Richmond List Analysis (footytragic.com)

[JVT]

Astbury got destroyed by Liam Jones FFS hahahaha

Yeah don't like what I see regarding Astbury. Needs to show a lot more than what he has so far.

[Danog]

Astbury got destroyed by Liam Jones FFS hahahaha

Yeah don't like what I see regarding Astbury. Needs to show a lot more than what he has so far.

He's shown plenty as a forward, and should stay a forward.

[JVT]

Astbury got destroyed by Liam Jones FFS hahahaha

Yeah don't like what I see regarding Astbury. Needs to show a lot more than what he has so far.

He's shown plenty as a forward, and should stay a forward.

When? The most promising year he had for us was his first one. Since then (could be argued rightly so with the knee) he hasn't shown anything special IMO.

If anything he actually looks a little slow and seems to struggle with positioning. I'd agree he looks 'better' as a forward, but that is because he looks useless as a defender.

[Bengal]

Astbury got destroyed by Liam Jones FFS hahahaha

Yeah don't like what I see regarding Astbury. Needs to show a lot more than what he has so far.

He's shown plenty as a forward, and should stay a forward.

Outmarking Hurley once doesnt constitute heaps,  although i like him we do have plenty of his type.. i think it will come down to who stands up and performs as to who stays..  At present he isnt there yet

[bojangles17]

Anyone got a summary, that made the Koran look brief by comparison

[Gigantor]

Love the potential of griff ,but the only thing hes shown me so far is an unbelievable ability to get injured.

[Chuck17]

Astbury got destroyed by Liam Jones FFS hahahaha

Yeah don't like what I see regarding Astbury. Needs to show a lot more than what he has so far.

He's shown plenty as a forward, and should stay a forward.

When? The most promising year he had for us was his first one. Since then (could be argued rightly so with the knee) he hasn't shown anything special IMO.

If anything he actually looks a little slow and seems to struggle with positioning. I'd agree he looks 'better' as a forward, but that is because he looks useless as a defender.

You are forgetting his good footy brain and outstanding leadership qualities.

It doesn't get kicks on the footy field but it sure sounds impressive.

[the claw]

Just a general question I am putting out there, if you can't structure a paragraph properly what are the chances you could consider yourself as some expert in your pants analysis on list structure.

who considers himself an expert all ive ever done is voice my opinion on the subject bad gramma and all.
i have an interest in just 3 areras. recruitment, list management and development. get all three right and everything else takes care of itself imo.
 so your telling us now anyone who has poor gramma has no idea on any subject.

seems a totally independent  analysis by footy tragic .com  agrees with me poor gramma and all.

most of you lot are tarred with the same brush. always willing to put the boots in to anyone who dares voices an opinion that differs.
 but it seems never ever have an idea or opinion  on what is being debated, in this case list management.
i at least put out there what i think is the ideal number of mids talls rucks flankers etc.

  all ive copped so far is griffiths is a defender and astbury is a forward.
or this beauty from what must be a 10 yr old, list management is just speculative  rubbish a person who cant differentiate the need for good players and the need for good players who perform different roles. yep bang on benga the sheep have spoken. hhhaaarrrggghhhh hhhhaaarrrrgggghhh hhhhhhhaaaarrrrgggghhh. i may not have good english but whos the idiot.

or danog who cant see that by placing griffiths as a defender and astbury as a forward as far as depth goes in critical tall areas all you are doing is moving the deck chairs the numbers dont change. id say thats robbing peter to pay paul.
do i need to go on.

its a list management thread and no one has the guts or an inkling to even suggest what they think  an ideal number of mids on alist is,  or an ideal number of  rucks or talls or defenders and importantly why.
seems to me only one person is prepared to state these things and the sheep jump all over it.
do we want a list management debate or not,  or do you all just want to do a bengal and shove your heads up your arses and pretend the sun is shining.

i come on here to talk footy and voice my opinion even if it differs to most.  not run with the herd  like most of the lil buddys obviously do.
who the hell comes on an internet forum to be buddys with others most be a lonely existence at home.

[Bengal]

Just a general question I am putting out there, if you can't structure a paragraph properly what are the chances you could consider yourself as some expert in your pants analysis on list structure.

who considers himself an expert all ive ever done is voice my opinion on the subject bad gramma and all.
i have an interest in just 3 areras. recruitment, list management and development. get all three right and everything else takes care of itself imo.
 so your telling us now anyone who has poor gramma has no idea on any subject.

seems a totally independent  analysis by footy tragic .com  agrees with me poor gramma and all.

most of you lot are tarred with the same brush. always willing to put the boots in to anyone who dares voices an opinion that differs.
 but it seems never ever have an idea or opinion  on what is being debated, in this case list management.
i at least put out there what i think is the ideal number of mids talls rucks flankers etc.

  all ive copped so far is griffiths is a defender and astbury is a forward.
or this beauty from what must be a 10 yr old, list management is just speculative  rubbish a person who cant differentiate the need for good players and the need for good players who perform different roles. yep bang on benga the sheep have spoken. hhhaaarrrggghhhh hhhhaaarrrrgggghhh hhhhhhhaaaarrrrgggghhh. i may not have good english but whos the idiot.

or danog who cant see that by placing griffiths as a defender and astbury as a forward as far as depth goes in critical tall areas all you are doing is moving the deck chairs the numbers dont change. id say thats robbing peter to pay paul.
do i need to go on.

its a list management thread and no one has the guts or an inkling to even suggest what they think  an ideal number of mids on alist is,  or an ideal number of  rucks or talls or defenders and importantly why.
seems to me only one person is prepared to state these things and the sheep jump all over it.
do we want a list management debate or not,  or do you all just want to do a bengal and shove your heads up your arses and pretend the sun is shining.

i come on here to talk footy and voice my opinion even if it differs to most.  not run with the herd and stick my nose up everyones arse like most of the lil buddys obviously do.
who the hell comes on an internet forum to be buddys with others most be a lonely existence at home.

Anyway i will add you shouldnt get list management mixed up with team structure.. big difference and probably shows your obsession is getting in the way of constructive thought.

[Yeahright]

Just a general question I am putting out there, if you can't structure a paragraph properly what are the chances you could consider yourself as some expert in your pants analysis on list structure.

who considers himself an expert all ive ever done is voice my opinion on the subject bad gramma and all.
i have an interest in just 3 areras. recruitment, list management and development. get all three right and everything else takes care of itself imo.
 so your telling us now anyone who has poor gramma has no idea on any subject.

seems a totally independent  analysis by footy tragic .com  agrees with me poor gramma and all.

most of you lot are tarred with the same brush. always willing to put the boots in to anyone who dares voices an opinion that differs.
 but it seems never ever have an idea or opinion  on what is being debated, in this case list management.
i at least put out there what i think is the ideal number of mids talls rucks flankers etc.

  all ive copped so far is griffiths is a defender and astbury is a forward.
or this beauty from what must be a 10 yr old, list management is just speculative  rubbish a person who cant differentiate the need for good players and the need for good players who perform different roles. yep bang on benga the sheep have spoken. hhhaaarrrggghhhh hhhhaaarrrrgggghhh hhhhhhhaaaarrrrgggghhh. i may not have good english but whos the idiot.

or danog who cant see that by placing griffiths as a defender and astbury as a forward as far as depth goes in critical tall areas all you are doing is moving the deck chairs the numbers dont change. id say thats robbing peter to pay paul.
do i need to go on.

its a list management thread and no one has the guts or an inkling to even suggest what they think  an ideal number of mids on alist is,  or an ideal number of  rucks or talls or defenders and importantly why.
seems to me only one person is prepared to state these things and the sheep jump all over it.
do we want a list management debate or not,  or do you all just want to do a bengal and shove your heads up your arses and pretend the sun is shining.

i come on here to talk footy and voice my opinion even if it differs to most.  not run with the herd and stick my nose up everyones arse like most of the lil buddys obviously do.
who the hell comes on an internet forum to be buddys with others most be a lonely existence at home.

I actually enjoy reading your opinion Claw, although I don't agree with a lot of it  . At least you stick your neck out most the time and try and back up your reasoning. Although I wish you'd cut down the word count 

[the claw]

Just a general question I am putting out there, if you can't structure a paragraph properly what are the chances you could consider yourself as some expert in your pants analysis on list structure.

who considers himself an expert all ive ever done is voice my opinion on the subject bad gramma and all.
i have an interest in just 3 areras. recruitment, list management and development. get all three right and everything else takes care of itself imo.
 so your telling us now anyone who has poor gramma has no idea on any subject.

seems a totally independent  analysis by footy tragic .com  agrees with me poor gramma and all.

most of you lot are tarred with the same brush. always willing to put the boots in to anyone who dares voices an opinion that differs.
 but it seems never ever have an idea or opinion  on what is being debated, in this case list management.
i at least put out there what i think is the ideal number of mids talls rucks flankers etc.

  all ive copped so far is griffiths is a defender and astbury is a forward.
or this beauty from what must be a 10 yr old, list management is just speculative  rubbish a person who cant differentiate the need for good players and the need for good players who perform different roles. yep bang on benga the sheep have spoken. hhhaaarrrggghhhh hhhhaaarrrrgggghhh hhhhhhhaaaarrrrgggghhh. i may not have good english but whos the idiot.

or danog who cant see that by placing griffiths as a defender and astbury as a forward as far as depth goes in critical tall areas all you are doing is moving the deck chairs the numbers dont change. id say thats robbing peter to pay paul.
do i need to go on.

its a list management thread and no one has the guts or an inkling to even suggest what they think  an ideal number of mids on alist is,  or an ideal number of  rucks or talls or defenders and importantly why.
seems to me only one person is prepared to state these things and the sheep jump all over it.
do we want a list management debate or not,  or do you all just want to do a bengal and shove your heads up your arses and pretend the sun is shining.

i come on here to talk footy and voice my opinion even if it differs to most.  not run with the herd and stick my nose up everyones arse like most of the lil buddys obviously do.
who the hell comes on an internet forum to be buddys with others most be a lonely existence at home.

Anyway i will add you shouldnt get list management mixed up with team structure.. big difference and probably shows your obsession is getting in the way of constructive thought.

lol who has an obsession. its a list management thread  . my opinion is recruiting, list management and development are the 3 key areas of any club and make or break clubs and coaches. just ask malthouse who often said as much.

the above  truly shows ignorance. one of the main roles of list management is ensuring you have enough of the different types of players needed. its about ensuring theres enough quality in each area and its about having players in various stages of development and ready when injury hits and catering for succession.

 list management and team/list structure arent mutually exclusive but very much inclusive. i suppose you get that out look when you espouse list management is just speculative rubbish.
blokes like pelchen are highly regarded because they are good at ensuring team depth, enough cover in most positions, the right balance between development players and mature players etc.

but hey list management is just hocus pocus fair enough.

[Bengal]

Just a general question I am putting out there, if you can't structure a paragraph properly what are the chances you could consider yourself as some expert in your pants analysis on list structure.

who considers himself an expert all ive ever done is voice my opinion on the subject bad gramma and all.
i have an interest in just 3 areras. recruitment, list management and development. get all three right and everything else takes care of itself imo.
 so your telling us now anyone who has poor gramma has no idea on any subject.

seems a totally independent  analysis by footy tragic .com  agrees with me poor gramma and all.

most of you lot are tarred with the same brush. always willing to put the boots in to anyone who dares voices an opinion that differs.
 but it seems never ever have an idea or opinion  on what is being debated, in this case list management.
i at least put out there what i think is the ideal number of mids talls rucks flankers etc.

  all ive copped so far is griffiths is a defender and astbury is a forward.
or this beauty from what must be a 10 yr old, list management is just speculative  rubbish a person who cant differentiate the need for good players and the need for good players who perform different roles. yep bang on benga the sheep have spoken. hhhaaarrrggghhhh hhhhaaarrrrgggghhh hhhhhhhaaaarrrrgggghhh. i may not have good english but whos the idiot.

or danog who cant see that by placing griffiths as a defender and astbury as a forward as far as depth goes in critical tall areas all you are doing is moving the deck chairs the numbers dont change. id say thats robbing peter to pay paul.
do i need to go on.

its a list management thread and no one has the guts or an inkling to even suggest what they think  an ideal number of mids on alist is,  or an ideal number of  rucks or talls or defenders and importantly why.
seems to me only one person is prepared to state these things and the sheep jump all over it.
do we want a list management debate or not,  or do you all just want to do a bengal and shove your heads up your arses and pretend the sun is shining.

i come on here to talk footy and voice my opinion even if it differs to most.  not run with the herd and stick my nose up everyones arse like most of the lil buddys obviously do.
who the hell comes on an internet forum to be buddys with others most be a lonely existence at home.

Anyway i will add you shouldnt get list management mixed up with team structure.. big difference and probably shows your obsession is getting in the way of constructive thought.

lol who has an obsession. its a list management thread  . my opinion is recruiting, list management and development are the 3 key areas of any club and make or break clubs and coaches. just ask malthouse who often said as much.

the above  truly shows ignorance. one of the main roles of list management is ensuring you have enough of the different types of players needed. its about ensuring theres enough quality in each area and its about having players in various stages of development and ready when injury hits and catering for succession.

 list management and team/list structure arent mutually exclusive but very much inclusive. i suppose you get that out look when you espouse list management is just speculative rubbish.
blokes like pelchen are highly regarded because they are good at ensuring team depth, enough cover in most positions, the right balance between development players and mature players etc.

but hey list management is just hocus pocus fair enough.

What you missed is, list management depends on the team structure a coach is wanting to develop.  If he wants only 2 tall midfielders theres no point having 10 in the list if he wants 6 then yes he needs more. But unless you know the team structure you can never guess at the list management..  Enough said