Is Kosi a game breaker? We need another full forward.

[Oh When the Saints]

I agree with you bigcarl ... but it depends on whether Lyon is willing to revisit his judgement, or just prefers to look at other options.

[To the top]

So Watts and Allen are developing young ruck/forwards?

And, because we have these 2 developing ruck/forwards, Brooks is surplus to requirements!

Well, from what I have seen, Brooks is the developing young ruck/forward.

Watts has no experience in the ruck - has played as a key forward.

And what is Allen's height - plus some have the hope that he may develop as a full back. So I would imagine he is to the order of 194cm. And I do not think he has ever rucked.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Neither Watts nor Allen compare with Brooks as a developing young ruck/forward. With ability to further develop his ruckwork.

[plugger66]

So Watts and Allen are developing young ruck/forwards?

And, because we have these 2 developing ruck/forwards, Brooks is surplus to requirements!

Well, from what I have seen, Brooks is the developing young ruck/forward.

Watts has no experience in the ruck - has played as a key forward.

And what is Allen's height - plus some have the hope that he may develop as a full back. So I would imagine he is to the order of 194cm. And I do not think he has ever rucked.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Neither Watts nor Allen compare with Brooks as a developing young ruck/forward. With ability to further develop his ruckwork.

Allen played ruck all junoir career but agree he is not bis enough for an AFL ruckman. Also Brooks is not young. He will be 24 next season with 8 AFL games in 6 years but I do agree he will play in the ruck next year. King Island are short of a tall ruckman.

[bigcarl]

Allen played ruck all junoir career but agree he is not bis enough for an AFL ruckman. Also Brooks is not young. He will be 24 next season.

24 is a mere pup by ruck standards. they don't peak until much later. i agree there are question marks over his toughness and work ethic but he at least deserves the chance to prove himself now there is a spot for him. people can surprise you

[plugger66]

Allen played ruck all junoir career but agree he is not bis enough for an AFL ruckman. Also Brooks is not young. He will be 24 next season.

24 is a mere pup by ruck standards. they don't peak until much later. i agree there are question marks over his toughness and work ethic but he at least deserves the chance to prove himself now there is a spot for him. people can surprise you

Well he couldnt get more than 3 games in 2 years under 2 differnet coaches. Are they both wrong.

[bigcarl]

Well he couldnt get more than 3 games in 2 years under 2 differnet coaches. Are they both wrong.

could be that both are wrong.

neither is a genius.

gt is on record as saying brooks would have played in that 2006 elimination final against melbourne had the weather been fine ... so gt was beginning to come around on him.

in any case, kosi ... the only other young player of his type ... was a better option then. now we need kosi somewhere else.

everyone moves up one. that's how good organisations work

[Oh When the Saints]

gt is on record as saying brooks would have played in that 2006 elimination final against melbourne had the weather been fine ... so gt was beginning to come around on him.

That was the second* most disgraceful selection move of Grant Thomas' coaching career.

A bloke who had been on the list for 5 years finally gets his chance, plays a blinder against the Lions in Round 22 and looks the goods.

The next week rolls around and GT has to make a decision between Brooks and Rix.

And he selects Rix

Absolute disgrace, and a great way to kill Brooks' confidence. Should have played him, because on form he was in the top 10 players in that side.

There was nothing holding Brooks back from dominating in that final, and GT stuffed up big time.


*(The MOST disgraceful selection decision was not playing Montagna or Fiora on Subiaco in Round 1 last year)


To the Top ... answer my question.

How many players do Geelong, Collingwood, West Coast and Hawthorn have on their list who are 196cm+ ???

[bigcarl]

A bloke who had been on the list for 5 years finally gets his chance, plays a blinder against the Lions in Round 22 and looks the goods. The next week rolls around and GT has to make a decision between Brooks and Rix?

yeah, i though so too and would have played brooks regardless of the weather. my question at the time was how could melbourne contend with gehrig, riewoldt, kosi and brooks as marking targets?

but gt's papers were already signed by RB and the board and we would have won that game anyway had the injury gods not turned on us in a fairly savage way.

there's a lot of "what ifs" in footy

[bigcarl]

St Kilda has a history of putting EVERY player on a pedestal.........AND NOT being able to make an objective tough call to get the necessary skills compliment for the team that DOES have obvious holes (eg) ruckman, midfielders, another defender.

not a big fan of trading good players away, unless they are trouble-makers (spida) or don't want to play for us (hall) or have somehow otherwise run their race at the club (lockett, stewart)

i'm all for believing in and developing the national draft for all it is worth ... and exploiting the rookies system, however it works.

there is a lot to be said for the way that gt built a good young list and did his absolute best to keep the core of it together.

hawthorn and geelong have followed a similar ethos and look at them now.

i'll be appalled if we go down the "quick fix" path and bring in any more washed up duds next season.

keep 'em young and keep 'em coming through.

we must exploit the draft rules etc as much as we can. i wonder whether we have any good father-son picks coming through?

[Teflon]

St Kilda has a history of putting EVERY player on a pedestal.........AND NOT being able to make an objective tough call to get the necessary skills compliment for the team that DOES have obvious holes (eg) ruckman, midfielders, another defender.

not a big fan of trading good players away, unless they are trouble-makers (spida) or don't want to play for us (hall) or have somehow otherwise run their race at the club (lockett, stewart)

i'm all for believing in and developing the national draft for all it is worth ... and exploiting the rookies system, however it works.

there is a lot to be said for the way that gt built a good young list and did his absolute best to keep the core of it together.

hawthorn and geelong have followed a similar ethos and look at them now.

i'll be appalled if we go down the "quick fix" path and bring in any more washed up duds next season.

keep 'em young and keep 'em coming through.

we must exploit the draft rules etc as much as we can. i wonder whether we have any good father-son picks coming through?

so we wait for Van Reehan the saviour in 5 or so years while Rieiwldt is running round just about finished?

or

we pray Brooks omes to the rescue after 6 years of not being able to get a game and having been previously flicked by a club in Port renowned for dragging the best out of players

or

We pray Gardiner holds up and rob Peter to pay Paul and play kosi in ruck? (I wont even bother with Rix or Blake)

Point is - draft or no draft each team is at a different cycle in its stages - we aint in a ground zero rebuild stage to suggest sole reliance on drafting a kid ruck or waiting for Van Reehan is dumb. To also suggest that because weh havent traded succesfully for a genuine establsihed ruck previously is reason not to attempt that in future is sad logic.

At some stage in your life Cral you will have to make a hard decision - so will we as a club - that decision may not be popular but no risk.....no glory.

get off the fence.

[bigcarl]

hi teflon, thought that might wake you up, spoiling for a blue.

i've made my thoughts on it pretty clear, so no reason to repeat them.

i'd probably trade brooks for jolly ... but i doubt the swans would go for that. we could chuck in RL and RB as well i guess.

[Teflon]

hi teflon, thought that might wake you up, spoiling for a blue.

i've made my thoughts on it pretty clear, so no reason to repeat them.

i'd probably trade brooks for jolly ... but i doubt the swans would go for that. we could chuck in RL and RB as well i guess.

Whose after a blue?...just an opinion....sheesh...its like pulling teeth...besides it sounds as if you wrote the post in the hope youd get a reaction...yet somehow Im after a blue?... ...

Since your so keen to see Lyon get the flick maybe the Swans could make a play for your hero in Grant....like the recent 4 clubs who wanted a coach didnt...

[bigcarl]

Since your so keen to see Lyon get the flick maybe the Swans could make a play for your hero in Grant....like the recent 4 clubs who wanted a coach didnt...

i'm not keen to see rl get the flick. but he'd want to improve on this year's effort, thats for sure

[Teflon]

Since your so keen to see Lyon get the flick maybe the Swans could make a play for your hero in Grant....like the recent 4 clubs who wanted a coach didnt...

i'm not keen to see rl get the flick. but he'd want to improve on this year's effort, thats for sure

you keep suggesting he be off loaded to Sydney.

At least you made a call I guess.

[bigcarl]

you keep suggesting he be off loaded to Sydney.

it was a joke idiot. what i want to see from RL next year is a much improved coaching performance. but if we don't make the finals next year i'll be calling for his head.

[Teflon]

you keep suggesting he be off loaded to Sydney.

it was a joke idiot. what i want to see from RL next year is a much improved coaching performance. but if we don't make the finals next year i'll be calling for his head.

Always good to get your thoughts Carl..............................................eventually.

[To the top]

For starters, King can not get a game at Geelong, who ruck Ottens and Blake.

Secondly, how do you prise an established ruckman from another club unless they are disenchanted at their existing club? And who do we put on the table as a trade?

No side is going to let go of a ruckman they think has the potential to contribute. Immediately or into the future.

We rely on under sized players to compete in the spot where the game starts - and we pay the price.

Some on here take every opportunity to "bag" Brooks - on the basis that he got so many games etc. etc.

Well, when you have been around for a bit, and involved, and still enjoy a bit of interaction on the sidelines, you note the little things which stands players aside.

Against Brisbane, Brooks and Roo plus a couple of opponents flew for a mark in the goal square, the ball came off hands, was grabbed by Brooks who put it through off the left foot virtually before his feet hit the ground from flying in the contest. Split second, reflex stuff. Absolute class. And he is 198 cm to boot.

So open your eyes, not your boring, uneducated prejudices which only go to show that you know nothing about ability on a football field.

Some of what is presented here is absolute garbage.

With Gehrig gone, Kosi needs to stand up in attack. So someone else needs to take the support ruck/forward responsibilities Kosi has assumed - and the only option we have is Brooks.

He has been given the grounding, has shown consistent form at Casey, played well against WB before a hamstring cut him down for a few weeks - he was named, recall, but was a late withdrawal for successive matches.

Now he is not competing with Kosi for a spot.

So who is he competing with?

If Gardiner stands up - Rix? Or Blake as a ruckman also capable of resting forward and grabbing a goal or two, or three? Or Watts ditto for Blake?

I think not.

What say those who "bag" Brooks lift their gaze to the rest of the list - and our running mid-field options on our list.

[plugger66]

For starters, King can not get a game at Geelong, who ruck Ottens and Blake.

Secondly, how do you prise an established ruckman from another club unless they are disenchanted at their existing club? And who do we put on the table as a trade?

No side is going to let go of a ruckman they think has the potential to contribute. Immediately or into the future.

We rely on under sized players to compete in the spot where the game starts - and we pay the price.

Some on here take every opportunity to "bag" Brooks - on the basis that he got so many games etc. etc.

Well, when you have been around for a bit, and involved, and still enjoy a bit of interaction on the sidelines, you note the little things which stands players aside.

Against Brisbane, Brooks and Roo plus a couple of opponents flew for a mark in the goal square, the ball came off hands, was grabbed by Brooks who put it through off the left foot virtually before his feet hit the ground from flying in the contest. Split second, reflex stuff. Absolute class. And he is 198 cm to boot.

So open your eyes, not your boring, uneducated prejudices which only go to show that you know nothing about ability on a football field.

Some of what is presented here is absolute garbage.

With Gehrig gone, Kosi needs to stand up in attack. So someone else needs to take the support ruck/forward responsibilities Kosi has assumed - and the only option we have is Brooks.

He has been given the grounding, has shown consistent form at Casey, played well against WB before a hamstring cut him down for a few weeks - he was named, recall, but was a late withdrawal for successive matches.

Now he is not competing with Kosi for a spot.

So who is he competing with?

If Gardiner stands up - Rix? Or Blake as a ruckman also capable of resting forward and grabbing a goal or two, or three? Or Watts ditto for Blake?

I think not.

What say those who "bag" Brooks lift their gaze to the rest of the list - and our running mid-field options on our list.

Can I ask why you think this guy can play. Have you seen many games this year at casey? Also as I have said previously 2 coaches havent given him games when we have injuries to ruckmen and tall forwards. One player retires and he is all of a sudden needed. We have had 2-3 talls out previously and he wasnt needed.

[To the top]

Plugger66, can't you read?

Start concentrating on players we can afford to lose, like Baker, Milne, McQualter and a few others - who all have significant deficiencies and are clogging up our list.

I do not anticipate that any player added to our list post season will appear in the opening round of 2008.

So, we will go with something like this :-

Montagna Watts Allen
X. Clarke Koschitzke Fiora
Riewoldt Goddard Hayes
Gram Maguire S. Fisher
Gilbert Hudgden L. Fisher
Gardiner Dal Santo Ball

R. Clarke, Brooks, Blake, Harvey

I note it is said that Allen is very good below his knees- and on the assumption Hamill does not come up.

Apart from Blake, we do not need "taggers" because, hopefully, our mid-field will have the capacity to beat their opponents and be fully accountable for their opponents.

So, where are the options?

[plugger66]

Plugger66, can't you read?

Start concentrating on players we can afford to lose, like Baker, Milne, McQualter and a few others - who all have significant deficiencies and are clogging up our list.

I do not anticipate that any player added to our list post season will appear in the opening round of 2008.

So, we will go with something like this :-

Montagna Watts Allen
X. Clarke Koschitzke Fiora
Riewoldt Goddard Hayes
Gram Maguire S. Fisher
Gilbert Hudgden L. Fisher
Gardiner Dal Santo Ball

R. Clarke, Brooks, Blake, Harvey

I note it is said that Allen is very good below his knees- and on the assumption Hamill does not come up.

Apart from Blake, we do not need "taggers" because, hopefully, our mid-field will have the capacity to beat their opponents and be fully accountable for their opponents.

So, where are the options?

We can afford to lose Baker and Milne but keep Brooks. Have you seen him play this year at Scorps. Can you answer this. I am wondering about your football knowledge if we lose Milne and G. How many goals in total is that from this year and replace them with Watts and Joey in the pocket. And Rooy on the wing. best 3 CHF in the AFL and he goes to the wing.

[rodgerfox]

Plugger66, can't you read?

Start concentrating on players we can afford to lose, like Baker...

Lost me there.

You cannot be serious?

[saintsRrising]

Baker

Lose him...

Yes we are overbrimming with hard nuts = NOT!!!!!

[Dan Warna]

lol baker

frankly if any non saint player did what baker did, farmer would have got 2 weeks.

i love archer to bits but he infracted about 3 times on the weekend, worse than baker/FG/milne etc.

as for lenny's suspension a couple of seasons ago

[joffaboy]

lol baker

double lol Baker.

For a start have lost him already for 25% of next season.

If he were up for trade (which I am sure he wont be) his value has been diminished by 25% in his first year.

Extremely unlikely, in fact I am sure it wouldn't happen.

[Nathine29]

Fraser and Fev are very good friends.

Just imagine Fev at full forward for us.

Come on Fraser work on your mate.

Brendan would kick 100 every year on the end of a good team like ours.