rickety
Brownlow Medallist
Clarkson had a bit more mongrel in him than though.I do remember going to Kardinia Park as a young fella, and Kanga Kennedy, had Al Clarkson playing out of the goal square at FF.
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.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Clarkson had a bit more mongrel in him than though.I do remember going to Kardinia Park as a young fella, and Kanga Kennedy, had Al Clarkson playing out of the goal square at FF.
Still does!Clarkson had a bit more mongrel in him than though.
You're 100pct correct.......I know this won't be popular but would it have been worthwhile taking the Adelaide offer for pick #1?
View attachment 1389070
You can't change history so going forward, if a seriously juicy trade for our next first rounder was on offer, for instance two first rounders or a first and two good players or second rounders would that be worth looking deep and hard at at the end of this year to get in some of the missing demographic?
Along with the mid season pick and the PP of course.
Anyone saying we did the wrong thing with Tarrant is kidding themselves. Have you watched him play at the tigers? He’s gone and constantly getting beaten and that’s with a team that’s decent an offers defensive pressure. If he was having 5 a week kicked on him people woudl be piling in saying why did we give him two.
Was 100% the right decision to let him go. Just a pity it’s Josh Walker down there who’s not up to it.
Honestly what were they offering - a couple of first rounders? (maybe some change?)You're 100pct correct.......
....."I know this won't be popular"
....I put it back to you then,,,,would you put JHF up for trade?,,,,reckon you'd get damn sight better offers than those proposed pre draft last year.
Theoretical I know as there's 0 chance of that happening, but I think it also answers your question.
He did the previous year when questioned why we didnt draft a key forward having lost Brown. Was along the lines of structuring up differently, Richmond won a flag without a key forward, etc etc.Righto. The list manager has a responsibility for carefully planning the demographics of the list. It was discussed from a mile out in the offseason how light on we were in key positions after losing Brown and Tarrant in consecutive years.
Of course we weren't going to find world-beater KPPs in the rookie draft or DFA circuit. But it was predicted that our AFL side could be exposed very quickly down back if something went awry. Ditto up forward where Larkey is rapidly headed for Ben Brown 2020 territory shouldering too much load solo.
As tazaa has said if we could add Walker, Bosenvulagi, Young, Greenwoood et al to our list just to "play roles" then we could've found other similar players to help us hold a structure while we develop. The VFL side hasn't been helped either by running a list so bereft of structure.
I can't see how the developing kids are benefited by running a list where players are having to play out of position to form a side (ie Bonar - Harry McKay). Injuries happen but we ran with a list that started the season with one arm behind our back.
Fwiw I rank the lack of small forwards as a list balance weakness also however accept that is is less dangerous to the side's long term competitiveness and structure.
Again as tazaa said not sure why the protectiveness of the club staff when questioning these things? We assembled a list that sits square at the bottom of the AFL and a VFL unit that's taken sound poundings with few clear apparent KPP understudies. Where's our next fullback or CHB coming from? Who's the developing KPF if Comben continues to break or Edwards is just a ruckman?
Nobody would expects these list players to be elite talents but IMO you need somebody there eg Josh Walker. The fact Luff bristled and cited McGuinness as a KPD option smacked of either arrogance or delusion to me. An eye around the league suggests other clubs don't run with such a high risk profile. And no, I don't think running a list structure this way assuming you're on the way to football nirvana in 3-4 years when things "come together" benefits the young mids or existing KPPs in any way.
I think it's fair to judge them at any stage along the journey, drawing a line through their name is another matter.I think we have to give the list management team more than 2 off seasons to judge their work.
It'd be like taking your brownies out of the oven at the half way cooking point, tasting them, declaring they're shit and tossing them.
Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk
A couple of points then. The first is people shouldn't be looking at particular players and blaming their selection on Luff's supercoach.Think there's some confusion between list management and recruitment from a high level.
List management - planning out the number of each player type, age and experience profiles etc on the list. Assessing what we have vs what we could have - eg retaining Jack Ziebell for 2023 vs other options for that list spot.
Recruitment - scouting and procuring players for the club.
List management is your overall portfolio (Brad Scott likes this). Recruitment is actually selecting and purchasing various investments or adjusting super options etc.
The recruitment decisions by the club remain works in progress. The list management decisions leading into 2022 are showing immediate results.
Yeah.I’ve been told that he has lowballed Xerri and really p***** him off. When I say lowball, I mean 1 year extension and on a marginal wage increase. This is despite the club telling him he’s the #1 ruck moving forward.
Xerri has a lot of interest elsewhere & “apparently” Luff has stopped communication with his manager given they want to talk about trade options.
Goldy wants out.
A bit of a trend surfacing with Glenn…
We have no surplus of anything at the club OTHER than cap space.I’ve been told that he has lowballed Xerri and really p***** him off. When I say lowball, I mean 1 year extension and on a marginal wage increase. This is despite the club telling him he’s the #1 ruck moving forward.
Xerri has a lot of interest elsewhere & “apparently” Luff has stopped communication with his manager given they want to talk about trade options.
Goldy wants out.
A bit of a trend surfacing with Glenn…
Guess if it eventuates at the end of the year and the club tries to make out that he 'walked' then a trend has well and truly emerged.I’ve been told that he has lowballed Xerri and really p***** him off. When I say lowball, I mean 1 year extension and on a marginal wage increase. This is despite the club telling him he’s the #1 ruck moving forward.
Xerri has a lot of interest elsewhere & “apparently” Luff has stopped communication with his manager given they want to talk about trade options.
Goldy wants out.
A bit of a trend surfacing with Glenn…
So I've got no reason to doubt your source, or the detail, but "Luff" is not an island unto himself; list decisions are a collegiate process overseen by Rawlings. A 'trend with Glenn' is not how the thing worksI’ve been told that he has lowballed Xerri and really p***** him off. When I say lowball, I mean 1 year extension and on a marginal wage increase. This is despite the club telling him he’s the #1 ruck moving forward.
Xerri has a lot of interest elsewhere & “apparently” Luff has stopped communication with his manager given they want to talk about trade options.
Goldy wants out.
A bit of a trend surfacing with Glenn…
I’ve been told that he has lowballed Xerri and really p***** him off. When I say lowball, I mean 1 year extension and on a marginal wage increase. This is despite the club telling him he’s the #1 ruck moving forward.
Xerri has a lot of interest elsewhere & “apparently” Luff has stopped communication with his manager given they want to talk about trade options.
Goldy wants out.
A bit of a trend surfacing with Glenn…
Although they all sit under the Brady umbrella, Luff is responsible for the contracts & negotiations. If you’d like a publicly available reference for this, I believe Scott Clayton stated it in a radio interview pre draft last year.So I've got no reason to doubt your source, or the detail, but "Luff" is not an island unto himself; list decisions are a collegiate process overseen by Rawlings. A 'trend with Glenn' is not how the thing works
No need to lay anything out - Luff may well 'do' the negotiations, but the negotiating position is determined by the management structure, so if Xerri has been 'low balled', it's not because Luff woke up one morning and decided I've got a bright idea, but because that's the club's position. Whether it's right or wrong is another questionAlthough they all sit under the Brady umbrella, Luff is responsible for the contracts & negotiations. If you’d like a publicly available reference for this, I believe Scott Clayton stated it in a radio interview pre draft last year.
Happy for you to doubt if you please, as always I lay it out for ya’ll to play it out.
I’ve been told that he has lowballed Xerri and really p***** him off. When I say lowball, I mean 1 year extension and on a marginal wage increase. This is despite the club telling him he’s the #1 ruck moving forward.
Xerri has a lot of interest elsewhere & “apparently” Luff has stopped communication with his manager given they want to talk about trade options.
Goldy wants out.
A bit of a trend surfacing with Glenn…
Yep. Negotiators have an acute awareness of their authorising environment and general positions would be agreed. Can't say I'm surprised to hear that rumours are flying that it's only Luff making these decisions, though, although I highly doubt that's actually the case. Could be wrong though.No need to lay anything out - Luff may well 'do' the negotiations, but the negotiating position is determined by the management structure, so if Xerri has been 'low balled', it's not because Luff woke up one morning and decided I've got a bright idea, but because that's the club's position. Whether it's right or wrong is another question
It’s bizarre.You'd want to have an absolute mountain of faith in CCJ and Edwards if you're willing to basically tip Xerri out the door. One year and a small pay increase is plain stupid. If you insist on just the one year so you can find out if he and CCJ work together then at least give the bloke a payday and some extension triggers. We can afford it and he'll have far longer offers elsewhere. Being a scrooge in this situation makes zero sense to me.
It makes sense if you want them gone.You'd want to have an absolute mountain of faith in CCJ and Edwards if you're willing to basically tip Xerri out the door. One year and a small pay increase is plain stupid. If you insist on just the one year so you can find out if he and CCJ work together then at least give the bloke a payday and some extension triggers. We can afford it and he'll have far longer offers elsewhere. Being a scrooge in this situation makes zero sense to me.