New Tigers Petterd and Stephenson out to impress (afl site)

[Penelope]

 
i never even mentioned pettard's name yet alone suggested he was the lock.

do you put the twist in twisties for a living, by any chance

I suggested that we wait and see which bloke on the rookie list performs best in the pre season rather than have a pre conceived idea and you can somehow seeing a correlation to doing the same between the newly appointed captain and runner up in the brownlow and a 2nd year player.

Hmmmm!

As you seem to be saying that we should have lonergan penciled in to promote without any consideration to the others, I take it you think we we should have taken him in the PSD draft instead, that way there would be no decision to make now?

[Yeahright]

with the way foleys pre season has gone i would have thought lonergan was a lock to be promoted.  inside grunt and midfield depth anyone.

up forward we have a edwards possibly knights  and ohanlon as medium forward options. down back the medium options are endless. so where does it leave petterd atm..

how could a bloke who has been in the medical room be a lock?

I would have thought that you promote someone on pre-season form rather than make up your mind beforehand?

wait a minute here hasnt petterd been injured as well.
how many yrs have both been in the afl system plenty.

based on their time in that system lonergans a mile in front. he also meets a more important list need and actually performs a role we have little depth in.
they are both mature players if we didnt take em  to perform a role why take em at all. the need for lonergans role atm is imo greater than the need for petterds.
 its like saying gee lets play helbig instead of cotchin because hes had a better pre season.

we either actually try to fix the problems of so much depending on so few mids or we go down the same path as last yr.
a blind man can see lonergan is the insurance for foley not getting up or getting hurt again. fair odds atm of both happening.

I think you fail to see is Conca should and will play Foleys role. And taking in Pettard to half back allows players such as Newman, Ellis and lesser extent Houli drift up into a wing/onball/forward what ever the case may be

[Smokey]

I thought we could elevate TWO rookies???

When we got [Petterd] we thought about what role might be best for him and we thought about a wing role, and someone mentioned he played a lot of footy across half back as a junior," Daly said.

So they didn't know how they were going to use him before they picked him up? And he was our first rookie pick? Outrageous. Why were they looking at him then? Surely they had an idea what spot he would fill on the list before drafting him? Surely they knew prior that he also played half back as a junior? Surely he wasn't just picked up because Craig Cameron said "I drafted this bloke when I was a gun recruiter at Melbourne"? Outrageous.

Oh, wait, he's gone 

Doesn't always mean the plan or original intent can't be changed Gerks.  It's very reasonable that when the player in question arrives at the club then they see attributes or potential that another club didn't.  Maybe thats what happened in Petterd's case because after all, he seemed to fill the role of sub a fair bit at the Dees.  When Houli first came to us the club saw him as a mid going forward but look now:

Following a frustrating 2010 season with Essendon, Houli had a meeting with Richmond coach Damien Hardwick in September about a possible move to Tigerland - and came away convinced where his football future lay.

“Dimma said, ‘this is where we are heading as a team, and this is where we see you fitting in’.

“He basically outlined the role he saw me playing - mainly as an outside midfielder, trying to deliver inside 50 to the bigger boys, with a bit of half-forward as well - and told me he felt I could add a bit to the team.

But nah, let's just blame Cameron for not having a clue.....again.  Much easier that way, requires no thought.

[gerkin greg]

Houli's role changed to half back because Deledio demanded a move to the midfield, but I agree that players roles can change once you get them. But that's not what Danny Daly said, he said they thought about where they were going to use him after they got him, which reads to me that they just wanted to get him regardless of whether or not he could be of benefit to the team. The fact that someone had to point out that he used to be a HBF as a junior AFTER he arrived is an indictment on the recruiters. Basic homework. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to finger Cameron with a lot of the decision making when it comes to Petterd – last 3 years we have taken one of his ex-players in the rookie draft. A 2nd pick and two 1st picks. 2 are no longer with the club. But hey, that guy is faultless to a tee, maybe this one will be his home run 

[Smokey]

Houli's role changed to half back because Deledio demanded a move to the midfield, but I agree that players roles can change once you get them. But that's not what Danny Daly said, he said they thought about where they were going to use him after they got him, which reads to me that they just wanted to get him regardless of whether or not he could be of benefit to the team. The fact that someone had to point out that he used to be a HBF as a junior AFTER he arrived is an indictment on the recruiters. Basic homework. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to finger Cameron with a lot of the decision making when it comes to Petterd – last 3 years we have taken one of his ex-players in the rookie draft. A 2nd pick and two 1st picks. 2 are no longer with the club. But hey, that guy is faultless to a tee, maybe this one will be his home run 

To split hairs, Daly didn't say "after" either, he said "when".  I wouldn't like my chances of securing a prosecution based on the generalised and contextual use of that word.  "When" could just as easily be a word that Daly used to describe the period of assessing and recruiting Petterd, just as the discussion of how they saw using him.  The footy dept might have agreed in principal to recruit him, long before they finalised their plans for him - they could very well have seen him as a utility with a few potential uses, before deciding on a particular role after watching him train for a while (and prior to the rubber stamp from the club), and after seeing how the draft period left the list structure.  All of that period can quite easily be encompassed in the term "when we got Petterd".  "After" was an assumption you made, all I'm saying is there is just as much chance it wasn't literally after.

[tigs2011]

Could have been the recruiters that pointed it out to the coaches.

[tiga]

Petterd has far more natural ability than Lonergan. Lonergan is a slow inside grunt who no doubt has courage on his side, but very little else. Petterd has a brilliant leap, great leg speed and excellent footskills. Only reason he was offloaded was because of injuries.

[gerkin greg]

Wasn't Netty a turnover merchant for Meltank off half back in his early days and that's why they swung him forward? Or was it because they were blessed with a glut of excellent ball-users back there that he was surplus to their needs?

[JVT]

Wasn't Netty a turnover merchant for Meltank off half back in his early days and that's why they swung him forward? Or was it because they were blessed with a glut of excellent ball-users back there that he was surplus to their needs?

I can think of a few players who struggled early days before coming on . . . not saying he is like these players, just that inexperience shows sometimes.