doubt he can play, he knows how to play, the only reason I didn't include him in my groupings is that I have 1 or 2 smaller types in my list anyway, Im hoping a club picks him.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Yeahright on November 15, 2014, 11:33:14 PM
Problem with going off a highlight reel is it makes his kicking look better than it is :shh

If it does that with kicking then it does that with every skill used and every player.

Why don't you just get on board!!!

Tried to dig it up but couldn't find it. Was on board about 6 months ago and had a conversation with someone on here about him :shh. Feel like it might of been Dwaino but he might tell you otherwise.

I think what highlight reels show is what a player is capable of. At least we know he can kick to a really high level. Id rather go with a highlight reel of a player kicking in real action of a game rather than rubbish kicking test they have come up with where there is no heat. The kicking test at the combine is a waste of time IMHO.

Good point regarding highlight reels. I don't mind the kicking test. Most times it does correlate well with good kickers but I guess it just has to be taken with a grain of salt
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Hard Roar Tiger on July 06, 2015, 08:48:42 PM
Later pick, get him, just what we need, he's probably bigger than old mate from Port and he kills it. Look at the highlights, has plenty to offer...get it done Tiges.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-09-10/jack-lonie-highlights

Good call WAT :thumbsup

IT’S rare that a 110-point win is defined by a smother.

From the Hun today...,

But, Jack Lonie’s want to throw himself at Bomber Jake Melksham’s boot in the third quarter was as influential as any of St Kilda’s 25 goals on Sunday afternoon.

That smother, along with 18 disposals and a brilliant dribble goal, earned Lonie the Round 14 Rising Star nomination.

“The boys were just really happy that I played my role. It was great that it turned into a goal. It’s not something you get a stat for — a kick, mark or handball — it’s just a little one percenter,” Lonie said.

Lonie has kicked just 10 goals across 12 games in his debut season, but it’s his defensive ferocity that’s prompted some Lenny Hayes fans to add a No. 3 to their jumper.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Stalin on July 06, 2015, 08:54:17 PM
Too small , who was that player from up Albury way we got ,number of years ago ,  now plays with fev, was champion junior and bush legend but didn't make it being too small

He's not too small

Watch him up close he's magic
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: MintOnLamb on July 06, 2015, 10:41:23 PM
Diesel
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: No More on July 06, 2015, 11:33:55 PM
He is a quality young player. Its a pity we didn't have another pick around the 30 mark to pick him.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: big tone on July 06, 2015, 11:37:01 PM
He is a quality young player. Its a pity we didn't have another pick around the 30 mark to pick him.
We did, we took Menadue at 33 and Lonie went at 41.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: No More on July 06, 2015, 11:56:17 PM
He is a quality young player. Its a pity we didn't have another pick around the 30 mark to pick him.
We did, we took Menadue at 33 and Lonie went at 41.

I meant having 2 picks around this mark
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: WA Tiger on July 07, 2015, 08:00:04 AM
Mmmmmm. Just what we needed, could have one of the ones we needed to get us to the next level...
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: big tone on July 07, 2015, 06:23:20 PM
He is a quality young player. Its a pity we didn't have another pick around the 30 mark to pick him.
We did, we took Menadue at 33 and Lonie went at 41.

I meant having 2 picks around this mark
:thumbsup
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Yeahright on July 08, 2015, 10:34:40 PM
Richmond were keen on him but felt we needed speed so we went Menadue. Been told that we were hoping he'd make it to pick 52 because he was our next preference.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Stalin on July 09, 2015, 10:16:47 AM
Richmond were keen on him but felt we needed speed so we went Menadue. Been told that we were hoping he'd make it to pick 52 because he was our next preference.

Should of traded someone
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: WA Tiger on July 09, 2015, 10:57:45 AM
Richmond were keen on him but felt we needed speed so we went Menadue. Been told that we were hoping he'd make it to pick 52 because he was our next preference.

Should of traded someone

 :huh :huh :huh...he was picked up in the draft. We should have selected him before Menadue then tried to get Menadue at 52.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Yeahright on July 09, 2015, 01:50:59 PM
We rated Menadue slightly higher (rightly or wrongly, time will tell) and he fit our needs for speed so who knows if he would of been there at 52 either.
Despite Judge's dyslexic typing he has a point (I assume) that we should of traded someone for an extra pick around that area.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Diocletian on July 09, 2015, 01:57:16 PM
Most people were complaining that we didn't land a big fish last year but my main complaint was that we didn't at least trade back into the draft - which was all the more perplexing when you consider we rated the draft very highly and had apparently been planning for it and targeting it since even before the previous year's draft.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Penelope on July 09, 2015, 02:03:19 PM
given Hardwicks angst about being able to trade players without their consent, i suspect we have had trades fall through because players did not consent.
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Stalin on July 09, 2015, 02:26:11 PM
Most people were complaining that we didn't land a big fish last year but my main complaint was that we didn't at least trade back into the draft - which was all the more perplexing when you consider we rated the draft very highly and had apparently been planning for it and targeting it since even before the previous year's draft.

and they knew this draft was going to b weak
Title: Re: Jack Lonie
Post by: Diocletian on July 09, 2015, 02:28:45 PM
given Hardwicks angst about being able to trade players without their consent, i suspect we have had trades fall through because players did not consent.

Maybe so al, but surely just trading for at least one extra pick inside the top 40 shouldn't be that big of an ask.