On AFL Trade radio today, they (Barrett & Wallace) questioned Neeld's approach to Gumbleton.

They said:

1. it seems that MFC have missed the key quality expereinced players they thought they may attract.

2. Gumbleton was not on their radar and now is. Appears to be a scattergun approach to "at least get something"

3. Gumbleton and Clark are too similar, and have no ground ability . Too similar big/ruck style fwds.

I tend to agree. However 30 mins for a coffee to check the air is not a big investment given Neeld was there to meet Hogan and his family.

Gumbleton is injury proned and a big NO from me. No way. Move on. Pass. His kicking is poor.

Clark lacking ability at ground level for a big man is flat out wrong. Very adept for a big man at ground level

On AFL Trade radio today, they (Barrett & Wallace) questioned Neeld's approach to Gumbleton.

3. Gumbleton and Clark are too similar, and have no ground ability . Too similar big/ruck style fwds.

Clark kicked about as many goals from general play/crumbs as he did from set shots. About as handy at ground level as a big man gets. Dumb comment.

Clark kicked about as many goals from general play/crumbs as he did from set shots. About as handy at ground level as a big man gets. Dumb comment.

This, kicked 5 against west coast almost purely off the deck.

Do not want. Seems to be turning a corner but still too much of a risk. Pick 20 would be absurd.

Anyone who thinks Clarke has no ground ability did not actually watch him play last season.

I like the way our fwd line would look a year away if we were to get both Gumby and Dawes and wait for Hogan to debut!

LHF: Dawes CHF: Hogan RHF: gumbleton

LFP: Brynes FF: Clark RFP: Possibly dom barry as he switches between mid and fwd

It may be a bit top heavy but very few, if any defences in the game would be able to handle a forward line with as many big and strong forwards as that! B) He isn't worth pick 20 but if we get a decent compo pick for losing moloney (possibly rivers) then we could offer that for him.

Edited October 11, 201212 yr by young dee enthusiast

Clark has proven himself more than capable at ground level to suggest otherwise is foolish. Neeld WANTS a big forward to help Mitch out (dont we all) Pederson is an option, but probably has not really been tested in a key attacking position week in week out, Dawes has worked in that space so knows the drills, and how not crowd his fellow forwards, etc.. he provides body contact and create contests at centre half forward so that we dont see the ball bouncing straight back out of of our 50 and down the other end. Obviously if Dawes does not want to come across we want to have a contingency plan, Gumbleton is a posibility for that contingency role so they are talking to him. good thinking, if you dont have a backup plan should you fail on your primary target(s) then you will soley be relying on whats in the draft pool, which could be someone fantastic but given we will probably take a quality mid with no 4 that leaves us to pick someone good at 20 there may not be any reasonable talls in pool by then, or if so they may not be worth pick 20. So recruit one or two now and also hope you pick up more in the draft.

On AFL Trade radio today, they (Barrett & Wallace) questioned Neeld's approach to Gumbleton.

They said:

1. it seems that MFC have missed the key quality expereinced players they thought they may attract.

2. Gumbleton was not on their radar and now is. Appears to be a scattergun approach to "at least get something"

3. Gumbleton and Clark are too similar, and have no ground ability . Too similar big/ruck style fwds.

I tend to agree. However 30 mins for a coffee to check the air is not a big investment given Neeld was there to meet Hogan and his family.

Gumbleton is injury proned and a big NO from me. No way. Move on. Pass. His kicking is poor.

Wallace left Richmond's list in such great shape; yeah he's be the first person I'd be getting recruiting advice from. Troy Simmons 5 year contract, good one that was.

On AFL Trade radio today, they (Barrett & Wallace) questioned Neeld's approach to Gumbleton.

They said:

1. it seems that MFC have missed the key quality expereinced players they thought they may attract.

2. Gumbleton was not on their radar and now is. Appears to be a scattergun approach to "at least get something"

3. Gumbleton and Clark are too similar, and have no ground ability . Too similar big/ruck style fwds.

I tend to agree. However 30 mins for a coffee to check the air is not a big investment given Neeld was there to meet Hogan and his family.

Gumbleton is injury proned and a big NO from me. No way. Move on. Pass. His kicking is poor.

I flush things down the toilet that I have more respect for than Wallace, and Barrett is a gossip monger not a football brain. Their opinions on what our plans may or may not be mean less than nothing.

I'm pretty meh on Dawes but I trust that Neeld knows what he can bring and what he's really worth. Depending on the cost I'll either be happy or depressed about getting him. On Gumby I really don't know. Horribly injury prone but if he can stay fit... as a cheap risky pick then maybe he's worth the chance. Only a cheap pick though.

I guess that it comes down to me wanting the club to have a sensible set point where they are ready to walk away. I don't really want us to have to get into bidding wars or sweetening deals to get these guys over the line because while they might be useful but they won't missed if we don't get them.

Risk versus reward.

Wouldn't have to give up much or anything for Gumbleton and odds are that he'd spend more time in injury rooms than on the field. But for a minimal outlay you could get a former number 2 draft pick who is far from a dud, but a very talented player who has been crippled by injuries.

The risks are big, the odds are he's cursed by the injury gods, but if he can put his injuries behind him the potential rewards are huge, a quality, good marking tall for whom we'd have to give up little for.

I can think of a quarter of our list who I would remove in a heartbeat at this possibility eventuating

It would be good to try and force the Bummers to over pay for Gumby's services. But, don't want him. Let Freo have him.

Looks like Essendon have re signed him for another injury interrupted year.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/149976/default.aspx

I really can't see why he wouldn't have gone to freo. Its his home state and they obviously wanted him more than essendon as ess only signed him for a year, so they obviously have no confidence in him. How is a player meant to develop and have confidence in himself if the club he plays for doesn't have confidence in their player???

I really can't see why he wouldn't have gone to freo. Its his home state and they obviously wanted him more than essendon as ess only signed him for a year, so they obviously have no confidence in him. How is a player meant to develop and have confidence in himself if the club he plays for doesn't have confidence in their player???

28 games in 6 years - he is too injury prone to ever develop.

He will be their Warren Dean.

Edited October 19, 201212 yr by jumbo returns

28 games in 6 years - he is too injury prone to ever develop.

He will be their Warren Dean.

yeah its a shame though, he definitely has good talent

28 games in 6 years - he is too injury prone to ever develop.

He will be their Warren Dean.

JR that is 26 more than we will ever get out of Cook

JR that is 26 more than we will ever get out of Cook

True - but in terms of intrinsic value, they've both been disappointing.

I suppose it all goes back to their high draft pick status.

True - but in terms of intrinsic value, they've both been disappointing.

I suppose it all goes back to their high draft pick status.

It must be way more anoying for the Bombers I think he was a pick 4, he has obvious talent but cannot get on the park.

The bombers keep hoping he will turn the corner injury wise.

Where as Cook has never looked good enough, we knew he was of doubtful quality early on.

Where as Cook has never looked good enough, we knew he was of doubtful quality early on.

Pity Barry Prendergast didn't.

JR that is 26 more than we will ever get out of Cook

28 actually if you don't include pre season

Clark kicked about as many goals from general play/crumbs as he did from set shots. About as handy at ground level as a big man gets. Dumb comment.

Anyone who thinks Clarke has no ground ability did not actually watch him play last season.

From that fantastic YouTube it seems that in fact more of his goals were crumbing snaps or from diving marks than pack splitting grabs. Still, does anyone really take whining Terry Wallett seriously?

But back to this the Gumby thread. I hear on the wireless that he has signed with the Bummers for one season only. I think that says that those who know him best are concerned about his recurring injuries. Glad we didn't get him.

Edited October 19, 201212 yr by monoccular

It does make you wonder when you look back on his first half of the season, in a rubbish side, what sort of forward Mitch Clark would be today if he'd spent most of his career playing there as one of the main focal points.

Also how much damage will he do with a steady, decent supply? He often made the most of every opportunity.

My god I hope he fully recovers and plays most of next year.

I forgot just how good he is! What a steal at 12!

He stays at FF, the rest of the forwards can work around him. He is the main man, he is king.

I will gladly sacrifice ALL of life's little pleasures for a whole year if Clark stays on the park.

If not, well I don't want to think about what I might do.

JR that is 26 more than we will ever get out of Cook

I fail to see relevance when the end result is they have both amounted to zilch, anyway how the hell did I get in a Gumby thread?

Not interested.

I want someone who is part of a team to play footy, not bludge around in the medical rooms. Next!