Cousins vs a Young Kid

[Judge Roughneck]

Isn't it likely that Freo will pick up Gourdis?

Who gives a poo?

I cannot beleive he is worth getting if we delisted him 4 weeks ago...

He was only delisted so we could put him on the rookie list, it was a list management decision because he was a project player
I don't know how many times this needs to be explained

Would never have taken that risk if he was 1/2 decent. Would have keeped him on the list for his 2nd year of AFL. Another club can claim him now, if we valued him so much would not have been delisted. He was rated as one of the 3-4 more expendable players at Richmond. More so, it is rare that players are cut in thier first yearm even wackeds like JON / Jacko etc. get a good 3/4 years. So Gourdis cannot have been, really, all that much chop.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

If we were happy to get Cousins @ PSD #7 - we should now take him @ #6, if he is still there, and take our chances on picking up a Cournilus (sp?), or other 'project type', in the rookie draft - in which we have many selections.

The potential of Gourdis / Kleme etc. cannot overrride getting the drugo if we were happy to get him, if granted two PSD picks.

We did not have a crack at Aka a couple years ago cause we were still a long way away and needed to go down other path rather than invest in a star thats only got a couple years left but would add major spark. Now we are sposed to be in 5th year and new regime and should be looking to add a marquee to top up, seeing as it has come up. As Aka says - can never have too many gun mids.

If Richmond get Cuz ->  

Good luck if we get a kid. Will be intersting to see how many senior games he plays, and if he stays on the list longer than my boy Andy Collins.

[one-eyed]

Ben Cousins still worth risk at No. 6
Mike Sheahan | December 16, 2008

THE AFL Commission has called Richmond's bluff. It's message is clear: you want Ben Cousins, you assume all risks.

The commission has deemed Richmond to be opportunistic in its cheeky bid to park Graham Polak on the rookie list, thereby creating a vacancy for Cousins on the primary list.

It has surprised many observers, including this one, by denying the Richmond request on Polak, leaving the Tigers with only its existing No. 6 selection in today's pre-season draft to claim the fallen West Coast champion.

Particularly when AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou is known to be keen to see Cousins get another chance. Perhaps Demetriou doesn't always get his way, after all.

So, now it's up to the Tigers.

Do they remain faithful to their oft-declared promise to take a youngster at No. 6 today?

Or do they gamble on one of the great players of the modern era, a 30-year-old champion with a drug problem that many believe remains as significant as it has been for 10 years?

It is a tough call.

Cousins might be the difference between missing the finals and finishing top four.

Then again, he might be no different to the troubled star who ultimately forced West Coast to delist him.

The Cousins camp has performed poorly in recent months. No contrition, no show of faith, no credible bid for public understanding and sympathy.

He has told several clubs he wants another chance, yet he hasn't convinced them he has changed his ways. Or his shady associates.

Now it's down to Richmond president Gary March and coach Terry Wallace.

The strong suspicion is Wallace is driving the push for Cousins, with March mindful of the inevitable backlash among sponsors and supporters that will follow if Cousins falls over.

What we say is this: If the Tigers were prepared to take Cousins with a possible second selection today, they should take him with their solitary pick.

It is ludicrous to suggest any youngster could possibly match the impact of Cousins, on or off the field.

Cousins in the right shape and frame of mind is a top-10 player. Two years ago, you would have been happy to lose the toss in any choice between then teammates Cousins and Chris Judd.

He is a champion. Each of them is. He is capable of lifting the Tigers into premiership contention. His history, though, says he is just as capable of succumbing again to his addiction.

Richmond has a massive dilemma. One unprecedented in the AFL. The rewards are huge; the prospective penalties are both damaging and humiliating.

He isn't, as many commentators would have you believe, a reformed drug addict, he is a drug addict.

What we say is, if the risk was warranted at No. 7, surely it still is warranted at No. 6.

That doesn't make it right, simply logical.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24805758-11088,00.html

[one-eyed]

Isn't it likely that Freo will pick up Gourdis?

Who gives a poo?

I cannot beleive he is worth getting if we delisted him 4 weeks ago...

He was only delisted so we could put him on the rookie list, it was a list management decision because he was a project player
I don't know how many times this needs to be explained

Would never have taken that risk if he was 1/2 decent. Would have keeped him on the list for his 2nd year of AFL. Another club can claim him now, if we valued him so much would not have been delisted. He was rated as one of the 3-4 more expendable players at Richmond. More so, it is rare that players are cut in thier first yearm even wackeds like JON / Jacko etc. get a good 3/4 years. So Gourdis cannot have been, really, all that much chop.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

If we were happy to get Cousins @ PSD #7 - we should now take him @ #6, if he is still there, and take our chances on picking up a Cournilus (sp?), or other 'project type', in the rookie draft - in which we have many selections.

The potential of Gourdis / Kleme etc. cannot overrride getting the drugo if we were happy to get him, if granted two PSD picks.

We did not have a crack at Aka a couple years ago cause we were still a long way away and needed to go down other path rather than invest in a star thats only got a couple years left but would add major spark. Now we are sposed to be in 5th year and new regime and should be looking to add a marquee to top up, seeing as it has come up. As Aka says - can never have too many gun mids.

If Richmond get Cuz ->  

Good luck if we get a kid. Will be intersting to see how many senior games he plays, and if he stays on the list longer than my boy Andy Collins.

Gourdis isn't the one we had lined up for pick 6 in the PSD. It was Klemke.

[Darth Tiger]

Have finally formed an opinion on this Cuz business, and have essentially decided to seperate Cuz the footballer from Cuz the recovering drug addict.

Cuz WAS a good footballer in his last full season in 06, however is yet to play AFL of any great length for 2 years.  His impact on matchday was minimal (exception 1st game back) prior to suffering the serious hamstring tear.  This is the issue for me, does the RFC list need another aging 30y-o running outside midfielder in its rotation ?  There is Johnno, Tuck & Cogs as the midfield veterans, so I suspect that Cuz would deny a younger midfielder from the position.

Is this where RFC wants its list heading ?  What about the development of the 20 to 23y-o fringe midfielders like Jackson, Polo and even young Dan Connors & Andrew Collins, will they get game time because Cuz is in the 22 ?

If RFC pick Cuz at 6 it does commit the club to play him in more games than the young guys. 

That to me is a problem because IMHO Cuz will not play in a grand final for RFC.

[Francois Jackson]

Isn't it likely that Freo will pick up Gourdis?

Who gives a poo?

I cannot beleive he is worth getting if we delisted him 4 weeks ago...

He was only delisted so we could put him on the rookie list, it was a list management decision because he was a project player
I don't know how many times this needs to be explained

Would never have taken that risk if he was 1/2 decent. Would have keeped him on the list for his 2nd year of AFL. Another club can claim him now, if we valued him so much would not have been delisted. He was rated as one of the 3-4 more expendable players at Richmond. More so, it is rare that players are cut in thier first yearm even wackeds like JON / Jacko etc. get a good 3/4 years. So Gourdis cannot have been, really, all that much chop.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

If we were happy to get Cousins @ PSD #7 - we should now take him @ #6, if he is still there, and take our chances on picking up a Cournilus (sp?), or other 'project type', in the rookie draft - in which we have many selections.

The potential of Gourdis / Kleme etc. cannot overrride getting the drugo if we were happy to get him, if granted two PSD picks.

We did not have a crack at Aka a couple years ago cause we were still a long way away and needed to go down other path rather than invest in a star thats only got a couple years left but would add major spark. Now we are sposed to be in 5th year and new regime and should be looking to add a marquee to top up, seeing as it has come up. As Aka says - can never have too many gun mids.

If Richmond get Cuz ->  

Good luck if we get a kid. Will be intersting to see how many senior games he plays, and if he stays on the list longer than my boy Andy Collins.

Gourdis isn't the one we had lined up for pick 6 in the PSD. It was Klemke.

that makes sense.

why would we be considering drafting a player we delisted a month ago.

[mightytiges]

I just hope these supporters who want Cousins so desperately don't turn on him if he doesn't produce like he did as an Eagle. Even returning as a decent footballer who adds to our midfield depth would be a successful comeback for any 30-31 year old.

[1965]

I'm beginning to think a reasonable outcome will be for one of the other 5 clubs to pick up Ben before pick 6.