SITTING DOWN

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

McLean doesn't lack awareness and isn't slow. He and Jones both struggle with our gameplan, because we have very few options forward of the ball, and they're are the ones who are made to look slow and lack awareness because they are trying to find the right option. The instincts and natural game of both players is to look up and kick the ball, not handball sideways or backwards. They don't have the evasive skills of a Judd or Ablett.

As I've said all along, the gameplan doesn't suit the natural instincts of our key midfielders.

Pace and awareness have nothing to do with the gameplan.

But thanks for jumping on your hobby horse.

[beelzebub 23,313]

I suppose the thing with McLean and Jonesy is we expect them to be our "elite' 1st and 2nd midlfielders when really by league standards they are 2nd and 3rd respectively. Nothing to do with endeavor before all and sundry jump up and down ....its about reality and results.

edit

P.S.

more the more reasons why we desperately need to secure a gun of a midfielder in this years draft

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Your last paragraph summed it up. It REALLY bothers me when, just because you have faith in some of your younger players (in the list as it is) you're labelled, by know-it-alls like you, as "accepting of mediocrity." And that's laughable. You know better than that Rhino. Truth be told, if I kept ONLY the players that are perfect in my eyes, the list would be down to about 3 guys. The vast majority of league footballers have weaknesses. In some cases they play around them, in some cases (where possible) they fix them...

We carry on and on at our younger guys to SHOW SOMETHING!! week in week out, and yet when we have players like PJ, Bate, Bell and Dunn who have at times in their careers shown something, we jump on their backs the MINUTE they lose a bit of touch and confidence. God forbid these 21 yr olds shouldn't be perfect, eh?

DD, there comes a time when you have to make the assessment on NQR players. You can talk them up as much as you like and blame climate change. But after seven years if they are not having a consistent impact at AFL level in that time. Questions have to be asked as to where they are at? I dont know why you go on pushing PJ above Jamar. Truth be known, if we had better options both would go.

And I dont know why you rattle on about players being "perfect"?? I didn't. I just want players who can competently fulfill their role consistently at the AFL level. Bell and PJ cant and dont and I think should be gone at year end. If they do something they have done in that time and play good consistent AFL football in their roles then maybe we can have a look at them again. But I would not hold my breath.

I am puzzled why you latch onto ordinary fringe footballers and see them as must keeps or important to the future.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I suppose the thing with McLean and Jonesy is we expect them to be our "elite' 1st and 2nd midlfielders when really by league standards they are 2nd and 3rd respectively. Nothing to do with endeavor before all and sundry jump up and down ....its about reality and results.

edit

P.S.

more the more reasons why we desperately need to secure a gun of a midfielder in this years draft

Agree

[beelzebub 23,313]

Rhino I agree with your outlook there except in that I think PJ really has more to offer than Jamar. However youre absolutely on the money in saying with more options both ought to consider life after MFC. And I say thata little disappointed with PJ as I thought he was really starting to show something..still..he might again and then we revisit this qunadary of seemingly ok one minute and let downs the next. For us as a club to become truly a force to be reckoned with this level of achievement by players simply isnt enough.

I suppose the winner of the Russian roulette at seasons end will be , do we need a back up ruck only type ( with limited side orders ) or a back up in a ruck/roverish type ?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Rhino I agree with your outlook there except in that I think PJ really has more to offer than Jamar. However youre absolutely on the money in saying with more options both ought to consider life after MFC. And I say thata little disappointed with PJ as I thought he was really starting to show something..still..he might again and then we revisit this qunadary of seemingly ok one minute and let downs the next. For us as a club to become truly a force to be reckoned with this level of achievement by players simply isnt enough.

I suppose the winner of the Russian roulette at seasons end will be , do we need a back up ruck only type ( with limited side orders ) or a back up in a ruck/roverish type ?

They both have critical flaws in their game and its a line ball decision. I slightly favour Jamar only because he can ruck and PJ cant.

[beelzebub 23,313]

They both have critical flaws in their game and its a line ball decision. I slightly favour Jamar only because he can ruck and PJ cant.

As to the rucking abilites we may have to agree to see disimilar qulaities. Having said that I as many will concur that Jamar is a ruck in the more classic view.

In that light Im going to suggest thathe in favour of PJ would hold currency come trade week. Rucks arent exactly plentiful on theground and he ( MJ ) might attract some interest. I dont think PJ will get another gig at AFL if he cant cement it with us.

So if the rationale is to trim the numbers.. Jamar becomes a better and more likely candidate..for mine

[dee-luded 2,959]

Now not that I think these players are dead wood but what will happen with Matthew Whelan and Paul Wheatley this year?

At the start of the year I would of had them in our starting 18 for sure however with the emergence of players like Frawley and Bennell will there be a spot for them when they are fit? Further more with both of them nearing 30 is there still a future for them at our club or are they on the dead wood list?

Whelan, I think is still of use to the young playing group as a mentor & protector.

Wheatley whilst a fair footballer no longer suits the way the game has evolved, the zone is almost ending his career, as IMO he likes to carry the ball in space only running straight lines & I think he doesn't have the ability to baulk & cut through the traffic.

Bruce is skating on thin ice, as he is being left behind with his disposal skill.

Belly, it's time to show or tell.

Dunny, is a likely trade.

PJohnson, IMO is in Danger, just don't see upside & meeson looks the better follower.

[re draft molan 1]

I am not so sure why posters are so keen to hold onto some players who have had up to 7 years in the AFL and have not developed a consistent and competitive role in a bung awful third rate team. The alarms should be ringing. For some people fringe players are like the old gold mine that you sure one day will come good. MFC dont have the luxury to carry them

If the Footy Dept comes to a view that a player aint going to make it after 4,5,6 or 7 years on the list then they go. Hell, MFC has a terrible record of keeping crud on the list (eg Godfrey, Ferg, Ward, Reed etc.)

Even if you develop a core of A grade players (and I hope we do), players certaintly of the ilk of PJ, Bartram,Newton Bell and Dunn are still going to be weights on your list. The issue with these players is not what its around them. Its the individual players themselves. IMO we have seen what they can give and its not good enough.

I don't agree with you putting Daniel Ward in with your "crud" players. He was an excellent player for us over a long period.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I don't agree with you putting Daniel Ward in with your "crud" players. He was an excellent player for us over a long period.

Fair enough.

He was a player that continually butchered the ball which undermined his ability to break the lines. We kept him too long.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

I am puzzled why you latch onto ordinary fringe footballers and see them as must keeps or important to the future.

The simple answer... or answers... are.

A: I remember their good periods as much as their bad. Unlike some who only consider their poor efforts. And I'm not banging on about PJ. He had a good season last season. What you are doing is ignoring that fact.

B: I don't think these two players are as bad as you say. Well... I would put PJ ahead of Bell, but you get my point. It's a simple disagreement. They're not as average as you say they are.

C: I'm far more realistic about how our list is going. There are about 30 players who are capable of less (currently in the squad) than what these two are. ie Blease is not going to do as much this year as Bell will (injuries aside, you can't predict that)...

By your assessment, we need to play ONLY our 18-21 year olds. Some of whom will NEVER put together a season like Bate's first couple in red and blue, PJs 08, Bell's 07... And yet with those guys, for you, it's onwards and upwards. How you can say Bate has fatal flaws is beyond me too. YES he has fatal flaws. So do EVERYONE in football excluding maybe Ablett. Judd has his body, Buddy has his brain, Roughie has his kick, Fevs a peanut... Bate has kicked a bag, NUMEROUS times. He's down on form, is turning like the QE2, and dropping everything. Go back two years and he was the opposite. How can you be so certain he's never going to come good? He's still a kid FFS! The same is true, on a smaller scale of PJ. Likewise for Bell, though as you say, If we had a liust that resembled AFL standard, he would be the guy you'd want to see gone.

I'm just saying, RR, that it's dangerous getting rid of the ONLY guys in the side that can and HAVE stood up to show they're at the right level. When there's younger guys SCREAMING out to be let into the 22... For 22 whole rounds, then fair enough, drop Bell and PJ, maybe it'll give them incentive... if not, they're gone. At this stage both are two of the bigger triers at the club. Wait another half-a-dozen rounds, if PJ has been dropped, worked his way back in, and is kicking 3 a week, what then? He did it last year (minus the 3 a week bit).

Put simply, we just don't have the cattle right now to be dropping anyone who's [censored] off RR. People said this rebuild would take 3 years. THEY are the ones kidding themselves. We need (from 07) 5 years. And that's a minimum. We haven't even recruited the core of the list yet. So what's your solution? Have a list of 8 teenagres from last years' draft and sod the rest off?

It's not so black and white as you claim.

[Ho Chi Dee 0]

The simple answer... or answers... are...

DD, I don't think anyone else is arguing that we must rid ourselves of all NQR players. As has been rightly pointed out, the majority of AFL footballers, by definition, are ordinary and there are numbers of NQR players on every club's list.

The issue is not whether we can afford to have any, but the amount we can afford to carry. And Melbourne's "depth" of NQR players is the deepest in the league (at least there's one area we're leading the competition.).

So, if we have to cull our list of such players, it should be coming from the players that have 4-7 years behind them - the middle aged players. If you don't cull these players when you have the chance two things happen. You deny yourself the chance to try to develop more able talent (and seeing this is something the MFC has a poor track record of, the more chances the better) and ultimately you end up in the situation we are in now where the club's senior "leaders" are for the most part not good enough.

I want as many as possible of those who have had 4-7 years who have shown themselves not good enough to be moved on and their spaces used to try to attract talent that will take us somewhere. We will always have ordinary and NQR footballers, but if we're to be good we need a core of good ones and a smattering of elite ones.

I'm hoping and expecting that plenty of people will be moved on again at year's end.

Oh and general shout out: Can people please make themselves aware of the difference between "less" and "fewer"? It is grating to have to put up with primary school literacy every time a thread concerning draft picks and the number of games required crops up.

[mo64 5,853]

By your assessment, we need to play ONLY our 18-21 year olds. Some of whom will NEVER put together a season like Bate's first couple in red and blue, PJs 08, Bell's 07... And yet with those guys, for you, it's onwards and upwards. How you can say Bate has fatal flaws is beyond me too. YES he has fatal flaws. So do EVERYONE in football excluding maybe Ablett. Judd has his body, Buddy has his brain, Roughie has his kick, Fevs a peanut... Bate has kicked a bag, NUMEROUS times.

DD, you've hit the nail on the head. RR assessment of players swings like the wind. He'll assess every player as NQR and C-graders, when in actual fact the team is down on confidence, and the individual player performance reflects that. This is why I mentioned in a previous post that our focus should on the development of the 21-25 year olds. If we throw them on the scrapheap as is RR's want, we'll be doomed for failure for the next 5 years. And there's no guarantee that the next generation of players will be any better. We'll end up being another Richmond.

In RR's eyes, Cooney was a NQR in 2007 when the Bulldogs were having a bad year. Leon Davis would have been shown the door at Collingwood 2 years ago.

Every football department would have confidence in their ability to get the best out of their players, which is why they'd look at the players' upside, rather than downside as RR does.

I agree that there will be minimal changes to our senior list at the end of this year.

[beelzebub 23,313]

By your assessment, we need to play ONLY our 18-21 year olds. Some of whom will NEVER put together a season like Bate's first couple in red and blue, PJs 08, Bell's 07... And yet with those guys, for you, it's onwards and upwards. How you can say Bate has fatal flaws is beyond me too. YES he has fatal flaws. So do EVERYONE in football excluding maybe Ablett. Judd has his body, Buddy has his brain, Roughie has his kick, Fevs a peanut... Bate has kicked a bag, NUMEROUS times. He's down on form, is turning like the QE2, and dropping everything. Go back two years and he was the opposite. How can you be so certain he's never going to come good? He's still a kid FFS! The same is true, on a smaller scale of PJ. Likewise for Bell, though as you say, If we had a liust that resembled AFL standard, he would be the guy you'd want to see gone.

It does beg the question though doesnt it...you tend to think of players geting better...not worse ? In this day and age you need more than half your list as 18-21 yo's probably a third 21-25 with whats left as the 'elite' elder statesmen of the club. You expect the 21-25's to be steady consumate players ( well sort of..lol ) ..they are contributors week in week out...not still learning or promising to one day be the goods...they ought to be by now...and thats where we fall down big time

I'm just saying, RR, that it's dangerous getting rid of the ONLY guys in the side that can and HAVE stood up to show they're at the right level. When there's younger guys SCREAMING out to be let into the 22... For 22 whole rounds, then fair enough, drop Bell and PJ, maybe it'll give them incentive... if not, they're gone. At this stage both are two of the bigger triers at the club. Wait another half-a-dozen rounds, if PJ has been dropped, worked his way back in, and is kicking 3 a week, what then? He did it last year (minus the 3 a week bit).

There is no try..there is only do !!

Put simply, we just don't have the cattle right now to be dropping anyone who's [censored] off RR. People said this rebuild would take 3 years. THEY are the ones kidding themselves. We need (from 07) 5 years. And that's a minimum. We haven't even recruited the core of the list yet. So what's your solution? Have a list of 8 teenagres from last years' draft and sod the rest off?

well we sort of have fodder if not cattle.. might as well introduce them as soon as near to . They dont have to stay there week in week out but lets see who can and who's not. This isnt to say its a one only exam of merit but itll give us an idea of who is near the mark and who needs more time. There no loser in that We arent in any window..

It's not so black and white as you claim.

Dappa..please refrain from ever speaking of those colours here

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

The simple answer... or answers... are.

By your assessment, we need to play ONLY our 18-21 year olds.

I did not assert that at any time and you only look silly for trying to counter a view that was not made at all particularly by me.

Some of whom will NEVER put together a season like Bate's first couple in red and blue, PJs 08, Bell's 07... And yet with those guys, for you, it's onwards and upwards. How you can say Bate has fatal flaws is beyond me too.

I didnt think PJ's 2008 was that good. He still cant ruck. Bell has yet to show that he can consistently compete at an AFL level. And I have never said Bate has fatal flaws. You are making it up again.

The same is true, on a smaller scale of PJ. Likewise for Bell, though as you say, If we had a list that resembled AFL standard, he would be the guy you'd want to see gone.

Dappa, are we seeking to have a list that is AFL standard or better? Then I dont know why you are defending Bell. it makes no sense.

BTW, they have been on the list each for seven years. They are not kids. Its not a matter of "potential". They are both struggling to consistently perform at AFL level. Bell has had 3 games at Casey and struggles at VFL level. I have held this all along that PJ is not a ruckman's bootlace.

I'm just saying, RR, that it's dangerous getting rid of the ONLY guys in the side that can and HAVE stood up to show they're at the right level. When there's younger guys SCREAMING out to be let into the 22... For 22 whole rounds, then fair enough, drop Bell and PJ, maybe it'll give them incentive... if not, they're gone. At this stage both are two of the bigger triers at the club. Wait another half-a-dozen rounds, if PJ has been dropped, worked his way back in, and is kicking 3 a week, what then? He did it last year (minus the 3 a week bit).

No it isnt. Its foolish to continue with them. Play them if necessary while we have injuries but know their fate at year end. PJ needs to make it as a ruckman. He hasn't. As this opposition coach at another AFL club advised me about PJ. He is the sort of player who will "tickle your nuts" that he will make it but ultimately wont deliver. The tickling is over. Hard decisions will be made.

Put simply, we just don't have the cattle right now to be dropping anyone who's [censored] off RR. People said this rebuild would take 3 years. THEY are the ones kidding themselves. We need (from 07) 5 years. And that's a minimum. We haven't even recruited the core of the list yet. So what's your solution? Have a list of 8 teenagres from last years' draft and sod the rest off?

Once again where did I say about now? You are looking silly again. I dont think the length of the rebuild is the issue. Its what you cut at year end. We have to keep improving our list. Blokes like Bell, PJ and possibly Dunn just dont cut the mustard and should go. Your suggestion of the 8 teenagers is your idea and I think you are smarter than to suggest that.

It's not so black and white as you claim.

I didn't and you look s....

[Ho Chi Dee 0]

This is why I mentioned in a previous post that our focus should on the development of the 21-25 year olds. If we throw them on the scrapheap as is RR's want, we'll be doomed for failure for the next 5 years. And there's no guarantee that the next generation of players will be any better. We'll end up being another Richmond.

I agree that there will be minimal changes to our senior list at the end of this year.

No - our focus should be on the players on our list with the requisite skills and mental capacity to carry out game plan in the future.

Good God there are some sophists here who love to to indulge in overstatement. Who's advocating the removal of all the 21-25 year olds?

You get to where we are and where Richmond is with poor list management. Holding on too many NQR players has been a fault of the MFC for years. We can't remove all our NQRs at once as contractual issues wont allow it, but we need to keep pruning as many as possible in an attempt to allow as many potential good / great players to come on board as possible.

Bell, PJ, Dunn, Buckley, Bartram and Newton for a start are all sevrely limited players. Enough of our last 2-3 drafts of players will be limited - why keep the ones that have been around long enough to show they wont be the ones to lead the revival?

If there are few changes at the end of the year it will only be because the football department have serious doubts about the depth of the upcoming draft.

[Guest petjud]

No - our focus should be on the players on our list with the requisite skills and mental capacity to carry out game plan in the future.

Good God there are some sophists here who love to to indulge in overstatement. Who's advocating the removal of all the 21-25 year olds?

You get to where we are and where Richmond is with poor list management. Holding on too many NQR players has been a fault of the MFC for years. We can't remove all our NQRs at once as contractual issues wont allow it, but we need to keep pruning as many as possible in an attempt to allow as many potential good / great players to come on board as possible.

Bell, PJ, Dunn, Buckley, Bartram and Newton for a start are all sevrely limited players. Enough of our last 2-3 drafts of players will be limited - why keep the ones that have been around long enough to show they wont be the ones to lead the revival?

If there are few changes at the end of the year it will only be because the football department have serious doubts about the depth of the upcoming draft.

Finally Bartam's name came up, I wondered when he was going to get namechecked, probably posters were being polite after the circumstances of the last couple of weeks.

With sitting in the Ponsford for the games, usually have oppisition supporters nearly, had a chat to a guy from Nth Victoria who supports the Cats but doesn't get to too many games, bit difficult getting to Geelong quicker to get train into G.

ON Sunday he picked Frawley as our best young up and comer followed by Morton, Flash as our best player at the moment and Bartram as our best tweenie....he agreed does not have the best skills but would never doubt his endeavour, said he will be a really good player who just works..........interesting viewpoint........

[beelzebub 23,313]

No - our focus should be on the players on our list with the requisite skills and mental capacity to carry out game plan in the future.

Good God there are some sophists here who love to to indulge in overstatement. Who's advocating the removal of all the 21-25 year olds?

You get to where we are and where Richmond is with poor list management. Holding on too many NQR players has been a fault of the MFC for years. We can't remove all our NQRs at once as contractual issues wont allow it, but we need to keep pruning as many as possible in an attempt to allow as many potential good / great players to come on board as possible.

Bell, PJ, Dunn, Buckley, Bartram and Newton for a start are all sevrely limited players. Enough of our last 2-3 drafts of players will be limited - why keep the ones that have been around long enough to show they wont be the ones to lead the revival?

If there are few changes at the end of the year it will only be because the football department have serious doubts about the depth of the upcoming draft.

and you know...some still won't understand this, though you have cradled the complete ethos of what many here are trying to say.

As in many other paths of life you continually pursue the idea of trading up at al available opportunities. In so doing you WILL part with things ( players) in order to gain a better one. It shouldnt be that hard to grasp...really !!

[beelzebub 23,313]

can we please stop equating endeavour with ability/effectiveness/results

again..

there are those that try...and those that do..lets see if we cant stack a team with doers for a change !!

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

DD, you've hit the nail on the head. RR assessment of players swings like the wind. He'll assess every player as NQR and C-graders, when in actual fact the team is down on confidence, and the individual player performance reflects that. This is why I mentioned in a previous post that our focus should on the development of the 21-25 year olds. If we throw them on the scrapheap as is RR's want, we'll be doomed for failure for the next 5 years. And there's no guarantee that the next generation of players will be any better. We'll end up being another Richmond.

Just after I chided DD for misrepresenting my statements there you go and do your trademark of fabricating another one's views to somehow justify yours.

I have been consistent in the assessment of both PJ and Bell. I have never mentioned throwing all 21 to 25 years olds on the scrapheap. *YAWN*.

Richmond are on the scrapheap due to their awful list management and their retention of list cloggers. They have them by the score. And they reap the rewards.

In RR's eyes, Cooney was a NQR in 2007 when the Bulldogs were having a bad year.

No what I did say is that Cooney was a talented player who had not delivered on this talent upto early 2007. He has turned that around. Nothing like a bit of truth to dispel a myth of yours Mo

Every football department would have confidence in their ability to get the best out of their players, which is why they'd look at the players' upside, rather than downside as RR does.

They have confidence in their ability to assess whether a player should be kept on the list or not to achieve the footy departments goals. Its not a case of blue sky mining that you make out.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Bell, PJ, Dunn, Buckley, Bartram and Newton for a start are all sevrely limited players. Enough of our last 2-3 drafts of players will be limited - why keep the ones that have been around long enough to show they wont be the ones to lead the revival?

If there are few changes at the end of the year it will only be because the football department have serious doubts about the depth of the upcoming draft.

In a nutshell.

[Guest petjud]

can we please stop equating endeavour with ability/effectiveness/results

again..

there are those that try...and those that do..lets see if we cant stack a team with doers for a change !!

I endeavour to get my post right, sometimes I do and sometimes I don't , but I butter up time and time again

I could always have a few flashes of brilliance and fill a highlight reel, for a quick result, and momentary adulation, but after a while people will go off my posts because they are not consistent'

but over a season I am consistent what you see is what you get I follow team instructions and carry out the coaches wishes to the letter....I don't mind sacrificing my own game for the teams sake....

.becsause we have players with great ability but they can't be everywhere and you always need the 'workers' .......just like in life......Bartam never gives anything less than his best...........if you actually appreciated him for the type of player he is rather than the type of player you think he should be......

[mo64 5,853]

No - our focus should be on the players on our list with the requisite skills and mental capacity to carry out game plan in the future.

Good God there are some sophists here who love to to indulge in overstatement. Who's advocating the removal of all the 21-25 year olds?

You get to where we are and where Richmond is with poor list management. Holding on too many NQR players has been a fault of the MFC for years. We can't remove all our NQRs at once as contractual issues wont allow it, but we need to keep pruning as many as possible in an attempt to allow as many potential good / great players to come on board as possible.

Bell, PJ, Dunn, Buckley, Bartram and Newton for a start are all sevrely limited players. Enough of our last 2-3 drafts of players will be limited - why keep the ones that have been around long enough to show they wont be the ones to lead the revival?

If there are few changes at the end of the year it will only be because the football department have serious doubts about the depth of the upcoming draft.

You've focused on keeping players who can carry out our game plan in the future. So what happens when that game plan becomes redundant in 3 years time, because it's been superceded by another visionary coach? The games forever evolving if you haven't noticed.

And I find the term "NQR" to describe a player as meaningless. As Dapper and others pointed out, even the elite players have flaws in their game. If you're looking for a team full of faultless players, you'll be disappointed to know that it'll never happen. Look at the current St.Kilda team, who most believe are in the running for a flag. Ray, McQualter, Dawson, Gardiner, Milne, Schneider, Blake, Gram, Gwilt would all have been considered NQRs at some time during their career.

The key to success is getting the best out of the players you have at your disposal, with an eye to the future.

[Ho Chi Dee 0]

You've focused on keeping players who can carry out our game plan in the future. So what happens when that game plan becomes redundant in 3 years time, because it's been superceded by another visionary coach? The games forever evolving if you haven't noticed.

And I find the term "NQR" to describe a player as meaningless. As Dapper and others pointed out, even the elite players have flaws in their game. If you're looking for a team full of faultless players, you'll be disappointed to know that it'll never happen. Look at the current St.Kilda team, who most believe are in the running for a flag. Ray, McQualter, Dawson, Gardiner, Milne, Schneider, Blake, Gram, Gwilt would all have been considered NQRs at some time during their career.

The key to success is getting the best out of the players you have at your disposal, with an eye to the future.

I'm guessing the game plans of the future will continue to value excellent skills, good reaction time, awareness and athleticism. There's only so much of that you can teach.

And if you find the term NQR meaningless, its probably because when it comes to grasping the abstract you've shown yourself to be NQR.

Nobody's looking for a team of faultless players. St Kilda have a couple of A grade players and a good spread of good ordinary players. At the moment we have none of the former and only a few of the latter. If you take those at the top out of St Kilda the players you name would seemingly revert to type.

You get the the best out of players by having enough good and A grade players to pull the cart.

Prepare for disappointment at years end when more drift is set loose.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Exactly