Opinion Player list management and game plan 2019 part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

I have an admission to make about the whole Wingard thing.

He was traded not because of Fortnite, not because of his attitude or poor body composition. He was traded because he deliberately and willfully skied a ball in order to have Charlie Dixon's leg broken.

I know this is hard to take, but it's the truth.

o_O
 

Log in to remove this ad.

If we got Murdoch, would be yet another son of a 1980s SANFL player.

Apparently his dad played 100 games for Norwood but Jordan and his brother both got drafted from Glenelg. What’s that about?
 
Doubt we are looking at any of the delisted players. I’d look at Blair though. Known goal kicker although doubts about his body being able to stand up to regular AFL footy. He’s an upgrade on Neade.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Murdoch would be ok on a 1 year deal with an option to extend if he demonstrates learning the gameplan (such as it is) and can come in and perform as depth if and when required.

I'm all for rotating depth players through the squad for 1, max 2 seasons to see if any of them come good rather than holding onto duds (Toumpas, Hewett etc.) for no reason. So basically what we're doing now, but not holding onto them for as long as we currently do if they don't turn out.
 
Doubt we are looking at any of the delisted players. I’d look at Blair though. Known goal kicker although doubts about his body being able to stand up to regular AFL footy. He’s an upgrade on Neade.

Can a DFA go straight to the rookie list ? Would consider it as a depth only option (similar to a Goddard or Collins) can play a role if injured and provides structure and role players in the SANFL side which aides in player development.
 
If this year's trade period has shown us anything, it should be that this policy of giving fair trades to other teams because they'll treat us fairly in the future is a load of dingo's testicles. A defender who will be first 22 for his team for a future 4th, a line-breaking defender for nothing, a wingman after a career best year going for pick 11 was OK but packaging him with a free player and a 3rd-rounder was not.
Our policy of sweetening trades seems to show too many times that we've bent over backwards. Letting a future third go to Hawthorn was a bit much when they were taking one of our best, they were not the ones in the position of strength and whether he could have gone as a free agent next year is not the point. He may not have done that and they may not have wanted to take that risk. The two seconds and a third we sent to Fremantle to move up 5 places in the draft could be a masterstroke but again this appears to me a trade we went into showing our hand. We wanted 6 and paid overs. Five moves early in the draft can be precious but the draft will always be a crapshoot, you still have to nail it. We had an opportunity there to pick up a third for father and son and missed it.
 
Last edited:
If this year's trade period has shown us anything, it should be that this policy of giving fair trades to other teams because they'll treat us fairly in the future is a load of dingo's testicles. A defender who will be first 22 for his team for a future 4th, a line-breaking defender for nothing, a wingman after a career best year going for pick 11 was OK but packaging him with a free player and a 3rd-rounder was not.
Our policy of sweetening trades seems to show too many times that we've bent over backwards. Letting a future third go to Hawthorn was a bit much when they were taking one of our best, they were not the ones in the position of strength and whether he could have gone as a free agent next year is not the point. He may not have done that and they may not have wanted to take that risk. The two seconds and a third we sent to Fremantle to move up 5 places in the draft could be a masterstroke but again this appears to me a trade we went into showing our hand. We wanted 6 and paid overs. Five moves early in the draft can be precious but the draft will always be a crapshoot, you still have to nail it. We had an opportunity there to pick up a late third for father and son and missed it.


With our (current) draft picks you could say we have a narrow lead going into the final quarter...
 
If this year's trade period has shown us anything, it should be that this policy of giving fair trades to other teams because they'll treat us fairly in the future is a load of dingo's testicles. A defender who will be first 22 for his team for a future 4th, a line-breaking defender for nothing, a wingman after a career best year going for pick 11 was OK but packaging him with a free player and a 3rd-rounder was not.
Our policy of sweetening trades seems to show too many times that we've bent over backwards. Letting a future third go to Hawthorn was a bit much when they were taking one of our best, they were not the ones in the position of strength and whether he could have gone as a free agent next year is not the point. He may not have done that and they may not have wanted to take that risk. The two seconds and a third we sent to Fremantle to move up 5 places in the draft could be a masterstroke but again this appears to me a trade we went into showing our hand. We wanted 6 and paid overs. Five moves early in the draft can be precious but the draft will always be a crapshoot, you still have to nail it. We had an opportunity there to pick up a late third for father and son and missed it.
Those trades weren’t to be nice to other teams. It was being nice to our former players.

Hombsch for instance has been a great club man. He deserves to be playing AFL. We made it easy for him to continue his career elsewhere. If we had played hardball, every chance the deal doesn’t get done and he plays SANFL most year for us then gets delisted.

We did the right thing letting him go for nothing.
 
Those trades weren’t to be nice to other teams. It was being nice to our former players.

Hombsch for instance has been a great club man. He deserves to be playing AFL. We made it easy for him to continue his career elsewhere. If we had played hardball, every chance the deal doesn’t get done and he plays SANFL most year for us then gets delisted.

We did the right thing letting him go for nothing.

We should come back to this if one of our defenders goes down with an injury and we're forced to play Trent McKenzie or Jack Watts back there or we further expect Westhoff to be Mr. Fix it, instead of playing him forward of the ball where he can split games wide open.

Giving a player up to a club that fits into their best 18 for nothing is never smart. He could have still ended up there if we negotiated something better in return.
 
We should come back to this if one of our defenders goes down with an injury and we're forced to play Trent McKenzie or Jack Watts back there or we further expect Westhoff to be Mr. Fix it, instead of playing him forward of the ball where he can split games wide open.

Giving a player up to a club that fits into their best 18 for nothing is never smart. He could have still ended up there if we negotiated something better in return.
The most baffling trade of all.
Pittard was one of the clique and let go, but with no back up to give an AFL STANDARD player away is nuts.
 
I don't think losing to Collingwood means that Richmond's game plan is completely null and void. In fact I think it's this attitude which made us set about reinventing the wheel after last year.
I think the bigger issue with Richmond will be they will have to play another tall as a ruck plus they will have Lynch as well as Riewoldt up forward. Can see their style having to change.
 
Can a DFA go straight to the rookie list ? Would consider it as a depth only option (similar to a Goddard or Collins) can play a role if injured and provides structure and role players in the SANFL side which aides in player development.

No.

DFAs on to the primary list.

There is a rookie draft for rookies. :)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Opinion Player list management and game plan 2019 part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top