Well...? 

Please....maybe a little support would not go astray. Think about what it means to have a players back.

 

9 minutes ago, whitito said:

Please....maybe a little support would not go astray. Think about what it means to have a players back.

So his perpetually bad decision making doesn't worry you then?

Don't think so.....most of the time, plays on the edge.

But, he's fast, has lovely hands and can play his role.

I just don't want him to overthink a situation....first option.

8 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

Well...? 

Not a feck.

Tom makes some bad errors but also does some fantastic work.

He'll find more consistency as the team develops its new game style.

More support would be a better option. Wishful thinking but someone like Hurley would do wonders for him. 

Il just kindly walk out of this thread.

2 minutes ago, MikeAlphaTango said:

More support would be a better option. Wishful thinking but someone like Hurley would do wonders for him. 

Totally agree MAT

Nope. I completely agree that he just needs some more support in the backline. 

Yes, I'm always confident when he has the ball in hand but his spoiling and marking ability outweigh any of his deficiencies. Experienced key defenders don't exactly grow on trees either. 

I've gone backwards and forwards on this. 

At the end of the day I think my answer is no because of his elite endurance, good marking and solid defending. 

They are 3 vital tools in a zone defending CHB. Ultimately I think it's up to the rest of the backline to give him cover.

Wagner and Salem have the skills and Hunt the athleticism to combine with Tommy. Vince can and should play half back.

I'd rather chase a 2nd reliable tall to go with Tom than trade him and try and find 2 with less errors. 

I only hope that recent comments on his "uncoachability" have been overstated.

Interesting responses.

So let's say his decision making doesn't improve throughout the course of the season and we're at Round 23, and he's still making the same sorts of errors: does anyone reconsider? I totally get the argument that we've got one KPD with elite attributes and it's easier to stick with him given these, but at what point do these elite traits get overshadowed by turn overs?

Yes, I suppose he's tradable... and we'd get something pretty good for him as he is a very, very good player.

I'd prefer to keep the developed, seasoned, 23yo, 100 odd game, center-half-back, who is consistently the leading aerobic runner at the club and a member of the leadership group.

Anyone is 'tradeable.'

But before you go off and dream of what we will get back, have a think about what you lose and what Tom McDonald could be when he works himself out.

Would it not be easier to surround him with players that take the kicking burden off him?

17 other clubs would queue up for him. He is a massive frustration at times but there is an All Australian KPD in there...

55 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

Well...? 

Fair suck of the sav Adam. What a negative post when we have so much to look forward to. 

10 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Anyone is 'tradeable.'

But before you go off and dream of what we will get back, have a think about what you lose and what Tom McDonald could be when he works himself out.

Would it not be easier to surround him with players that take the kicking burden off him?

Is it really a kicking burden though? He always seems to just do what he likes. Surely they've told him to play to his strengths and not try for a low percentage option, yet that's what he consistently does. We have Salem and Vince taking the pressure off him, but everyone needs to be able to kick. If you can't, you can be a liability. He showed against GWS this year though, that it might be a confidence thing. He was very sure that day.

For the record, I haven't made up my mind one way or the other on Tom, but I had hoped by now he would learn to play to his limitations.

7 minutes ago, hemingway said:

Fair suck of the sav Adam. What a negative post when we have so much to look forward to. 

I wouldn't call it negative. I'd go the old 'realist' route. Only trying to inspire debate.

Vince has only started playing back this year, is more of a mid, and Salem is a kid.

No, I mean actual honest-to-god - HBFs - think Malceski.

He is asked to make kicks because of his own ego but also because of habits ingrained because there are no better options to scream at him for not handing it off. And his kicking is fine, it is his decision making that is the problem. And that can always be tamed.

I wouldn't offload McDonald. He just needs more support down back. He isn't a stay at home defender, but will improve playing alongside one (and a good one). If we managed to snare Hurley in the upcoming trade period, I think we'd see McDonald find more consistency. If we had the luxury of playing McDonald loose man in the backline he'd probably take 10-15 intercept marks a game. We just aren't there yet. Dunn has stagnated, Oscar isn't quite ready, Garland is finished, and White is too short to play a lock down role. TMAC is invaluable for us atm, even if he does have the odd brain fade.

For mine the question posed is  .. Is he tradable ?

Of course he is.

Another question might be ... Would you ?

I'd listen to offers before making a stance.

Imagine how f'ed we'd be if we lost both bookends at the end of the year.

He is, but I wouldn't even though I'm not a huge fan. 

You'd need a KPD in return, and the chances of getting a better one than Tom to come over are pretty slim. 

This thread was obviously started as a result of last weeks game.

Watching him at the Saints game to me he looked like he was playing hurt, nowhere near his normal pace. The 2 weeks before lets no forget he was awesome

14 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

I wouldn't call it negative. I'd go the old 'realist' route. Only trying to inspire debate.

Good response Adam, my response was instinctive.