jabberwocky

Oh but I did answer, go back and have a look.

Went back and had a look, nup no sarcasm there mate. Pretty poor way to try and win an argument. Jarka says, "Oh did I say that, nah I was just being sarcastic". And contrare you are the oracle who seems to have the answers and volunteers them in a discussion in which you actually played no part. Good luck in your future debates.

Jarka you have conceded that dals tackling was an issue and I have conceded that it was not just his tackling. Therefore we are in agreement. I don't know why Hayes wasn't dropped, please enlighten me. I thought we were talking about Dalsanto. You obviously have a combative nature and I don't mind an argument. Talk to you soon. Go back and have a look at what the topic was about ie Brock Mclean and see if you agree with the point I was trying to make to the young guy.

so we are actually fairly close to being in agreement.

This is strange but Ricky Petterd is named as part of the interchange for the reserves. It suggests possibly that there might be a doubt over his fitness. The fact that Newton's not there suggests that he's unfit for one reason or other (I suppose that's pretty obvious isn't it?) SANDRINGHAM v PORT MELBOURNE (Reserves) Sunday 22nd June Trevor Barker Beach Oval at 11:10 AM SANDRINGHAM Backs Cannon Curcio Sargent Half backs Plymin Shakaib McNamara Centreline Hine McConnell Kondarovskis Half forwards Hardiman Cleeve Lyall Forwards Lockwood Zomer Weetra Followers Spencer Williams Fleming Interchange (from) Dean Eaton Gribbin Liddell Monaghan Petterd Summons Torcasio This was taken from the thread re sandys teams this week. No newton. Is this incorrect? Demonland posted it????

Interesting Jarka. I made the call that Dal had a low tackle count and you questioned it and I replied. In fairness it was probably a lack of one percenters than purely his tackle count. You made the statement that he was selfish and yet you refuse to quantify it. Seems you like to try to shoot people down but don't take too kindly to having your own views questioned. If your view that Dalsanto is selfish because he doesn't do enough of the one percenters then we are actually in agreement. Seems you have wasted a lot of effort to actually agree with me.

He hasn't appeared on an injury list this season yet he states that he had a knee then a hamstring problem and rumours abound of a rift with the coach and a poor attitude. Does anyone know why he is not playing this weekend? I am not really a conspiracy theorist but it seems there is a distinct lack of information coming out about this particular player. Why?

in what way is he selfish? he eats all the oranges at half time? hogs the rub down table?

apparently you are easily amused. what was the reason for his ommission then? please enlighten me.

thanks jarka, good to see you've got my back. he laid one tackle last week. you never did state what your point was though.

The secrecy seems to surround one player in particular.

i agree, or garland.

o'keefe is a tough match up. he is very strong overhead. i dont know if either bode or bartram would get the job due to this.

He laid one tackle and gave away 5 free kicks. he was obviously not doing something that he was asked to do. tarzan was trying to make the point that stats were meaningless as the foundation of his attack on Mclean. My point was that possession stats can be misleading but stats such as tackles, clearances etc displays a players real work rate. Go back and read the thread and this should become apparent to you. What exactly was your point?

what about last week?

I saw this and his point was that possession stats can be misleading. hardball gets, clearances and tackles tell the story. in fact i might suggest to you that the reason for dal santos ommission is due to his tackle count being very low or non-existent. Very important stats indeed because it shows the players committment to the team. Richmond recently dropped Pettifer and Bowden for not tackling. Please Tarzan have a look at the stats that matter. You really should give up on this one.

Too many conspiracy theories. The reasons will no doubt be a combination of things. The 12 player rule, management of Petterd's injury and Sautners return. I think it is likely that part of Newton's frustration with going back to Sandy is having to compete with Sautner to be the focal point. I agree with RR. I like Petterd and want to see him return fully fit whether that be this year or next. Same with Frank Grimes. And Jarka, Petterd won't be traded.

agree with that. and the fact that sautner is back which limits newtons chances to get his hands on the footy.

if thats the case we could get him if he really wanted to come over if we got pick 1 in the psd.

does anyone know if davey is out of contract.

Now you're talking. If we picked up all three along with no 1 in the draft, that would be quite a coup. We would need a lot of things to fall our way.

even still if we picked up nick nat in the draft and we had the choice of prismall/davey in the psd or warnock. I would take prismall or davey. Our list has that many holes that we don't have the luxury of selecting back ups.

age?

i agree with most of what you say but there is no guarantee that Warnock is the answer either. I am from the school of thought that a ruckman needs to give you a lot more than hitouts. Either marking or linking up around the ground, kicking goals etc. I dont know enough about warnock to know if he can do this. you are obviously keen on him, what are his strengths??

yeah. i was mislead. i only looked at this thread because of the title.