Author Topic: Jake Batchelor [merged]  (Read 199513 times)

Offline JVT

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1834
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #195 on: August 27, 2012, 04:46:10 PM »
Played much better on Friday than he had for most of the season.  2nd season blues (he says with all fingers and toes crossed).
He reminds me of a young Goddard . . .  :thumbsup

Offline Coach

  • Hardly A Prude
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8719
  • Depend on Schulzy
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #196 on: August 27, 2012, 04:55:05 PM »
Harsh. Goddard was ass when he was young

Offline JVT

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1834
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #197 on: August 27, 2012, 04:56:41 PM »
Harsh. Goddard was ass when he was young
Get with it, a young Goddard, not Goddard when he was young  :police:

Offline Coach

  • Hardly A Prude
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8719
  • Depend on Schulzy
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #198 on: August 27, 2012, 04:57:42 PM »
Harsh. Goddard was ass when he was young
Get with it, a yound Goddard, not Goddard when he was young  :police:

Yound? Stop trying to confuse people FFS :banghead

Offline JVT

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1834
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #199 on: August 27, 2012, 04:59:09 PM »
 :rollin

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #200 on: January 30, 2013, 10:28:09 PM »
I have seen many 'best 22' without Bach.

Where does he fit in 2013?

Offline Coach

  • Hardly A Prude
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8719
  • Depend on Schulzy
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #201 on: January 31, 2013, 12:27:59 AM »
I have seen many 'best 22' without Bach.

Where does he fit in 2013?

Mrs Houli still makes tabouli every thursday night...

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 100503
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #202 on: February 13, 2013, 01:31:20 PM »
It's Jake's 21st today  :birthday

gerkin greg

  • Guest
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #203 on: February 13, 2013, 01:41:26 PM »
 :birthday yay sleeping pills!  :birthday

Offline WA Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14257
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #204 on: February 13, 2013, 01:58:47 PM »
Happy Birthday Jake.... :birthday
DIMMA - You will be held ACCOUNTABLE...

“We are really excited about what we have brought in. We have got great depth of players that can take us where we need to go. We are just putting some cream on the top at the moment,” he said.

"Rucks:
Shaun Hampson is the No.1 man"

the claw

  • Guest
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #205 on: February 16, 2013, 06:31:58 PM »
Do we all agree if fit the talls down back would be.
Grimes, Rance, and Chaplin. if Grimes is not fit Griffiths is likely to play CHB. Dunno where this leaves Astbury.

 Can we all agree based on last yr Morris is a lock in for one of the remaining 3 med/sml spots.

So effectively theres  two spots available with  5 players at a minimum  trying to win one of them.

The front runners for those two spots have to be  mediums in Batchelor, Dea, Newman. smls in  Ellis, Houli.

Some variations on this could be Vlastuin getting games of hb an idea i really like.
Two other possibilities imo are Mcintosh being played as a tall running back and Helbig who imo is ideal for a defensive role. Thats 8 players vieing for 2 spots.

Batchelor imo has plenty of competition for a spot.

Offline RedanTiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1062
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #206 on: February 16, 2013, 06:45:16 PM »
Understand your reasoning Claw, but I think Batchelor has one advantage over Dea, Newman and even Morris and Vlastuin.
He has that extra bit of height that allows him to be used more flexibly as he did last year as CHB against Hurley.
I think really that Morris as you say has a lock on a HBF but I think his competition is really Dea, Newman, Vlastuin and surprisingly Petterd.
While I see your point about Helbig I think they're really looking at him as a more forward/midfield option competing against Knights.
Batchelor really only has Grimes as competition for that taller option until McIntosh or Darrou are more experienced.
Smalls as you say will be Ellis, Houli and Arnot.
 

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 59486
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #207 on: February 16, 2013, 06:45:53 PM »
Didn't Batch or one of the coaches say last year that they saw him eventually pushing up the field and playing on a wing?
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline RedanTiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1062
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #208 on: February 16, 2013, 07:35:20 PM »
Didn't Batch or one of the coaches say last year that they saw him eventually pushing up the field and playing on a wing?

Yeah, I think it was pre-season.
First time they tried it (in an NAB game IIRC) was a disaster.
He was totally lost and didn't know where to go. His opponent chewed him up and spat him out and I think they shelved the idea.

the claw

  • Guest
Re: Jake Batchelor [merged]
« Reply #209 on: February 16, 2013, 09:53:21 PM »
Understand your reasoning Claw, but I think Batchelor has one advantage over Dea, Newman and even Morris and Vlastuin.
He has that extra bit of height that allows him to be used more flexibly as he did last year as CHB against Hurley.
I think really that Morris as you say has a lock on a HBF but I think his competition is really Dea, Newman, Vlastuin and surprisingly Petterd.
While I see your point about Helbig I think they're really looking at him as a more forward/midfield option competing against Knights.
Batchelor really only has Grimes as competition for that taller option until McIntosh or Darrou are more experienced.
Smalls as you say will be Ellis, Houli and Arnot.
i see it a little differently redan but i too understand where your coming from.
while jake at 188cm is no midget it certainly is not ideal to have him play against kpfs. hurley would tear him apart 8 out of 10 times imo. dea and vlastuin are both 187?  just 1 cm in it.lets not have our players constantly having to fight out of their weight/height division. if we play 3 genuine talls back we want the other 3 to provide good run and importantly good delivery as well as accountability when needed and  with good decision making.
 batch would be ideal if a tall back went down during a game but you want him lining up on the chris maynes or even a edwards of the world and providing plenty of run.dylan grimes in his short interupted career has shown he is the third tall.

imo batch is in a dog fight with dea,  vlastuin,  and mcintosh who in time may become a kpp. in mcintosh i see a much more accountable grant birchall or andrew mackie.
i dunno i have some real concerns about jake yet there is also a lot of things i really like about him.

on morris morris is there because of his aggresion and ability to play on smalls imo batchelor does not have the pace/agility  to play on smalls. morris and batch are not in competition.
imo helbig could do a similar role to morris with better skills. that would in time free morris up to do a run with role in the midfield eliminating the need for hacks like jackson and white.

ben darrou if he ever makes it i see as a genuine f/b a little like mal michael. the shorter but powerful kpd.others of his ilk have been grover at freo rutten at adelaide not overly tall at 190cm but powerful and strong at around 100kg.

most likely im wrong about jake  but you know if i was looking down the track 3 yrs my back 6 plus a few in cover would go.

b/ morris 185/83 - chaplin 195/100 - grimes 193/93
hb/ mcintosh 192/92 - rance 194/95 - helbig 185/85 possibly ellis because of his foot skills coming out.
if helbig makes it as a mid fine,i just like the idea of playing him of hb.  i have always had plenty of time for matt dea and batchelor let them  fight for their spots.
over the next  one or two drafts at the latest 3 drafts i really hope we target a genuine fb with a 1st or second rnd pick.

anyway just some thoughts on the subject. by the way an interesting exercise is say looking who will be there in 3 yrs time. over the next 3 off seasons we will likely turn over a minimum of 15 players thats conservative. by the start of 2016 i would hope we are in a top 4 if not  premiship, sheesh its been that long i cant even spell it  window,  if we get it right. if blokes like batchelor are potentially struggling for agame in 2016 it means we have good cover in the role now, and done a few things right.