Selectors to decide on Tambling

[one-eyed]

Selectors to decide on Tambling
4:31:51 PM Tue 26 April, 2005
Scott Spits
Sportal for afl.com.au

Richmond will decide this week whether to select No.4 draft pick Richard Tambling for his AFL debut against Port Adelaide after the 18-year-old emerged unscathed from his VFL hit-out on Anzac Day.

The highly-rated youngster from the Northern Territory played for Coburg after overcoming a back injury which had hampered the start to his first AFL season.

Richmond coach Terry Wallace said the match committee will weigh up whether Tambling has enough footy under his belt for his senior debut.

"When you play your first senior game you want to be absolutely knocking the door down. We've got to make a decision whether that's now or in a week or two," Wallace said on Tuesday.

The Tigers had planned to play him in round one but a toe injury, followed by a back-related hamstring complaint, had kept Tambling on the sidelines.

"He's a good young footballer that we want to get into senior football as soon as we possibly can," Wallace said.

"We had always spoken about him playing round one if he was right, and he just wasn't right. He just had a few niggling injuries.

"The question really is - has he played enough footy for a young bloke to play his first game of AFL footy? Everyone wants to see him play and everyone is looking forward to the opportunity of seeing him, but is he ready purely and simply from football terms?"

http://richmondfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=198703

[mightytiges]

As we're not going for the flag it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things if Tambling debuts this week or the next. He probably needs another week at Coburg to earn a senior spot on form but I just have a feeling Turbo will get the call up to add pace around the midfield that we'll miss with Hyde out.

[LondonTiger]

Interesting decision coming up.

My understanding is that players like Roach and Gilmour had better overall games than Tambling in the magoos.

Hmmmm, who do you bring in first?




Nah, how about

Hyde - inj, Krak - magoos, Pettifer - magoos.  Bring in all three!!!

Hall, Tivva and Simmonds - time to pull the finger out

[letsgetiton!]

Interesting decision coming up.

My understanding is that players like Roach and Gilmour had better overall games than Tambling in the magoos.

Hmmmm, who do you bring in first?




Nah, how about

Hyde - inj, Krak - magoos, Pettifer - magoos.  Bring in all three!!!

Hall, Tivva and Simmonds - time to pull the finger out

gilmore was th ebog by far but tambling showed enough to be selected imo. of coures he started slow but in the last quarter when we could have lost it he was the one who did what it took to seal and win the game. he actually played very well for someone who was heavily tagged.
imo gilmore should be in for tivendale
tambling in for hyde(injured)
patterson in for graham
meyer in for chaffey
morrison in for hall

and roach, imo still does have the steadiness to play afl level

[Harry]

X - how can you possibly drop Tivendale ahead of Krakouer.  Krakouer was easily our worst on Sunday.  Worse than Chaffey and that's saying something.  If we want to get fair dinkum as a football club we have to stamp out such weak performances and drop players promptly to Coburg.  Gilmour must come in for Krakouer, there's no 2 ways about it.  Also I'd drop Chaffey as he's absolutely useless and easily the worst player in the league, but because Hyde got injured he'd probably keep his spot.  Perhaps bring in Tambling to replace Hyde.  Patto is showing really good form and I'd bring him in to replace Simmonds who has been very poor and has been probably our worst big man.  Also Patto can play his position - ie ruck/forward.  I'd also look at dropping Graham, but Patto would struggle to fill his position in defence.  Hall has done well to keep his spot.  Very lucky and on the verge of demotion are Pettifer and Chaffey.

Ins - Gilmour, Tambling, Pattison
Out - Hyde, Krakouer, Simmonds. 

[letsgetiton!]

HH, as tw said , up until last sunday, krak did what he had to do and all th ecoaching staff were happy, he had an off day, tivers had many possessions and continually made the same mistakes, he has had imo 5 bad weeks, and 5 weeks where he has not adapted to the game plan properly

as for simmonds, he had a bad game but it wasnt his fault, he made sapce lead out and the ball went str8 over his head

[Roar]

There will be only one change Tambling in for Hyde unless Sugar's ready of course, there won't be any big moves till after Rnd 8 IMO.

[WilliamPowell]

There will be only one change Tambling in for Hyde unless Sugar's ready of course, there won't be any big moves till after Rnd 8 IMO.

Yeah I was thinking along those lines myself Roar -  that they'd probably go Tambling for Hyde. Personally if I was only going ot make the one change it would be Meyer for Hyde. Meyer's been very consistent for Coburg

[tigertough12]

Tambling will play against Port Adelaide this Sunday.

[Harry]

HH, as tw said , up until last sunday, krak did what he had to do and all th ecoaching staff were happy,

That's a massive concern if the coaching staff are so easily satisfied.  IMO Krak has only had one good quarter all year, and as such has had 4 and three quarter bad games.  He is definately surviving on his name alone.

Naming Tambling in the side ahead of Gilmour and Pattison is a is a bad move IMO - it sends out the wrong message to the young guys.  Let's not reward blokes purely on what number they were drafted at.  Not a good move Terry.

[bg25]

HH, as tw said , up until last sunday, krak did what he had to do and all th ecoaching staff were happy,

That's a massive concern if the coaching staff are so easily satisfied.  IMO Krak has only had one good quarter all year, and as such has had 4 and three quarter bad games.  He is definately surviving on his name alone.

Naming Tambling in the side ahead of Gilmour and Pattison is a is a bad move IMO - it sends out the wrong message to the young guys.  Let's not reward blokes purely on what number they were drafted at.  Not a good move Terry.

You can throw Meyer into that mix as well.

As for your theory, I guess it also depends on the type of player that is required for the seniors. From what I've seen, Tambling plays a different game to the others and as such would be required to fulfill a different on field role. Not much point losing Hyde from the midfield and replacing him with Pattison.

I'd probably adopt the 'horses for courses' attitude' and try to pick the side best suited to the ground, conditions and opposition.

I'd love to see the young guys rewarded for effort and I think that Tambling still fits this criteria, based on his training, pre season games and his game for Coburg. Much and all as I'd love to see Alex in the seniors, he probably needs to produce Monday's effort on a consistent basis.

Depending on how we're travelling at about round 10, I think we'll see all of the above get their chance if they show they deserve it.

Some of our seniors are on borrowed time, but I think TW is doing the right thing by really testing them so that there will be no knee jerk decisions made come the end of this year.

[letsgetiton!]

HH, as tw said , up until last sunday, krak did what he had to do and all th ecoaching staff were happy,

That's a massive concern if the coaching staff are so easily satisfied.  IMO Krak has only had one good quarter all year, and as such has had 4 and three quarter bad games.  He is definately surviving on his name alone.

Naming Tambling in the side ahead of Gilmour and Pattison is a is a bad move IMO - it sends out the wrong message to the young guys.  Let's not reward blokes purely on what number they were drafted at.  Not a good move Terry.

You can throw Meyer into that mix as well.

As for your theory, I guess it also depends on the type of player that is required for the seniors. From what I've seen, Tambling plays a different game to the others and as such would be required to fulfill a different on field role. Not much point losing Hyde from the midfield and replacing him with Pattison.

I'd probably adopt the 'horses for courses' attitude' and try to pick the side best suited to the ground, conditions and opposition.

I'd love to see the young guys rewarded for effort and I think that Tambling still fits this criteria, based on his training, pre season games and his game for Coburg. Much and all as I'd love to see Alex in the seniors, he probably needs to produce Monday's effort on a consistent basis.

Depending on how we're travelling at about round 10, I think we'll see all of the above get their chance if they show they deserve it.

Some of our seniors are on borrowed time, but I think TW is doing the right thing by really testing them so that there will be no knee jerk decisions made come the end of this year.

i agree, tambling was a shoe in 4 rnd 1 if he wasnt injured, his progress was ahead of the others, oi dont see him as a player who was selected on status alone b4 the others, he was injured played a game in the 2s, and now is in, would have been no different to any other player in our top 22

[mightytiges]

If hyde wasn't injured then IMO Tambling might not have been promoted. Losing Hyde's newly found pace and willingness to to play on straight away will hurt us especially  in the "perfect" surrounds of the Dome.

It would have also helped Tambling that he has potentially a greater upside (as shown against the Pies in the Wiz Cup) even if he wasn't B.O.G. for Coburg. Meyer's been the most consistent one at Coburg so rightly gets his chance as well. Gilmour is unlucky but for his sake he needs to back up the good effort against Box Hill with a similar performance vs Frankston. If he does that his time will come.