-
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.
Did Gaspar Gate mark the turning of the tide for the RFC.
- Thread starter gustiger12
- Start date
the claw said:
Absolutely correct. Common sense Claws yet again.
Im sure their wouldve been other options and Millar wouldve been a worthy rooky option give him a go and see if hes good enough great if not theres no loss, nothing ventured nothing gained and looking at kids that what the rookie list is for.
The club already knows Howat aint up to it its been proven.
Howats re rookying after being sacked twice by a coach that stated he wasnt hard at it enough and one sided is laughable and highlights why this club has been a laughing stock.
Simple formula for improvement.
Keep those that can.
Get rid of those that cant.
rosy23 said:
Agree ... I don't know if anyone else has commented on this but in the Kellaway situation (this is on only page 4 of a 10 page thread but...), Wallace made it clear at the after-match function (At least the upstairs interview) that Andy was offered the chance to play his farewell game, but as he was injured didn't feel he could give 100% so declined.
Not sure how true that actually is, and even if so obviously there would be more to it (His dissapointment etc) but it is what TW said to the members.
At the very least, Terry certainly didn't portray it as a dummy spit. So if anyone in the past has suggested that it was/may have been ... They need to listen to what the club actually said.
Ian4 said:
Really hard decisons? By that I mean unpopular.
Very few IMO.
Andy Kellaway & a couple at the selection table in his third year and that's about it.
Was going to put Ottens in there but he wanted out so it doesn't count.
rosy23 said:
I think (and hope) that Gas will be remembered as a great servant of the club and that he was, during his time a very good defender who earned all Australian honours...
However at the end of the day I think that Thursfield is a much better option than Gas simply because of the way the modern game is played and in particular the game plan that Wall ace wants to implement with run and carry. Gas simply didn't fit in with the game plan. His lack of footskills was his achilles heel and while he could still be a defensive, he lacked the skills to be an attacking defender in the mould of someone like Scarlett. In short I think the game had passed him by.
Will can be a good defender and has the ability to run off and deliver the ball well, however he lacks the body size at present to play on the gorilla's, but it is certainly time to give the game time to the younger guys.
With the recruiting of Rance and maybe Silverster, I think will be used more as a 2nd or 3rd tall back, not as fullback. He is more suited to playing on the Russell Robertson type forwards.
Although I appreciate your comments Gus I don't think you answered my question. I put the emphasis on "at that stage" because of the reasons Terry gave then. I understand about developing kids for the future but I didn't ask about that.
I asked about Kel because from memory he was the one who replaced Gas in the side so you'd think by comments at the time that Terry thought had caught up to or was equal to Gas 5 rounds in to last season.
As Hayfever alluded to Gas' season hadn't been that bad and he was up in the highest vote getters in the PRE player of the year for the first three or so weeeks and he left after Rd 5.
I asked about Kel because from memory he was the one who replaced Gas in the side so you'd think by comments at the time that Terry thought had caught up to or was equal to Gas 5 rounds in to last season.
As Hayfever alluded to Gas' season hadn't been that bad and he was up in the highest vote getters in the PRE player of the year for the first three or so weeeks and he left after Rd 5.
rosy23 said:
I think if we are going to compare players, I think that Will is the comparison to make as he is the one who basically took Gas' spot at FB, if there is such a thing these days, with matchups etc. I don't understand your comparison will Kel as they are different player who play different positions. I think your drawing a long bow by saying that because Moore came into the side that Wallace was inferring that he had caught up to Gas. He was obviously at the time considered the next in line by the powers to be. But in answer to your question no I don't think Kel had reached Gas' level or anywhere close to it, but when you are talking about youth you could also talk about Polak and McGuane who were playing in defensive posts and yes I do beleive that they had both caught up to Gas. Whilst Kel cant play on the Giants that Gas did in his heyday, Gas was cut up by Medhurst who is the type of player that Moore could infact match up on reasonably well. From memory Medhurst kicked 4 on Gas that day and I don't think Kel would have done much worse.
Kel may have replaced Gas in the side, but I don't think that means he took his spot.
It could be argued that Gas' form hadn't been all that great and many on here were calling for him to be dropped. Wallace said his form hadn't been horrid, which is far from saying his form was good and to me was a polite way of saying as much.
At that point in his career I don't think Gas offered us anything going forward and was coming off a very ordinary season after his knee. He was not capable of playing the game that Wallace is trying to implement and unfortunately there is only going to be one outcome in that case. I think the call should have been made at the end of the previous year, but can see the point of keeping him as insurance with Will coming of a Knee himself, but what was Gas told at the end of 2006. Was he told he was only being kept on as Insurance. I don't know and maybe these questions would answer a lot of questions for many. Surely the delisting of AK was a sign for him.
I think the ones that had definety caught upt o Gas were Thursfield and Polak and with Bowden holding down the CHB spot where do you play Gas. He was really a specialist fullback.
But if you use the "at that stage" argument then the club will never progress and that is the crux of the thread. "Did the decision mark a change in the thinking of the club that fast tracking the kids was the way forward?"
The retirement of champions is always a difficult task, especially when that player thinks he can go on when his time is up. Wayne Carey was a classic example of this. Great player, one of the greatest, but his time at Adelaide did little for his legacy.
The Richmond Football Club must keep there focus on the future if we are to be a force again and that means that at times hard decisions have to be made.
So for me Rosy at that stage the decision was the right one, but one that probably should have been made at the end of 2006, but thats easy to say in hindsight. Yes it may have been handled a little better, but players are well renumerated for there services and they know from day one that it is a cut throat business.
Hope that answers your question.
Redford said:
Yeah but he weakened and towed the line towards the end of the season choosing to conform and don the Polo. See he folds under peer group pressure. Told you these hard decisions wouldn't last. ;D
could be a little out but wallace has had 31 players go thru the system. 10 of them have been retirements.gustiger12 said:
he has traded just 2 of them away for picks or player for player swaps. this tells us a number of things we know.1 our players generally were crap. 2 we hang onto players until they have no value in a trade simply put we habg onto them for to long. of the two players traded ottens walked out. and we offloaded fiora to keep our no1 psd pick.
the amount of players he has has traded for or taken as recycleds is 12. and the list of 12 does not make for good reading. the amount of players who have been taken in wallaces time but are already gone is 8. there is another 8 or so already on shaky ground.
if we do miller from 2002 to 2007 it is even worse. in fact the amount of players we have had to get rid of that have come to the club in millers time is substantial. it seems every yr wallace is forced to get rid of miller selections.
the claw said:
Seems we won't have to worry about that much longer with Craig Cameron coming onboard.. ;D