One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on November 26, 2013, 06:34:23 PM
-
Tigers eye delisted Lion Banfield
Callum Twomey
afl.com.au
November 26, 2013 6:00 PM
RICHMOND has expressed interest in recruiting Brisbane Lions small forward Todd Banfield at Wednesday's NAB AFL Rookie Draft.
The Lions delisted Banfield earlier this month but committed to redrafting him as a rookie, however the Tigers are believed to be keen on the small forward.
The Lions are considering their position on the 23-year-old, given the club's first pick in the rookie draft comes before Richmond's.
The Tigers have one spare spot on their senior list and hold a pre-season draft selection, but are likely to head into the season with a shorter primary list.
Banfield didn't play a game for the Lions in 2013, but has kicked 57 goals from his 53 games for the club.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-11-26/tigers-eye-delisted-lion
-
He'd be available after the rookie draft for peel thunder :banghead
-
Geez we ve gone overboard on FP, if this comes off, hard to believe he wasn't in bris best 22 , he looked like being anything 3 years ago :shh
-
White replacement. Runs like the wind. Can't kick.
-
Hope we take him
-
I think we are trying to spook Brisbane into picking him with their first pick as they are probably eying of the same players as us which allows us to take first pick of the those.
-
> thomas
-
I hope we take him and not that lonergan spud
We have next to no smells(kings almost done) so can't hurt
-
if chasing a mature forward id like to see us give a bloke like ryan lester smith a go or a kid like ben sokal.
but why are we chasing sml forwards.
king lloyd mcdonough s edwards not enough or maybe just not good enough. if they are happy with who they have they dont need to chase another.
geez then you have to fit in mediums ohanlon, a edwards, petterd, knights and gordon bloody hell no wonder im laughing my head off at all the excuses.
-
if chasing a mature forward id like to see us give a bloke like ryan lester smith a go or a kid like ben sokal.
computer says no
-
Lester smith isn't available.
-
Lester smith isn't available.
yes he is. if freo dont take him as a f/a he can be taken. they will have to nominate him before the rookie draft.
what i dont get is the love for banfield. why do people fall in love with players who are nothing but quick. fair dinkum lloyd is a much better player and lo and behold is a sml forward.
i can see it now thomas and banfield and the rot will continue to set in.
why are we so keen on a bloke who cant find the ball doesnt actually kick a lot of goals and who imo has poor foot skills. but wait he runs real quick.
its funny im lambasted by just about everyone here but i at least stick to some pretty basic principals. not the least demanding a basic skill requirement.
-
Freo already nominated him.
-
I think we are trying to spook Brisbane into picking him with their first pick as they are probably eying of the same players as us which allows us to take first pick of the those.
Lol. Thought the same thing myself. :thumbsup
-
Welcome Todd :)
-
DUD
FO Richmond :banghead
-
DUD
FO Richmond :banghead
:lol :lol :lol
-
Well the eyes have it
Banfield to the Tigers with our first rookie draft pick ;D
-
worse than addam maric, possibly the worst kick in the comp and has stuff all decision making skills
DELIST FJ the stuffing stupid silly
-
Any highlight video?
-
:chuck
-
Give the guy chance in the yellow and black!
I hope he makes all of you eat humble pie!!!
-
Any highlight video?
Here you go Stripes ...
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2013-11-27/2013-rookie-draft-pick-11-todd-banfield
-
Not a bad selection for a rookie.
-
(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/000/063/Picture_2_c.jpg)
-
Todd Banfield
(http://www.richmondfc.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/Media/Images/251614-tlsnewsportrait.jpg)
Age: 23
Height: 183cm
Weight: 83kg
Debut: 2010
Games: 53
Goals: 57
Recruited originally from: Swan Districts
-----------------------------------------
Banfield booted 27 goals in the 2010 season, and followed that up with 24 goals the following year.
Injury problems, however, restricted him to just 12 senior appearances and six goals for Brisbane in 2012.
He subsequently spent the entire 2013 season with Brisbane’s reserve-grade side in the NEAFL.
The Tigers believe Banfield can provide them with a valuable option up forward due to his blistering pace, attack on the ball, hard tackling and goalkicking ability.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2013-11-27/2013-rookie-draft-pick-11-todd-banfield
-
Welcome Todd, you have some work to do to prove the habitual knockers and whiners wrong, hope you can do it!!!
-
More rangas :clapping
-
Welcome Todd, you have some work to do to prove the habitual knockers and whiners wrong, hope you can do it!!!
you need to respect yourself more mate
-
DUD
FO Richmond :banghead
:whistle ::)
-
Thank god, I thought we were gonna miss our annual red head pick up.
-
DUD
FO Richmond :banghead
:whistle ::)
can you sing? because you sure can't whistle
-
got pretty hair
-
:yep :yep :dancing
DUD
FO Richmond :banghead
:whistle ::)
can you sing? because you sure can't whistle
:dancing :yep
-
Could have been worse. Cam Wood. :lol :lol :lol Let it go Mick, let it go.
-
Banfield was recruited as firewood for those cold winter nights :shh
We had a need and the club fulfilled it :thumbsup
-
Could have been worse. Cam Wood. :lol :lol :lol Let it go Mick, let it go.
Im a bit surprised we didn't get another ruckman
-
Any highlight video?
Here you go Stripes ...
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2013-11-27/2013-rookie-draft-pick-11-todd-banfield
Cheers OE! :cheers
-
White replacement. Runs like the wind. Can't kick.
White could kick. (At goal)
-
:yep :yep :dancingDUD
FO Richmond :banghead
:whistle ::)
can you sing? because you sure can't whistle
:dancing :yep
haha i can just imagine you after a couple of bintang's, lips hanging low under your grass skirt, swinging those hips :lol
-
Could have been worse. Cam Wood. :lol :lol :lol Let it go Mick, let it go.
Im a bit surprised we didn't get another ruckman
Can you imagine Claw's reaction if we had taken Cam Wood? :damnpc
-
Could have been worse. Cam Wood. :lol :lol :lol Let it go Mick, let it go.
Im a bit surprised we didn't get another ruckman
Can you imagine Claw's reaction if we had taken Cam Wood? :damnpc
Not so sure abt that smokey, I reckon he would've been :huh3 bc he wouldn't know whether to :damnpc bc its another mature age recruit or whether to :dancing bc we filled a list need ;D
-
Welcome Todd, you have some work to do to prove the habitual knockers and whiners wrong, hope you can do it!!!
you need to respect yourself more mate
:lol
-
:yep :yep :dancingDUD
FO Richmond :banghead
:whistle ::)
can you sing? because you sure can't whistle
:dancing :yep
haha i can just imagine you after a couple of bintang's, lips hanging low under your grass skirt, swinging those hips :lol
Lips?????? Mate if I hit you over the head with it you would see more than stars.. ;D
-
:yep :yep :dancingDUD
FO Richmond :banghead
:whistle ::)
can you sing? because you sure can't whistle
:dancing :yep
haha i can just imagine you after a couple of bintang's, lips hanging low under your grass skirt, swinging those hips :lol
Lips?????? Mate if I hit you over the head with it you would see more than stars.. ;D
:lol put it away mate
-
:yep :yep :dancingDUD
FO Richmond :banghead
:whistle ::)
can you sing? because you sure can't whistle
:dancing :yep
haha i can just imagine you after a couple of bintang's, lips hanging low under your grass skirt, swinging those hips :lol
Lips?????? Mate if I hit you over the head with it you would see more than stars.. ;D
:lol put it away mate
;)
-
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ft7O4MzlbVw/TjCsRM2rRFI/AAAAAAAAASY/wdMzEkiGsIs/s400/bottom2Bof2Bbarrel.jpg)
-
Happy with this pick, nothing to lose and potentially a lot to gain.
-
2008
AFL National Draft, Round 3, Pick No. 41
TODD BANFIELD - Medium midfielder
Date of birth: 28 June 1990
Height: 181.9cm
Weight: 74.8kg
Club: Swan Districts (WA)
Incredibly quick and aggressive medium-sized midfielder who uses his turn of pace to break games open (2.87sec for 20m). Has the ability to win ball at contested situations and displays neat skills by foot.
Draft Profile
Banfield is a very quick midfielder from Swan Districts who has solid skills on both sides of his body. He is very hard at the contest and some would say an old fashioned footballer. He has clean hands and is really capable at breaking the lines with his brilliant pace. He provided very good defensive pressure for Swan Districts this year, utilising his pace effectively.
Draft Profile
No. 41 TODD BANFIELD: (Swan Districts, WAFL) 18, 182cm (5'11"), 75kg (165): has played some senior WAFL football and was one of the best on ground in the WAFL Grand Final. A speedy midfielder who attacks the ball well.
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/todd-banfield.521637/
2013
less positive
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/the-banfield-conundrum.970367/
*at least he's fast
-
The big banana field :clapping
-
Todd Banfield !! Cool , now I can take my new bumper sticker to the footy with me >>
(http://yay.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/I-love-spuds-480.jpg)
-
At least he has an appropriate name - they should ban field kicking by him for being a crime against football.
-
not even good at FIFA
-
Is he an improvement on Nahas?
-
Banfield was recruited as firewood for those cold winter nights :shh
We had a need and the club fulfilled it :thumbsup
In a sea of irrelevant posts, there is this piece of pure gold.
:thumbsup
-
FMS IMHO why can't you lot be +ive about something
(M = mercies)
You are the biggest bunch of whiners whingers on the planet.
-
FMS IMHO why can't you lot be +ive about something
(M = mercies)
You are the biggest bunch of whiners whingers on the planet.
Are you whining about people whining?
-
FMS IMHO why can't you lot be +ive about something
(M = mercies)
You are the biggest bunch of whiners whingers on the planet.
Are you whining about people whining?
A double negative equals a positive.
-
White replacement. Runs like the wind. Can't kick.
White could kick. (At goal)
only when he's sober!!
-
Where's claw? I want his thoughts now
-
Can seriously kick a goal this kid and boy can he run, pretty shrewd pick ups by the tiges , more than compliments where whitey left off ...could be a surprise packet :shh
-
Locked and loaded ? :banghead
-
Where's claw? I want his thoughts now
on what.
i reckon my thoughts are there for all to see before and during the trade draft period.
on the rookie selections.
1/ did we go thru the right process. imo yes we took mature players where they should be taken.
2/ did we take the right type of mature players who tick enough boxes and meet enough criteria. imo no but hey we all have differing opinions on the merits of players and what boxes they should tick.
3/ did we address in any significant way important list needs. imo no.
its almost as if we have drafted to make the ressies side competetive rather than drafting for list needs and trying to take the best talent available.
i can think of at least 5 or 6 younger players id prefer we gave a go to. but i suppose that is a preference thing.
im still asking what have we addressed as far as needs go. geez atm all can come up with is the sml/med forward dilemma and we have addressed it with what. did we target one high quality forward.
we took a ruckman and it had to be done but again what did we target. was it a quality player or one who has battled even longer to establish himself than the many mature players we took.
ah opinions, just like arse holes we all have em.
-
I mean geez, you guys. List needs, you guys. Geez.
-
its almost as if we have drafted to make the ressies side competetive rather than drafting for list needs and trying to take the best talent available.
:clapping
100% agree
-
Banfield isn't going to make any side better so you are both wrong
-
Very good pick up this... ;D ;)
-
its almost as if we have drafted to make the ressies side competetive rather than drafting for list needs and trying to take the best talent available.
:clapping
100% agree
-
I don't mind the richmond-vfl*champions strategy
-
I would've thought if you kept attending to list needs and taking the best available, your entire list would improve anyway as you'd have better players and good depth in every position.
-
It would just be nice to win something
-
its almost as if we have drafted to make the ressies side competetive rather than drafting for list needs and trying to take the best talent available.
Yes I think there was a bit of that if not as the first priority then certainly as a secondary focus. Probably trying to develop what we have and build up a strong culture of competition across both teams. Depth over potential.
-
Does anyone know why he didn't get a run at Brisbane this year?
He seemed to get a run a couple of years back.
-
Because he's brown mr whippy
-
Does anyone know why he didn't get a run at Brisbane this year?
He seemed to get a run a couple of years back.
Don't hold me to it but I think Zorko pushed him out. Or if not Zorko directly the addition of Zorko caused them to reshuffle and out he went.
-
Does anyone know why he didn't get a run at Brisbane this year?
He seemed to get a run a couple of years back.
Don't hold me to it but I think Zorko pushed him out. Or if not Zorko directly the addition of Zorko caused them to reshuffle and out he went.
I thought it was that guy Green who played the same role as Banfield.
-
Does anyone know why he didn't get a run at Brisbane this year?
He seemed to get a run a couple of years back.
Don't hold me to it but I think Zorko pushed him out. Or if not Zorko directly the addition of Zorko caused them to reshuffle and out he went.
I thought it was that guy Green who played the same role as Banfield.
You could be right. I know Green had a ripper in the NAB cup final and probably earned brownie points for the season. They also had that Berwick or whatever too. Then Zorko played mid and forward.
-
Banfield happy to land at Tigerland
richmondfc.com.au
December 2, 2013
“Richmond have lost two small forwards, so I suppose it opens doors for myself and, hopefully, it works out for the best,” he said.
“I’m happy to see what I can do down there.”
Read more at: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2013-12-02/banfield-happy-to-land-at-tigerland
-
Banfield happy to land at Tigerland
richmondfc.com.au
December 2, 2013
“Richmond have lost two small forwards, so I suppose it opens doors for myself and, hopefully, it works out for the best,” he said.
“I’m happy to see what I can do down there.”
Read more at: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2013-12-02/banfield-happy-to-land-at-tigerland
I have some hope that Banfield will become a decent player for us he has pace so that gives him an opportunity. Banfield is a cheaper option than keeping Nahas and I consider Banfield a better player.
-
we all have hope, yes even me. isnt that the problem though. we continue to take players on hope rather than properly asesing them.
how hard is it to target players based on
1/ performance over the journey. hmm he fails.
2/ type. a forward and nothing more fail.
3/ skills bloody hell why why why. geez short sml players with no skills with no consistent performance and find no bloody ball :o :o :o :o :o but bloody hell hes quick ::) ::) ::). oh ffs why do i bother.
-
The Snore...
:sleep
-
we all have hope, yes even me. isnt that the problem though. we continue to take players on hope rather than properly asesing them.
how hard is it to target players based on
1/ performance over the journey. hmm he fails.
2/ type. a forward and nothing more fail.
3/ skills bloody hell why why why. geez short sml players with no skills with no consistent performance and find no bloody ball :o :o :o :o :o but bloody hell hes quick ::) ::) ::). oh ffs why do i bother.
Give it a break claw. We get the gist!
Come back to this topic in 12 months and either tell us that you told us so or apologize for getting it wrong. In the end they are the only two options you'll have!
-
we all have hope, yes even me. isnt that the problem though. we continue to take players on hope rather than properly asesing them.
But the above is only your opinion and in all honesty that is your view but that doesn't make it right or factual. That's the point here
You are basically saying that the RFC footy department, whether that be the list management committee, the full time recruiters etc do not spend not one minute on assessing players. That is simply not true
The fact that they don't select the players you want doesn't mean they are wrong, nor does it mean they are not putting the time or effort into assessing. I would argue that based on the data they have, the time spent watching these players they would know a helluva lot more than you or me.
To suggest otherwise is simply ridiculous. Clearly you don't agree with their "hows" & "whys" and that's fine it is your opinion.
You are entitled to an opinion as we all are but to continually suggest that the club isn't assessing players and making decisions based on a criteria, the Club's criteria is wrong.
-
Couldn't agree more WP. The recruiters definitely look at many many players and have all sorts of criteria that they take into account.
It is the problem with the "Moneyball" approach. We are trying to find gems from other peoples discards/unloved/unappreciated stocks.
Blair Hartley and the recruiting team are doing a more than fair job.
When Maric, Houli, Grigg were recruited - they were pretty much on the fringe at their previous clubs. I know people like to bag a couple of these guys, but in my opinion all 3 have held their own and improved our team. All 3 have polled in the top 5 from memory in our b&f.
As for Banfield - he is a cheap rookie option. Not everyone can kick 27 goals in a season. He did it with Brown and Fev in that 2010 Lions fwd line.
His highlights look good and he doesn't mind to tackle average 3.5 over his 53 games (only slightly behind Nahas tackle average).
Hopefully he has a better attitude than Nahas did last year.
-
Richo talking about us picking up Banfield:
"He played some good games at Brisbane. I like him in the forward 50. Those sort of players are crucial now. You have to have those guys inside your forward 50, who can get up the ground and come back. Every gun team has two or three of those little fellas inside forward 50. Look at Fremantle, look at Geelong, you need them. I think one area where we can get better is in the crumbing and small forward area. Nothing against Kingy and Shane Edwards, who played that role really well, but it’s good to beef up that area because quick, defensive-minded small forwards are so important now."
Hear and read more at:
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2013-12-18/talking-tigers-2013-christmas-special
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2013-12-20/richo-tips-banfield-boost-for-tigers
-
hit the bongs hard in retirement hey cho?
-
Pretty shrewd pick up by the tigers , runs like a quarter horse and can seriously kick a goal too just quietly :shh
-
we all have hope, yes even me. isnt that the problem though. we continue to take players on hope rather than properly asesing them.
But the above is only your opinion and in all honesty that is your view but that doesn't make it right or factual. That's the point here
You are basically saying that the RFC footy department, whether that be the list management committee, the full time recruiters etc do not spend not one minute on assessing players. That is simply not true
The fact that they don't select the players you want doesn't mean they are wrong, nor does it mean they are not putting the time or effort into assessing. I would argue that based on the data they have, the time spent watching these players they would know a helluva lot more than you or me.
To suggest otherwise is simply ridiculous. Clearly you don't agree with their "hows" & "whys" and that's fine it is your opinion.
You are entitled to an opinion as we all are but to continually suggest that the club isn't assessing players and making decisions based on a criteria, the Club's criteria is wrong.
so wp how does banfield rate over the journey. poorly is the fact. i would not have thought it was debateable. its right there for all to see.
to date hes a forward and nothing else. there is nothing to suggest otherwise in his history at brisbane.
to date his skills for a smal have been poor. the club is happy to ram down our throat the premise that they only take good kicks as a selection priority and then regualrly do the opposite.
to finish all im asking is what criteria are they setting. it cant be based on performance, skills, or genuine needs because they have ignored them, yes i reckon im very entitled to question the processes they are going thru. if they claim to be doing due process they are imo doing something wrong.
i know they took him because he has pace geez he actually ticks a box. he may be a replacement for white to date hes a poor mans matt white and imo white had to go.
we in effect took a bloke who whos basically nothing but a 23yo 6th yr small forward whos played 53 games and the majority have been poor. this goes with poor kicking skills, did we take him for his skills nope. . he has an inability to find enough ball he goes at less than 10 possesions a game, did we take him for his ball winning ability?? nope. and for an almost exclusive forward he goes at just 1 goal a game did we take him for his goal kicking prowess ???? nope. . we did this after loading up with sml and medium sized forwards so did we take him to meet a list need????? nope.
of course they should be questioned. every single thing they do should be put under a microscope.
-
so wp how does banfield rate over the journey. poorly is the fact. i would not have thought it was debateable. its right there for all to see.
I wasn't talking about Banfield. Never mentioned him. You don't agree worth his selection and I have no problem with that
But....l
You made a sweeping statement saying the club "continues to take players on hope rather than properly assessing them"
I was simply replying to that saying that you were stating it as some sort of fact when it was only your opinion based more so on them not selecting players you approved of. It's your opinion and as I said you are entitled to
I have no problem with you or anyone questioning them but to suggest that don't have a criteria when they select players is I will repeat ridiculous. They have clearly, the fact you don't agree with it doesn't mean one doesn't exist.
That was the point of my post, nothing more; nothing less
-
Yeah but what's the point
-
More dribble than a game of basketball.
-
Yeah but what's the point
My point is really simple to say the club has no criteria when selecting players and that they do it based on hope which is what claw said is ridiculous and absolute crap.
Clear enough?
-
Yeah but what's the point
My point is really simple to say the club has no criteria when selecting players and that they do it based on hope which is what claw said is ridiculous and absolute crap.
Clear enough?
WP
What exactly are you trying to say?
Try writing it on the end of a bit of 2x4.
:lol
-
Pretty shrewd pick up by the tigers , runs like a quarter horse and can seriously kick a goal too just quietly :shh
You say that about ever player we get. Pretty sure you said it about JON too
-
Pretty shrewd pick up by the tigers , runs like a quarter horse and can seriously kick a goal too just quietly :shh
You say that about ever player we get. Pretty sure you said it about JON too
Nah. He said that JON ran like a sixteenth of a horse.
-
HMM what did Bo say about Relton Roberts?
-
If I was to describe Bo the footballer and played alongside him for a few years ,it would be as follows
ran like carl lewis on steroids
kicked like a mule with bionic limbs
marked as if Pamela andersons norks were up for grabs
and delivered the pill like he was performing lazer eye surgery.
But post match looked like keith Richards falling out of the coconut tree
-
hit the bongs hard in retirement hey cho?
Nah that'll be you. Richo has a point
-
hit the bongs hard in retirement hey cho?
Nah that'll be you. Richo has a point
He said that about Post too and Post was being called the new Richo. Some people have very short memories
-
You're also one with a short memory Filthy Philsy.
We finished 5th.
;D
-
You're also one with a short memory Filthy Philsy.
We finished 5th.
;D
We finished 7th
-
You're also one with a short memory Filthy Philsy.
We finished 5th.
;D
We finished 7th
yep and crumbled like a house of cards against a team that finished 9th on the ladder in the h/a and ultimately finished above us.
even when they make finals they find a way to somehow belittle the achievment.
-
How did we finish 7th and Carlton 9th? It's either 5th and 9th or 7th and 6th.
-
has this dud been delisted yet?
if not why not?
-
has this dud been delisted yet?
if not why not?
He is on his last chance.....
-
has this dud been delisted yet?
if not why not?
He is on his last chance.....
I heard he's just signed an extension. :whistle
-
so wp how does banfield rate over the journey. poorly is the fact. i would not have thought it was debateable. its right there for all to see.
I wasn't talking about Banfield. Never mentioned him. You don't agree worth his selection and I have no problem with that
But....l
You made a sweeping statement saying the club "continues to take players on hope rather than properly assessing them"
I was simply replying to that saying that you were stating it as some sort of fact when it was only your opinion based more so on them not selecting players you approved of. It's your opinion and as I said you are entitled to
I have no problem with you or anyone questioning them but to suggest that don't have a criteria when they select players is I will repeat ridiculous. They have clearly, the fact you don't agree with it doesn't mean one doesn't exist.
That was the point of my post, nothing more; nothing less
this thread is about banfield of course i was talking about banfield and his weaknesses which we have ignored. cant kick cant find the ball and his performances over 6 yrs have in the main been poor. can they give us one real good redeeming attribute as to why they ignored these things or isit they didnt even look at em. its not just banfield they have done this with either.
in this case it really does SEEM they the club have no criteria and they took him on hope rather than properly assesing him
a fair few of my mates think he can play thats potential i suppose. but based on some pretty simple criteria which we obviously have ignored i dont think he should have been taken.
-
so wp how does banfield rate over the journey. poorly is the fact. i would not have thought it was debateable. its right there for all to see.
I wasn't talking about Banfield. Never mentioned him. You don't agree worth his selection and I have no problem with that
But....l
You made a sweeping statement saying the club "continues to take players on hope rather than properly assessing them"
I was simply replying to that saying that you were stating it as some sort of fact when it was only your opinion based more so on them not selecting players you approved of. It's your opinion and as I said you are entitled to
I have no problem with you or anyone questioning them but to suggest that don't have a criteria when they select players is I will repeat ridiculous. They have clearly, the fact you don't agree with it doesn't mean one doesn't exist.
That was the point of my post, nothing more; nothing less
this thread is about banfield of course i was talking about banfield and his weaknesses which we have ignored. cant kick cant find the ball and his performances over 6 yrs have in the main been poor. can they give us one real good redeeming attribute as to why they ignored these things or isit they didnt even look at em. its not just banfield they have done this with either.
in this case it really does SEEM they the club have no criteria and they took him on hope rather than properly assesing him
a fair few of my mates think he can play thats potential i suppose. but based on some pretty simple criteria which we obviously have ignored i dont think he should have been taken.
He's on the rookie list, bro. Untwist ya knickers.
-
so wp how does banfield rate over the journey. poorly is the fact. i would not have thought it was debateable. its right there for all to see.
I wasn't talking about Banfield. Never mentioned him. You don't agree worth his selection and I have no problem with that
But....l
You made a sweeping statement saying the club "continues to take players on hope rather than properly assessing them"
I was simply replying to that saying that you were stating it as some sort of fact when it was only your opinion based more so on them not selecting players you approved of. It's your opinion and as I said you are entitled to
I have no problem with you or anyone questioning them but to suggest that don't have a criteria when they select players is I will repeat ridiculous. They have clearly, the fact you don't agree with it doesn't mean one doesn't exist.
That was the point of my post, nothing more; nothing less
this thread is about banfield of course i was talking about banfield and his weaknesses which we have ignored. cant kick cant find the ball and his performances over 6 yrs have in the main been poor. can they give us one real good redeeming attribute as to why they ignored these things or isit they didnt even look at em. its not just banfield they have done this with either.
in this case it really does SEEM they the club have no criteria and they took him on hope rather than properly assesing him
a fair few of my mates think he can play thats potential i suppose. but based on some pretty simple criteria which we obviously have ignored i dont think he should have been taken.
FFS, as has been said, he is only a rookie!!!!!!!
Very little given away and he has a bit of X-factor about him with his speed. Just give the club a break and hold off your criticisms until AFTER he has failed at least.
-
Very smart move by the tiges picking up an ex premiership player from West Coast. Getting a bit long in the tooth though , turns 40 in Feb this year. Probably gonna have to use him as the sub most weeks.
Anyhow , all the best at tigerland Drew.
-
so wp how does banfield rate over the journey. poorly is the fact. i would not have thought it was debateable. its right there for all to see.
I wasn't talking about Banfield. Never mentioned him. You don't agree worth his selection and I have no problem with that
But....l
You made a sweeping statement saying the club "continues to take players on hope rather than properly assessing them"
I was simply replying to that saying that you were stating it as some sort of fact when it was only your opinion based more so on them not selecting players you approved of. It's your opinion and as I said you are entitled to
I have no problem with you or anyone questioning them but to suggest that don't have a criteria when they select players is I will repeat ridiculous. They have clearly, the fact you don't agree with it doesn't mean one doesn't exist.
That was the point of my post, nothing more; nothing less
this thread is about banfield of course i was talking about banfield and his weaknesses which we have ignored. cant kick cant find the ball and his performances over 6 yrs have in the main been poor. can they give us one real good redeeming attribute as to why they ignored these things or isit they didnt even look at em. its not just banfield they have done this with either.
in this case it really does SEEM they the club have no criteria and they took him on hope rather than properly assesing him
a fair few of my mates think he can play thats potential i suppose. but based on some pretty simple criteria which we obviously have ignored i dont think he should have been taken.
FFS, as has been said, he is only a rookie!!!!!!!
Very little given away and he has a bit of X-factor about him with his speed. Just give the club a break and hold off your criticisms until AFTER he has failed at least.
weather its a rookie pick a mid range nd pick, a first rnd pick or a mature recruit. the question should be asked. why are we continuing to take players with such obvious weakneses and poor performance records.
-
No
The question is at each respective pick what other available options would strengthen the list more so - in this case ban field
More so if you want to dissect it further what small fast forward
-
so wp how does banfield rate over the journey. poorly is the fact. i would not have thought it was debateable. its right there for all to see.
I wasn't talking about Banfield. Never mentioned him. You don't agree worth his selection and I have no problem with that
But....l
You made a sweeping statement saying the club "continues to take players on hope rather than properly assessing them"
I was simply replying to that saying that you were stating it as some sort of fact when it was only your opinion based more so on them not selecting players you approved of. It's your opinion and as I said you are entitled to
I have no problem with you or anyone questioning them but to suggest that don't have a criteria when they select players is I will repeat ridiculous. They have clearly, the fact you don't agree with it doesn't mean one doesn't exist.
That was the point of my post, nothing more; nothing less
this thread is about banfield of course i was talking about banfield and his weaknesses which we have ignored. cant kick cant find the ball and his performances over 6 yrs have in the main been poor. can they give us one real good redeeming attribute as to why they ignored these things or isit they didnt even look at em. its not just banfield they have done this with either.
in this case it really does SEEM they the club have no criteria and they took him on hope rather than properly assesing him
a fair few of my mates think he can play thats potential i suppose. but based on some pretty simple criteria which we obviously have ignored i dont think he should have been taken.
FFS, as has been said, he is only a rookie!!!!!!!
Very little given away and he has a bit of X-factor about him with his speed. Just give the club a break and hold off your criticisms until AFTER he has failed at least.
weather its a rookie pick a mid range nd pick, a first rnd pick or a mature recruit. the question should be asked. why are we continuing to take players with such obvious weakneses and poor performance records.
Because there are no flawless players available in the rookie draft.
-
'course there are ::)
-
weather its a rookie pick a mid range nd pick, a first rnd pick or a mature recruit. the question should be asked. why are we continuing to take players with such obvious weakneses and poor performance records.
In your opinion of course ;D