Lekkas

[Yardie]

Angelo looked a bit lost in the first three quarters of the match. He has also struggled all season.

Last quarter was fantastic and lets hope this is a turning point for him. But if it is not do you guys think that a spell at Box Hill would be in order.

[andrew coombs]

Lekkas was the bloke who went bleating about unfairness when Hawthorn were contemplating a three year offer for Nathan Brown. Brown has indicated his decision not to come to Hawthorn was based around the apparent animosity it may cause with some of the players. How much could we have used NB this year? I guess improving the list is lower on the list of priorities in Angelo's world than his own bloated portfolio. Shows too.

[The Candy Man]

Originally posted by andrew coombs
Lekkas was the bloke who went bleating about unfairness when Hawthorn were contemplating a three year offer for Nathan Brown. Brown has indicated his decision not to come to Hawthorn was based around the apparent animosity it may cause with some of the players. How much could we have used NB this year? I guess improving the list is lower on the list of priorities in Angelo's world than his own bloated portfolio. Shows too.

I was going to offer similar comment. The least Lekkas could do after costing us a crack at securing Brown is to perform. It's funny how footy players seem to produce their worst footy the first year after renewing a contract ..... or am I being a little too cynical?

[lasher]

lekkas needs to step up and perform or he will join the list of catch ya later...at least he's a little tradable...just a little...

[andrew coombs]

I reckon I would hang onto Lekkas but he definately needs to lift his game. Problem with Angelo is he finds it hard to get into the game when the side plays its chip sideways style. If the players direct the footy straight and quick at the hot spot his pace in invaluable in the front half. For this to happen of course we need a target demanding the footy from the goalsquare. If Thommo can find the form to at least create contests Lekkas would become a dangerous proposition.

[Gary Shadforth]

Originally posted by andrew coombs
Lekkas was the bloke who went bleating about unfairness when Hawthorn were contemplating a three year offer for Nathan Brown. Brown has indicated his decision not to come to Hawthorn was based around the apparent animosity it may cause with some of the players. How much could we have used NB this year? I guess improving the list is lower on the list of priorities in Angelo's world than his own bloated portfolio. Shows too.
The wonders of hindsight, andrew. I thought Angelo was one of our hard-at-it consistent performers in the last-12-game-turnaround last year.

I would have something to say if I feel I have given solid service to an organization and one cash-hunter is about to crash-in after disloyalty to his former employer.

Is Richmond, getting full value. thus far, and I emphasize the word full, for Brownie?

Cheers, Andrew, be patient the year 2010 isn't that far away.

[andrew coombs]

Originally posted by Gary Shadforth
The wonders of hindsight, andrew. I thought Angelo was one of our hard-at-it consistent performers in the last-12-game-turnaround last year.

I would have something to say if I feel I have given solid service to an organization and one cash-hunter is about to crash-in after disloyalty to his former employer.

Is Richmond, getting full value. thus far, and I emphasize the word full, for Brownie?

Cheers, Andrew, be patient the year 2010 isn't that far away.

No player is bigger than the club and there can be no doubt what so ever that the aquisition of a player of Brown's class would improve any team. I would say that it is a safe bet that Richmond are getting terrific value from Brown. In their four wins this year he has been the key player in two and the second best to Richo in the other couple. I read the other day that Glen Archer was prepared to take a pay cut to get Jade Rawlings to the Roos and I would say that the Arch has plenty more runs on the board than Angelo. I thought at the time when Angelo was publically complaining about Brown that he was putting some unwanted pressure on himself. It is up to him to produce.

[Gary Shadforth]

Originally posted by andrew coombs
No player is bigger than the club and there can be no doubt what so ever that the aquisition of a player of Brown's class would improve any team. I would say that it is a safe bet that Richmond are getting terrific value from Brown. In their four wins this year he has been the key player in two and the second best to Richo in the other couple. I read the other day that Glen Archer was prepared to take a pay cut to get Jade Rawlings to the Roos and I would say that the Arch has plenty more runs on the board than Angelo. I thought at the time when Angelo was publically complaining about Brown that he was putting some unwanted pressure on himself. It is up to him to produce. I've never thought of Angelo as being bigger than the club, IMO, he is an honest hard working performer. Our powers-that-be must have thought so after he spoke up.

To use a regular cliche, Andrew, we will need to agree to disagree. Angelo did produce and was very much a contributor in the 12-game-turn-around last season and, IMO, he said what he thought and was entitled to and needed to say before this season begun so I think it puts paid to your hindsight.

Maybe you are not a stats man but observe Brown's performances with the Tiges - 17 possessions average thus far this season, IMO, it is just that, AVERAGE. Not a lot of value for what they have paid for him (thank God we didn't fall for such a cash-hungry ordinary 2003 performer at his previous club). From what I have observed his performances, arguably, have been far from ultra-productive in the welfare and results of the Richmond Football Club so far 2004 (like us hapless). I rest my case.

[andrew coombs]

Originally posted by Gary Shadforth
I've never thought of Angelo as being bigger than the club, IMO, he is an honest hard working performer. Our powers-that-be must have thought so after he spoke up.

To use a regular cliche, Andrew, we will need to agree to disagree. Angelo did produce and was very much a contributor in the 12-game-turn-around last season and, IMO, he said what he thought and was entitled to and needed to say before this season begun so I think it puts paid to your hindsight.

Maybe you are not a stats man but observe Brown's performances with the Tiges - 17 possessions average thus far this season, IMO, it is just that, AVERAGE. Not a lot of value for what they have paid for him (thank God we didn't fall for such a cash-hungry ordinary 2003 performer at his previous club). From what I have observed his performances, arguably, have been far from ultra-productive in the welfare and results of the Richmond Football Club so far 2004 (like us hapless). I rest my case.


Gary , I know you may not believe it but I am an Angelo fan. There is a growing opinion around footy circles that he is a downhill skier and it is up to him to prove this wrong. He played some great footy last year in a losing ( finals ) cause on the back of Spider,Sam,Crawf and Richie and he needs to stand up right now. I rate you as a football analyst but your Brown comments are badly flawed.

[mick]

Gary wrote:
Maybe you are not a stats man but observe Brown's performances with the Tiges - 17 possessions average thus far this season, IMO, it is just that, AVERAGE. Not a lot of value for what they have paid for him (thank God we didn't fall for such a cash-hungry ordinary 2003 performer at his previous club). From what I have observed his performances, arguably, have been far from ultra-productive in the welfare and results of the Richmond Football Club so far 2004 (like us hapless). I rest my case.

Andrew may not be a stats man Gary, but I think they can provide a fair picture of a players performance if correctly interpreted.

Brown is second on the Richmond goal kicking list.

Brown leads the club in kicks.

Brown leads the club in overall possessions, and most experts would acknowledge that his disposal and decision making is first rate.



These stats would indicate that Brown is the most effective player at Richmond-hardly an "average" player.

To put this in perspective Richmond gave up their pick 6 and Peter Street for Brown. For that pick six we got Danny Jacobs.

Danny Jacobs might turn out to be a very good player but Brown is a dead set star-Look at his input at Richmond compared with that of Jacobs.

As for Brown being money hungry- to be fair neither you or I know what Browns motivations were for leaving Footscray, he might have misjudged Richmond's chances of playing in finals-like Buckley did at the Lions.

Cheers

[Gary Shadforth]

andrew, as I said let's agree to disagree. I take on board your comments about Angelo needing to lift his game but he has a lot of mates in the team though who played well in the latter part of 2003 and are not performing so well this season, my point is Angelo is not alone.

As for Brown you appear to like his style, I don't, so, we are each entitled to our opinions.

I am thinking up a thread as a topic about 'cash-hunters', the likes of Brown and Rawlings.

My thoughts are about the AFL having to inject $3m into the Tiges, another one of the grande olde clubs that has found itself in a big financial hole.

To put it briefly as I can, such a scenario cannot continue - the AFL cannot forever go on propping up clubs. 'Businessmen' like Brown, Rawlings and player-managers will find it a tougher in trading their wares when the time comes, (IMO, it is only a matter of time) there are only, say, 10-12 clubs (or maybe even less) in the competition. Its all to do with what is affordable for the comp. to financially withstand - viability in the coming years. Add to this abounding corporates are getting harder by the year for clubs to find as sponsors and it seems supporters pockets aren't as deep these days for the struggling clubs.

So, therefore, with some 132 less players taking the field each weekend the likes of the Rawlings and the Brownses will need to be of a higher quality (i.e: Hird, Lloyd) to attract the dollars they, (Brown, Rawlings) are asking today, IMO and if you get my drift.

Anyway, andrew, let's hope we are both happier after today's game against the crows - good luck mate.

[TheHeatleyStand]

Ang wasnt bleating for the sake of himself.
Brown was never coming to Hawthorn at $500k a season, you couldnt fit him in.
Lekkas was illustrating the point that you would have allowed Rawlings to leave because you couldnt fit him in and his terms were too long and then bringing in someone for more $$$$$ and a longer contract.

[Gary Shadforth]

Originally posted by TheHeatleyStand
Ang wasnt bleating for the sake of himself.
Brown was never coming to Hawthorn at $500k a season, you couldnt fit him in.
Lekkas was illustrating the point that you would have allowed Rawlings to leave because you couldnt fit him in and his terms were too long and then bringing in someone for more $$$$$ and a longer contract.
As I have stated, businessmen at work. Business first, football a bad second.

Rawlings was at Glenferrie 8 years, gave one reasonably good season, his last at the Hawks after the latter persevered with him and gave him years to develop - season 2003 evolves - gets quite a lot of press - he thinks he is better than what he is and puts k-dollars on his head and tells his business manager to get to work.

Australian football, with a world code like soccer now working on really developing itself in Oz, cannot afford prima-donnas, and I relate this to certainly not ongoing recurrences of the scenario of just last week with the AFL injecting $3m into Richmond.

And discussing business, what kind of business persons have we got at the AFL and Richmond? Last week's practice is unsustainable.

[andrew coombs]

Originally posted by TheHeatleyStand
Ang wasnt bleating for the sake of himself.
Brown was never coming to Hawthorn at $500k a season, you couldnt fit him in.
Lekkas was illustrating the point that you would have allowed Rawlings to leave because you couldnt fit him in and his terms were too long and then bringing in someone for more $$$$$ and a longer contract.

Peter Schwab said in an interview this afternoon on 3AW that he found Lekkas' comments at a time when the club were attempting to improve the list with the recruitment of Brown as "Very dissapointing". If Brown was never coming over why would this have been the Case?