Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Hemi Baxter wrote:That's right and why should they? If in fact he is to be delisted then it will be because he hasn't shown enough in the twos over several seasons.
I've watched perhaps 75% or more of his games. As has been pointed out here many times his speed is his best asset but defensively he has always, in my view, been a long way behind and hasn't improved. He has struggled to provide a contest and win his own ball even when he has been fully fit.
All v reminiscent of the hysteria around the club's delisting of Tom Ledger in 2013 where many posters predicted that he would quickly be snapped up by another club and that Saintsational naysayers would suffer.
Good luck to Daniel if another club sees something we haven't.
While I have no problem with people saying he isn't good enough, I do get annoyed when people say "he struggled to win his own ball" when the fact is that it was his role to hang back from the contest and be the release option for a clearance.
Poor bastard would have stood more of chance if he was allowed to get under packs and get a kick, but instead he did the team thing and followed instructions.
Pretty fed up with morons calling him soft because he's not at the bottom of packs winning clearances, when he was specifically told not to do that.
Still think it's a bit weird that they wouldn't at least give him a game or two to see if he could play at the next level, when we are screaming out for outside mids. Dan has a few elite tools that we could really do with in the side, but no-one gave him any confidence or direction after Watters left.
Well, according to comments made by Hudson during the year, he was told to get the ball himself, and NOT hang back. So I don't know where you got your info from.
"Our criticism of Daniel recently has been his low contested ball numbers. But on Sunday, he went and found it himself. " http://www.saints.com.au/news/2015-08-1 ... w-round-17
Hemi Baxter wrote:That's right and why should they? If in fact he is to be delisted then it will be because he hasn't shown enough in the twos over several seasons.
I've watched perhaps 75% or more of his games. As has been pointed out here many times his speed is his best asset but defensively he has always, in my view, been a long way behind and hasn't improved. He has struggled to provide a contest and win his own ball even when he has been fully fit.
All v reminiscent of the hysteria around the club's delisting of Tom Ledger in 2013 where many posters predicted that he would quickly be snapped up by another club and that Saintsational naysayers would suffer.
Good luck to Daniel if another club sees something we haven't.
While I have no problem with people saying he isn't good enough, I do get annoyed when people say "he struggled to win his own ball" when the fact is that it was his role to hang back from the contest and be the release option for a clearance.
Poor bastard would have stood more of chance if he was allowed to get under packs and get a kick, but instead he did the team thing and followed instructions.
Pretty fed up with morons calling him soft because he's not at the bottom of packs winning clearances, when he was specifically told not to do that.
Still think it's a bit weird that they wouldn't at least give him a game or two to see if he could play at the next level, when we are screaming out for outside mids. Dan has a few elite tools that we could really do with in the side, but no-one gave him any confidence or direction after Watters left.
Well, according to comments made by Hudson during the year, he was told to get the ball himself, and NOT hang back. So I don't know where you got your info from.
"Our criticism of Daniel recently has been his low contested ball numbers. But on Sunday, he went and found it himself. " http://www.saints.com.au/news/2015-08-1 ... w-round-17
Good find.. My info is from speaking with him.
Do you think his role at sandy is an in & under clearance player?
HitTheBoundary wrote:Well, according to comments made by Hudson during the year, he was told to get the ball himself, and NOT hang back. So I don't know where you got your info from.
"Our criticism of Daniel recently has been his low contested ball numbers. But on Sunday, he went and found it himself. " http://www.saints.com.au/news/2015-08-1 ... w-round-17
Good find.. My info is from speaking with him.
Do you think his role at sandy is an in & under clearance player?
No I don't think that's his role, but I don't think that's what Hudson was referring to.
I think the issue is he doesn't win enough one on one contests. That doesn't have to be in and under, but rather in direct opposition to an opponent he's not winning enough of the ball.
I also think he's not physical enough, but that may be partly due to his shoulder op.
That's my observation, but admittedly I've only seen tv games, not live.
HitTheBoundary wrote:Well, according to comments made by Hudson during the year, he was told to get the ball himself, and NOT hang back. So I don't know where you got your info from.
"Our criticism of Daniel recently has been his low contested ball numbers. But on Sunday, he went and found it himself. " http://www.saints.com.au/news/2015-08-1 ... w-round-17
Good find.. My info is from speaking with him.
Do you think his role at sandy is an in & under clearance player?
No I don't think that's his role, but I don't think that's what Hudson was referring to.
I think the issue is he doesn't win enough one on one contests. That doesn't have to be in and under, but rather in direct opposition to an opponent he's not winning enough of the ball.
I also think he's not physical enough, but that may be partly due to his shoulder op.
That's my observation, but admittedly I've only seen tv games, not live.
