Ben Hudson Better recruit than Mitch Clarke

[jumbo returns 6,703]

Leigh Matthews said this morning that Clarke has always been considered as an 'average' KPP and That Ben Hudson will be a better recruit for the Lions than Clarke will be for the Dees.....also, the Lions will save about 500K.

[deeflog 679]

clearly leigh hasn't thought too hard before making this comment

at best hudson has 2 years left in the game, will play 35-45% game time and have minimal impact and is stalling the development of a young ruckman

clarke has 10 years, will get better than yesterday and his bigger imapct will be in 4 years time when hudson is long into retirement

[diesel 420]

Leigh Matthews said this morning that Clarke has always been considered as an 'average' KPP and That Ben Hudson will be a better recruit for the Lions than Clarke will be for the Dees.....also, the Lions will save about 500K.

In isolation that is just a flippant and stupid statement. Ben Hudson is 33. In isolation yesterday we are paying overs for Clarke but I don't expect our midfield and game plan to remain as incompetent in getting the ball to Clarke as they were yesterday. If Clarke were to prove not to be the answer as a KPF then he'll have to move to the ruck and on Jamars performance yesterday he could move to Casey or take the money at the end of the year. At the end of the year Hudson will be on an AFLPA pension.

[Guest Jackie]

Given our recent track record and mysterious goings on at the club I'd expect even Judd or Ablett to disappoint if we did mange to snare them.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Jackie

[Arsene Wenger 72]

Hype.

Matthews enjoys having a dig.

It's funny how people try to say that Clark is a ruckman we're trying to play as a CHF, because although he was good as a ruckman, he was a CHF being played in the ruck.

[Samsara 65]

Clark still ended up with 2 goals yesterday in what was an insipid performance from the entire team (bar a few). The delivering inside F50 was horrendous, so I wasn't too concerned about Clark. Plenty of other issues to worry about. This week against WCE will be ugly.

[Daz's Dee's 113]

Pretty much a throw away line from Matthews as he tends to do from time to time. Clarke is worth every cent IMO he didn't have a great game yesterday neither did 20 others. But he made a contest chased and tackled exactly what we want from him. Once the game plan and skills are excecuted as per coaches instructions he will dominate games, he is big strong and fast with a good leap and grab. Love it how everyone lays the boots in when your down guess that's human nature easy to talk about the negatives rather then positives.

And come on Ben Hudson really?? A better recruit that is such a bulls$@t statement he will not play anymore than 2 years will Brisbane benifit significantly during this period and challenge for a flag with Hudson in there best 22 come on no offense to Hudson but come on lethal

Edited April 1, 2012 by Daz's Dee's

[Jerry Lundergard 420]

I think that Jamar is Hudsons bunny. He destroyed him in the Dogs game last year also.

[Real Demon 232]

What an outstanding call from Matthews...................one week into the season Leigh you drip!!!!!!!!

[Mono 455]

Leigh Matthews said this morning that Clarke has always been considered as an 'average' KPP and That Ben Hudson will be a better recruit for the Lions than Clarke will be for the Dees.....also, the Lions will save about 500K.

I well remember Matthews having a shot at us for paying a largish lump of TJ's first year salary at the Lions as in we were stupid and the Lion's had shafted/conned us. Fraid not Matthews - that was the price we paid to move TJ on and get a 1st rounder for him. Lions were the ones shafted/conned.

I think that Jamar is Hudsons bunny. He destroyed him in the Dogs game last year also.

I agree; they are very similar types. Jamar will get better.

[Biffen 12,816]

What an outstanding call from Matthews...................one week into the season Leigh you drip!!!!!!!!

Yes

Clark is going to go well.

Hudson had a day out-it wont last.

[DeeSpencer 24,701]

Hudson in the ruck so that Leunberger along with your full back in Merrett can be your key forwards. I know it worked against us and they are unlucky to have Staker and Brown injured but what exactly are they achieving.

Surely at some stage Michael Voss has to put some faith in some kids to hold down key posts.

[Forest Demon 4,681]

Didn't hear it exactly, but sounds like a stupid comment. Mitch was far from the worst yesterday. Wayne Carey and Gary Ablett's lovechild would have struggled to get a kick playing up forward for us yesterday.

[Biffen 12,816]

This is really a dumb topic and pretty hard to prove right .

It makes a bad dummy spit worse to read this sort of stuff.

[DEELIGHTED 16]

What an outstanding call from Matthews...................one week into the season Leigh you drip!!!!!!!!

not really any different to all the talk on here today after round 1!!!!!!!

[Swampfox 190]

Made me laugh

Hudson 33

Clark 24

Yeah right Barney

[demoniac 1,295]

Even the great Lethal would have struggled to look good in our forward line yesterday.

Leigh may be one of the great players and coaches but nothing I hear from him today gives me an impression that he has any great understanding of how strategies have become more important since his retirement.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

I have absolutely no concerns about Mitch Clark.

[GOLF 13]

How many games exactly did Clark play at FF for Brizzie? Lots of the 82 were as a ruck. He turns 25 this year. How about we leave him at FF and see if he learns. Or if our midfield learn how to deliver to him. Or if some other forward learns how (Howe?) to present to take some defensive heat off him.

[Carlos Danger 380]

I have absolutely no concerns about Mitch Clark.

Nor do I.

But I do think it's ridiculous how many people on here that can't get his name right. Who would have thought a 5 letter name could be so difficult to spell?

[Supermercado 2,784]

Nor do I.

But I do think it's ridiculous how many people on here that can't get his name right. Who would have thought a 5 letter name could be so difficult to spell?

Given that people are still saying Maloney, Maclean, Pettard and Trengrove I don't like the chances of it being universally accepted just yet.