The talk of Terlich's questionable disposal is absolute nonsense. He is fine 90% of the time. He struggled last year more because nobody spread and he'd always be trying to avoid kicking to a contest. If much rather that than have Pederson continually blaze away under 10's style.

Terlich is one of our most aggressive and ferocious players, is smart and can use the ball.

Is is easily in out best 22.

The talk of Terlich's questionable disposal is absolute nonsense. He is fine 90% of the time. He struggled last year more because nobody spread and he'd always be trying to avoid kicking to a contest. If much rather that than have Pederson continually blaze away under 10's style.

Terlich is one of our most aggressive and ferocious players, is smart and can use the ball.

Is is easily in out best 22.

We have probably had this discussion before stmj but I see it at every level - a lot of 'poorly skilled' players are simply making consistently bad decisions with the footy.

If you play within your limitations and make good decisions - you can play a role in well structured team.

Roos will give the players roles - it is up to them to fulfil those roles.

Yes, I understand all of that but I'll pose this question to you.

At what point does thelack of ability to execute the fundamentals of the game outweigh what you're saying... Which is that if players play within their limitations and make decisions based on their limitations, they can play a role?

I'm not sure if I'm articulating my point well enough.

I feel as if you too easily excuse players who in my opinion do not possess nearly enough attributes to contribute to team success. You can't just have a bunch of 'role players' who are extremely limited in their own ability but are designated a certain task and expect us to be magically better as a side.

Role players can also be extremely damaging footballers whilst performing their 'role'.

The whole 'role' argument is ridiculous RPFC. Roos has alluded to it, media have alluded to it, everyone is aware of it. We do not have a enough quality footballers on the list. It's plain for all to see.

Now with Terlich, people bang on about his kicking, but it's really not that bad. He makes bold and risky decisions and is a good user of the ball. He's a great attacking player and Roos is now getting him up to speed with his defensive work. He's also a solid contested mark for his size. He has several strong attributes to his name, which makes him a valuable player for us.

When it comes to others whom I won't bother naming... They do not possess a range of attributes. Perhaps one or two, but then their other attributes are well below where they need to be to perform at this level. We have too many of these types of players still running around. It doesn't matter what damn 'role' their given. They need to provide and contribute more, and they done. Meaning we need more quality on the list RPFC. It's obvious.

Salem is one, who if developed and nurtured correctly, will replace one of the spuds I'm talking about within the next year or so. We need to constantly address this.

Forget the 'role playing' rubbish.

Yes, I understand all of that but I'll pose this question to you.

At what point does thelack of ability to execute the fundamentals of the game outweigh what you're saying... Which is that if players play within their limitations and make decisions based on their limitations, they can play a role?

I'm not sure if I'm articulating my point well enough.

I feel as if you too easily excuse players who in my opinion do not possess nearly enough attributes to contribute to team success. You can't just have a bunch of 'role players' who are extremely limited in their own ability but are designated a certain task and expect us to be magically better as a side.

Role players can also be extremely damaging footballers whilst performing their 'role'.

The whole 'role' argument is ridiculous RPFC. Roos has alluded to it, media have alluded to it, everyone is aware of it. We do not have a enough quality footballers on the list. It's plain for all to see.

Now with Terlich, people bang on about his kicking, but it's really not that bad. He makes bold and risky decisions and is a good user of the ball. He's a great attacking player and Roos is now getting him up to speed with his defensive work. He's also a solid contested mark for his size. He has several strong attributes to his name, which makes him a valuable player for us.

When it comes to others whom I won't bother naming... They do not possess a range of attributes. Perhaps one or two, but then their other attributes are well below where they need to be to perform at this level. We have too many of these types of players still running around. It doesn't matter what damn 'role' their given. They need to provide and contribute more, and they done. Meaning we need more quality on the list RPFC. It's obvious.

Salem is one, who if developed and nurtured correctly, will replace one of the spuds I'm talking about within the next year or so. We need to constantly address this.

Forget the 'role playing' rubbish.

I don't know why you are so dismissive.

It isn't rubbish - it's giving players specific points to hit a contest (or stay away from it), a specific place to look to give it off so that you are not asked to do things that only very talented players can do.

These are structures - around a stoppage they are easy to get your head around - this is where we set up, this is where we look to move the ball, etc.

Away from stoppages they are less tangible to supporters but good teams still have them; a point inboard or backwards to look for a short kick rather than kick it long if that is something they cannot do very well, a movement forward will see a player position themselves to create space for more talented players with blocks, leading in and out of space, and, again, when getting the football, looking for players in pre-determined spots on the field that they can easily hit.

And, nowhere have I said that we don't lack quality.

Only that 'poorly skilled' players are sometimes those that need to learn to play within their ability and make better decisions.

Yes I understand all of what you are saying. Structures and roles are clearly important.

I am just continually frustrated with supporters believing that the spuds on our list can play a 'role' and contribute to team success.

They can't. And they won't.

Yes I understand all of what you are saying. Structures and roles are clearly important.

I am just continually frustrated with supporters believing that the spuds on our list can play a 'role' and contribute to team success.

They can't. And they won't.

I tend to agree with you

However I am not sure if Terlich is good or not at this point.

There is a reason for 6 wins out of 45 over the last 2+ years it is called lack of good players.

We still have a large number of NGE's but we don't want it to be the case and imagine quite a few are way better than they are.

I pray a few more will be replaced at years end.

I tend to agree with you

However I am not sure if Terlich is good or not at this point.

There is a reason for 6 wins out of 45 over the last 2+ years it is called lack of good players.

We still have a large number of NGE's but we don't want it to be the case and imagine quite a few are way better than they are.

I pray a few more will be replaced at years end.

I think it says it all that our best player by a mile is Nathan Jones. I love Jonesy , his endeavour and never say die attitude. But think Geelong in its prime - I love Cameron Ling who went from a good tagger to great midfielder (even made AA) - similar attributes to Jones - but he was fourth in line behind Ablett, Bartel, Selwood, Stevey J. We need four better midfielders than Jones and as good as Terlich is now we need much better footballers than him - or for him to continue to improve.

I think it says it all that our best player by a mile is Nathan Jones. I love Jonesy , his endeavour and never say die attitude. But think Geelong in its prime - I love Cameron Ling who went from a good tagger to great midfielder (even made AA) - similar attributes to Jones - but he was fourth in line behind Ablett, Bartel, Selwood, Stevey J. We need four better midfielders than Jones and as good as Terlich is now we need much better footballers than him - or for him to continue to improve.

Spot on nutbean

Should you need it count my vote in your camp.

I don't know

The talk of Terlich's questionable disposal is absolute nonsense. He is fine 90% of the time. He struggled last year more because nobody spread and he'd always be trying to avoid kicking to a contest. If much rather that than have Pederson continually blaze away under 10's style.

Terlich is one of our most aggressive and ferocious players, is smart and can use the ball.

Is is easily in out best 22.

I have said previously I don't know with Terlich

If your statement is true then it may say more about our best 22 than it does about Terlich

good player, stats last year show evidence that he is a good contributor, there are worse players to worry about I would have thought

Terlich & Strauss will never be regulars in a good, top 8 side. If you could merge their respective strengths you would still only have a good player.

I see the small Defender as Clisby in the short/medium term..

I think Grimes needs to lift with his decision making more than Terlich.

Terls wouldn't get a run with a top 8 side imo, he is in the best 22 now because he is the best we have but i can't see him playing a huge role when we start to seriously improve

A good 21 game player.

A good 21 game player.

The likes of Terlich get marked a little harder ( and rightly so) as they are mature aged and are expected to adapt pretty quickly - as opposed to drafting your 18 year olds.