like Brad Ottens only not injury prone and loyal
Thats Bullshit Ize ... Ottens wanted to stay but we shipped him off . Fact
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Toast Ty Vickery "I apologise" - Tugga, please post here
- Thread starter meltiger
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Thats Bullshit Ize ... Ottens wanted to stay but we shipped him off . Fact
TIAGRA
Team Captain
- Jun 21, 2010
- 325
- 7
- AFL Club
- Richmond
but how much was he asking for ?
tis a slight digression but Miller &. TW took the attitude they'd prefer to roll the dice and secure draft picks than meet his contract demands that were well within our capacity to pay............in any case Vickers is a real talent...can move ,good dukes, is quick of mind and has a very reliable no bullshit kicking technique
My favourite player since round 1 this year 
for some reason im a fan of the unlikely types
Love it how non tigers supporters have bagged the shit out of me yet TV has consistantly chipped in with 2-3 goals a game in the past month.
Surely he'd be close to 15 goals this year.
for some reason im a fan of the unlikely types Love it how non tigers supporters have bagged the shit out of me yet TV has consistantly chipped in with 2-3 goals a game in the past month.
Surely he'd be close to 15 goals this year.
- Apr 5, 2010
- 1,444
- 319
- AFL Club
- Richmond
This. Unsociable football is great, and certainly not something ide have expected from TV. The thing that has pained me about Tyrone since day dot is his lack of presence for such a unit. Lately hes been hitting contests hard and showing no respect for the oppositions safety, precisely what i love to see... its a factor that (atleast to me) has made Helbig and Batchelor so likeable.
Also really liking the set shots on goal
Jack Riewoldt - 33
Jake King - 17
Tyrone Vickery - 15
Dustin Martin - 13
Robin Nahas - 9
- Banned
- #31
31 games (22 really, he's been decent all year) is hardly forever Cogga....
exactly dip, think about it a little bit and you might work it out one day.
Here is a leg up, corollas and coronas like yourself would wait for 100 games and still suggest we need to wait, since talls take forever. The good ones dont take FOR ****ING EVER...they show something early and 31 games is early in my book, dont know about yours... All i and for that matter tugg and a few others were concerned about was that he looked lost in the fog in games 1-10. Now he has turned us into fans, because he looks like he belongs.
- Mar 16, 2002
- 22,597
- 14,179
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Richmond
Going to be an elite ruck, extremely excited. Will be exactly like Brad Ottens only not injury prone and loyal
harsh on Ottens.... Was probably the best 20-21 year old of his age bracket... We offered him a paycut to force him to look else where... the facts are the club showed very little loyalty to Ottens and Geelong then offered him more.
The story as i know it Katherine ... is that Ottens commenced negotiations by walking in and asking for a 3-4 year contract , as any player in the prime of his career would , at around the 450k a year mark .
Not all that unreasonable for a top ruckman like him ....
Miller promptly marched him out the door and said... "no thanks Brad , we'll shop you around" ... from what i know Brad was quite taken aback as it was never his intention to leave the
RFC
Miller and Wallace saw him as prime trade value in a sellers market and knew very well Geelong were screaming for an A grade ruckman/forward . We saw him as injury prone and in our position of "apparently" rebuilding from the ground up the chance of getting 2 more first round draft picks to add to the 3 we already had was their ultimate goal .
Bradley was a sacrificial lamb in this quest my friend .
As Bojangles alluded to recently in another thread Geelong initially offered Brent Moloney and Corey Enright but we said no ...2 first rounders which were used with spectaclar success on Adam Pattison and Danny Meyer .... one can't help but L ones AO
hmm, makes me sick to the core, alas we have a very good young tall emerging with TV
- Banned
- #35
And of course all this BS was blamed on us not having resources by Miller and that TW had to paint the rooms etc etc et ****ing cetra...funny how you can blame not having resources, when you are the ****ing resource we were paying isnt it?
exactly dip, think about it a little bit and you might work it out one day.
Here is a leg up, corollas and coronas like yourself would wait for 100 games and still suggest we need to wait, since talls take forever. The good ones dont take FOR ****ING EVER...they show something early and 31 games is early in my book, dont know about yours... All i and for that matter tugg and a few others were concerned about was that he looked lost in the fog in games 1-10. Now he has turned us into fans, because he looks like he belongs.
Might just take 30-50 games for that to happen hey Coggs
The sensible enough of us saw the glimpses to know he would make progress.... Sorry I don't subscribe to most of the knee jerk, irrational thoughts of most on here. Didn't think you were normally one them though.
And of course all this BS was blamed on us not having resources by Miller and that TW had to paint the rooms etc etc et ****ing cetra...funny how you can blame not having resources, when you are the ****ing resource we were paying isnt it?
very good point ... that decision had f..k all to do with "resources"
- Banned
- #38
Might just take 30-50 games for that to happen hey Coggs
The senseless were seeing number 8 pick and hoping like **** that we hadnt ****ed up another number 8 pick.
The sensible of us, saw nothing and wanted something and now that he is showing something, we doff our hats and say welcome to the big time Ty. Not to mention that we didnt have to wait for 5 years, as was the rule of thumb, the senseless thumb suckers were promoting as the amount of time we needed to wait.
The senseless were seeing number 8 pick and hoping like **** that we hadnt ****ed up another number 8 pick.
The sensible of us, saw nothing and wanted something and now that he is showing something, we doff our hats and say welcome to the big time Ty. Not to mention that we didnt have to wait for 5 years, as was the rule of thumb, the senseless thumb suckers were promoting as the amount of time we needed to wait.
Agreed ... i'm not apologising for anything .
The comparison i draw is Griffiths . He showed more in his 5 brief appearances last year than Ty showed in his whole 2 years . Showed ability in the areas you want a big bloke to show ability in , don't give me this crap of "he moved well in traffic and showed some great evasive skills" .... pffft
Where was the odd big pack mark or smatterings of good ruckwork ?
Nothing.
Wrapped Ty is coming on in leaps and bounds . Mark of a good coach and good development ... but up until things got away in anger this year we were more than entitled to show more than a raised eyebrow in TV's direction
it underlines the theory that big fellas really do take a bit to come on...really need to be locked away and forgotten about for a while. TV was prob subjected to more scrutiny than he should coz he was being played when he shouldnt have. simmo went down and vickers was thrown to wolves 12 months earlier than he should. Jolly , jamar...**** Benny Gale anyone...you wouldn't give a knob of goat shit for the any of their early career form.
Hislpo will be the next star he's the only other one I can think of that has been openly panned on here that hasnt come on.....yet
Hislpo will be the next star he's the only other one I can think of that has been openly panned on here that hasnt come on.....yet
The senseless were seeing number 8 pick and hoping like **** that we hadnt ****ed up another number 8 pick.
The sensible of us, saw nothing and wanted something and now that he is showing something, we doff our hats and say welcome to the big time Ty. Not to mention that we didnt have to wait for 5 years, as was the rule of thumb, the senseless thumb suckers were promoting as the amount of time we needed to wait.
Don't remember saying anything about 5 years or any length of time but perhaps you aren't talking about me specifically. Generally I'm not a big fan of using high picks on rucks.... can be got through trades or rookie lists as has been proven heaps of times but I saw things in Vik, during his first couple of years (not that many things granted) that I thought meant he could make it at the level. TBH he hasn't made it yet and is not a certainty to.... but the signs are there.
ize_
Cancelled
- Jun 15, 2007
- 5,881
- 4,044
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Well I had the complete opposite direction. The impression coming out of the club has been more along the "Ottens wanted out" line of things. That's genuinely what I've always believed, never heard the anything of the story.
- Banned
- #43
Trump you on that one and suggest he has. As i said he had Fletcher done like a dinner and was only restricted by players not honoring his presenting.
Dimma must be licking his chops with JR and Ty in the FL.
Eventually his team mates will understand that they dont have to look only for the number 8.
This weeks game against an easy kill should produce the bag that he has threatened to produce for the last 3 weeks.
i think thats the impression Miller and Wallace wanted us to have so they could sell it .
Its why ive never really harboured any grudge towards Brad , all the best to him , he's done well .
What we tried to do was fundmentally right IMHO , just executed woefully
Very accurate shot at goal, like Jack, all these blokes need is 3 or 4 chances a game and they make the most of them.........Hear Griff isn't that bad a shot either
Wallace wanted to keep Ottens, he certainly tried to put a positive spin on the draft picks, but he said repeatedly in the 04/05 off-season that he did his best to convince Ottens to stay, but the decisions had been made prior to his arrival (Miller?). After all, you'd rather hold Ottens than hope you'll be lucky enough to score a twice-failed ruckman (Simmonds) and a bloke whose body was shot to bits (Knobel).
We had to ask Ottens to take a pay cut in '03 on the existing contract he had up until the end of '04 because we were tapped in terms of salary cap after the Gaspar, Stafford, Johnson, Brown and other big $ deals. He obliged because he'd been out injured so often, but he wasn't at all happy about it. We had to ask Coughlan and Richo to re-sign for well under their market value at the time (which they happily did).
Even after Ottens' departure, we could only squeeze Simmonds in because we gave him a 5yr deal on much less than his worth - so that in itself seems to indicate how little we must have had left for Ottens after Frawley's follies. We were paying Holland and Daffy to play (or not play as the case was with Daffy at Sydney) for other clubs and were forced to trade them just to offset the massive contracts Frawley had set them up on.
It was commonly accepted at the time of the trade that Ottens was very much an outsider at the club, not particularly liked by the club leaders and that the feeling was mutual. There are threads all over the archives of the oldest Richmond boards and groups categorically labelling him a traitor who walked out on us because we again wanted to stiff him on his contract. I don't recall a single person defending him or saying otherwise.
When his early form at Geelong was terrible, his mum got involved in some media scrimmage regarding the allegedly shabby way we treated him and there were rumours about an off-field indiscretion involving a new teammate...practically everyone was thrilled that we'd got rid of a mercenary traitor who couldn't get along with his teammates and whose best football was well behind him.
Anyway, I'm not saying your recollections are wrong and mine are right, but they're certainly pretty different.
sante
Emu
Has been great so far. Great effort by him for sure. Hopefully he keeps improving.
i dont think those views are all that different at all , your spin is just a lot more elaborateWallace wanted to keep Ottens, he certainly tried to put a positive spin on the draft picks, but he said repeatedly in the 04/05 off-season that he did his best to convince Ottens to stay, but the decisions had been made prior to his arrival (Miller?). After all, you'd rather hold Ottens than hope you'll be lucky enough to score a twice-failed ruckman (Simmonds) and a bloke whose body was shot to bits (Knobel).
We had to ask Ottens to take a pay cut in '03 on the existing contract he had up until the end of '04 because we were tapped in terms of salary cap after the Gaspar, Stafford, Johnson, Brown and other big $ deals. He obliged because he'd been out injured so often, but he wasn't at all happy about it. We had to ask Coughlan and Richo to re-sign for well under their market value at the time (which they happily did).
Even after Ottens' departure, we could only squeeze Simmonds in because we gave him a 5yr deal on much less than his worth - so that in itself seems to indicate how little we must have had left for Ottens after Frawley's follies. We were paying Holland and Daffy to play (or not play as the case was with Daffy at Sydney) for other clubs and were forced to trade them just to offset the massive contracts Frawley had set them up on.
It was commonly accepted at the time of the trade that Ottens was very much an outsider at the club, not particularly liked by the club leaders and that the feeling was mutual. There are threads all over the archives of the oldest Richmond boards and groups categorically labelling him a traitor who walked out on us because we again wanted to stiff him on his contract. I don't recall a single person defending him or saying otherwise.
When his early form at Geelong was terrible, his mum got involved in some media scrimmage regarding the allegedly shabby way we treated him and there were rumours about an off-field indiscretion involving a new teammate...practically everyone was thrilled that we'd got rid of a mercenary traitor who couldn't get along with his teammates and whose best football was well behind him.
Anyway, I'm not saying your recollections are wrong and mine are right, but they're certainly pretty different.
... and yes , i did have a few chortles at his early form at Geelong .
.... and yes , the club did do the right thing by moving him on because if you equate $ per output he would be one of the most expensive footballers ever . Only an outfit like Geelong could afford to carry a crock like him and just trot him out come finals time.... we just completely botched the picks
.... and regarding Wallace , i know your views on Terry Rayzor but i personally do not believe a word that has come out of his mouth post his days at Richmond , suffice to say that Miller and him were always a completely united front , so i do not buy the "Wallace wanted him but Miller had already decided BS" ... seriously Rayzor ...LMAO
Ottens was never a traitor , just expendable and great currency at the trade table
The easily being able to afford him, him wanting to stay and Wallace being a part of wanting him out bits are entirely at odds I would say Iddy.
Couldn't agree more on Ottens, though I've always maintained that there wasn't a lot else we could have reasonably picked. Very unlucky year to get those traded picks and our other early one, usually it's impossible to strike out that badly no matter how much you misjudge the talent.
You're entitled to that opinion mate, personally I find his explanation to the media on multiple occasions back then way more convincing than your apparent assertion that he would publicly lie about who made the decision (for no apparent reason) and thereby piss off the football director cum head recruiter cum Saviour of Richmond in his first weeks on the job.
The part of your two quotes which intrigued me the most and had me reaching for the quote button was Bo's assertion that we had room to easily offer Ottens the $ he wanted, when all I can remember from that era is everyone cringing over how badly we'd messed up on our player contracts and stood to pay for years afterwards.
The easily being able to afford him, him wanting to stay and Wallace being a part of wanting him out bits are entirely at odds I would say Iddy.
Bo's assertion not mine .... my assertion has always been that it suited the RFC in moving Brad Ottens on not the other way around . Your points only strengthen my arguement
You're entitled to that opinion mate, personally I find his explanation to the media on multiple occasions back then way more convincing than your apparent assertion that he would publicly lie about who made the decision (for no apparent reason) and thereby piss off the football director cum head recruiter cum Saviour of Richmond in his first weeks on the job.
Yeah ... the Sydney Swans and plough never lied hey ?
He left the Bulldogs because of cutbacks and were under resourced hey ? So The RFC was his answer
... then when it all went pear-shaped ??? Seriously Ray ... this has been done so many times it aint funny
You need to consider mine and Bo's posting on this topic as seperate entities and not one and the same
Similar threads
