Clarke is coming off his second knee reco. He is long shot to make an AFL career
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
2024 Draft Thread
- Thread starter Mr T.
- Start date
Entirely possible that YouTube has put together a very uninspiring highlight clip for Moraes and Algar, perhaps they have hidden talents, but if that’s what’s left on the board I would be taking the ruckman or trading out and waiting for the rookie draft.
We played it safe with our long-term vision for the game while taking risks on the individual selections within that safe broader vision.
The first round revealed that Richmond is committed to the idea that an optimised future of AFL will continue to include the same number of talls as today. If that's our vision, then we were smart to recruit a bag of talls early in the rebuild.
Now, some people believe the future is small. Even the #1 contested marking player in the competition only takes 1 contested mark per half of football. Only 2 CMs per game. They rarely influence finals. Most GF goals are kicked in general play from I50 handball chains or from shorter, intentional kicks to players in space. Short players can mark those balls. So, some argue in favour of abandoning the "kick it long to a tall player" strategy entirely.
The second argument for tall players is that you still need to bring the ball to ground to prevent the opposition from taking intercept marks (which are highly damaging as a fast counter attack). However, in a Grand Final setting, medium players like Townsend and Caddy have succeeded at this task, so height isn't a prerequisite. There's still merit to some height helping to nuetralise their intercept defenders. But still, there's nothing forcing us to kick it to packs I50, and how much should we invest in what is effectively a modern day "tagger" for their best defender?
Anyway, we took the traditional approach and have done a flawless job within that paradigm. It's probably for the best. If we took an extreme view regarding the future of the game, then we'd risk ruining this rebuild on a direction that's only been tested in spurts. It's interesting to think about, but now that we've shown our hand, I'll back them in. Go Tiges!
The first round revealed that Richmond is committed to the idea that an optimised future of AFL will continue to include the same number of talls as today. If that's our vision, then we were smart to recruit a bag of talls early in the rebuild.
Now, some people believe the future is small. Even the #1 contested marking player in the competition only takes 1 contested mark per half of football. Only 2 CMs per game. They rarely influence finals. Most GF goals are kicked in general play from I50 handball chains or from shorter, intentional kicks to players in space. Short players can mark those balls. So, some argue in favour of abandoning the "kick it long to a tall player" strategy entirely.
The second argument for tall players is that you still need to bring the ball to ground to prevent the opposition from taking intercept marks (which are highly damaging as a fast counter attack). However, in a Grand Final setting, medium players like Townsend and Caddy have succeeded at this task, so height isn't a prerequisite. There's still merit to some height helping to nuetralise their intercept defenders. But still, there's nothing forcing us to kick it to packs I50, and how much should we invest in what is effectively a modern day "tagger" for their best defender?
Anyway, we took the traditional approach and have done a flawless job within that paradigm. It's probably for the best. If we took an extreme view regarding the future of the game, then we'd risk ruining this rebuild on a direction that's only been tested in spurts. It's interesting to think about, but now that we've shown our hand, I'll back them in. Go Tiges!
Very true however people will be judging it after next years preseason game(s)!
We have definitely gone for high risk high reward so only time will tell if we have got it wrong or not. However taking Tauru wouldn’t have improved the situation either, he also has a poor injury record over the last 2 years. He could also be classed as high risk high reward.
Don' t get me wrong mate, I was very pleased he slid so far and we grabbed him.
I was just amused when Shifter came out with the line that is trotted out at every draft and a few of us on here get a bit of a laugh at.
No sarcastic or cynical intentions
True, they discussed his back last night, that's a potential snag in the road.
No, no one from Essendon should get the sack, life time tenure to all of them
Gellong will have first pick tonight
We won't be taking anyone else only upgrading young
We won't be taking anyone else only upgrading young
Watch tonight we don't get the picks; Essendon just lose them and everyone else moves up.
Shifter I agree, he thinks everyone is a star but when said by Geisch & Blair in separate interviews I will take them at their word as there was no need for spin last night.
Cheers
I don't know mate. From my pov, and what was conveyed at the club's event, it was more about taking the player we had listed as the best at the pick, regardless of injury concerns. Giesh Jnr also mentioned how all of the players (including Bill & Ted 3's Jonty Joins the Band) were very high quality individuals, as well as great talents.
Who the hell made Taj bend the knee for that photo. Have they no respect for RFC's future?
