Football > Richmond Rant

Still questions on Richmond's depth as it wasn't tested this year: Ralph (SEN)

(1/4) > >>

one-eyed:
Two sides lead the way for list depth: Ralph

By Justin Talent
SEN
8 November 2017

Jon Ralph believes two highly active sides in NAB AFL Trade and Free Agency Period have become the competition’s new leaders for playing list depth.

The Herald Sun journalist declared that Essendon and Port Adelaide have the deepest lists in the AFL – the two teams that have been the busiest in offseason dealings so far.

The Power’s work in being able to bring in Tom Rockliff, Steven Motlop, Jack Watts, Jack Trengove and Trent McKenzie in the past month, with ex-North Melbourne forward Lindsay Thomas also believed to be close to a move to Alberton via delisted free agency, was commended by Ralph.

“To be able to bring in four or five really established players there (opens) the ability to push (Travis) Boak to a half-forward flank and to have the versatility for those like (Chad) Wingard to be able to play forward or midfield,” he told SEN’s Hungry For Sport.

Ralph also says he is “excited” by Essendon’s new-found list depth, despite still considering the 2017 finalists to be one star inside midfielder short of being serious contenders next year.

The Bombers picked up 2015 All-Australian Jake Stringer, ex-Giant Devon Smith and former Gold Coast speedster Adam Saad during the trade period.

Despite winning their first premiership in 37 years this season, Ralph still holds questions for the strength of Richmond’s list, believing their depth wasn’t tested this year after a remarkably kind run with injuries.

“I’m not getting excited by Richmond’s depth because I still look at them and think, they only had Nathan Drummond on their injury list for the last 10 weeks of the year. That is just unparalleled” he said.

“They’ve won the premiership, but let’s see how deep they are when they have four or five injuries. They might lose a (Trent) Cotchin or a (Dustin) Martin or an (Alex) Rance at some stage, for an extended period potentially, through 2018.”

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2017/11/07/two-sides-lead-the-way-for-list-depth-ralph/

georgies31:
Typical media guy gets payed for nothing and knows bugger all.You loose your best 3 players off course your going to struggle ,any side in the competition.Dim bat didn't even mention vfl side had a great year alot of guys pushing for seniors.

Hard Roar Tiger:
I think Markov, Short, Lloyd, Miles, Stengle, Bolton and even a fully fit Griff give us plenty of options should we have injuries.
No one can replace their top 4 at any club

Slipper:
It suits me just fine that people continue to underrate us.

But in this case, I think Ralph is confusing depth with experience.

I look at our list and we do have  areas we can improve for depth. But the thing is, we have players in a lot of areas who can cover injuries to better players because the back-ups look to fit our game plan well. Those guys like Bolton, Stengle, Drummond, Miles, Lloyd etc. look like they should easily slot into the team if/when required.

Contrast that to Port and Essendon, who have added a lot of experienced players. They have AFL experience, but do they really fit their respective teams' gameplans? The jury is way out for mine.

And really, who did Port actually bring in?

Rockliff can get heaps of footy, but what does he really bring to the team?

Motlop and Watts have massive question marks over them. Port backing themselves to get these guys to realise their potential where others have failed. Doesn't sound like depth to me, not in the short term anyway.

Trengove massive punt to see if injuries have healed. McKenzie, well who knows what went wrong there, but not a good sign when you can't crack much of a go at a club like GC.

IMO, Essendon killed Port in terms of the draft period. But still some question marks.

Beans:

--- Quote from: Slipper on November 08, 2017, 07:48:18 AM ---It suits me just fine that people continue to underrate us.

But in this case, I think Ralph is confusing depth with experience.

I look at our list and we do have  areas we can improve for depth. But the thing is, we have players in a lot of areas who can cover injuries to better players because the back-ups look to fit our game plan well. Those guys like Bolton, Stengle, Drummond, Miles, Lloyd etc. look like they should easily slot into the team if/when required.

Contrast that to Port and Essendon, who have added a lot of experienced players. They have AFL experience, but do they really fit their respective teams' gameplans? The jury is way out for mine.

And really, who did Port actually bring in?

Rockliff can get heaps of footy, but what does he really bring to the team?

Motlop and Watts have massive question marks over them. Port backing themselves to get these guys to realise their potential where others have failed. Doesn't sound like depth to me, not in the short term anyway.

Trengove massive punt to see if injuries have healed. McKenzie, well who knows what went wrong there, but not a good sign when you can't crack much of a go at a club like GC.

IMO, Essendon killed Port in terms of the draft period. But still some question marks.

--- End quote ---
Port have not improved one iota I believe.
Rockcliff gets the ball but lacks poise and pace - the same as the rest of the Port midfield.
Motlop is like for like replacement of Impey
Watts is a like for like replacement of Jackson Trengove
McKenzie can kick but cant find it.
Trengrove is cooked.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version