One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on June 14, 2009, 05:08:05 AM

Title: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: one-eyed on June 14, 2009, 05:08:05 AM
Yeah a bit early for this but fire away .......
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Infamy on June 14, 2009, 10:15:37 AM
Probably no change, although maybe bring in Cogs to play against their mature midfield, or Thomson
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Jackstar is back on June 14, 2009, 10:18:45 AM
I really think Patto is a real worry.
his turnovers killed us last night which resulted in 2 goals in succession to the west coast.
Dont know whether to keep or not at years end
Guys on 3AW say he aint up to it,
I tend to agree.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Ramps on June 14, 2009, 11:09:23 AM
I really think Patto is a real worry.
his turnovers killed us last night which resulted in 2 goals in succession to the west coast.
Dont know whether to keep or not at years end
Guys on 3AW say he aint up to it,
I tend to agree.

I wanted to post this last night, I dont reckon he has a future at Richmond, must be traded end this year before he becomes worthless trade wise. Pattison was so out of sink with the rest of his mates- he just didnt look like it at all, on the other hand, Edwards showed that he can dispose of the footy well enough to play footy at the level but he needs to show more of last nights efforts until R22.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: tigersalive on June 14, 2009, 11:29:03 AM
I think we'll be a bit top heavy against the Saints.

Out: Patto

In: White
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: camboon on June 14, 2009, 11:54:09 AM
Patto made a couple of skill errors but more than made up for it with his endevour. His second and third efforts got us acouple of goal, helped shut down Cox, and always gives his best.

I think we should keep putting games into him and make no changes unless someone is injured or young kid has a blinder at Coburg.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: mat073 on June 14, 2009, 02:10:27 PM
What will be very interesting is whether Nathan Brown comes back into the team against the saints. :-\
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Gordon Bennett on June 14, 2009, 02:31:12 PM

 Pattison was so out of sink with the rest of his mates- he just didnt look like it at all,
you think he needs a tap on the shoulder? :lol
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Jackstar is back on June 14, 2009, 08:59:36 PM

 Pattison was so out of sink with the rest of his mates- he just didnt look like it at all,
you think he needs a tap on the shoulder? :lol

Champagne comedy at its best Gordon :cheers
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: 1965 on June 14, 2009, 09:01:49 PM

 Pattison was so out of sink with the rest of his mates- he just didnt look like it at all,
you think he needs a tap on the shoulder? :lol

Champagne comedy at its best Gordon :cheers

I thought of saying...

He went to water.

or

He got a bath last night.

But thought better of it.

 :lol
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: mightytiges on June 14, 2009, 11:19:10 PM
Too hot and cold  :outtahere

Yep seriously Patto is the only one I would consider had a disappointing game and may be dropped if others have a good game for the Burgers next week.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 15, 2009, 07:25:08 AM
Outs: Patto, Moore (horribly out of form)

Ins: Silvestor  :eyebrow, Thomson

White coming back from a hammie must come back via Coburg. The 5 dropped this week must actually play at Coburg before being considered IMHO
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Ekto on June 15, 2009, 08:38:30 AM
I'd love to see the best full back in the VFL in the Tiger jumper too.

Go Catter.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: TigerTime on June 15, 2009, 10:43:05 AM
silvester ....please.......no f way

if moore goes out for wahtever reason POST  must come in

WP ur love affair for silvester has to stop. his is an average vfl player, ok maybe a bit better than that but so is jay schulz!

silvester must never ever play for us , he is not good enough and we have our young defenders to develop as im mguane, moore, thursty, post, rance ......no room to go backwards and play silvester

moore wasnt that bad, made a couple of errors but made up for them. he has had a good yr esp considering his shoulder is rooted

thomsom cant kick so why should he get a game

we won the game with a very young team.

NO CHANGE FULL STOP

ps unless twig has the balls to drop newman
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: sabartooth on June 15, 2009, 11:05:37 AM
out: edwards/patto
in:  :jon     :-\
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Stripes on June 15, 2009, 11:40:41 AM
I would like to see Silvester play. I was chatting to some of the Coburg players and they say that Rawlings is a big rap for Silvester and the big cat has improved his pace and confidence this year so deserves a chance. They said that they would expect him to play in the next 2/3 weeks  8)

I would also like to see Thomson play so we can see if he will make it. No use writing him off before he has even played a senior game in the H&A season. I would like to see is his footskills are as bad as some people make them out to be around here. Thomson should come in well before Cogs - we know what Cogs has shown us so far this year  :whistle

Stripes
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Chuck17 on June 17, 2009, 12:25:02 PM
In Schulz Silvestor

Out Patto Moore

I would like Schulz to be given an extended crack at FF, about three games where he isn't shifted into the back line when a hole needs plugging.  I dont know whether he can make it or not but I dont think he has gotten more than half a game at FF before he has been moved.

If he fails after an extended stay then fine back to Coburg for the rest of the year and then delist/trade.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: tiger till i die on June 17, 2009, 08:02:02 PM
if any thing dont lose like collingwood  :lol :gotigers
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: WA Tiger on June 17, 2009, 09:01:59 PM
In Schulz Silvestor

Out Patto Moore

I would like Schulz to be given an extended crack at FF, about three games where he isn't shifted into the back line when a hole needs plugging.  I dont know whether he can make it or not but I dont think he has gotten more than half a game at FF before he has been moved.

If he fails after an extended stay then fine back to Coburg for the rest of the year and then delist/trade.


Chuck why would you take Moore out against the likes of Kosi & Riewoldt?? Schulz shot himself ages ago and should of gone before Wallace. Would like to see Silvestor have a crack but not at the expense of Moore.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 17, 2009, 09:05:47 PM
Moore is clearly carrying a bad shoulder and his form the past few weeks has been average because of it.

With the season gone, he might as well go and have surgery if needed or just take a break from playing  to get the shoulder properly healed
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Smokey on June 17, 2009, 09:17:55 PM
Moore is clearly carrying a bad shoulder and his form the past few weeks has been average because of it.

With the season gone, he might as well go and have surgery if needed or just take a break from playing  to get the shoulder properly healed

Ain't that the truth.  It is soooooo obvious to anyone watching you would have to wonder what reason they have for playing him.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: WA Tiger on June 17, 2009, 09:19:52 PM
Moore is clearly carrying a bad shoulder and his form the past few weeks has been average because of it.

With the season gone, he might as well go and have surgery if needed or just take a break from playing  to get the shoulder properly healed

So, he would still go better than Schulz, how many chances and in different positions has this bloke had, good VFL footballer. Like I said I would like to see Silvestor have a go so if Moore does get dropped then he would be my choice.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 17, 2009, 09:24:38 PM
So, he would still go better than Schulz, how many chances and in different positions has this bloke had, good VFL footballer. Like I said I would like to see Silvestor have a go so if Moore does get dropped then he would be my choice.

I didn't say anything about Schulz, I just said why I'd drop Moore

I want to see Silvestor get a chance, ditto Post before the season is out
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: WA Tiger on June 17, 2009, 09:29:21 PM
So, he would still go better than Schulz, how many chances and in different positions has this bloke had, good VFL footballer. Like I said I would like to see Silvestor have a go so if Moore does get dropped then he would be my choice.

I didn't say anything about Schulz, I just said why I'd drop Moore

I want to see Silvestor get a chance, ditto Post before the season is out

Couldn't agree any more on the Post call, he is a must to play and soon I hope, I forgive you about Schulz.... :shh
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: TigerTime on June 17, 2009, 10:34:02 PM
wp

if we are fairdinkum about building our future, quit ur love affair with silvester

post is the only one to come in if moore is unfit

ffs silvester is not and will not be part or any future success we may have

picking siklvester in the team is going backwards, would rather joel back in the team, at least he can play
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 18, 2009, 07:28:25 AM
wp

if we are fairdinkum about building our future, quit ur love affair with silvester

post is the only one to come in if moore is unfit

ffs silvester is not and will not be part or any future success we may have

picking siklvester in the team is going backwards, would rather joel back in the team, at least he can play

Settle down  ;D

I have explained this a number of times. But I will again for your benefit.    ;D

Firstly, when was the last time you saw Silvestor play? NAB cup this year (2009) or perhaps 2008? If your assessment is based on the 2008 NAB Cup then you have a case but his effort against Freo in the NAB this year was good, not great but good. His form for Couburg this year = outstanding

He has again improved and the areas that people have queried look like they have been improved.

With that in mind, the ONLY way we are going to see if the improvement is enough for him to be an AFL footballer if he actually plays AFL football.

He is a rookie, this is the last year he can be a rookie, so we as a club need to see if he is up to it. We have nothing to lose but guess what if he does well we actually gain.

Post is going to be there in 2010 as he has a standard 2 year contract. Ditto Gourdis. Gilligan and BrownE as they can be re-rookied.

What I want to see is the majoirty of the "untried" or borderline blokes on the list be given a couple of games so it can be assessed what they have to offer, if anything. It's called list management ;D

Like I said above and have said many times with Silvestor if we play him we have nothing to lose but a helluva lot to gain   
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: gtig on June 18, 2009, 08:48:44 AM
i agree bring in silvester.
can't see any downside to playing him or any of the marginals/kids. if they're up to it then great, if not, better draft picks await.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: TigerTime on June 18, 2009, 10:40:40 AM
wp

if we are fairdinkum about building our future, quit ur love affair with silvester

post is the only one to come in if moore is unfit

ffs silvester is not and will not be part or any future success we may have

picking siklvester in the team is going backwards, would rather joel back in the team, at least he can play

Settle down  ;D

I have explained this a number of times. But I will again for your benefit.    ;D

Firstly, when was the last time you saw Silvestor play? NAB cup this year (2009) or perhaps 2008? If your assessment is based on the 2008 NAB Cup then you have a case but his effort against Freo in the NAB this year was good, not great but good. His form for Couburg this year = outstanding

He has again improved and the areas that people have queried look like they have been improved.

With that in mind, the ONLY way we are going to see if the improvement is enough for him to be an AFL footballer if he actually plays AFL football.

He is a rookie, this is the last year he can be a rookie, so we as a club need to see if he is up to it. We have nothing to lose but guess what if he does well we actually gain.

Post is going to be there in 2010 as he has a standard 2 year contract. Ditto Gourdis. Gilligan and BrownE as they can be re-rookied.

What I want to see is the majoirty of the "untried" or borderline blokes on the list be given a couple of games so it can be assessed what they have to offer, if anything. It's called list management ;D

Like I said above and have said many times with Silvestor if we play him we have nothing to lose but a helluva lot to gain   

im settled dont worry, just concerned about ur love for the big cat

u say his form at vfl has been outstanding, so has jay schulz
but we are building for the future now, and silvester is not part of that and never will be. post is rance is mguane is moore is and thursty if his head is right is too. no room for the big cat and he is just a good vfl player like jay .
no need to "try" him in our team when we can further and fast track the development of post
if we are going to "try" players on our rookie list , surelly gourdis and gilligan must be "tried " b4 silvester

our backline is not our concern
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 18, 2009, 11:29:20 AM

im settled dont worry, just concerned about ur love for the big cat


Good  ;D ;D

Quote
u say his form at vfl has been outstanding, so has jay schulz
but we are building for the future now, and silvester is not part of that and never will be.

You have actually just given a reason why Silvestor should be given a go

You are correct Schulz has been given so many chances it isn't funny but at least we know where we stand with him

Silvestor hasn't been given a chance

How can you say a player is not part of the future if he hasn't be given an opportunity at the highest level?

Isn't the next 11 weeks about opportunity and rewarding players with a team first mind set?

Post will get his opportunity. Gourdis might, Gilligan at the moment doesn't deserve it. But Silvestor deserve a chance - if he fails I'll be the first to say thanks but no thanks

Will repeat again - nothing to lose, lots to gain
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Chuck17 on June 18, 2009, 11:38:07 AM
I still dont know whether Schulz has been given four qtrs in a row and kept at FF in a while (dont think its happended in 2009 or 2008).

He has played under Jade before in a team that has a tall structure and as such he may be worth a go under Jade's "game plan".

So many have bagged out TW's gameplan and how it didn't play to our teams advantage, I just reckon it would be worth it to give Schulz a go as FF but kept there for at least one full game.

Anyway best judge of that will be Jade as he has coached Schulz a fair bit at Coburg

Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: torch on June 18, 2009, 12:37:21 PM
what has happened to Dean Putt?

when does these players contracts expire?

Dean Putt
Graham Polak
Jay Schulz
Jake King
Jordan McMahon
Cleve Hughes
Mark Coughlan
Shane Tuck
Tom Hislop
Shane Edwards
Adam Pattison
Jarrard Oakley-Nicholls
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: wayne on June 18, 2009, 12:55:41 PM
what has happened to Dean Putt?

when does these players contracts expire?

http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum//index.php?topic=9436.msg144225#msg144225
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: torch on June 18, 2009, 01:10:09 PM
thank you 'wayne'.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: wayne on June 18, 2009, 03:55:53 PM
I work with a very passionate Saint supporter.

They'll win by ten goals without raising a sweat he tells me and if they do bother to raise a sweat, the margin will be 20 goals.

This may very well be true  :lol BUT as per the last 3 years, this is the team I want to beat most.

Wouldn't it be nice them going into the Cats match with a loss against their name and Jade Rawlings 2 for 2.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: mat073 on June 18, 2009, 05:01:16 PM
I work with a very passionate Saint supporter.

They'll win by ten goals without raising a sweat he tells me and if they do bother to raise a sweat, the margin will be 20 goals.

This may very well be true  :lol BUT as per the last 3 years, this is the team I want to beat most.

Wouldn't it be nice them going into the Cats match with a loss against their name and Jade Rawlings 2 for 2.

I would say wayne that our only hope is if the saints are totally consumed with their round 14 clash with Geelong and dont "come to play"
Start agreeing with your mate that they can win by 20 goals so you can give him crap if they only win by 5. :lol
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Infamy on June 20, 2009, 04:07:42 PM
NO CHANGE!!!
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: mightytiges on June 20, 2009, 04:35:54 PM
NO CHANGE!!!
Agree after the rubbish we saw today :P.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: 1965 on June 20, 2009, 04:38:32 PM

Should someone apologise to all the Coburg supporters?

 :yep
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Jackstar is back on June 20, 2009, 07:22:37 PM

Should someone apologise to all the Coburg supporters?

 :yep

Agree, the Richmond players were disgraceful
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: cub on June 20, 2009, 09:22:43 PM
On the flip side I have to give Gary Ayres a wrap, he cetainly has a stand alone team playing for each other and doing the 1%ers.
Know many laughed at his trumpet blowing can win a flag at Richmond within 4 years! But not a bad coach and got an average (imo) side playing great team footy.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 21, 2009, 08:31:55 PM

Should someone apologise to all the Coburg supporters?

 :yep

Agree, the Richmond players were disgraceful

Yep not much team first mentality out there yesterday
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Stripes on June 21, 2009, 08:35:55 PM
It would be good to see Aryes given an assistant coach job at the club but I doubt he would accept this. I think he would actual make a good coach... :shh
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: Ramps on June 22, 2009, 08:32:33 AM
I liked the way Ayres talked to his players. The instructions were clear and he new what he wanted. Ayres seems to me to desperately want to get back into the AFL system. Hed probably accept a job doing player development coaching of youngsters - and thats were he could help us.
Title: Re: Changes for round 13 against the Saints?
Post by: one-eyed on June 24, 2009, 05:14:26 AM
In the mix: round 13
afl.com.au

Richmond

Despite several senior players being dropped back to the VFL, nobody playing for Coburg did enough to demand a spot in the senior team. With debutant Tyrone Vickery playing well against the Eagles, the Tigers selection committee has a winning team that needs no changes. After a week’s break, all should be fresh and raring to go. Young defender Will Thursfield was quiet, but it was only his third game since coming back into the side.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/79243/default.aspx