Tyrone Vickery [merged]

[big tone]

imo he would be the worst PERFORMED ruckman in the comp and that goes for juniors as well as seniors. as a ruckman hes abysmal.

Sorry Claw but if that is really what you think then there is little point even discussing it further as you are obviously incapable of understanding the game.

He isn't even the worst performed ruckman on our list.

we only have two others imo,  hamspud who is terrible player  but a better ruckman than vickery yet people want him delisted  and maric who is a circuit of flemington in front of him.
what ruckmen on our list is he in front of.

hmm other ruckmen
jacobs  no where near him similar age.
leuenberger nope nowhere near him
martin nope martin easy.
kruezer  nope
warnock nope
cameron wood nope  is a better ruckman hhhaaarrrggghhh.
grundy nope  is already better
witts nope  is better
bellchambers nope
giles nope
sandilands nope
clarke nope
griffiths nope.
do i really need to go on and do every team. im not sure what you and tone are watching  but all ive seen is ordinary when it comes to vickery and the ruck. ffs orren stephenson was a mile better ruckman than vickery.
derickx at sydney, a bloke we cut  has shown more.  longer looks better in the role already. we are talking ruckman here and vickery has played 6 complete seasons approaches 100 games is close to 25 yrs old at the start of the season and we are still having debates about his potential and weather he should even be kept or not. quite frankly that is not good enough.

 to date in the role of ruckman vickery has  been poo. and there is not one thing you or tone or flipflop judge can bring up to dispute it.

In his 6 years he has played in the ruck probably about 30% of the time. Why would you judge his whole career on just his ruck work? He has kicked 100 goals.
Take the glasses off mate, he is no star but he has done ok to date with his best footy in front of him just going by what players of his size and age have done.
Compare him to Griffith's 5 years on our list as a forward/ruck. Don't think he has even been in the best players after a senior game.

once again i will say i wasnt the one who compared him to ruckmen. i just showed quite effectively that it was a nonsense comparison.
cmon logic says we went and got hamspson because vickery just didnt come on as a ruckman.
what im actually saying here to people is its a nonsense to try and place vickery in #1 ruck company hes been terrible in the role when hes played there  and the stats back it up. blokes who are scared dont make it in the ruck.
so imo hes not a top level ruckman and thats what ive argued because others keep comparing him to ruckmen, with hampson so ordinary as a player the need remains for us to find a top level ruckman to take over from maric.

if you want to talk about him as a tall fwd im happy to do that as well. ive regularly posted my criticisms of him as a fwd and i think him ordinary or just ok most of the time.the one saving grace, and is probably the only thing that keeps him getting a game,  is like you say he manages to kick a few goals  mostly cheapies mind. but he hits the scoreboard.
but even then as a kpf he needs to kick more.

i dont need stats to tell me he doesnt take many c/m an ideal trait for a tall fwd. he hasnt in the past crashed packs and given good aerial contests.at 200cm he should be the one we bomb it to when we need to.
he tackles rarely in fact is lazy without the ball and doesnt even chase half the time.
doesnt block or even spoil so few 1% another trait id expect in my tallsand  rucks at least.the simple truth is he just disappears in games.
hes not finding a lot of ball despite often being freed up on ball. and to finish when on ball he contributes little.
constant criticisms of his game and until they improve i will continue to complain about them.
 for 6 yrs the same sort of criticisms no change so what makes people think they magically change in yr 7.

all i ask of the club is they go out and draft a decent junior kpf in the draft just in case vickery doesnt take that magical leap you think he will.so we arent left at the start line again still looking for a top level kpf to partner riewoldt.
imo we should be looking at kpfs and not another 200cm come ruck cum fwd  if we are lucky just okay  at both roles.

What I don't understand is why you are comparing Vickory against either a genuine ruckmen or a genuine KPF. His is part time at both. It's unfair to do it the way you have. You need to compare him against players that play his roll. A second ruckmen which he is behind Maric, that plays forward because he CAN take a good clunk and kick it pretty well. If you were to ask me I don't think he is good enough to play either roll exclusively. But IMO is doing a pretty good job doing what he is doing for a player of his size and shape in his 6th year.

sheesh how many times does one have to say hes not the one who compared him to other ruckmen.others did that.
so all ive done is show there is no comparison with the comparisons.
ive been saying exactly what you have said hes not good enough to play either role exclusively your words,i take it a step further and constanfly said imo he should not get a game because he doesnt do one of the roles to an acceptable level. jack of two trades master of neither.
my opinion on most of our talls has been and continues to be, we could easily upgrade most of our kpp/ruck  stocks with only riewoldt rance and maric top level performers.
mate theres good reasons as to why i keep on saying our tall fwd stocks are dire.

so if vickery is a part timefwd/ruck what the hell do we do with griffiths. same role as vickery only one place.

but there is a reason to compare him against others in the roles he plays. that is to see how he stacks up in that role.

me ive constantly put him in the ruck/fwd or utility category and have constantly stated he is ordinary at both rolesit would be good if he was top level or even decent at one of the roles.

Claw that's all you ever do is compare players and their STATS. Who are you kidding!
In saying that I'm happy to hear the comparison between TV and players of his age and roll. As long as it's a genuine like for like comparison.

[the claw]

tone this is the last time on this.
i judge our players the exact same way i look at juniors .
i look for what they do well and i look for what they dont do so well. i will then look at stats to see if what ive seen is actually on the ball.
if you cant be convinced of this then no point continuing.
at least im not selective like you. and i have doine the comparison between his age and roll??. he doesnt stack up.

i have judged vickery against all players at the same stages of his career and he doesnt stack up. you said it yourself and quote. i dont think hes good enough to play either role exclusively. end quote. id argue he must be capable of doing one of the roles to a pretty decent level or we are wasting our time.

if we as a club are going to play vickery in one of the key fwd posts then i dont want him in the side. id much rather we recognise the need for a quality kpf and go after a kid like mccartin. we do need a top level kpf to partner riewoldt. vickery is not the answer. unlike you i dont think he clunks marks well nowhere near enough and he doesnt compete in the air enough.

i could live with vickery in the ruck/fwd role but to be honest i think griffiths is the better option in this role  even though his performances to date arent as good as vickerys.its called greater potential even though hes been ordinary.

if vickery at pick 8 is not good enough to play ruck or kpf exclusively is this a failed top 10 pick. imo yes.

mate im sick of going around in circles we wont agree on this and im happy to leave it as it is knowing we disagree.

[Judge Roughneck]

How do we easily upgrade every tall to rance standard?

With those 7, top 5 draft picks we have?

Maybe we can ask the magic fairy and she will grant our wish if give her yellow paddlepops

did i say in one draft or even two. only an imbecile would think that, hence i didnt state it. but hey it seems one or two on here arent too bright and need every detail spelt out for em.

im sure you can work your own question out it just takes a smidgeon of common sense. yet again a bloke who believes in magic fairies probably cant.

The wise and great claw ski

but there is a reason to compare him against others in the roles he plays. that is to see how he stacks up in that role.

How,would you say Vickery rates in comparison to kpp from his draft pool ?

why dont you tell me. not sure what its got to do with vickery and how hes performed.to me if talls in his draft pool rate worse than him and have performed worse than him  it just shows how poor they have been as well. are you saying we keep vickery because hes been less poor than others.
thats unbelievable poor is poor regardless.

You have proposed it is Easy;
to replace Hampson, Chaplin, Griffiths, Vickery, grimes, Astbury

So outside the magic fairy option lets investigate how one can do this.

to get these six 'A grade' KPp' Over say a three year period. You'd have to use a first and secound draft pick each season on a tall. This would equate to 6 kPp. The problem I would say is as follows,

 1.  that's 3 years of 2nd and 1st round draft picks . Are we have to allow the midfield stagnate to such an extent? Three years of prioritising bigs regardless of the midfield talent?

2. I there a some sort of assurance that these six talls will make it? Is there a similar promise they will be superior to the current crop?

3. Is there going to be a good chance after very little time on the list, you will call for these new players to be delisted as they have not shown enough, fast enough?


You said it was easy so it beside my self with excitement waiting for the orcales explanation.


You are not sure why the comparison between the talls in his draft and Tyrone? Well, it's a more fair or accurate comparison, you see? Apples with apples if you will. Perhaps mor apt than the comparison itch the two best ruckman of the modern era. I am not saying we should keep Vickery becaus era other large kid in Australia s coincidently rubbish that season - I am saying more, perhaps if the overwhelming theme of the talls in that draft is fail, then they could require more time in the system before conclusive judge and label duds? Poor = poor. But does 100 goals @ 23 yoa, at 1.2  per game poor?

[Judge Roughneck]

tone this is the last time on this.
i judge our players the exact same way i look at juniors .
i look for what they do well and i look for what they dont do so well. i will then look at stats to see if what ive seen is actually on the ball.
if you cant be convinced of this then no point continuing.
at least im not selective like you. and i have doine the comparison between his age and roll??. he doesnt stack up.


mate im sick of going around in circles we wont agree on this and im happy to leave it as it is knowing we disagree.

The talk unadulterated crap strategy then go away. Genius.

[the claw]

tone this is the last time on this.
i judge our players the exact same way i look at juniors .
i look for what they do well and i look for what they dont do so well. i will then look at stats to see if what ive seen is actually on the ball.
if you cant be convinced of this then no point continuing.
at least im not selective like you. and i have doine the comparison between his age and roll??. he doesnt stack up.


mate im sick of going around in circles we wont agree on this and im happy to leave it as it is knowing we disagree.

The talk unadulterated crap strategy then go away. Genius.

oh deary me you getting bitter there judge cmon you should be used to vickers copping criticism hes been so lousy.
and no ive said what i wanted to say not once not twice but numerous times i dont see the point in going over and over the exact same things even if you do.
cmon judge tell us all how good vickery has been again. someone else may be silly enough to reply to you.

[the claw]

How do we easily upgrade every tall to rance standard?

With those 7, top 5 draft picks we have?

Maybe we can ask the magic fairy and she will grant our wish if give her yellow paddlepops

did i say in one draft or even two. only an imbecile would think that, hence i didnt state it. but hey it seems one or two on here arent too bright and need every detail spelt out for em.

im sure you can work your own question out it just takes a smidgeon of common sense. yet again a bloke who believes in magic fairies probably cant.

The wise and great claw ski

but there is a reason to compare him against others in the roles he plays. that is to see how he stacks up in that role.

How,would you say Vickery rates in comparison to kpp from his draft pool ?

why dont you tell me. not sure what its got to do with vickery and how hes performed.to me if talls in his draft pool rate worse than him and have performed worse than him  it just shows how poor they have been as well. are you saying we keep vickery because hes been less poor than others.
thats unbelievable poor is poor regardless.

You have proposed it is Easy;
to replace Hampson, Chaplin, Griffiths, Vickery, grimes, Astbury

So outside the magic fairy option lets investigate how one can do this.

to get these six 'A grade' KPp' Over say a three year period. You'd have to use a first and secound draft pick each season on a tall. This would equate to 6 kPp. The problem I would say is as follows,

 1.  that's 3 years of 2nd and 1st round draft picks . Are we have to allow the midfield stagnate to such an extent? Three years of prioritising bigs regardless of the midfield talent?

2. I there a some sort of assurance that these six talls will make it? Is there a similar promise they will be superior to the current crop?

3. Is there going to be a good chance after very little time on the list, you will call for these new players to be delisted as they have not shown enough, fast enough?


You said it was easy so it beside my self with excitement waiting for the orcales explanation.


You are not sure why the comparison between the talls in his draft and Tyrone? Well, it's a more fair or accurate comparison, you see? Apples with apples if you will. Perhaps mor apt than the comparison itch the two best ruckman of the modern era. I am not saying we should keep Vickery becaus era other large kid in Australia s coincidently rubbish that season - I am saying more, perhaps if the overwhelming theme of the talls in that draft is fail, then they could require more time in the system before conclusive judge and label duds? Poor = poor. But does 100 goals @ 23 yoa, at 1.2  per game poor?

with that nonsense you would be better of sticking with your magic fairy  theory. not too bright are we

cmon judge tell us all at just how good
vickery griffiths grimes astbury elton chaplin hampson mcintosh have been, have  i missed any. then you can tell us all why its impossible to replace em and why we shouldnt. this should be good.

[big tone]

How do we easily upgrade every tall to rance standard?

With those 7, top 5 draft picks we have?

Maybe we can ask the magic fairy and she will grant our wish if give her yellow paddlepops

did i say in one draft or even two. only an imbecile would think that, hence i didnt state it. but hey it seems one or two on here arent too bright and need every detail spelt out for em.

im sure you can work your own question out it just takes a smidgeon of common sense. yet again a bloke who believes in magic fairies probably cant.

The wise and great claw ski

but there is a reason to compare him against others in the roles he plays. that is to see how he stacks up in that role.

How,would you say Vickery rates in comparison to kpp from his draft pool ?

why dont you tell me. not sure what its got to do with vickery and how hes performed.to me if talls in his draft pool rate worse than him and have performed worse than him  it just shows how poor they have been as well. are you saying we keep vickery because hes been less poor than others.
thats unbelievable poor is poor regardless.

You have proposed it is Easy;
to replace Hampson, Chaplin, Griffiths, Vickery, grimes, Astbury

So outside the magic fairy option lets investigate how one can do this.

to get these six 'A grade' KPp' Over say a three year period. You'd have to use a first and secound draft pick each season on a tall. This would equate to 6 kPp. The problem I would say is as follows,

 1.  that's 3 years of 2nd and 1st round draft picks . Are we have to allow the midfield stagnate to such an extent? Three years of prioritising bigs regardless of the midfield talent?

2. I there a some sort of assurance that these six talls will make it? Is there a similar promise they will be superior to the current crop?

3. Is there going to be a good chance after very little time on the list, you will call for these new players to be delisted as they have not shown enough, fast enough?


You said it was easy so it beside my self with excitement waiting for the orcales explanation.


You are not sure why the comparison between the talls in his draft and Tyrone? Well, it's a more fair or accurate comparison, you see? Apples with apples if you will. Perhaps mor apt than the comparison itch the two best ruckman of the modern era. I am not saying we should keep Vickery becaus era other large kid in Australia s coincidently rubbish that season - I am saying more, perhaps if the overwhelming theme of the talls in that draft is fail, then they could require more time in the system before conclusive judge and label duds? Poor = poor. But does 100 goals @ 23 yoa, at 1.2  per game poor?

with that nonsense you would be better of sticking with your magic fairy  theory. not too bright are we

cmon judge tell us all at just how good
vickery griffiths grimes astbury elton chaplin hampson mcintosh have been, have  i missed any. then you can tell us all why its impossible to replace em and why we shouldnt. this should be good.

Isn't McIntosh one of yours Claw. I'm sure he is as he is one of the only players you have put your name to as a potential, which I think is great, without any stats to back you up. You must see something in him that you like.
Now you want him gone?
By the way, Grimes is twice the player he will ever be.

[the claw]

nope i dont want him gone just yet.  just stating the real obvious that hes been poor to date.injury has had a fair bit to do with that so i cut him plenty of slack. cmon no one can call him top level or say with any certainty that he will become top level atm.  it may be two ot three yrs before anyone can that is if he survives.
yep i liked mcintosh a real lot as a junior and i like a lot of his attributes but i wont be putting him on a pedestal until he earns it.you tell me how hard based on what hes done would it be to rplace him.
in the context of the conversation with what hes delivered to date it would not be hard to find a player who would produce more in the same sort of time frame. and thats the point many on here already want mcintosh cut .
the simple fact is we have just 3 top level tall players  now those three would be hard to replace, but sheesh look at the performance of the rest and it is a legit question how hard would it be to upgrade the rest. imo not hard at all.

as for your grimes comment you could end up right but that doesnt make grimes a good player either. it will just mean both have been poo. i just hate spineless players and grimes is in the vickery class when it comes to a bit of mongrel and ticker.ffs how many times does a bloke his size have to be pushed around by midgets.
yep mcintosh is one of mine but im honest when i talk about em and their performances.
hmm helbig i liked and said so contin was another post another and theres been plenty more  gourdis imo worth looking at. mate i have never ever said i get em all right i certainly get my share wrong. as i said if you think i dont look at players fine whats the point in even having the debate. you know one thing though ive always said id back my record over the club and most other tiger supporters.
i know you dont like to hear it but ordinary sums our talls up bar just 3 and your arguing i think that they cant be easily replaced and if not what the hell are you arguing.imo  youve been reading judges posts too long and hes rubbing off on ya.
how does it go again oh yeah, i dont think hes good enough to play either role exclusively not my words tone so what the hell are you arguing about.without a doubt awith a 6 yr window no one can argue to date vickeys been a na wont pee you off any more than you lets just say hes been ordinary. hmm do you believe in magical fairies  too tone.

just to finish i hope your right.i hope the big girl can turn it around and become a decent player and for me at least become a decent player in one the roles he currently performs badly in.6yr 7 100 games 25 yrs of age sort of says its make or break dont you think.

[Judge Roughneck]

For what it is worth, I don't overly like or dislike Vickery either way.

#standbygriffiths

tone this is the last time on this.
i judge our players the exact same way i look at juniors .
i look for what they do well and i look for what they dont do so well. i will then look at stats to see if what ive seen is actually on the ball.
if you cant be convinced of this then no point continuing.
at least im not selective like you. and i have doine the comparison between his age and roll??. he doesnt stack up.


mate im sick of going around in circles we wont agree on this and im happy to leave it as it is knowing we disagree.

The talk unadulterated crap strategy then go away. Genius.

oh deary me you getting bitter there judge cmon you should be used to vickers copping criticism hes been so lousy.
and no ive said what i wanted to say not once not twice but numerous times i dont see the point in going over and over the exact same things even if you do.
cmon judge tell us all how good vickery has been again. someone else may be silly enough to reply to you.

In the history of the richmond football club: Founded   1885.

There have been 18 players.

200cm of hight, or taller.



Of this list, the following are included;   

 Vickery, Griffiths, orren, Hampson, Derrickx, Hampson, Angus graham, Trent knoble, Greg Stafford, brad ottens.

The majority, playing or having played in the last few years.

I put it to you, old boy; the reason for the lack of successful KPFs historically, is largely that they did not exist in plentiful amount, in regards to being on an vfl/afl list. Where as now the trend is for larger super-athletes (for whatever the reason) Hence the future will see both an increase of 200cm+ footballers in the system and more successful KPFs.


* I seem to have quoted the wrong post but oh wel

* not two hampsons, (thank god), but rather Andrew Browne. He was a gun IMO. Should never let him go

[Penelope]

the reason for lack of 200+cm  kpf is.

1 not many 200+cm players have successful careers.
2 the majority of those that do, play ruck.

[Judge Roughneck]

the reason for lack of 200+cm  kpf is.

1 not many 200+cm players have successful careers.
2 the majority of those that do, play ruck.

The richmond football club has had only eighteen people 200+cm, to play one or more game -  150 odd years

Many of those, are currently on the list or were very recently    mcbean #19

Why would that be?

[Penelope]

hormones in chicken meat?

[Go Richo 12]

hormones in chicken meat?

Evolution? john Nichols was called big nick and played ruck. He is actually the same size as Chris Judd.
Polly farmer, one of the greatest rucks in history was only about 6 ft 3.
The reason why we have had so few 200 cm plus players in 150 years is that there weren't as many around.

[the claw]

For what it is worth, I don't overly like or dislike Vickery either way.

#standbygriffiths

tone this is the last time on this.
i judge our players the exact same way i look at juniors .
i look for what they do well and i look for what they dont do so well. i will then look at stats to see if what ive seen is actually on the ball.
if you cant be convinced of this then no point continuing.
at least im not selective like you. and i have doine the comparison between his age and roll??. he doesnt stack up.


mate im sick of going around in circles we wont agree on this and im happy to leave it as it is knowing we disagree.

The talk unadulterated crap strategy then go away. Genius.

oh deary me you getting bitter there judge cmon you should be used to vickers copping criticism hes been so lousy.
and no ive said what i wanted to say not once not twice but numerous times i dont see the point in going over and over the exact same things even if you do.
cmon judge tell us all how good vickery has been again. someone else may be silly enough to reply to you.

In the history of the richmond football club: Founded   1885.

There have been 18 players.

200cm of hight, or taller.



Of this list, the following are included;   

 Vickery, Griffiths, orren, Hampson, Derrickx, Hampson, Angus graham, Trent knoble, Greg Stafford, brad ottens.

The majority, playing or having played in the last few years.

I put it to you, old boy; the reason for the lack of successful KPFs historically, is largely that they did not exist in plentiful amount, in regards to being on an vfl/afl list. Where as now the trend is for larger super-athletes (for whatever the reason) Hence the future will see both an increase of 200cm+ footballers in the system and more successful KPFs.


* I seem to have quoted the wrong post but oh wel

* not two hampsons, (thank god), but rather Andrew Browne. He was a gun IMO. Should never let him go

and not one top level kpf amopng them. keep going going judge you just make my point stronger and stronger.
im still asking of all the 200cm plus players who have played how many have cecome top level kpfs. 
if you had pick 8 and wanted a kpf would you use it on a 200cm  player. you would think long and hard and most likely say no. ffs you would be loath to use pick 8 on a kid who projects strongly as a ruckman.

im still waiting for your list of 200cm plus  players who have become top level kpfs.

look we all know why you put your head in the sand on this. we have 3 players vickery  griffiths and mcbean all 200cm plus with expectations that they will play kpf. we cant have someone coming up with data  that says wait a minute  historically few  at 200cm go on to become top level kpfs.historically 200cm players are ruckmen.
  if im wrong show me the list o 200cm players that have become top level fwds or shut the stuff up and stop your whining like a little girl.

1 not many 200+cm players have successful careers.
2 the majority of those that do, play ruck.

so what are you saying here or even arguing about.
when i say few 200cm players have ever become top level kpfs what are you and the nuffie arguing about.
when a say if we are chasing kpfs we should be looking at players around 194 - 197cm because histotically so many of the top level ones have been at this height yoiu disagree its a decent guide of the height rande to look at .

im reall not sure waht you and the nuffie are debating here but keep on going you make me look good.

[Penelope]

im saying there are reasons why there are not too many kkp above 200, the main one being that the percentage of the population that height is low, therefore the percentage of afl players will be low.

of the few that are, they are general played in the ruck as their height gives an advantage in getting first use of the ball. this does not nesesarrily mean they cant become kpf, ( in some cases this is true, though) just that team balance is normalled served better by playing the 200+ in the ruck and the 200- as kpp.

if you truly believe that a player cannot play kpf just because he is over 200cm, then not even the village idiot could say anything to make you look good.