Author Topic: Arnot delisted .... but to be redrafted to the rookie list ....... (afl site)  (Read 5744 times)

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
does anyone know the rules?

can someone burrown down vlads hole and find them pls

Offline tiga

  • Exhaling Carbon in the
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5547
  • Yes Hampson has taken a mark!
Arnot was the victim of last seasons winning streak. Darrou and Helbig also probably in the same boat.  There was no way the club was going to put games into fringe players whilst it was still mathematically possible that we would make finals.
In some ways from a development perspective we may have been better off had we not reached for finals this year.

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Short term goals

Lack of vision and boldness

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Problem is that Hardwick perceives it as a risk.

^

Ding Ding Ding

Offline Hard Roar Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7670
Problem is that Hardwick perceives it as a risk.

^

Ding Ding Ding

You can't develop playing finals football, better off playing kids and losing eh
“I find it nearly impossible to make those judgments, but he is certainly up there with the really important ones, he is certainly up there with the Francis Bourkes and the Royce Harts and the Kevin Bartlett and the Kevin Sheedys, there is no doubt about that,” Balme said.

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Problem is that Hardwick perceives it as a risk.

^

Ding Ding Ding

You can't develop playing finals football, better off playing kids and losing eh

 King, Jackson, Thomas, Newman, Chaplin, Grigg, Pettard cant be developed, no.

Mcgaune...  :sleep

imo the clubs leadership in regards to the manager is delusional and selfish


Jackstar is back!!!

  • Guest
his played 8 games in 3 years please he wont get a game next year might as well tried our luck on a young kid :thumbsup

Correct !!

the claw

  • Guest
Problem is that Hardwick perceives it as a risk.

^

Ding Ding Ding

You can't develop playing finals football, better off playing kids and losing eh

 King, Jackson, Thomas, Newman, Chaplin, Grigg, Pettard cant be developed, no.

Mcgaune...  :sleep

imo the clubs leadership in regards to the manager is delusional and selfish
look we all agree to a man i reckon. but what you and a few others steadfastly refuse to acknowledge is the very simple fac,t the older blokes get more games because they show and do more than the kids. you know those total hacks you constantly bag and complain about give the team more than the kids you want played.  it may be a bitter pill to swallow but its the truth.
for sure play the kids in the right circumstances but ffs the kids in the main look bloody awful to date.

im a bit different with arnot i dont see the point in keeping him at all. hes not good enough to keep on the main list yet we rookie him.  looking for what exactly?  some ordinary depth???.

we are one of the few clubs who have done this cut em and put em on the rookie list just to totally delist em a yr later .

Offline Yeahright

  • Moderator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9394
Probably rate Arnot less than pick 70(ish?) but more than what our last rookie pick would have been

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Problem is that Hardwick perceives it as a risk.

^

Ding Ding Ding

You can't develop playing finals football, better off playing kids and losing eh

 King, Jackson, Thomas, Newman, Chaplin, Grigg, Pettard cant be developed, no.

Mcgaune...  :sleep

imo the clubs leadership in regards to the manager is delusional and selfish
look we all agree to a man i reckon. but what you and a few others steadfastly refuse to acknowledge is the very simple fac,t the older blokes get more games because they show and do more than the kids. you know those total hacks you constantly bag and complain about give the team more than the kids you want played.  it may be a bitter pill to swallow but its the truth.
for sure play the kids in the right circumstances but ffs the kids in the main look bloody awful to date.

im a bit different with arnot i dont see the point in keeping him at all. hes not good enough to keep on the main list yet we rookie him.  looking for what exactly?  some ordinary depth???.

we are one of the few clubs who have done this cut em and put em on the rookie list just to totally delist em a yr later .

How can you claim this

If the grigg of the world as never dropped?

And the kids get the rough end of the stick regardless of form

the claw

  • Guest
Problem is that Hardwick perceives it as a risk.

^

Ding Ding Ding

You can't develop playing finals football, better off playing kids and losing eh

 King, Jackson, Thomas, Newman, Chaplin, Grigg, Pettard cant be developed, no.

Mcgaune...  :sleep

imo the clubs leadership in regards to the manager is delusional and selfish
look we all agree to a man i reckon. but what you and a few others steadfastly refuse to acknowledge is the very simple fac,t the older blokes get more games because they show and do more than the kids. you know those total hacks you constantly bag and complain about give the team more than the kids you want played.  it may be a bitter pill to swallow but its the truth.
for sure play the kids in the right circumstances but ffs the kids in the main look bloody awful to date.

im a bit different with arnot i dont see the point in keeping him at all. hes not good enough to keep on the main list yet we rookie him.  looking for what exactly?  some ordinary depth???.

we are one of the few clubs who have done this cut em and put em on the rookie list just to totally delist em a yr later .

How can you claim this

If the grigg of the world as never dropped?

And the kids get the rough end of the stick regardless of form
im not claiming anything just stating a fact.

Offline Go Richo 12

  • Richmond tragic, bleeding heart, hopeless cricketer and terrible fisherman.
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5346
Problem is that Hardwick perceives it as a risk.

^

Ding Ding Ding

You can't develop playing finals football, better off playing kids and losing eh

 King, Jackson, Thomas, Newman, Chaplin, Grigg, Pettard cant be developed, no.

Mcgaune...  :sleep

imo the clubs leadership in regards to the manager is delusional and selfish
look we all agree to a man i reckon. but what you and a few others steadfastly refuse to acknowledge is the very simple fac,t the older blokes get more games because they show and do more than the kids. you know those total hacks you constantly bag and complain about give the team more than the kids you want played.  it may be a bitter pill to swallow but its the truth.
for sure play the kids in the right circumstances but ffs the kids in the main look bloody awful to date.

im a bit different with arnot i dont see the point in keeping him at all. hes not good enough to keep on the main list yet we rookie him.  looking for what exactly?  some ordinary depth???.

we are one of the few clubs who have done this cut em and put em on the rookie list just to totally delist em a yr later .

How can you claim this

If the grigg of the world as never dropped?

And the kids get the rough end of the stick regardless of form
im not claiming anything just stating a fact.
I agree with claw.
The kids need to be bashing the door down for a game, they are not.

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Darrou zero games. -   good form in twos

Chaplin never dropped -  shyte form in ones

Offline Owl

  • Magnificent Bastard
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7011
  • Bring me TWO chickens
Look,
Lots of people name their swords......

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18434
  • Proud Gang of Four member #albomustgo
Darrou zero games. -   good form in twos

Chaplin never dropped -  shyte form in ones

Darrou was on the rookie list - should've  been elevated when Astbury went down and Miles earlier instead of Thomarse.

Arnot was playing well, was rewarded but played out of position in the FP where he returned figures similar to King ...the biggest joke was the match where they brought him in for Thomarse but then played him as a defensive forward and stuck Petterd - an actual defensive forward - in the middle instead.

Despite also not being played in his best position for most of the year, McDonough did everything right in the twos and not too much wrong in his few senior appearances, both him & Dea deserved games over Newman, who was a liabilty all year. 

Grigg as usual was useless all year but no real direct outside mid replacement putting pressure on except maybe Gordon - and they were both playing by the end. Would've preferred Gordon to Grigg, with Lennon and O'Hanlon alternating between Gordon's role & sub.

Speaking of O'Hanlon - comes on as a sub, has 9 decent touches in a quarter, then gets dropped.

Maybe they weren't all bashing down the door (and I don't even rate a couple of them that highly myself), but they were at least knocking on it and all showed they could at least be serviceable and no worse, if not better, than the same old hacks serving up the same old crap. Hacks that've already reached their ceiling and are no chance of inproving and , if anything, are only going to get worse.


"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.