Having said that i agree that some players seem to get longer to develop than others. What is the criteria for the amount of time allowed to develop? It must be different for each individual and i think this is what you are saying!?
Yep that's what I am saying. There seems to be different rules for different blokes? Why?
When it's all said and done it comes down to how much time do you give them? Do you base it on years on the list? Number of games? Anything else?
I used Nason because I knew someone would say he was picked as mature aged player but it still highlights the massive gap between 2nd tier and the AFL. Seems to be you come from the under age comps yuo'll be given more time and that's fair enough but agqain how long do you give them and what do they have to show in that time.
Another good example is JON - he played a handful a games (less than 20) but most people thought early on that he wasn't going to make it, so people called for him to be de-listed. Why are people not allowed to raise the same questions about Dea? What's the difference?
I actually sit on the fence when it comes to Dea. I have no strong thoughts either way, either he gets delisted or stays, i don't really care. He didn't cost us much.I like to see all kids make it but that is fantasy.
However, when it comes to some players, i think some posters already had their mind made up before they played their first game. I am not putting you in this bracket, WP, except when it comes to Postie
Even though i disagree with Jackstar on many things he says, i don't think he should be called JackTard or Jankstar as some have purely because his opinion is not agreed with. It is rather rude to both Jack and people with a disability
