Why did RL overlook Walsh?

Sainternist · Tue 18 Oct 2011 7:42pm

Surely, there has to be a reason for this?

Younger players like Sippos, Ledger and Lynch were given a chance over him.

Perhaps he is not really as good as he has been touted as being?

Saints94 · Post: # 1166264Post **Saints94** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 7:43pm

He should have played him against Carlton at least.....

plugger66 · Post: # 1166265Post **plugger66** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 7:43pm

Saints94 wrote:He should have played him against Carlton at least.....

Because he would have stayed then.

Dr Spaceman · Tue 18 Oct 2011 7:46pm

Sainternist wrote:Surely, there has to be a reason for this?

Younger players like Sippos, Ledger and Lynch were given a chance over him.

Perhaps he is not really as good as he has been touted as being?

Tommy or Ross?

clarky449 · Post: # 1166270Post **clarky449** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 7:48pm

plugger66 wrote:
Saints94 wrote:He should have played him against Carlton at least.....
Because he would have stayed then.

Im curious Plugger, do you think Tommy Walsh should of played a game last season?

plugger66 · Post: # 1166273Post **plugger66** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 7:49pm

clarky449 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Saints94 wrote:He should have played him against Carlton at least.....
Because he would have stayed then.
Im curious Plugger, do you think Tommy Walsh should of played a game last season?

Maybe, probably. really dont know but I am guessing a few games wouldnt have meant much apart from getting a better or worse pick for him.

Sainternist · Tue 18 Oct 2011 7:51pm

There were a lot of doubters about Tommy on here saying he was overhyped and no one would have paid so much attention to him if he wasn't Irish. Perhaps there is some merit in those claims?

Posters on here like Bernard Shakey seemed to have watched a lot of Sandy games and BS seemed dubious.

clarky449 · Post: # 1166276Post **clarky449** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 7:51pm

plugger66 wrote:
clarky449 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Saints94 wrote:He should have played him against Carlton at least.....
Because he would have stayed then.
Im curious Plugger, do you think Tommy Walsh should of played a game last season?
Maybe, probably. really dont know but I am guessing a few games wouldnt have meant much apart from getting a better or worse pick for him.

All i asked was whether you think he should of played. So thankyou

Dr Spaceman · Tue 18 Oct 2011 7:58pm

plugger66 wrote:
clarky449 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Saints94 wrote:He should have played him against Carlton at least.....
Because he would have stayed then.
Im curious Plugger, do you think Tommy Walsh should of played a game last season?
Maybe, probably. really dont know but I am guessing a few games wouldnt have meant much apart from getting a better or worse pick for him.

Would have given us a better feel of his true value, whether that be higher than the Swans opinion, lower than ours or somewhere in between.

plugger66 · Post: # 1166285Post **plugger66** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:00pm

Dr Spaceman wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
clarky449 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Saints94 wrote:He should have played him against Carlton at least.....
Because he would have stayed then.
Im curious Plugger, do you think Tommy Walsh should of played a game last season?
Maybe, probably. really dont know but I am guessing a few games wouldnt have meant much apart from getting a better or worse pick for him.
Would have given us a better feel of his true value, whether that be higher than the Swans opinion, lower than ours or somewhere in between.

Just like it did with Lynch.

barks4eva · Post: # 1166286Post **barks4eva** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:01pm

Perhaps Ross Lyon knew Walsh was leaving by mid year and therefore chose not to play him.

This possibility could explain why he did not get selected!

thejiggingsaint · Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:05pm

Dr Spaceman · Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:06pm

plugger66 wrote:
Dr Spaceman wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
clarky449 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Saints94 wrote:He should have played him against Carlton at least.....
Because he would have stayed then.
Im curious Plugger, do you think Tommy Walsh should of played a game last season?
Maybe, probably. really dont know but I am guessing a few games wouldnt have meant much apart from getting a better or worse pick for him.
Would have given us a better feel of his true value, whether that be higher than the Swans opinion, lower than ours or somewhere in between.
Just like it did with Lynch.

At least we had a fair idea of his worth and his potential and therefore whether he was worth fighting for.

With TW it was all theoretical.

Never mind, it's all history now.

Scoop · Post: # 1166292Post **Scoop** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:06pm

mad saint guy · Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:06pm

A few reasons

He did take a while to develop; probably wasn't ready in 2010
Lyon made him learn the game as a defender, which meant that he was behind a long list of backmen until he finally moved forward late this year
When he did finally get a chance up forward, we had hit some form and Lyon has always refused to change a winning side

SaintPav · Post: # 1166297Post **SaintPav** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:08pm

Sainternist wrote:There were a lot of doubters about Tommy on here saying he was overhyped and no one would have paid so much attention to him if he wasn't Irish. Perhaps there is some merit in those claims?

Posters on here like Bernard Shakey seemed to have watched a lot of Sandy games and BS seemed dubious.

The probabilty of Walsh being a superstar in the AFL is infentisimle.

He'd be a bit of a plodder at best and IMO would turn out to be a player in the mould of a Karmicheal Hunt or Setanta.

Having said that, he is a great athlete and it has been a phenominal effort to get this far.

thejiggingsaint · Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:12pm

I went along to a couple of Sandy matches when Tom Walsh played, and I honnestly thought he was "alright" or "not bad" nothing I saw made me think he was smashing down the door for selection in the first team....of course it was only 2 games, and he may not have been at his best

markp · Post: # 1166305Post **markp** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:24pm

How did BJ go in his first game of AFL?... or Roo?... or McGough?

We would've learned jack shyte.

As pointed out he wouldn't sign a contract mid-year, so maybe it was plain to see what was going to happen.... and as also pointed out, most all the other youngsters got a gig....

And I wonder, could it have affected our perilous SC position if he'd played?

thejiggingsaint · Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:30pm

Could well be perhaps that the deal to take him to Sydney had been WELL DONE AND DUSTED (a-la Lying to freo) much earlier in the season than just these past few weeks. As I say, pity to lose him, no use in wasting any energy on him now, nothing can be gained from that

Dr Spaceman · Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:34pm

thejiggingsaint wrote:Could well be perhaps that the deal to take him to Sydney had been WELL DONE AND DUSTED (a-la Lying to freo) much earlier in the season than just these past few weeks. As I say, pity to lose him, no use in wasting any energy on him now, nothing can be gained from that

Well after the club exploded in a sea of explicit Duthieness, and his manager was pictured on the front page bouncing on a motel bed in bad underwear, maybe Tommy was ripe for the picking!

markp · Post: # 1166317Post **markp** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:37pm

Dr Spaceman wrote:
thejiggingsaint wrote:Could well be perhaps that the deal to take him to Sydney had been WELL DONE AND DUSTED (a-la Lying to freo) much earlier in the season than just these past few weeks. As I say, pity to lose him, no use in wasting any energy on him now, nothing can be gained from that
Well after the club exploded in a sea of explicit Duthieness, and his manager was pictured on the front page bouncing on a motel bed in bad underwear, maybe Tommy was ripe for the picking!

Hmmm... cant have filled his mum and family with confidence if they kept track of Saints 'news'.

ace · Post: # 1166330Post **ace** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 8:51pm

Saints94 wrote:He should have played him against Carlton at least.....

I think that he was a chance to play in the second half of the season BUT
because he refused to re-sign, the club knew he was being shopped around by his management and that he was likely to walk.
St Kilda knew they could not compete financially because of salary cap issues.

Lyon and the club were not going to waste games on him until he signed.
You want to play seniors you re-sign otherwise stay in the magoos.

Kilda · Post: # 1166394Post **Kilda** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 10:03pm

I reckon Tommy was bloody stiff not to get a senior game this year. Wasn't he named as an emergency about 5-6 times?

He's a great bloke with an exceptional physique for footy and it's just a shame he'll strut his stuff elsewhere.

WinnersOnly · Tue 18 Oct 2011 10:19pm

If Ross f...wit LYON had of played WALSH mid year he would have been satisfied and signed our contract. Instead he was left hanging and has left all because of LYON and is antiquated ideals.

All WALSH wanted to do is play AFL footy and he had earnt a game. I would be looking over your shoulder RL as the calma bus is coming for you!

Mr Magic · Post: # 1166424Post **Mr Magic** » Tue 18 Oct 2011 10:23pm

WinnersOnly wrote:If Ross f...wit LYON had of played WALSH mid year he would have been satisfied and signed our contract. Instead he was left hanging and has left all because of LYON and is antiquated ideals.

All WALSH wanted to do is play AFL footy and he had earnt a game. I would be looking over your shoulder RL as the calma bus is coming for you!

Tommy told you this?

Why did RL overlook Walsh?

Why did RL overlook Walsh?

Re: Why did RL overlook Walsh?

All he wants to do is play footy...

Re: All he wants to do is play footy...