-
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.
McGuane, White & Derrickx Get 1 Year Extensions
- Thread starter Baloo
- Start date
Ridley said:
Don't have to do much to get contract extensions at Richmond do you?
Story of Matthew White's and Luke McGuane's careers. To a lesser extent Jackson too (although he did manage a decent B&F result a fair years ago when we were a rabble).
Keeping or delisting Macg and white has nothing to do with rebuilding our list. The add us nothing revuilding wise so how is that different to getting a 24 yo state leaguer. He won't be any worse, and could turn out to be quite good ala MorrisDisco08 said:
Disco08 said:
Playstation mentality is good disco. For me it captures some of the over-the-top reactions to some individual list management decision by some people. Its as if people think they have some sort of vicarious control, like playing Playstation 'AFL Manager', and unsurpassed expertise. And throw a tantrum when the club doesn't comply with their imaginary joystick. No individual is going to agree with every individual recruitment or selection decision.
Re: Re: Jayden Post
Yeah Aaron Shattock is the poster boy for bum premiership players. Every time I watch a GF replay I see a players and think 'holy crap, I'd forgotten he'd played in a flag'.
uhuh uhuh said:
Yeah Aaron Shattock is the poster boy for bum premiership players. Every time I watch a GF replay I see a players and think 'holy crap, I'd forgotten he'd played in a flag'.
keepa lids onit said:
That's your opinion. I actually tend to agree with it too, but for the sake of a couple of depth places that have no effect on the rebuild, I don't see the point in all the angst.
Not too long ago McGuane and White were integral parts of the senior team. Since 09 they've gradually been replaced by younger, better players to the point where they clearly are only providing depth in case of disaster. They're also obviously going to make way for more draftees in the very near future. What's the problem?
Well said, Ty and nails the truth of it. Any one of them would have to put in a huge season to keep their spots on the list for 2014.Ty Esler said:
Am I right in thinking that if we delisted all three now then we would have to draft some kids deep into the draft that more than likely would not be worth any better than those three and then we would have to keep them for two years. Then next year we have to delist at least three players to enable us to take part in next years draft.
I think this is good list management they stay give us mature players to come in if injuries require them and they have the chance to show they can stay further or they get selisted next year and we have our minimum three delistings we need to make.
I think this is good list management they stay give us mature players to come in if injuries require them and they have the chance to show they can stay further or they get selisted next year and we have our minimum three delistings we need to make.
brigadiertiger said:
No not correct. As Lids says below we can draft 23 yo state league players on a 1 year deal. We will know very quickly if they are going to add anything ala Morris. If not, no loss we're where we are now & we go again next year, if they do perform, hey hey hey we've added a player of worth.
As was shown this year when injuries hit & depth is required against decent teams (or not decent sometimes) White, & also Derikz & McGuane have shown they cant be relied upon & lack of depth it still costs us games anyway.
Leysy would be staggered if Jackson & Co couldnt recruit a better state league player than Matt White. Appparently we have employed a person to do this. If they can't we have some very serious problems in talent identification.
There is no point keeping them all? Nothing to lose by jettisoning a minimum one of them.
Leysy really doesnt understand how anyone can put up an arguement against that.
keepa lids onit said:
Dont mind this at all, even though Whitey has his downside he is a great team player and he's been a tiger for life.. If nothing else, he teaches the younger players pride in the jumper with his determination to succeed.
Lukey earned his contract late in the season and Derickx is still bulking up for his role after an injury riddled 1st season and a bit. Tom might be a mature recruit but he still needs to get his fitness up to speed to play consistant AFL footy. This will be his make or break year, hence the 1 year deal..
Lukey earned his contract late in the season and Derickx is still bulking up for his role after an injury riddled 1st season and a bit. Tom might be a mature recruit but he still needs to get his fitness up to speed to play consistant AFL footy. This will be his make or break year, hence the 1 year deal..
Leysy Days said:
I'll argue this point. McGuane did quite well up forward for his role when he came in. Made some embarrassing blunders but his return was more than we could reasonably expect. He is purely depth and hopefully he will make the most of his year and force competition for spots and make the most of his opportunities he does get. Would prefer not to see him in the backline but he is also depth there.
Derickx I cannot compliment after that disgusting dropped mark against Gold Coast (his whole game actually) owever I would prefer him to Graham and since he is gone I am happy.
White is also depth, a bloke that gives his all and sets a good example o nthe track. MAny would argue not enough to get another year but he has experience in a list full of youth and will play games for us next year. I like the kid and hope he also makes the most of the extra year he has gotten and keeps his spot on the list with some good performances. I also agree with a previous poster that he would be a good sub for a fair portion of the year.
As for Post, he is the only otehr possible bloke that should have been kept. I dont know the reason he is gone but if it as mooted that he wasnt putting in the hard yards then we are better off without him and have osmeone in the culture who is pulling their weight. If that is not the reason I would have kept him but his lack of real courage in some situations this year that I witnessed were enough for me to have lost him as a poitential player for the future.
And I am sure if the recruiters thought there were state league players out there that are better and would fit in with our list management then these blokes owuldnt be around.
Leysy Days said:
Funny that you assume we have serious talent identification problems because they didn't delist a player you personally don't rate when all and sundry have been singing the virtues of our talent identification process after some excellent low cost acquisitions we've made over the last couple of years.
We've got plenty of spots still to fill, especially on the rookie list. We can get the state league players we like without having to delist these three. As they are these three are presumably low cost, one year back ups. Big deal.