Isn't that why we got Dean Polo?

SainterK · Post: # 1055725Post **SainterK** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 3:32pm

So we had a bit of inside mid depth?

Armo inside mid, Polo helping out?

What's his injury status?

Dr Spaceman · Sat 02 Apr 2011 3:33pm

SainterK wrote:So we had a bit of inside mid depth?

Armo inside mid, Polo helping out?

What's his injury status?

I can't put a finger on it at the moment

InkerSaint · Sat 02 Apr 2011 4:04pm

The early talk was a potential replacement for Baker.

It will be interesting to see how Armo's stocks go up when folks realise how hard a good inside midfielder is to come by.

SainterK · Post: # 1055772Post **SainterK** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 4:16pm

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/afl ... 5955985557

"Lyon said he had followed Polo's career in recent years and a breakfast meeting with him last month convinced the St Kilda coach that he deserved another chance.

"I'm not saying he is the perfect player, but as an under 18 (player) he was an elite inside hard working midfielder, and he might be able to help Lenny Hayes," Lyon said.

St Lenny · Post: # 1055866Post **St Lenny** » Sat 02 Apr 2011 6:11pm

Got a sore finger or something..............

wasaintsfan · Sat 02 Apr 2011 6:54pm

gonna resume training wearing a glove.....

maybe in round 6-7??

Con Gorozidis · Sat 02 Apr 2011 10:40pm

ffs. whats wrong with his god damn finger. unbelievable.

armo contract/salary to double as of today you would think.

StNoodles · Post: # 1056351Post **StNoodles** » Sun 03 Apr 2011 8:26pm

Vandenberg.

degruch · Post: # 1056561Post **degruch** » Mon 04 Apr 2011 2:57pm

Daniel Chick

Dr Spaceman · Mon 04 Apr 2011 3:02pm

With Lenny gone there's now a big chance for him to really make a name for himself once his finger heals.

Hope he can make a fist of it

StNoodles · Post: # 1056564Post **StNoodles** » Mon 04 Apr 2011 3:08pm

degruch wrote:Daniel Chick

Indeed

True Blue Sainter · Mon 04 Apr 2011 4:45pm

degruch wrote:Daniel Chick

Tim Hargreaves

gringo · Post: # 1056668Post **gringo** » Mon 04 Apr 2011 6:19pm

Ling's dad was a one arm player down the highway somewhere wasn't he? Chop it off and get on with it.

saintspremiers · Mon 04 Apr 2011 7:17pm

gringo wrote:Ling's dad was a one arm player down the highway somewhere wasn't he? Chop it off and get on with it.

127 hours is the new 2 weeks.

BigMart · Post: # 1056690Post **BigMart** » Mon 04 Apr 2011 7:26pm

What......to replace lenny hayes...

So a guy delisted by a bottom side will come in for a b&f winner and norm smith medallist in the same year

marksnsparks · Tue 05 Apr 2011 1:16am

Luke Ball

bergholt · Post: # 1056813Post **bergholt** » Tue 05 Apr 2011 9:13am

BigMart wrote:What......to replace lenny hayes...

So a guy delisted by a bottom side will come in for a b&f winner and norm smith medallist in the same year

you can't replace lenny. but someone has to try. in the absence of a more compelling option, i'd like to see polo get a run.

B W and R all over · Tue 05 Apr 2011 3:24pm

gringo wrote:Ling's dad was a one arm player down the highway somewhere wasn't he? Chop it off and get on with it.

Brett Kirk's old man.

NoMore · Post: # 1056892Post **NoMore** » Tue 05 Apr 2011 3:28pm

Recruiting this bloke was a step backwards anyway

Lets not continue the long walk into oblivion by actually playing him

Thinline · Post: # 1056897Post **Thinline** » Tue 05 Apr 2011 3:38pm

NoMore wrote:Recruiting this bloke was a step backwards anyway

Lets not continue the long walk into oblivion by actually playing him

We got him with pick four billion when we could have taken, what, four billion and one?

He was a top up bonus no matter which way you look at it.

I gather from your posts you're not a particularly positive kind of dude.

But why bother posting utter bulls***?

Dr Spaceman · Tue 05 Apr 2011 3:42pm

Thinline wrote:
NoMore wrote:Recruiting this bloke was a step backwards anyway

Lets not continue the long walk into oblivion by actually playing him

We got him with pick four billion when we could have taken, what, four billion and one?

He was a top up bonus no matter which way you look at it.

I gather from your posts you're not a particularly positive kind of dude.

But why bother posting utter bulls***?

Agree Thinny.

Maybe if we had picked him up from Coburg rather than Richmond people would be looking at him more favourably.

Plenty of time to bag the guy but perhaps it's a good idea to let him play a few games first

NoMore · Post: # 1056909Post **NoMore** » Tue 05 Apr 2011 3:48pm

Thinline wrote:
NoMore wrote:Recruiting this bloke was a step backwards anyway

Lets not continue the long walk into oblivion by actually playing him

We got him with pick four billion when we could have taken, what, four billion and one?

He was a top up bonus no matter which way you look at it.

I gather from your posts you're not a particularly positive kind of dude.

But why bother posting utter bulls***?

Why would we pay a top up bonus player.

Why not take a young project player?

I am being a bit negative at the moment and i am sorry for that but i genuinly think we are a 10 goal better side than richmond with the right team picked.

Thinline · Post: # 1056911Post **Thinline** » Tue 05 Apr 2011 3:50pm

NoMore wrote:
Thinline wrote:
NoMore wrote:Recruiting this bloke was a step backwards anyway

Lets not continue the long walk into oblivion by actually playing him

We got him with pick four billion when we could have taken, what, four billion and one?

He was a top up bonus no matter which way you look at it.

I gather from your posts you're not a particularly positive kind of dude.

But why bother posting utter bulls***?
Why would we pay a top up bonus player.

Why not take a young project player?

I am being a bit negative at the moment and i am sorry for that but i genuinly think we are a 10 goal better side than richmond with the right team picked.

Because our time is now or never. When you have one or maybe two years to win the thing, why bother with a seedling who may not grow? Better off with a physically capable player who can fill a slot if required.

SainterK · Post: # 1056912Post **SainterK** » Tue 05 Apr 2011 3:51pm

Thinline wrote:
NoMore wrote:Recruiting this bloke was a step backwards anyway

Lets not continue the long walk into oblivion by actually playing him

We got him with pick four billion when we could have taken, what, four billion and one?

He was a top up bonus no matter which way you look at it.

I gather from your posts you're not a particularly positive kind of dude.

But why bother posting utter bulls***?

four billion, one hundred and three.

NoMore · Post: # 1056914Post **NoMore** » Tue 05 Apr 2011 3:55pm

Thinline wrote:
NoMore wrote:
Thinline wrote:
NoMore wrote:Recruiting this bloke was a step backwards anyway

Lets not continue the long walk into oblivion by actually playing him

We got him with pick four billion when we could have taken, what, four billion and one?

He was a top up bonus no matter which way you look at it.

I gather from your posts you're not a particularly positive kind of dude.

But why bother posting utter bulls***?
Why would we pay a top up bonus player.

Why not take a young project player?

I am being a bit negative at the moment and i am sorry for that but i genuinly think we are a 10 goal better side than richmond with the right team picked.
Because our time is now or never. When you have one or maybe two years to win the thing, why bother with a seedling who may not grow? Better off with a physically capable player who can fill a slot if required.

But that is not the way to sustain success at a club. You sustain success by slowly introducing new players to take over from the previous generation. No club should be standing still

The old saying u r either building to win a flag or trying to win one is bullsh!t. You should always be building towards ur next tilt.

What ur saying is exactly how Australian cricket ended up where it is. They continued to top up there batting stocks when young batsmen should have been being blooded at number 6 allowing them to take over when retirments set in.

Good coaches and selection commitees coach for the now while planning for the future. I really do hope we are doing this

Isn't that why we got Dean Polo?

Isn't that why we got Dean Polo?

Re: Isn't that why we got Dean Polo?