Raph Clarke (THE STRIDER)

[congorozides]

i had a mate i went to uni with, who was a very very good player and a great bloke as well. he went on to make the saints rookie list. i remember catching up with him one time, and i'll never forget what he told me (knowing i am a huge saints fan). he said he always thought he was a decent player, but he said when he first went out onto the track and they were doing circle work, and when he saw WINMAR hitting plugger with 60mtr passes from the wing, he knew he was out of his league.

oh, and i played in the NT between 99-01 and actually played against X (when he was only 15 or 16). he was very good, but it was common knowledge up there that Raph would be the better footballer. whether that comes to fruition is another thing.

x is great with his intensity at the ball, just as long as he doesn't keep getting injured. loved seeing him playing on the ball last week.

a mate also grew up in NT and said the same about raph. i do like the way x throws his body infront of contests. scares the hell of me sometimes just watching from the stands. time will tell i guess. 08 will be an important year. no reason saints cant go all the way. just need 25 or so blokes playing good for 25 weeks.

[saintsRrising]

He will be the best indigenous player since...actually I think he will be even better than the likes of Long, Akermanis, Davey's, Clarke's, Motlop's, Burgoyne's, etc

WTF!!! I have read some massive statements on here, but that is the best (or worst).

Long and the Burgoyne brothers have been very very good premiership players.

And I didn't even realise Akermanis was indigenous

As others have said....Winmar..

The guy shone as a star from early on and from the indigenous players I have seen has been the best.

To exceed him or some of the others named there is a long LONG way to go....

no mention of winmar in the email i quoted. he was comparing cyril rioli to those players.

Winmar was a great player, no doubt though.

No all is cool...the others was..

You must be too young to have seen Nicky Winmar in his prime.
.

and just to clarify my intent, my remarks were more reinforcing what you had said....and commenting on what SaintBot had written.

[congorozides]

winmar was incredible.

akermanis isnt even indiginous. he just made one his remarks where "he thought he might be" cos one day he kind of felt like it when he was running or something.

another time where akers mouth reacted a little before his brain could catch up!

[Teflon]

Raph Clarke was touted as better than X by many who had seen them both play in NT - BUT and yes injury hasnt helped - right now X has it all over Raph IMHO.

It isnt about skill - its the difference in intensity - X goes flat out and will tackle (sometimes not thinking bout his safety). Raph to me still lumbers and looks slow with decisions. He HAS to stepup this year - by the end of this year Raph Clarke needs to have made the clear statement he belongs in our best 22.....right now (and if others continue to come on as we have started to see) thats up for debate IMO.

I don't buy the intensity thing with Raph. I agree that at the moment X is well ahead, and I can understand why Raph's intensity at times is questioned, but I think it more illusion than reality. I actually think the problem with both is their brains, they're both very talented, but don't think their way through situations well, and can run themselves into trouble.

X, being a bit smaller, ends up at the bottome of more packs, and importantly, when he's racing along, he looks like he's racing along. Raph on the other hand always looks like he's jogging, and that typifies his game.

When watching Raph, when I watch the players around him, I often see Raph loping along, looking like he's jogging - as everyone around him is at full sprint just trying to keep up. When he jumps, those around him are stretching to get the same height. When he kicks, it looks like a half thought option, only to drop to the Saints between 3 opposition players. I have no trouble imagining Raph taking apart a Juniors game, but in the group dynamic at AFL level, those skills are the price of entry, not a guarentee.

Yet for all that, he'll beat his opponent, only to find himself another one to lose to, and have left his man open. His first step isn't great - witness Delidio often having a step on him on Friday, because Delidio's fast enough that if he gets his step, you won't get it back.

Put either Clarke in defense and you could tell the same story... and to me that sums up the greatest weakness for both. It does no good to beat one opponent, or break the lines, if you then turn the ball over, because you've created a disadvantage for yourself. I have no problem with the intensity of either one, but I'd like to see them making better choices with the ball in their hands.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one....

I don't buy the "illusion" theory - I get what your saying but intensity is more than "stride" Intensity is second efforts - X has it ALL over Raph in that area and thats why X found himself in the fwd line at times last year - he hurries opposition players up, gets up goes again and can lay a tackle. Yet to really see that "mongrel" from Raph to be honest. As for the Mar Waugh analogy.....again its all "stride" stuff - facts are Deledio was simply to quick the other night on many occasions - actually Deledio looked damn dangerous up fwd...if he had some quick, decent supply I dont think Raph couldve gone with him.

Both players could improve decision making no doubt - again IMO (and probably cause hes played more) here again X is in front by a fair way (Raph puts many players under pressure with his disposal and thats experience for sure)

[The OtherThommo]

Raph has now had a preparation. It counts. When he first arrived he'd played non stop for 18 months, because he'd won a scholarship at the Institute of Sport in the ACT, which kept him at it in the 5-6 months off every other kid had off in between seasons. He won the scholarship because he was the celebrated kid indigenous footballer from the NT. Problem was when he got to us he was stuffed.

From a young 16 to 18 the kid had no time off. No wonder he became injury prone. But, still, and to his eternal credit he tried. Remember the '05 defeat of Adelaide in the Rob Harvey final? Raph was magnificent. An underprepared kid in a back half riddled with injury and he stood up.

He has a football brain. He's deceptively quick, tackles better than anyone there (he's a hip watcher), regularly wins the footy backing into packs with his head up. Fearless, intelligent and attacking. As for Deledio leading him to the ball on the lead last week - name me 27 players who would have run past Deledio in the same situation. It's crap. Any forward worth his salt, and with a bit of speed, will always lead a trailing backman to the ball.

He'll be fine. And so will his brother. Good preseasons make good seasons.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

I don't buy the intensity thing with Raph. I agree that at the moment X is well ahead, and I can understand why Raph's intensity at times is questioned, but I think it more illusion than reality. I actually think the problem with both is their brains, they're both very talented, but don't think their way through situations well, and can run themselves into trouble.

X, being a bit smaller, ends up at the bottome of more packs, and importantly, when he's racing along, he looks like he's racing along. Raph on the other hand always looks like he's jogging, and that typifies his game.

When watching Raph, when I watch the players around him, I often see Raph loping along, looking like he's jogging - as everyone around him is at full sprint just trying to keep up. When he jumps, those around him are stretching to get the same height. When he kicks, it looks like a half thought option, only to drop to the Saints between 3 opposition players. I have no trouble imagining Raph taking apart a Juniors game, but in the group dynamic at AFL level, those skills are the price of entry, not a guarentee.

Yet for all that, he'll beat his opponent, only to find himself another one to lose to, and have left his man open. His first step isn't great - witness Delidio often having a step on him on Friday, because Delidio's fast enough that if he gets his step, you won't get it back.

Put either Clarke in defense and you could tell the same story... and to me that sums up the greatest weakness for both. It does no good to beat one opponent, or break the lines, if you then turn the ball over, because you've created a disadvantage for yourself. I have no problem with the intensity of either one, but I'd like to see them making better choices with the ball in their hands.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one....

I don't buy the "illusion" theory - I get what your saying but intensity is more than "stride" Intensity is second efforts - X has it ALL over Raph in that area and thats why X found himself in the fwd line at times last year - he hurries opposition players up, gets up goes again and can lay a tackle. Yet to really see that "mongrel" from Raph to be honest. As for the Mar Waugh analogy.....again its all "stride" stuff - facts are Deledio was simply to quick the other night on many occasions - actually Deledio looked damn dangerous up fwd...if he had some quick, decent supply I dont think Raph couldve gone with him.

Both players could improve decision making no doubt - again IMO (and probably cause hes played more) here again X is in front by a fair way (Raph puts many players under pressure with his disposal and thats experience for sure)[/quote]

No need to agree to disagree on Delideo over Raph, though Delideo had the honours in that one easy. Also thought he (Delideo) played really well, and wasn't to bothered by losing the matchup on those circumstances... Delideo is finally finding his spot, we've always known he was lightning quick.

I know what you're saying about the mongrel - and you could well be right - but my view is that except in exceptional circumstance or with excxeptional players, it's actually very difficult to guage a players intensity from the sidelines. If a guy is regularly shirking contests, that's easy, but it's tough to get to AFL level with that kind of flaw... equally, it's easy to see a mongrel in someone like Hammill or Maguire, but those are top 5% intensity guys. When it comes to the Tamblings, or Raph Clarke's it's tough to tell whether they're into it or not... you run out of the backline, it doesn't present a lot of opportunity to get to the bottom of packs (ala X), being 3rd man in at a contest or cutting a ball off is considered minimum effort, so we can't give points there, so I just find it hard to cast a judgement... unless I'm doing so just for the sake of it. All I know is that with Raph's injury history, the last thing I want him doing is initiating the rough stuff after the whistle... on the other hand, it'd probably do his reputation on here the world of good if once, just once, he threw an elbow at someones head on Friday night football with the camera watching.

I see where you're coming from, and I'm sure many agree with you, I just don't think it's as cut and dried as it sometimes gets made out to be.

[Teflon]

Good points BAM and I agree its never cut and dried and perhaps the best example iof what your saying is Dal Santo - often, by opposition fans, termed an outside soft player...not so IMO can and does tackle quite well and will win his own footy too (its just that he oozes class so he must be soft syndrome)

On Raph I dont want him elbowing heads (just as I didnt want Hamill dropping knees into Johnson ending careers) what you do want to see is is a little urgency, hunger for the pill and second efforts give you the best insight into this......Raph IMO could improve in this area.