17 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

So you would delist a defender with 100+ games experience and pay out his contract and maybe with a decent pre season under his belt get back to where he was to get the extension,   to recruit a guy who has managed 12 games in 3 yrs? And one who threw a sulk

 

The above quote was your first response. ^

A response which was typically defensive and suggestive to your brainwashed mind. The poster clearly outlined that Garland would be his first choice to go, BUT he is still contracted. (Inferring that it's problematic and in no way suggesting that his contract should be paid out in that initial post).

Is it any wonder why people think that 'your' opinion in regards to what our list needs is completely and utterly clouded?

Most obviously I'm as far from an 'expert' as you are, the only difference between us is that your cognition and analysis of things like list management is completely distorted because of the fact that you have formed relationships with the players. Even if there is evidence to the contrary you still go on and on and on about posters not being 'experts' and they therefore have no right to share thoughts about what our list might need or who should go and who should stay. It's so boring man.

The last sentence of your post directed at me is the only one I accept and agree with. I'll stop reading your posts. 

May the thread go on..

 

1 hour ago, Satyriconhome said:

And you are the expert right? So what position and what club are you on the list management team, would like to run an eye, non critical of course, over some of your list decisions

I could then bow down to your superior knowledge,  maybe not

As this is a forum and the thread is about looking at recruiting Xavier Richards, there will be differing opinions on his worth, mine is in the negative especially if it requires a payout of a contract

You will have to.live with that, or not read or reply to my posts, this course of action may suit us both

The poster you're referring to didn't suggest paying out his current contract as it sits, just expressed where he felt Col sits, because this is a fan forum he has every right to express his views on this. 

you have to acknowledge that at his age, given he's spending so much time in the reserves, if he wasn't contracted he would be quite nervous about being cut, the club clearly sees him as little more than insurance at the moment.

 

 

 .

Col is a legend.  Get off his back.  He'll bounce back this year will Col.  Go Col.  

22 minutes ago, jeck wartz said:

The poster you're referring to didn't suggest paying out his current contract as it sits, just expressed where he felt Col sits, because this is a fan forum he has every right to express his views on this. 

you have to acknowledge that at his age, given he's spending so much time in the reserves, if he wasn't contracted he would be quite nervous about being cut, the club clearly sees him as little more than insurance at the moment.

 

 

 .

Of course he has right to express, same as I do to express my contrary opinion although STMJ doesn't think I have

I am sure Garland has been overjoyed at being stuck at Casey for most of last season, that's why I expect him to lift this year, which is only good for the team, as the competition for spots should bring out the best in everybody

As for Richards,  as I have said previously, it matters little what we think on here, me, can't see why we would recruit him, but if club looks at him cool, although it would require a further delisting

6 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Of course he has right to express, same as I do to express my contrary opinion although STMJ doesn't think I have

I am sure Garland has been overjoyed at being stuck at Casey for most of last season, that's why I expect him to lift this year, which is only good for the team, as the competition for spots should bring out the best in everybody

As for Richards,  as I have said previously, it matters little what we think on here, me, can't see why we would recruit him, but if club looks at him cool, although it would require a further delisting

The question is can he lift, if a regular spot in the best 22 of a team as exciting as ours wasn't a big enough carrot i am not sure what makes the situation so different now. 

if we are to assume given his age that where his form sits is as good as we're going to get, perhaps someone like Richards would be a better bet, given his age/potential upside. 

obviously the contract situation makes it very unlikely, but i reckon if Col doesn't bounce back extremely strongly he won't survive.

18 minutes ago, pinkshark said:

Col is a legend.  Get off his back.  He'll bounce back this year will Col.  Go Col.  

Would be great if he does. At his best he was an important play maker from the backline and a good intercept mark.

3 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

Would be great if he does. At his best he was an important play maker from the backline and a good intercept mark.

Not does Chook  HAS TO

21 hours ago, DeeZee said:

Didn't think we were looking for a defender?

To replace who?

i would've thought we have enough defenders, with Hibberd now in the team and Garland not able to get a game

The obvious one is O mac easily! Would have him in a heartbeat!

He's probably a player Roos would love because he has that ability to play multiple roles (fwd/back), so wouldn't hurt in that regard. But if he's put a price on his head,  which obviously did himself no favors in trade week or at the swans, then he might be beyond the scope of what we're looking at. I'd think we'll be looking at just rookies (including mature agers) at the draft and rookie list. 

29 minutes ago, picket fence said:

The obvious one is O mac easily! Would have him in a heartbeat!

Agree.  I think they're is some sort of mass subconcious delusion amongst posters that O Mac is ready or at least consistently reliable.  Last year at times he was completely out of his depth.  He is a lucky lad in many ways as the coaching staff clearly have faith in him.  I thought Dunn was hard done by to be fair.  Don't get me wrong, I want OMAC to be super successful, I am just pointing out that I find it difficult to believe he is a lock in defender for us each weekend. 

2 minutes ago, pinkshark said:

Agree.  I think they're is some sort of mass subconcious delusion amongst posters that O Mac is ready or at least consistently reliable.  Last year at times he was completely out of his depth.  He is a lucky lad in many ways as the coaching staff clearly have faith in him.  I thought Dunn was hard done by to be fair.  Don't get me wrong, I want OMAC to be super successful, I am just pointing out that I find it difficult to believe he is a lock in defender for us each weekend. 

Unfortunately I agree.

That playing in the Hawthorn game where he's coming through middle, it's apparent he doesn't want the responsibility. He hands the ball off and it immediately comes back because he's the player in the best position for it. He then does that wierd dribble kick to Pedo. It all turns out ok in the end, but he really didn't want that ball.

I reckon he's got a massive potential, and has already shown more than I thought he would at this stage, but I don't think he can be consistently reliable as you say. Needs another season IMO.

1 minute ago, pinkshark said:

Agree.  I think they're is some sort of mass subconcious delusion amongst posters that O Mac is ready or at least consistently reliable.  Last year at times he was completely out of his depth.  He is a lucky lad in many ways as the coaching staff clearly have faith in him.  I thought Dunn was hard done by to be fair.  Don't get me wrong, I want OMAC to be super successful, I am just pointing out that I find it difficult to believe he is a lock in defender for us each weekend. 

From what I've seen of Richards as a defender I think he's much less developed than OMac, in fact he had to go forward and wait for injuries there to get an opportunity, while they had injuries in the back half (to his brother initially) and he didn't get a gig. I think it's universally acknowledged that we sacrificed a lot for OMac to be in the team ahead of Dunn and maybe Garlo, just to get some experience. It's a position where pre-season and Casey games will only get you so far, you need to play against the best to get better yourself and I reckon after his 3rd pre-season he's got the potential to improve as much or more than anyone on our list.

I wasn't over impressed with what little I saw of Richards, he played a role but nothing more, if he wasn't Ted's brother, would he have been on the list in the first place, maybe they thought he displayed similar traits, he didn't look as if he did.

With regard to Col, I'd like to see him play forward and not back, he's been replaced in the backline and if he was relieved of the pressure of the kick out of defence, he might show something worth while. He has good closing speed so he should be able to use this to lead out to the flanks and may snag a few goals, his kicking is not all that bad.

1 hour ago, Choke said:

Unfortunately I agree.

That playing in the Hawthorn game where he's coming through middle, it's apparent he doesn't want the responsibility. He hands the ball off and it immediately comes back because he's the player in the best position for it. He then does that wierd dribble kick to Pedo. It all turns out ok in the end, but he really didn't want that ball.

I reckon he's got a massive potential, and has already shown more than I thought he would at this stage, but I don't think he can be consistently reliable as you say. Needs another season IMO.

Thats a big call to assume he did not want the ball based on the view of the play. Agree he did not expect it to come back to him and had ran the 2-3rd the length of the ground and had decelerated before the ball pinged back. It appears more surprise when it came back and then he has to accelerate again and delivers a haphazard kick under fatigue.

He started off slow but was rarely beaten in the last 8 weeks and hardly made an execution error.

I watched Richards a fair bit towards the end of the season and he didn't look to have the ability to execute skills or made good decisions under pressure. Personally, I would give him a miss.

As for Richards to get back on topic, it is still no from me, but if FD go for him will have my full support (as long as it doesn't mean a Garland delisting)

20 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

As for Richards to get back on topic, it is still no from me, but if FD go for him will have my full support (as long as it doesn't mean a Garland delisting)

Who will have your conditional "full support?"  Richards or the FD?  Would you withdraw your full support for the FD if in their wisdom they delisted Garland? And on the other hand, surely you would not withhold your support Richards if he became an MFC player just because the FD wisely or foolishly delisted Garland?  

Nathan Ablett says hi!!