The Jack Darling Thread

[old55 21,864]

I wouldn't take him - I want a GUARANTEED very good player at 12 and there's too much risk with Darling.

I want our list to overwhelm the opposition with solid quality - like the WC sides of the early 90s that batted so deep.

We're not short of X-factor with Jurrah, Watts, Morton, Sylvia, Davey, Bennell, Blease, Tapscott, Gawn.

We can take some risks on more X-factor with our later picks.

.

Edited November 15, 2010 by old55

[Roost It 1,434]

He was a top 3 pick last year and nothing he has done on the field has changed that. If he's there at 12 my guess is we'll snap him up. I'm hoping for Lynch but probably needed pick 6 - 10 for him.

Edited November 15, 2010 by Roost It

[hrob 2]

why are people so concerned with the risk of taking him? he was going to be a top 3 pick if it wasn't for a lean year this year on the field, yes he has made some mistakes but what 18 yr old hasn't, as far as im concerned he's just what we need and I for one hope we take him! i mean i don't see many people on here complaining about the bloke in the middle of our banner n how he turned out, there's not enough grunt in our side (especially our forward line) n i reckon darling would be a perfect fit!

[Brayshaw Self 847]

I think we need a skillful running defender just as much, if not more than a big forward but I also think we should take the best available at pick 12 so whichever one of the two is left for us to take will fill a need either way.

Darling is the most likely big forward and Smedts the most likely defender in my opinion.

Both players have been labelled as d1ckheads on this forum but I believe that with the culture our club has built, the prominent leadership by young players especially and the fact that both players would be moving away from home would decrease the likelihood that they act up.

[old55 21,864]

He was a top 3 pick last year and nothing he has done on the field has changed that. If he's there at 12 my guess is we'll snap him up. I'm hoping for Lynch but probably needed pick 6 - 10 for him.

yeah and John Butcher was top 2 the year before

both may turn out great players

MDT

[Daz's Dee's 113]

I wouldn't take him - I want a GUARANTEED very good player at 12 and there's too much risk with Darling.

I want our list to overwhelm the opposition with solid quality - like the WC sides of the early 90s that batted so deep.

We're not short of X-factor with Jurrah, Watts, Morton, Sylvia, Davey, Bennell, Blease, Tapscott, Gawn.

We can take some risks on more X-factor with our later picks.

.

Yeah and what GARANTEED good players do you have in mind, since darling is such a massive risk?

[old dee 23,256]

why are people so concerned with the risk of taking him? he was going to be a top 3 pick if it wasn't for a lean year this year on the field, yes he has made some mistakes but what 18 yr old hasn't, as far as im concerned he's just what we need and I for one hope we take him! i mean i don't see many people on here complaining about the bloke in the middle of our banner n how he turned out, there's not enough grunt in our side (especially our forward line) n i reckon darling would be a perfect fit!

Me too and I think we need a bit of Mongrel. We have far too many "Nice" boys.

Carey was a [censored] and he led The Roos to two flags!

[Fan in the outer 0]

Me too and I think we need a bit of Mongrel. We have far too many "Nice" boys.

Carey was a [censored] and he led The Roos to two flags!

I'd be rapt to draft Darling, he'll compliment Liam & co perfectly. Let's hope we do take a risk and go for some x factor, instead of always playing safe and getting nowhere.

[DirtyDees DDC 171]

Looking at his highlights package from 2009 - he leads well; takes a mark; has good second and 3rd efforts, and he can kick a goal from outside 50.

I'm just not sure why he does those forward somersaults on a football field.

[bing181 8,357]

Been a bit of press around lately as the draft approaches, and with it a bit more info re our Jack. I liked Emma Quayle's notes re him that he was popular with his teammates, and serious about his footy - so, we're not talking about a Thorp or Anthony here!

(On the other hand, Age article on VFL players mentions that we're still interested in Thorp. This one just won't go away, maybe there really is something there?)

Getting back to Darling, a few posts around the place mentioning that he's had OP this year (partly why he has been back a bit on last year), and that the head injury and the after effects are proving fairly worrying - perhaps there's a question mark as to his ability to get back to full fitness.

I'm sure the FD are onto it, but ... hmm. Damaged goods?

[Je Roos Salem 661]

Seems too much like a work in progress for me. I've heard that Kieran harper is also an option for our pick 12 and he is more of a half forward sort of player.

[rpfc 27,689]

I'd be rapt to draft Darling, he'll compliment Liam & co perfectly. Let's hope we do take a risk and go for some x factor, instead of always playing safe and getting nowhere.

Huh?

[sylvinator 96]

Seems too much like a work in progress for me. I've heard that Kieran harper is also an option for our pick 12 and he is more of a half forward sort of player.

No, actually Kieran Harper is a work in progress, much more a risky pick than Darling imo.

Jack Darling could probably play 22 senior games next year if his attitude permits. The risks involved seem to be related to off-field indiscretions. Imo he could be a risk worth taking, the idea of Watts, Jurrah, Darling, Green and Pettard sounds dangerous!

[e25 5]

Agree on Harper Sylv.

[hrob 2]

No, actually Kieran Harper is a work in progress, much more a risky pick than Darling imo.

Jack Darling could probably play 22 senior games next year if his attitude permits. The risks involved seem to be related to off-field indiscretions. Imo he could be a risk worth taking, the idea of Watts, Jurrah, Darling, Green and Pettard sounds dangerous!

correct!

[Range Rover 1,935]

Would be rapt if we snaffle this guy at 12. Apart from his obvious talent he looks very competitive when the ball hits the deck. Like the touch of arrogance about him, too. A Jurrah, Watts, Darling full forward line would light up the MCG.

Take the punt if he's still there BP!

Edited November 15, 2010 by Range Rover Realism

[Demons 32 235]

Vote 1: Jack Darling

[Inner Demon 1]

From what I've read, which is all any of us have to go on really, Jack's "head issues" seem to be just as much physical as they are mental. If we wind up passing on this kid who does appear to be talented and ready to play, I will back the judgement our recruiters have made based on the extensive research they will have conducted on both this kid's mental state, and most importantly, the state of his ongoing health.

That said, all things being equal, I'd like to see him in our team. I get the feeling Darling & Tapscott could do some damage across our half-forward line in years to come!

Edited November 16, 2010 by Inner Demon

[Demon Disciple 11,209]

Vote 1: Jack Darling

Yes We Can!!!

Edited November 16, 2010 by Demon Disciple

[Axis of Bob 10,497]

I don't want Darling. And it's not just because of the off field issues. In fact, I think that his poor off field stuff has almost elevated his playing ability in supporters' eyes.

Firstly, if Gold Coast have decided that they won't touch him with their raft of high picks then why should we? We've just lost some experienced leaders, so these players are going to have to create their own culture. I don't want someone like he apparently is having a role of deciding this. We've got some great talent with some quality young kids who can create a great side - let's not [censored] it up.

Secondly, I don't think he adds much to our forward line like everyone parrots. He plays the role that we would expect Tapscott to play. The hard hitting, physical roaming half forward. The difference is a few inches, but both play as physical and undersized half forwards. The player we want in the forward line is a tall monster forward who can contest the long, slow, high ball. Darling would be good with the ball moving quickly because he could win it one on one with his physicality, but we already have a whole bunch of players who play well when the ball moves quickly so he doesn't really complement our current forward line at all.

Thirdly, I'm not sure he's that good. Someone built like he is should be absolutely smashing junior footballers. As it is he's just going. He relies a lot on his physicality too, but when he gets up to AFL level he's going to playing against players who are just as big as him and more athletic than him. He wants to play a key position style but his lack of height means that he's having to move into 'smaller' roles to make his mark. He's now a low possession hit man who's too small to play as a key forward.

So why would you spend pick 12 getting Mitch Hahn or Jarrad Rooke? And not just that, but a version who has off field issues, potential brain issues from being clubbed, and doesn't fill a role that we really need?

[two sheds jackson 3]

If Gold Coast has about 10 early picks (thus allowing them to take a few risks) and they still won't take a risk on Darling because of his off field issues, then what does that tell you?

Do. Not. Want.

I don't watch junior football and have no opinion on who we should take in the draft, but I get the feeling that in this years draft, off-field behavior might be more of a concern for the Gold Coast than it will be for us.

The GCS have to create a team culture from the ground up. Apart from wanting to draft a talanted group of kids, they'll also want to be extra, double-sure that all the kids in said group have a good head on their shoulders. With no established leadership group in place, they can't afford to risk drafting a [censored] whose antics might rub off on the other kids and create a poor playing culture from the outset. And with their plethora of high end picks, they really don't need to take this sort of gamble, even for a player with significant upside.

Our "no d*ckheads policy" may not be quite as strict as theirs this year, provided our FD feels we already have a positive, no-nonsense playing culture, a good leadership group and a healthy batch of determined young players who won't be influenced by the off-field antics of a new arrival and, in fact, will actually influence him to straighten up and meet the standards expected of him by the club.

Of course it's all a matter of degrees; I wouldn't like to say what we should do without knowing how much of a [censored] Darling may be, or how good he is at football. I just don't think it can be so easily boiled down to "the Gold Coast have more picks than us but arent taking the risk, therefor it's not a risk worth taking". As I said, there are some pretty substantial differences in the state of both of our lists and in some respects, they need to be more careful than us WRT who they recruit.

Edited November 16, 2010 by two sheds jackson

[dee-luded 2,958]

I don't watch junior football and have no opinion on who we should take in the draft, but I get the feeling that in this years draft, off-field behavior might be more of a concern for the Gold Coast than it will be for us.

The GCS have to create a team culture from the ground up. Apart from wanting to draft a talanted group of kids, they'll also want to be extra, double-sure that all the kids in said group have a good head on their shoulders. With no established leadership group in place, they can't afford to risk drafting a [censored] whose antics might rub off on the other kids and create a poor playing culture from the outset. And with their plethora of high end picks, they really don't need to take this sort of gamble, even for a player with significant upside.

Our "no d*ckheads policy" may not be quite as strict as theirs this year, provided our FD feels we already have a positive, no-nonsense playing culture, a good leadership group and a healthy batch of determined young players who won't be influenced by the off-field antics of a new arrival and, in fact, will actually influence him to straighten up and meet the standards expected of him by the club.

Of course it's all a matter of degrees; I wouldn't like to say what we should do without knowing how much of a [censored] Darling may be, or how good he is at football. I just don't think it can be so easily boiled down to "the Gold Coast have more picks than us but arent taking the risk, therefor it's not a risk worth taking". As I said, there are some pretty substantial differences in the state of both of our lists and in some respects, they need to be more careful than us WRT who they recruit.

If we go Tall, I'd rather go proper Tall, & strong. In that scenario, lets take Watson, who can play both ends,,, & leave The little darling to the oncoming blues. He can replace Fev there.

[Daz's Dee's 113]

I don't know the guy personally but what makes him such a basket case that some on here are so sure he is? What has he done that is sooooo bad? I'll leave it too the fd they very really get it wrong these days so if he is our pick up number 12 suck it up all u keyboard critics!

[Matt Demon 1,389]

As long as we end up with one of Darling, Lynch, Cook or Mitchell Ill be happy.

[Deeoldfart 7,853]

Others on here know far more than me about the capabilities of potential draftees, but I will stick my neck out and say that I'm not keen on Darling. If we are drafting a tall forward, I want him to be able take on some of the ruck work, at least on the forward line, if not around the ground on occasions. The new interchange arrangements, and the associated need for versatility, will make this very important IMO. To me, Darling's lack of inches would limit his capacity to do an effective job as a back-up ruckman.