Power Forward Options...

[samoht]

Some people are (deliberately) reading too much into the discussion re: Walsh and twisting what has been posted in order to incite a reaction.
I find this behaviour appalling.
Is there some etiquette or some moderation that can take part - even via a private message that could bring an end to it please.

No one has remotely suggested that Walsh will be a superstar first up at AFL level (how can they when he's only been reasonably good at VFL level ).

People nevertheless have a right to wonder why other players were given a run and a go at AFL level and Walsh has been by passed - that's all.

.. and Walsh does not need to be a superstar - if he could bring something new to our forward line in the form of defensive pressure (Leon Davis had 36 match winning possessions under little effective pressure !! - our forward line is too slow overall and Walsh may be more effective than another tall option in providing chase- as he has some pace, which would be a step in the right direction).

The moderators cant remain oblivious to this disrespectful behaviour - can they please nip it in the bud now.

[BigMart]

So you say he is not mentioned in the main one....by quayle...who i dont rate anyway.

And listed by two others......which obvously I didnt read...

Although i do see that one of the ones you mentioned had pat mccarthy at #18 and not cripps....Jay clarke and cripps not in the his top 25

The ones i read had us picking up Jed Lamb and Mitch Hallahan

Look, cripps may well be very good.....point was...on the limited research i had done....basically looked at some online phantom drafts on draft day and that was it....when his name was read out i had not heard of him.....wasnt disappointed, had no reason to be as i had never heard anything on him.....but as i said, didnt really look deeply into it in 2010 as i have done previously....there were a number who had not been called out who were known, not necessarily good.....but Darling was clearly the most noteable...

[joffaboy]

Some people are (deliberately) reading too much into the discussion re: Walsh and twisting what has been posted in order to incite a reaction.
I find this behaviour appalling.
Is there some etiquette or some moderation that can take part - even via a private message that could bring an end to it please.

No one has remotely suggested that Walsh will be a superstar first up at AFL level (how can they when he's only been reasonably good at VFL level ).

People nevertheless have a right to wonder why other players were given a run and a go at AFL level and Walsh has been by passed - that's all.

.. and Walsh does not need to be a superstar - if he could bring something new to our forward line in the form of defensive pressure (Leon Davis had 36 match winning possessions under little effective pressure !! - our forward line is too slow overall and Walsh may be more effective than another tall option in providing chase- as he has some pace, which would be a step in the right direction).

The moderators cant remain oblivious to this disrespectful behaviour - can they please nip it in the bud now.

What a joke of a post.

Because there is an alternate POV you want moderators to step in.

What an absolute sook you must be.

I showed your argument up last week as fatuous and ignorant.

What type of bully are you? To even infer that because others have shown your silly argument to be the garbage that it was, you want that alternate FACTUAL Pov censored.

So you can post what you like but when somebody else calls you on it you want to have it stopped

Bloody hell, what a joke. I find your whinging and calling for censorship of a legitmate argument appalling and you should actually try to defend you position instead of crying to moderators because you have had your stupid DEMANDS blown out of the water.

Tell you what, dont post ignorant crap, have a think about what you are posting, have some basis for your argument, and prosectute it, and ther will be no need for derision or sarcasm.

You sook

[samoht]

Some people are (deliberately) reading too much into the discussion re: Walsh and twisting what has been posted in order to incite a reaction.
I find this behaviour appalling.
Is there some etiquette or some moderation that can take part - even via a private message that could bring an end to it please.

No one has remotely suggested that Walsh will be a superstar first up at AFL level (how can they when he's only been reasonably good at VFL level ).

People nevertheless have a right to wonder why other players were given a run and a go at AFL level and Walsh has been by passed - that's all.

.. and Walsh does not need to be a superstar - if he could bring something new to our forward line in the form of defensive pressure (Leon Davis had 36 match winning possessions under little effective pressure !! - our forward line is too slow overall and Walsh may be more effective than another tall option in providing chase- as he has some pace, which would be a step in the right direction).

The moderators cant remain oblivious to this disrespectful behaviour - can they please nip it in the bud now.

What a joke of a post.

Because there is an alternate POV you want moderators to step in.

What an absolute sook you must be.

I showed your argument up last week as fatuous and ignorant.

What type of bully are you? To even infer that because others have shown your silly argument to be the garbage that it was, you want that alternate FACTUAL Pov censored.

So you can post what you like but when somebody else calls you on it you want to have it stopped

Bloody hell, what a joke. I find your whinging and calling for censorship of a legitmate argument appalling and you should actually try to defend you position instead of crying to moderators because you have had your stupid DEMANDS blown out of the water.

Tell you what, dont post ignorant crap, have a think about what you are posting, have some basis for your argument, and prosectute it, and ther will be no need for derision or sarcasm.

You sook

An alternate POV is fine .. but to take an alternate POV and twist/distort it is not.
Who has suggested that TW is a superstar ?

The ridiculous thing is you're arguing against things that you're making up !!!! .. and not alternate POV's .. just your alternate version of other people's POV's.

So you're arguing with/against your own fertile imagination at the end !!

[Dr Spaceman]

What a fickle lot some people are on here.

Last week we had the power forward of the century languishing at Sandy in Tommy Walsh.

This week he doesn't even get a mention  :D 

According to some (many who have NEVER even seen him play) Walsh is the answer to all our prayers up forward.

So in saying that, and considering we have Plugger, Jezza, Hudson, Coleman, and Dunstall all rolled into one in T.Walsh, wouldn't the money be better spent on getting some midfield pace and skill?

Discuss

I agree Joffa.
Throw in Stanley in to that potential mix too. Hopefully he can show something with an uninterrupted pre-season.

Focus on improving the midfield with some pace and skill. Think with better delivery, we'd see both Roo and Kosi improve their output also.

What i find interesting is that everyone is trying to find another tall to help Roo as he isnt kicking as many goals but all want Kosi to stay up forward even though he is averaging 0.9 goals a game... (1.25 over past 2 years)

Surely our main aim must be to find someone who can play as that 2nd main tall up and can actually hit the scoreboard.

Posted by tony74 on another thread and perhaps missed by many. 

At training yesterday Zac negated both Roo and Kosi in set plays. He is much taller than you think. There was one other player in that group ( Roo, Kosi, Zac, Chips, Arch and Tommy ) who really stood out and was rarely beaten and very clean with his hands............   no.41- Paul Cahill

Not saying he's the answer but the club could do a lot worse than keeping this guy on the list. Need to get him right mentally and physically of course!

How long do we give these blokes, hasnt really shown any signs that he would dominate in the VFL, let alone AFL.

Ahhhh, so it's a dominator you're looking for!  

No just someone that shows signs that he is capable of kicking a bagful... Only bloke down there that has shown that regularly is Johnson  

Now the big Irishman has the biggest bagful of them all (6)

Next week, Blake out, Tommy in

[joffaboy]

Some people are (deliberately) reading too much into the discussion re: Walsh and twisting what has been posted in order to incite a reaction.
I find this behaviour appalling.
Is there some etiquette or some moderation that can take part - even via a private message that could bring an end to it please.

No one has remotely suggested that Walsh will be a superstar first up at AFL level (how can they when he's only been reasonably good at VFL level ).

People nevertheless have a right to wonder why other players were given a run and a go at AFL level and Walsh has been by passed - that's all.

.. and Walsh does not need to be a superstar - if he could bring something new to our forward line in the form of defensive pressure (Leon Davis had 36 match winning possessions under little effective pressure !! - our forward line is too slow overall and Walsh may be more effective than another tall option in providing chase- as he has some pace, which would be a step in the right direction).

The moderators cant remain oblivious to this disrespectful behaviour - can they please nip it in the bud now.

What a joke of a post.

Because there is an alternate POV you want moderators to step in.

What an absolute sook you must be.

I showed your argument up last week as fatuous and ignorant.

What type of bully are you? To even infer that because others have shown your silly argument to be the garbage that it was, you want that alternate FACTUAL Pov censored.

So you can post what you like but when somebody else calls you on it you want to have it stopped

Bloody hell, what a joke. I find your whinging and calling for censorship of a legitmate argument appalling and you should actually try to defend you position instead of crying to moderators because you have had your stupid DEMANDS blown out of the water.

Tell you what, dont post ignorant crap, have a think about what you are posting, have some basis for your argument, and prosectute it, and ther will be no need for derision or sarcasm.

You sook

An alternate POV is fine .. but to take an alternate POV and twist/distort it is not.
Who has suggested that TW is a superstar ?

The ridiculous thing is you're arguing against things that you're making up !!!! .. and not alternate POV's .. just your alternate version of other people's POV's.

So you're arguing with/against your own fertile imagination at the end !!

Did I make up the fact that you wouldn't answer one question about Walsh and if you had seen him play?

For the record, i never once said Walsh shouldn't play in the seniors and that I hoped he would play for us for years. I see he got 6 today, which is just fantastic.

Your argument was fatuous and ignorant. Your whinging to the mods because someone ridiculed your ignorance is pathetic and foolish and makes you look like a child.

Go and have a good sook you embarrassment.

Cabbage

[samoht]

I think Walsh has answered your question.... and of course I've seen Walsh play who hasn't (haven't you?) .. what a silly question.

Did you see Heyne or Smith or Johnson or Cripps or Archer or Stanley or Ledger or Siposs play before they were given a go ? ,, but the point is they were given a go even when some of them haven't even been consistently amongst the best players at VFL (even when their bodies were not really ready in Siposs, Cripps and Ledger's case)- maybe only after an odd good game.

Your question implied that you considered that Walsh was not performing .. perhaps you have never seen him play then (how come ?).. so why even pose that silly question ?
You must be feeling embarrassed by your loaded question now.

it's laughable that you would consider me ignorant and fatuous for duly ignoring an ignorant and fatuous question that you posed (just because you deem it to be a valid question that deserves an answer doesn't actually make it one) - but you go ahead and twist it any way you like as per normal.

Name calling is not only childish, it also indicates that you're losing an argument - but anyway if a cabbage is a person who ignores silly questions .. then I'm a super, duper one.

[True Blue Sainter]

Walker has hit some consistent form.

Butcher has started his AFL career very nicely.

Our very own Irishman is staking a claim.

Who is in the box seat?

[saintjake]

Wow people on here amaze me.
Why would we want to go after ambling like butcher who has played two games- two good ones at that.
When we could have given Walsh/Johnson a gig and they might of done the same. IMO we have a range of forward options Stanley has been injured alot (Ross spoke about him last bight kn OWAAT as an option)
Cahill looks like if he applied himslef he could do it. Johnson looks capable he went through a couple of week burst where he kicked bags of four (although I see him more as a leadup onto the wings option with a long raking kick in) and of course Walsh who I still believe can cut it but unfortunately won't be given a chance this year.
Personally I think we have a group of forwards that can with a bit of luck and hard work come in and give us a new look. We should invest in some
More mids. That replace blokes like peake ray and polo to depth players.

Why would we want to trade for an2 game player when he won't get a
Chance for us anyway when we have the cattle in the backyard to do some damage with just a tiny bit of luck and faith

Siposs looks at though he will cut it. He is that sort of medium option but is also quite good when the ball hits the deck and can apply pressure.
Walsh looks like he can be that big brute fulll forward but with a bit of pace and agility (a bit like Dawes)
Johnson I really like and have been amazed that some blokes have been calling for him to be delisted.
I see him as another medium option (with Roo at chf and Walsh at FF) he is quick IMO can seems to be a pretty decent mark and from the games I've seen at sandy he seems to be able to lead up onto the flanks/wings kind of like that link player from the mids to forwards.
Stanley I hope we persist with there's question marks over his dedication and hardness but he is still only young give him time to develop any bloke that is 200 cm with agility and speed is worth persisting with. (nix naitanui anyone)
And Cahill seems to me like he has all the gifts to be your typical Leading FF
Sit in the square, burst out take a mark, go back kick a goal. Does he have enough defensive side to his game?
In my eyes we have options. It's more about
Biting the bullet and given them
A chance.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Butcher - Certainly not a cheaper option, but good potential. Potentially difficult trade, Port probably won't think our first rounder's enough and who wants to play for them?

Very few would want to play for them, but fortunately there is the option of trading someone to another club for a draft pick, then on-trading that pick to Port. Giving them our first round pick, plus another relatively high pick.

[saintjake]

Butcher - Certainly not a cheaper option, but good potential. Potentially difficult trade, Port probably won't think our first rounder's enough and who wants to play for them?

Very few would want to play for them, but fortunately there is the option of trading someone to another club for a draft pick, then on-trading that pick to Port. Giving them our first round pick, plus another relatively high pick.

Why the f*** do we wantto on trade our picks for
A
Young forward who Ross won't even effing put on the field

[goddardisgod]

Butcher - Certainly not a cheaper option, but good potential. Potentially difficult trade, Port probably won't think our first rounder's enough and who wants to play for them?

Very few would want to play for them, but fortunately there is the option of trading someone to another club for a draft pick, then on-trading that pick to Port. Giving them our first round pick, plus another relatively high pick.

Why the f*** do we wantto on trade our picks for
A
Young forward who Ross won't even effing put on the field

He came from another club. Ross will play him.

[plugger66]

Someone makes up a name on here as either we are interested in getting or they want to come to us and we run with it as fact. Butcher to Saints next year as much hope as probably Judd and 400 other players. Now if we want to run with fact I would be looking at Dawes. He is coming.

[dcstkfc]

Someone makes up a name on here as either we are interested in getting or they want to come to us and we run with it as fact. Butcher to Saints next year as much hope as probably Judd and 400 other players. Now if we want to run with fact I would be looking at Dawes. He is coming.

What do you think we'll have to give up for him plugger? Apart from a fair chunk of cap space.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Someone makes up a name on here as either we are interested in getting or they want to come to us and we run with it as fact.

Who the f*** is "running with it as fact"? That is a low point, even for you.

[StNoodles]

Someone makes up a name on here as either we are interested in getting or they want to come to us and we run with it as fact. Butcher to Saints next year as much hope as probably Judd and 400 other players. Now if we want to run with fact I would be looking at Dawes. He is coming.

are you teasing mr plugger?

[matrix]

LOL
dawes is steps away from resigned with the pies apparently

[shmic_s]

The fish are just leaping into the boat...

[plugger66]

Someone makes up a name on here as either we are interested in getting or they want to come to us and we run with it as fact.

Who the f*** is "running with it as fact"? That is a low point, even for you.

Are you still the guy who wants players dropped after one poor game even if they were best 10 weeks in a row before that as long as someone is playing well to replace them. That was low even for one of your posts. You are funny though. Maybe if we had some guts in selection we would have beaten Sydney last week.

[plugger66]

LOL
dawes is steps away from resigned with the pies apparently

That is my point. Are you Tim Webster?

[Dr Spaceman]

LOL
dawes is steps away from resigned with the pies apparently

That is my point. Are you Tim Webster?

Are you saying he can't get it up?

[plugger66]

LOL
dawes is steps away from resigned with the pies apparently

That is my point. Are you Tim Webster?

Are you saying he can't get it up?

Well apperently Nathan Buckley resigned from the pies about 10 years ago according to Tim Webster and now it looks like Dawes is following in his foot steps.

[saint tash]

LOL
dawes is steps away from resigned with the pies apparently

And a Sandy Dragons boy too.

[gringo]

I think we had guts at selection against Sydney, that was the problem.

[matrix]

who in the blue f****** hell is tim webster?