St Fidelius wrote:The fact that he had only played "two games" to me is illrelevant IMO.He is the best bet we have to play tall or small in defence, apart from out current top 22...
I don't think it is at all. In a season where we had 3 of our back 6 missing most of the time, you would think that a mature bodied defender like Ferguson would be given plenty of opportunities if he was rated. Gilbert, Gwilt and R.Clarke were all given more opportunitites than Ferguson. With Gilbert cementing his spot, Raph having a full pre season, Dempster's arrival and Goddard returning this year Ferguson will have a much harder time getting a gig in '08.
In my mind he will be capable of playing full back and to suggest that he is on the same page as M. Gardiner is a joke...
What can you base that on? He played some ok (not great) games in 2004 as a key defender, but he was still exposed for a lack of height, strength and concentration/reflexes.
RL gave Fergs a job on his two matches and performed well, your M.Gardiner has done F*** all in two years...
He played pretty well on a decent forward in LeCras, even though he did let LeCras get away from him at the end of the game and kick the goal that put us away. The week after that he was slaughtered by Pettifer.
I think that Ferg could be a solid AFL player, but his role would purely be as a medium defender. We have the best and longest list of medium defenders in the competition. He was occasionally used as an emergency tall defender, but now Gilbert is the first choice, Dempster would be the second and Gwilt would also be ahead of Ferguson because of his extra strength.
Gardiner is kept in the hope that he can one day regain some of the form that saw him regarded as the best ruckman in the competition in 2002-2003. He has plenty of negatives, but a huge potential upside, and he plays a position in which we are severely lacking.
I don't know why Ferguson is kept on the list. I don't see his AFL performances getting much better and he is well down on a long list of medium defenders.