Carlisle Was A Big Big Mistake

[Bunk_Moreland]

If anybody watch what North did to us last week they would see why we recruited Carlisle. We got smashed and Fisher won't be around for long. Either we I'll Dempster. Goddard will be a player but needs time. Delaney is a tackle bag.

We needed Carlisle and he could play for us for 8 years.
When we pick up Hurley this year our spine is set for a decade

[saintsRrising]

We're rebuilding over years, and not just one year.

If effect we have used a pick from next year to get Freeman a year early, and a pick from last year to get Carlisle a year later.

We were not winning a flag this year regardless, and certainly not if we used all of the picks from the last draft on kids alone.

[BigMart]

You gotta admit

We paid a high price for both... both in terms of salary and DPs

A player who has never consistently dominated, and a kid who has never played. They have obvious potential, that may well be realised (or not)

but it is no doubt a risky strategy.

It hasn't worked or failed yet. So hard to say anything with any certainty .... but IMO we paid overs for Carlisle, given the circumstances... but not by much...

[To the top]

"But IMO we paid overs for Carlisle, given the circumstances ... but not by much".

There is another subject on here which refers to Sam Fisher.

Fisher has been the cornerstone of our defensive structure virtually since he played at Geelong (and I think Ferguson was the other key defender that day - we lost, narrowly).

We were bereft of key defenders - hence Fisher and Ferguson finding themselves in the positions they found themselves in that day.

Fisher is 191 cm - and 94 kg.

He has produced as he has as a defender because of his reading of the ball and his ability to position to take defensive marks (and twice the Club B&F winner).

Fisher came from the Riverland in SA, West Adelaide zoned territory, and played for West Adelaide as a forward.

St Kilda recruited him as a mature age Draftee.

Despite that background as a forward, on the occasions St Kilda has played Fisher as a key forward he has not produced - the reason being he is just not tall enough and, as a forward, you do not get the opportunity to mark the ball because you read it better - you have defenders spoiling you in the contest.

Carlisle, on the other hand, is 198 cm and, when playing as a forward (which I think I read somewhere he does not prefer) has slotted a bag of 8 - no doubt because, at 7 cm taller than Fisher, he is able to mark with defenders all over him and attempting to spoil.

That is the difference 7 cm makes - between 191 cm and 198 cm.

I am not sure of the reference to "given the circumstances".

The only circumstance that I would consider is that he is a 198 cm key defender and he (or a similar 198 cm plus key defender with 80 plus games to his credit - so who exactly was available?) was an absolute requirement at St Kilda in the re-build (where, even with Goddard, Carlisle, Mc Cartin and Bruce we are very thin on the ground ahead of future Draft picks and the ability to trade or entice under Free Agency).

If you want, you pay.

So what we "paid" was what we paid to obtain an AVAILABLE player who ticked the boxes where we have an absolutely dire need - including because the 191 cm Fisher is getting no younger!

Exactly the same as having a dire need of forward pace and inventiveness when we Contracted Lovett - who was subsequently found not guilty of the allegations made against him, allegations which, poorly handled by St Kilda, saw Lovett never play a game for us.

Lovett could have been the factor which won us a premiership.

Carlisle could be the factor that wins us a premiership.

And that is the assessment that is made at Footy Clubs - and elsewhere.

And in the most recent Draft who exactly was the 198 cm plus potential key defender you could have got with Pick 6?

THAT is the question.

Carlisle WAS available, and we got him.

So, good luck to St Kilda.

Freeman was also available, and we got a talent with skills and pace (who I suspect St Kilda had "run the rule" over before ultimately going for Billings with Pick 3 in that Draft. Billings v Freeman may have been a very close run assessment, hence St Kilda's continuing interest in Freeman which has now delivered the result it has).

[whiskers3614]

Right so we mishandled Lovett charges and he was found not guilty.
Guess the other 15(?) clubs must have been blinded by his brilliance and innocence .
otherwise they would have beaten a path to his door once acquitted.

Both Lovett and Carlisle were PROVEN idiots BEFORE we negotiated for them.
A club that releases champions like Spider and Barry Hall based on a no d.Heads policy cannot justify picking up these morons!

[MC Gusto]

Said we paid overs at the time and that was prior to the coke and the years' suspension.

I've said it enough tho now and it doesn't make a shred of difference - we recruited him so all I can do is hope we got it right.

Still I thought more highly of bains and co prior to this trade...I thought they were the supposed trade masterminds and lethal negotiators. They got absolutely worked by Dorodo...where does that leave our brains trust??

[skeptic]

You gotta admit

We paid a high price for both... both in terms of salary and DPs

A player who has never consistently dominated, and a kid who has never played. They have obvious potential, that may well be realised (or not)

but it is no doubt a risky strategy.

It hasn't worked or failed yet. So hard to say anything with any certainty .... but IMO we paid overs for Carlisle, given the circumstances... but not by much...

I think we paid way over for Freeman but Carlisle?

The trade was pick #5 and #24'ish for Carlisle and #14

Essentially we traded a second round pick and downgraded another pick by 9 spots.

It's not a bad deal and i don't think you can say definitively that we paid overs. I think most neutral supporters would say the deal was geared slightly towards one team or the other.

We got after all a seemingly established first 22 player.

You could make an argument that we could have leveraged a better deal, and i reckon we could have, but we certainly weren't robbed.

[To the top]

I have been critical of players on St Kilda's List as well - but based on the performances I have seen when they are playing for St Kilda.

So Milne I questioned on defensive capacities and also on being only able to play in one position when the mid-field and mid-field rotations were vital - and, as a mid-field sized player, he could not contribute in the mid-field. Harsh? Probably given his goal kicking record but, that was my assessment in regards team. We could not afford a small player who was a liability over 40 m from goal and unable to have a shot on goal given how the game transformed.

Geary - who would you prefer with the ball 70 m out from goal with a little bit of space to work in, Gilbert or Geary? I would take Gilbert every day of the week because you are very likely to get a ping on goal from Gilbert - and successful. Geary you would not get run and you would not get a ping on goal because he would need to work to within 30 - and, if he passed, it would be up and under giving defenders what they want? Harsh for a player who gives it everything he has got? Probably but the criteria is our next premiership side (noting 1966 is the only one and that long ago so you become more analytical and demanding based on what you see being delivered)

It is a cruel game - because performance is there to be assessed every week.

So there you go!

Now to the subject at hand:-

None of Lovett, Carlisle or Freeman have yet pulled on a St Kilda jumper - to do what they were recruited for.

So, those attacking are not attacking the players named - they are attacking the Club and those in the positions they are in at the Club (and have been), those who are employed and remunerated to make those exact decisions in regards the List and the improvement of the List to consistent challenge status.

Match day selections will always be subject to debate and comment - because what is achieved on the field of play is there to be assessed in the eyes of the beholder.

But in regards those who have not pulled on a jumper, cut some slack until you are actually able to pass an opinion based on performance on the field wearing a St Kilda jumper.

When some describe as "proven idiots", probably never having ever met the person they describe as a "proven idiot", well perhaps looking into the mirror may be an education in regards a "proven idiot".

And, just to finish, if it is your opinion that St Kilda recruit "proven idiots" (before they even get on the field) and that is your commentary on St Kilda, then why even follow them?

Go follow Essendon.

[whiskers3614]

To quote Samuel Johnson>
"patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel"
If you can't tear down the unpopular opinion held by another poster with logic just flame away with accusations of treason.

[Bunk_Moreland]

To quote Samuel Johnson>
"patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel"
If you can't tear down the unpopular opinion held by another poster with logic just flame away with accusations of treason.

Don't know how much logic is involved in using emotive, and provocative statements like "proven idiot".

Lovett was a huge risk and proved that way.

Where is the evidence re Carlisle BEFORE we signed him and his Snapchat lunacy?

What had he done apart from saying about Essendon what we all felt?

Seems like a bit of personal bias with a big handful of logical fallacy.

So in essence TTP is correct. It is a revisionist attack on the club re Carlisle.

His argument was logical. You can only answer what he proposes is true. However that's how it looks.

[saynta]

Right so we mishandled Lovett charges and he was found not guilty.
Guess the other 15(?) clubs must have been blinded by his brilliance and innocence .
otherwise they would have beaten a path to his door once acquitted.

Both Lovett and Carlisle were PROVEN idiots BEFORE we negotiated for them.
A club that releases champions like Spider and Barry Hall based on a no d.Heads policy cannot justify picking up these morons!

Well said.

[Bluthy]

To quote Samuel Johnson>
"patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel"
If you can't tear down the unpopular opinion held by another poster with logic just flame away with accusations of treason.

Don't know how much logic is involved in using emotive, and provocative statements like "proven idiot".

Lovett was a huge risk and proved that way.

Where is the evidence re Carlisle BEFORE we signed him and his Snapchat lunacy?

What had he done apart from saying about Essendon what we all felt?

Seems like a bit of personal bias with a big handful of logical fallacy.

So in essence TTP is correct. It is a revisionist attack on the club re Carlisle.

His argument was logical. You can only answer what he proposes is true. However that's how it looks.

There were known issues there about his impulsiveness, maturity and if he was a team player. Punching Goddard, screaming about your club being f'd up on field, spitting the dummy about being played forward (you've got a right to make your case for your best position but you go about it in the right manner), being inconsistent on the field, having a mopey look on the field - that might be harsh as some people just have a hangdog look but some bombers supporters say he has a negative approach on the field not really giving other players encouragement and looking uninterested. My guess would be it was known he hung around with DJ's and some of the dodgy crew he's posted pictures of on twitter which as a club would make you very nervous.The drug bust and the lateness to training when he slept in (after promising to do everything right) highlight his impulsiveness and immaturity.

I'm not saying you don't recruit him because of that but to say there was no warning signs is not correct. No player is a complete angel but there were quite a few dodgy signs with Carlisle (and thats just the ones we know about - the club might have known of even more) The club is obviously betting they can mature him as a person and player, particularly Richo being that tough but caring father figure he probably needs instead of narcissistic Hird who was more interested in how tanned he looks to properly show off blond flowing locks. So it's a calculated risk that initially backfired but can still work out long term.

[Bunk_Moreland]

To quote Samuel Johnson>
"patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel"
If you can't tear down the unpopular opinion held by another poster with logic just flame away with accusations of treason.

Don't know how much logic is involved in using emotive, and provocative statements like "proven idiot".

Lovett was a huge risk and proved that way.

Where is the evidence re Carlisle BEFORE we signed him and his Snapchat lunacy?

What had he done apart from saying about Essendon what we all felt?

Seems like a bit of personal bias with a big handful of logical fallacy.

So in essence TTP is correct. It is a revisionist attack on the club re Carlisle.

His argument was logical. You can only answer what he proposes is true. However that's how it looks.

There were known issues there about his impulsiveness, maturity and if he was a team player. Punching Goddard, screaming about your club being f'd up on field, spitting the dummy about being played forward (you've got a right to make your case for your best position but you go about it in the right manner), being inconsistent on the field, having a mopey look on the field - that might be harsh as some people just have a hangdog look but some bombers supporters say he has a negative approach on the field not really giving other players encouragement and looking uninterested. My guess would be it was known he hung around with DJ's and some of the dodgy crew he's posted pictures of on twitter which as a club would make you very nervous.The drug bust and the lateness to training when he slept in (after promising to do everything right) highlight his impulsiveness and immaturity.

I'm not saying you don't recruit him because of that but to say there was no warning signs is not correct. No player is a complete angel but there were quite a few dodgy signs with Carlisle (and thats just the ones we know about - the club might have known of even more) The club is obviously betting they can mature him as a person and player, particularly Richo being that tough but caring father figure he probably needs instead of narcissistic Hird who was more interested in how tanned he looks to properly show off blond flowing locks. So it's a calculated risk that initially backfired but can still work out long term.

own idiot.
So rumour and innuendo make him a "known idiot"?

Saying "this club is Effed" about Essendon after what they put him through is a crime?

Many a player wants to punch Mr Pointy cheap kick out the back Goddard.

The rest is just character assassination making things up you know nothing about like sooking because he had to go forward and facial expressions.

Jesus some of you have really got it in for him if that's your evidence for him being a "known idiot".

And if the trade was so bad why were there experts all over the place saying we had to trade #5 straight for this "known idiot"?
Why did Clarkson try to recruit the known idiot?
Why did Worst old try to talk him out of leaving?
Why did Carlton and the Bulldogs make a big play for the "known idiot"?

What do people on a forum know more than half the football world?

Logical fallacy and straw man arguments are no arguments. Supposition is not an argument.

Apart from here say and character assassination there is no evidence for the slanderous accusation as a known idiot leveled by whiskers and supported by you.

The only idiot action by Carlisle which is indisputable occurred after trade.

So TTP is correct, just an attack on the club

[saynta]

I think anyone who lets someone completely unqualified stick you in the guts with unknown substances two or three times a week for the better part of a year is an idiot, known or unknown.

Certainly, Dempsey and Zaharakis told them to get stuffed.

[BackFromUSA]

Didn't Richo have some history with carlisle early in his career? Or was it one of our assistant coaches? if so, then they would have a fair idea of him as a person and where they can take him.

[saynta]

Didn't Richo have some history with carlisle early in his career? Or was it one of our assistant coaches? if so, then they would have a fair idea of him as a person and where they can take him.

No, it was Richo.

[Sainternist]

"It began as a mistake." - Charles Bukowski

"Don't try". Hank

Good to see someone on here is familiar with Post Office and Bukowski

[lewdogs]

At this stage it is pretty easy to say that Carlisle is a mistake. The one good thing is that I think Gresham is going to be unbelievable, which softens the blow of losing Pick 5 quite a lot.

However, if Carlisle plays good football for us from 2017 onwards then it will be a great move. He is one of the best marks in the competition. We clearly need him in our side, put him in there now and I'd say he makes us a 2 goal better team. If we can get him right then he will be immense. With that in mind, we can not unequivocally call this move a mistake for at least 3 years.

[Bluthy]

own idiot.
So rumour and innuendo make him a "known idiot"?

Saying "this club is Effed" about Essendon after what they put him through is a crime?

Many a player wants to punch Mr Pointy cheap kick out the back Goddard.

The rest is just character assassination making things up you know nothing about like sooking because he had to go forward and facial expressions.

Jesus some of you have really got it in for him if that's your evidence for him being a "known idiot".

And if the trade was so bad why were there experts all over the place saying we had to trade #5 straight for this "known idiot"?
Why did Clarkson try to recruit the known idiot?
Why did Worst old try to talk him out of leaving?
Why did Carlton and the Bulldogs make a big play for the "known idiot"?

What do people on a forum know more than half the football world?

Logical fallacy and straw man arguments are no arguments. Supposition is not an argument.

Apart from here say and character assassination there is no evidence for the slanderous accusation as a known idiot leveled by whiskers and supported by you.

The only idiot action by Carlisle which is indisputable occurred after trade.

So TTP is correct, just an attack on the club

Jesus Bunk could you be more melodramatic? You always spring to Jake's defense like people are calling him a murderer or a rapist. A huge hunk of the footy world would have said he was pretty immature with how he did things at Essendon. Doesn't mean he can't mature and become a rock solid a-grade player. If anything will mature him then being out of the game and the limelight for a season and having to hack away in an office for minimal salary might show him how short a footy career and yearly half-million dollar salaries can be and straighten him up for good.

But the club can get things wrong you know, they are not infallible. I don't necessarily have a problem with the trade. I like the look of Gresham who is the other component of the trade. Whether Carlisle can become an a-grader who performs week-in, week-out and not just when the mood takes him, and doesn't act too shitty out on the field when its not going his way, we need to wait and see.

[The Fireman]

well if the cheats pay for Carlisle this season and we get him cheaper in the long run due to his indiscretion we may have come out of this ok.

[8856brother]

well if the cheats pay for Carlisle this season and we get him cheaper in the long run due to his indiscretion we may have come out of this ok.

Plus his contact price dropped significantly after the wizz fizz affair. Genuine bargain.

[Bunk_Moreland]

own idiot.
So rumour and innuendo make him a "known idiot"?

Saying "this club is Effed" about Essendon after what they put him through is a crime?

Many a player wants to punch Mr Pointy cheap kick out the back Goddard.

The rest is just character assassination making things up you know nothing about like sooking because he had to go forward and facial expressions.

Jesus some of you have really got it in for him if that's your evidence for him being a "known idiot".

And if the trade was so bad why were there experts all over the place saying we had to trade #5 straight for this "known idiot"?
Why did Clarkson try to recruit the known idiot?
Why did Worst old try to talk him out of leaving?
Why did Carlton and the Bulldogs make a big play for the "known idiot"?

What do people on a forum know more than half the football world?

Logical fallacy and straw man arguments are no arguments. Supposition is not an argument.

Apart from here say and character assassination there is no evidence for the slanderous accusation as a known idiot leveled by whiskers and supported by you.

The only idiot action by Carlisle which is indisputable occurred after trade.

So TTP is correct, just an attack on the club

Jesus Bunk could you be more melodramatic? You always spring to Jake's defense like people are calling him a murderer or a rapist. A huge hunk of the footy world would have said he was pretty immature with how he did things at Essendon. Doesn't mean he can't mature and become a rock solid a-grade player. If anything will mature him then being out of the game and the limelight for a season and having to hack away in an office for minimal salary might show him how short a footy career and yearly half-million dollar salaries can be and straighten him up for good.

But the club can get things wrong you know, they are not infallible. I don't necessarily have a problem with the trade. I like the look of Gresham who is the other component of the trade. Whether Carlisle can become an a-grader who performs week-in, week-out and not just when the mood takes him, and doesn't act too shitty out on the field when its not going his way, we need to wait and see.

Way to go, attack the poster and project the melodrama.

I asked about the evidence of being a " known idiot".

You came back with sooking ( emotive and inaccurate) and him having expressions on his face not complying with your exacting standards.

Now you say he is immature. So he has gone from known idiot to immature? Going off that standard Half of the players in the AFL are "known idiots".

And who said the club never makes mistakes. I want the people using straw man arguments, unverified gossip and logical fallacies to provide evidence that would qualify Carlisle as a known idiot prior to us recruiting him.

Instead you argue everything but. At least have the courage to address the actual issue instead of launching into rubbish about melodrama and other crap.

So my post was that TTT was correct that the spurious claim of Carlisle being a known idiot was just a vehicle to kick the recruiting team as there is no evidence that he qualified for that extreme insult, prior to trading.

So enough with the personal stuff and deal with the facts. If you are able

[whiskers3614]

own idiot.
So rumour and innuendo make him a "known idiot"?

Saying "this club is Effed" about Essendon after what they put him through is a crime?

Many a player wants to punch Mr Pointy cheap kick out the back Goddard.

The rest is just character assassination making things up you know nothing about like sooking because he had to go forward and facial expressions.

Jesus some of you have really got it in for him if that's your evidence for him being a "known idiot".

And if the trade was so bad why were there experts all over the place saying we had to trade #5 straight for this "known idiot"?
Why did Clarkson try to recruit the known idiot?
Why did Worst old try to talk him out of leaving?
Why did Carlton and the Bulldogs make a big play for the "known idiot"?

What do people on a forum know more than half the football world?

Logical fallacy and straw man arguments are no arguments. Supposition is not an argument.

Apart from here say and character assassination there is no evidence for the slanderous accusation as a known idiot leveled by whiskers and supported by you.

The only idiot action by Carlisle which is indisputable occurred after trade.

So TTP is correct, just an attack on the club

Jesus Bunk could you be more melodramatic? You always spring to Jake's defense like people are calling him a murderer or a rapist. A huge hunk of the footy world would have said he was pretty immature with how he did things at Essendon. Doesn't mean he can't mature and become a rock solid a-grade player. If anything will mature him then being out of the game and the limelight for a season and having to hack away in an office for minimal salary might show him how short a footy career and yearly half-million dollar salaries can be and straighten him up for good.

But the club can get things wrong you know, they are not infallible. I don't necessarily have a problem with the trade. I like the look of Gresham who is the other component of the trade. Whether Carlisle can become an a-grader who performs week-in, week-out and not just when the mood takes him, and doesn't act too shitty out on the field when its not going his way, we need to wait and see.

Way to go, attack the poster and project the melodrama.

I asked about the evidence of being a " known idiot".

You came back with sooking ( emotive and inaccurate) and him having expressions on his face not complying with your exacting standards.

Now you say he is immature. So he has gone from known idiot to immature? Going off that standard Half of the players in the AFL are "known idiots".

And who said the club never makes mistakes. I want the people using straw man arguments, unverified gossip and logical fallacies to provide evidence that would qualify Carlisle as a known idiot prior to us recruiting him.

Instead you argue everything but. At least have the courage to address the actual issue instead of launching into rubbish about melodrama and other crap.

So my post was that TTT was correct that the spurious claim of Carlisle being a known idiot was just a vehicle to kick the recruiting team as there is no evidence that he qualified for that extreme insult, prior to trading.

So enough with the personal stuff and deal with the facts. If you are able

I want a return to no Dikcheads policy, if half of all AFL players are "known idiots" let's attempt to pick from the other half.
If we are going to laud blokes like Lenny and Rob Harvey for what we perceive their characters to be let's select less Fevolas and Dustin Martins and more Fyfes(personality wise).I might be wrong but I reckon GT's insistence on good character was the way to build a club culture to be proud of.
Don't know who is on the recruiting team and feel no desire to kick them or any other club officials but would prefer it if they would select more B. Goddards and less Essendon hacks. For all his supposed limitations Goddard's contribution in GF's is matched only by Lenny's and bettered by none.
Will be a fair while before Carlisle enters that sort of territory!

[BigMart]

TTT

Lovett was an alco woman bashed who was so lazy oit was ridiculous.

He had one top ten B&F finish... 9th and was not liked at Essendon,.. Or respected in the AFL

And he was gonna win us a premiership???

We gave up a FRDP and a Million for a guy who was beaten by A rookie ruckman in a time trial

And

I would bet my house
Carlisle
will never be anywhere near as good a CHB as Sam Fisher... Fisher won 2 b&fs
He was a star... Carlisle is not

[satchmo]

Carlisle
will never be anywhere near as good a CHB as Sam Fisher...

Ok fair enough. Can you point us to someone who will be, and is available?

There's a decent budget to work with.