boncer34
Formerly "Dos23"
$10 says our board experts will still defend the highly stupid move.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Geelong v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Cats at 54% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Prelim Finals
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Usually isBrunoV you were right!
I dunno, letting a good kick go because he can't defend, while keeping bad kicks that also can't defend seems a bit counter-intuitive.
amazing isn't it . microwave timewow this is crazy, the club makes one little mistake and everyone jumps on them
wow this is crazy, the club makes one little mistake and everyone jumps on them
i dont know - im not his motherHeās only what 21 as well?
EFA.wow this is crazy, the club makes 20 years of mistakes, and everyone jumps on them
I must admit it is confusing they've managed to survive Massimo, when we had to get rid of him or our team defense would be completely undone.I donāt see how it can be viewed as a little mistake.
Hawthorn have conceded the fewest points in the comp over the past 9 rounds with him as a wingman yet he was the one we singled out a liability defensively.
Heās only what 21 as well?
Maybe we wanted a player that was prepared to do what the coach wanted and not run around behind his back complaining about it ..........I must admit it is confusing they've managed to survive Massimo, when we had to get rid of him or our team defense would be completely undone.
Don't be silly. If Sheezel came we'd have to get rid of Martin. Can't fit 22 AFL quality players into a team.Sheezel wanted to come to us but his defensive stuff is average so we said no.
Young kid says young kid things, better trade him for a pick we'll never use.Maybe we wanted a player that was prepared to do what the coach wanted and not run around behind his back complaining about it ..........
It's pretty easy to rubbish the decision in hindsight, but with the body of work in front of the decision makers at the time it wasn't unreasonable. He'd been in and out of the side showing inconsistent flashes and not really impacting games. I doubt Scott gives him the unaccountable wing role he needed to achieve what he has at the Hawks, and I suspect if we had given him more years we'd be sitting in this thread right now wondering why.
I went back to page 30 where he was traded and there weren't that many calling it that.Heaps of us called it rubbish when it happened. All this unaccountable wing role stuff is copium to make people feel better. We've tried Kelly, Heppell, Cox, Jones, Menzie and Tsatas on a wing trying to find something we could've had with Massimo.
Bad call then, looks worse now, is not the reason we won't be a good side, I just think trying to justify it looks silly.
It is not that he is a dud . The problem is the issues that saw everyone pass on him in the ND are still there. He is slow to react defensively . We took a chance as he is a good kid with exceptional skills and his second efforts can not be questioned. He simply has shown no improvement in his reaction time as far as transitioning into the next phase of play. Have watched him live in the VFL a few times this year with the view of looking at exactly if he had improved and when you are solely watching what he is doing it becomes very obvious.
He is great with the footy in hand so if you can find a role where he does not have to defend at all and can just kick the footy he will probably win a Brownlow Medal.
I suspect you guys are hoping you can do something with his reaction time that we could not. If he was an average kick he would not have been drafted at all.
pretty easy at the time too, thought he was one of our best up and comers, yet we keep guys like hind kelly and heppellIt's pretty easy to rubbish the decision in hindsight, but with the body of work in front of the decision makers at the time it wasn't unreasonable. He'd been in and out of the side showing inconsistent flashes and not really impacting games. I doubt Scott gives him the unaccountable wing role he needed to achieve what he has at the Hawks, and I suspect if we had given him more years we'd be sitting in this thread right now wondering why.
Look I'm late to the party but... Gold Coast (the guys who gave up a top ten pick and a player for a future third round pick) atrocious list managers? Perish the thought.Weāve been defensively trash for a decade and if the call needs to be made to not reward a player who is poor defensively with a longer contract then so be it.
Sometimes it happens. The Suns let Wright go for peanuts yet heās important (albeit with his own limitations), are they atrocious list managers for letting him go to another club?