will thursfield

[archibald]

has anyone seen him play?

[Moo://_Cow]

I can remember reading an article about him in the paper a while back.

[archibald]

Will Thursfield
Details:
Club: Ormond/Sandringham
DOB: 19 April 1986 Hgt: 190cm Wgt: 75kg
Position: Full Back
Natural Foot: Right

Honours:
National Draft Camp 2004

TAC Stats:
2004: 20 games, 4 goals, 12.2 PPG

Strengths: Will is a very athletic defender with plenty of promise. He has a huge leap on him and is capable of the spectacular mark. He likes to carry the ball out of defence and has good pace for his size.

Thursfield only joined the Dragons this year from Brighton Grammar and was captain of the school athletics team. He is also a long kick.

Weaknesses: Still fairly raw and can get lost on the field at times. Will sometimes try and mark from behind rather than punching. TAC Cup form was solid but nothing special.

Footydraft.com comment: It wouldn't surprise at all if Thursfield was drafted - clubs love pacy tall athletes like him. Would require a fair bit of work if he was to make it but would be well worth the punt
he sounds quite handy,better then kirby i would think

[TheHeatleyStand]

Very athletic with a great leap.
Promising pick up by the Tigers.

[sante]

Good pick - up for us! Hopefully can become a KPP player for us in the future

[Bentleigh]

Good pick - up for us! Hopefully can become a KPP player for us in the future

Doubt it.

Doesnt look anything more than a Full Back.

[sante]

Doubt it.

Doesnt look anything more than a Full Back.
KPP still means FB

[OneEyedHawk]

Will Thursfield
Details:
Club: Ormond/Sandringham
DOB: 19 April 1986 Hgt: 190cm Wgt: 75kg
Position: Full Back
Natural Foot: Right

Honours:
National Draft Camp 2004

TAC Stats:
2004: 20 games, 4 goals, 12.2 PPG

Strengths: Will is a very athletic defender with plenty of promise. He has a huge leap on him and is capable of the spectacular mark. He likes to carry the ball out of defence and has good pace for his size.

Thursfield only joined the Dragons this year from Brighton Grammar and was captain of the school athletics team. He is also a long kick.

Weaknesses: Still fairly raw and can get lost on the field at times. Will sometimes try and mark from behind rather than punching. TAC Cup form was solid but nothing special.

Footydraft.com comment: It wouldn't surprise at all if Thursfield was drafted - clubs love pacy tall athletes like him. Would require a fair bit of work if he was to make it but would be well worth the punt
he sounds quite handy,better then kirby i would think
I love it how Hawthorn passes up Tambling to get the best available KPP in the draft and this is cast as the biggest mistake of all time, yet Richmond pass up Kirkby, clearly a better player and a supposed top 30 pick, yet this is some stroke of genius and the Tiges knew better than everyone else! At least we passed on Tambling for a genuine,urgent need. You guys just plain stuffed up!

[tigerT]

Doubt it.

Doesnt look anything more than a Full Back.


last i heard nothing more than a fullback was indeed a KPP :D

[Bentleigh]

last i heard nothing more than a fullback was indeed a KPP :D

ok...

KKP implys abilty to play CHF/CHF etc.

[One-eyed Tiger]

I love it how Hawthorn passes up Tambling to get the best available KPP in the draft and this is cast as the biggest mistake of all time, yet Richmond pass up Kirkby, clearly a better player and a supposed top 30 pick, yet this is some stroke of genius and the Tiges knew better than everyone else! At least we passed on Tambling for a genuine,urgent need. You guys just plain stuffed up!

Whatever...... :rolleyes:

I'm not overly concerned. Had a good look at both of these blokes (ie Kirkby and Thursfield) whilst training at Richmond lately. Kirkby took some nice grabs (when he managed to slip his opponent) and looked a nice left foot kick. Worryingly he did struggle in contested situations where he could be outmuscled. Obviously he has improvement in this area when he matures and puts on some size. The main area however where he struggled was running. His consistency however was first rate. He consistently finished 2nd-last in any sort of run, sprint, jog etc. (Last place was always Gilham). I won't argue that the boy has some ability but you'd really want to hope that his athletic/aerobic ability will improve drastically.

His aerobic capacity may just be the result of not working hard enough up til now. Richmond need key position Backs and I would not be confident of him measuring up here. Thursfield looks the athletic sort who can at the very least make it to a contest and provide a decent spoil. At this early stage Kirkby doesn't even look capable of doing that. So yes we did pass on Kirkby (as did 16 teams in the ND) for what I think was a good enough reason.

[dave_4813]

Richmond board.

[Bentleigh]

I love it how Hawthorn passes up Tambling to get the best available KPP in the draft and this is cast as the biggest mistake of all time, yet Richmond pass up Kirkby, clearly a better player and a supposed top 30 pick, yet this is some stroke of genius and the Tiges knew better than everyone else! At least we passed on Tambling for a genuine,urgent need. You guys just plain stuffed up!

No lad. Hodge over Judd/Ball was the biggest mistake, hopfully Tambling will be equaly as big.

Kirby trained at Richmond for a few weeks. After that time, If he is deemed not good enough I am happy for us to have passed him up. We had a good look at both kids...

He isnt clearly the better player. There was a alot of doubt over Kirbys speed, lack of althetic abilty, skinny, underdeveloped body which may stuggle to put on weight. Thursfield has alot of potential bing a fanstasic athleic with great speed and weight. Dont forget, both were passed up multible times by 16 clubs.

I would have prefered Kirby but there is alot of doubt for the kid. Saying that I would have much prefer Grundy or Jesse Smith. Good luck to Kirby, he might come good. Same goes for our kid. Finally, the Tigers did not stuff up champ. We only had 1 pick in the rookie draft. We got the kid we wanted, who Miller and Plough thought was best.

How can you compare the Tambling, Roughead issue to this? They were 2 of the best kids in the country compared to blokes who went in the rookie draft.

[Bentleigh]

Richmond board.

Um, No.

This Board is fine for a player which has been Drafted

[occy437]

You want to look out for will's brother ollie he is an absolute gun wouldnt be suprised if picking will had something to do with ollie this kid is a well built lad only 16 but is a huge kid ready made and should be drafted

[One-eyed Tiger]

Finally, the Tigers did not stuff up champ. We only had 1 pick in the rookie draft. We got the kid we wanted, who Miller and Plough thought was best.

Maybe not the best player, as there were plently of talented midfielders in the Rookie draft, but definitely the best player for our needs.......ie Tall Athletic Backman.

[Bentleigh]

Maybe not the best player, as there were plently of talented midfielders in the Rookie draft, but definitely the best player for our needs.......ie Tall Athletic Backman.

Indeed, the best player for out situation.

[dave_4813]

Um, No.

This Board is fine for a player which has been Draftedso if I started a thread on Ben Graham going to the NFL it would be okay? the reason being geelong drafted him a long time ago.

[Bentleigh]

so if I started a thread on Ben Graham going to the NFL it would be okay? the reason being geelong drafted him a long time ago.

One of the worst replys ive ever read.

Surly you can understand Graham was not a normal trade...

It'd be stupid if you made a thread about Graham being draft. Thursfeild was drafted only days ago...

You struggle with life eh?

[OldSchool]

Maybe not the best player, as there were plently of talented midfielders in the Rookie draft, but definitely the best player for our needs.......ie Tall Athletic Backman.
It was a good selection for the Tigers. Thursfield may need a season or two to fill out but he could become a very decent player.

[dave_4813]

One of the worst replys ive ever read.

Surly you can understand Graham was not a normal trade...

It'd be stupid if you made a thread about Graham being draft. Thursfeild was drafted only days ago...

You struggle with life eh?Graham was still drafted albeit in 1993. Take this ******** to the Richmond board. You're polluting valuable space.

[BobbyDavis]

Haha mate u r clueless. Kirkby is a slow skinny key position player. He was ok with kids but will get towelled up in the AFL. He is so overated it's not funny. Thursfield was the number 1 full back by far, and should have made the vic metro side. He's the perfect rookie selection as he's skinny now, but with a year of experience and his outstanding athletic attributes he's gonna be a beauty.

[OneEyedHawk]

Haha mate u r clueless. Kirkby is a slow skinny key position player. He was ok with kids but will get towelled up in the AFL. He is so overated it's not funny. Thursfield was the number 1 full back by far, and should have made the vic metro side. He's the perfect rookie selection as he's skinny now, but with a year of experience and his outstanding athletic attributes he's gonna be a beauty.
You reckon I'm clueless! Say your right and he is suddenly the best option. Richmond's most pressing need from day 1 was a key position backman. So what do you do? You don't use any of your 1000 picks in the ND on one, same goes in the PSD then in the Rookie Draft you finally do take one, but one who is supposedly that raw that he is years away from playing. Really sound logic that is. Maybe you can put little Danny Meyer down at full-back?

[dave_4813]

Haha mate u r clueless. Kirkby is a slow skinny key position player. He was ok with kids but will get towelled up in the AFL. He is so overated it's not funny. Thursfield was the number 1 full back by far, and should have made the vic metro side. He's the perfect rookie selection as he's skinny now, but with a year of experience and his outstanding athletic attributes he's gonna be a beauty.This shows the intelligence of the average Richmond supporter! Calling himself "BobbyDavis" do you know who Bob Davis played for? No wonder your club is so bad at running itself when you have a bunch of intelects like yourself!

Now that he has been drafted take this infernal racket to the Tugger board.

[dave_4813]

I've kindly made you a new thread.

Will T thread on the Richmond Board (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2667961#post2667961)

[Hammerfire]

Kirkby is a unathletic, skinny KPP who had done nothing until a bit of "flash in the pan" stuff in the middle of this year.

I had no problems taking Thursfield over Kirkby.

[dave_4813]

Kirkby is a unathletic, skinny KPP who had done nothing until a bit of "flash in the pan" stuff in the middle of this year.

I had no problems taking Thursfield over Kirkby.
I'd rather Kirby than Will T. Will T is nothing. Mark my words. Will be delisted this time next year, book mark this comment.

[Coughlan]

I'd rather Kirby than Will T. Will T is nothing. Mark my words. Will be delisted this time next year, book mark this comment.

And you were just bagging the intelligence of the avereange richmond supporter that is the stupidest thing i have ever heard, Kirkby is over rated he is unathletic he will not make it. He was training at Richmond if he was the future star that you think he will be Richmond would have taken him.
My bloody thongs are smarter then you you dumb ********

[dave_4813]

And you were just bagging the intelligence of the avereange richmond supporter that is the stupidest thing i have ever heard, Kirkby is over rated he is unathletic he will not make it. He was training at Richmond if he was the future star that you think he will be Richmond would have taken him.
My bloody thongs are smarter then you you dumb ********
I never said he was a future star! I said he is better than Will T. I said Will T will be delisted at the end of next season, I didn't say Kirkby would last any longer or play any better. I simply said:

Kirby > Will T

[Coughlan]

But you were speaking as if Kirkby is an absolute gun

[dave_4813]

But you were speaking as if Kirkby is an absolute gun

:rolleyes: Yes you would get that impression with the comment I made. I requoted to show you how I said he would be the next Wayne Carey! :rolleyes: LOL. Another delusional Tugger.

I'd rather Kirby than Will T

[occy437]

Has any one heard about his brother this could be a possiblity of why he was selected

[Hammerfire]

If his as good as someone reckons, it won't matter as he'll go high in the draft.

[BobbyDavis]

You reckon I'm clueless! Say your right and he is suddenly the best option. Richmond's most pressing need from day 1 was a key position backman. So what do you do? You don't use any of your 1000 picks in the ND on one, same goes in the PSD then in the Rookie Draft you finally do take one, but one who is supposedly that raw that he is years away from playing. Really sound logic that is. Maybe you can put little Danny Meyer down at full-back?
Our priority is key backman? Jay Schultz will play down back, along with Danial Jackson, Kelvin Moore and Kyle Archibald. All young, tall and full of promise and already at the club b4 this years drafts. Also Patterson and Mcguane could easily be groomed to play down back. Care to change your statement nuff-nuff?

[BobbyDavis]

This shows the intelligence of the average Richmond supporter! Calling himself "BobbyDavis" do you know who Bob Davis played for? No wonder your club is so bad at running itself when you have a bunch of intelects like yourself!

Now that he has been drafted take this infernal racket to the Tugger board.
My name is actually Robert Davis u tip rat. And the hawks r such a well oiled machine at the moment aren't they? At least ul have plenty of priority picks in the next 5 years u nancy boy

[dave_4813]

My name is actually Robert Davis u tip rat. And the hawks r such a well oiled machine at the moment aren't they? At least ul have plenty of priority picks in the next 5 years u nancy boyYou are a lying scum. We know your name isnt Robert Davis. We know you are stupid, no need for lies. Hey you come from Richmond where the IQ cap is set at 75. Enough said.

[Darth_Tiger]

You are a lying scum. We know your name isnt Robert Davis. We know you are stupid, no need for lies. Hey you come from Richmond where the IQ cap is set at 75. Enough said.
my IQ is 133 about 10 times more than yours you loser. LMAO that his name is Robert Davis! you just have your back up that you look like an idiot for having a go at his name!

[IDGAF]

You are a lying scum. We know your name isnt Robert Davis. We know you are stupid, no need for lies. Hey you come from Richmond where the IQ cap is set at 75. Enough said.Hey Dave , i don`t often venture down to these parts but since you went and invited us all down i thought that i would add my 2 cents worth .

The reason i don`t often peruse the main boards is that 99% of the time all you read is bucket loads of inane drivel posted by pre - mid pubescent tools like you .

Who died and made you the big footy police , deciding who can post where and when and what ?

I Especially love it when people like you , hiding behind the confines of thier keyboard get abusive , name calling , insulting etc .

Top marks for bravery ;)

I always try not to stoop to the depths that people like you plumb , i mean it ........... i`m trying real hard .................. but i can`t help it . I have been trying to figure out what the 4813 stands for and the only theory that i can come up with is that is how many times you have pulled yourself since you learned to count ...... about a year and a half ago , or did one of your mums or dads give you a calculator for christmas . Must be a real bitch having to change your nic 4 times a day ......... Damn , i couldn`t help it .

Go away little man ( hopefully enter oxx stage left )

[Hammerfire]

Dave_4813 just some lonely fat kid who has nothing to do over the school holidays because he has no friends!

Btw, why the ******** am i up at 4:42am you ask?

=Insomniac

[Tigerland]

I love it how Hawthorn passes up Tambling to get the best available KPP in the draft and this is cast as the biggest mistake of all time, yet Richmond pass up Kirkby, clearly a better player and a supposed top 30 pick, yet this is some stroke of genius and the Tiges knew better than everyone else! At least we passed on Tambling for a genuine,urgent need. You guys just plain stuffed up!

You're talking rubbish. The assumption that Hawthorn made a mistake not picking up Tambling is based on the experts opinion that he is a better player and Hawthorn didn't select be best player available. Time will tell whether that is the case and peoples opinions at present are worthless.
Hawthorn seem obsessed with KPP - Croad, Holland, Barker, Thompson - hardly made a champion team.
As for Kirby - a lot of teams passed on him. He didn't just slip through for no reason. Wow what a coup by Hawthorn grabbing him! His value seemed to rise between the two drafts for reasons which escape me. Rookie drafting is where Clubs really take a punt on players in the hope that they'll turn into champions. Every now and then a player surprises but generally if they don't get taken in the draft then they are probably up against it.

[OneEyedHawk]

Hawthorn seem obsessed with KPP - Croad, Holland, Barker, Thompson - hardly made a champion team.

I think you'll find most good teams are obsessed with KPP, as you put it. The last time those players you mentioned (along with Johnny Hay) were consistently on the field together we were a good team ie.2001, 1 kick out of GF. Coincidentally the last time Richmond were half a side was also that year when Ottens was firing and when the Kellaways and Gaspar were actually worth something.
The only difference now is we realized and addressed this whereas you didn't. Wallet seems to prefer building his team around midgets.

[Bentleigh]

the last time Richmond were half a side was also that year when Ottens was firing and when the Kellaways and Gaspar were actually worth something.
The only difference now is we realized and addressed this whereas you didn't. Wallet seems to prefer building his team around midgets.

And which blokes did he get in the PSD and trade? Simmonds and Knoble? alright champ...

Deledio can play KKP if needed but is a natural midfeilder. We took Tambling at 4, becasue he was the best player. That gives us 2 blokes of the highest class which will hopfully be at the club for the next 15 years.

With our 3rd pick we took the best avaible KKP. In Pattison we have a very good ruck/KKP player which, if he comes good will serve the club well.

I agree, our KKP is somewhat weak but im more than happy with having to live with that to get 2 potentiall great onballers.

Not to mention we actual do have a few decent KKP... both current and in the future.

For 2005 Both Gaspar and Graham are solid KKP in the back line. Stafford will his all in ruck and the forward line while Richo will provide a presence at CHF. Knoble will play ruck at times while Hall and Morrison are pretty good back ups.

The future si, if you can accpet it or not fairly bright. I like the look at Moore. He looks a good future Full back/3rd tall while you'd hope Thursfeild will come good. Schulz could be anything while Pattison looks a gem. There is a bloke called Limbach which was a steal at 52, could be a really good Full Forward. Like every club we have our fair share of project KKPs in the likes of; Archibald and McGuane.

[Snickers]

And which blokes did he get in the PSD and trade? Simmonds and Knoble? alright champ...

Deledio can play KKP if needed but is a natural midfeilder. We took Tambling at 4, becasue he was the best player. That gives us 2 blokes of the highest class which will hopfully be at the club for the next 15 years.

With our 3rd pick we took the best avaible KKP. In Pattison we have a very good ruck/KKP player which, if he comes good will serve the club well.

I agree, our KKP is somewhat weak but im more than happy with having to live with that to get 2 potentiall great onballers.

Not to mention we actual do have a few decent KKP... both current and in the future.

For 2005 Both Gaspar and Graham are solid KKP in the back line. Stafford will his all in ruck and the forward line while Richo will provide a presence at CHF. Knoble will play ruck at times while Hall and Morrison are pretty good back ups.

The future si, if you can accpet it or not fairly bright. I like the look at Moore. He looks a good future Full back/3rd tall while you'd hope Thursfeild will come good. Schulz could be anything while Pattison looks a gem. There is a bloke called Limbach which was a steal at 52, could be a really good Full Forward. Like every club we have our fair share of project KKPs in the likes of; Archibald and McGuane.
KKP??
I think you mean KPP (Key Position Player) if you wanted to know.

[Bentleigh]

KKP??
I think you mean KPP (Key Position Player) if you wanted to know.

Are you stalking me :eek:

KPP, i was rushing it a tad.

[occy437]

Mark My Words Ollie Thursfield Will Be A Gun

[Infamy]

In 2005, Richmond actually has the 6th tallest list in the AFL, so I wouldn't say that we are built around a team of midjets

[Bentleigh]

Mark My Words Ollie Thursfield Will Be A Gun

His brother is sposed to go alright eh?

[AROB_DEES]

His brother is sposed to go alright eh?
Yep massive for his age, big on baller

[theorangeapple]

i think the tigers were preparing to get roughead at 4 and when that didnt eventuate it would have put them out alittle. personally, i think their midfield is considerably stronger than forwards, backs or rucks. i dont think they wasted pick 4 on tambling, he will be a gun (more than likely) but i think they would have prefered a gun KPP than another midifelder.

personally i think they could have done alot better after pick 4. but i dont see even a fraction of these underage guys that the recruiting staff at richmond have. (btw, who was in charge of recruiting? is beck still there or was miller the head decision maker?). each of the guys they picked have deficiencies apparant to me but the recruiting staff think they were the best available so we will leave at that.

meyer is a forward flanker. didnt even play midfield in the SA side which says alot IMO. not saying forward flankers are a waste of time but i have been reading richmond supporters views that he will be a midfielder. i think he is along way off that happening. maybe in 6 yrs after his body and game style matures.

pattison is top age and an awkward kick. i havent seen much of him at all, but i was suprised the tigers overlooked a gift in wood to get him. i would have thought the prospect of banking away the ruck for the next 10 yrs woud have been to good to be true.

mcguane was taken much earlier than expected, and u could say the same about polo (to a lesser extent). mcguane is a pretty big risk IMO, a risk that i dont think the tigers should have taken at 36 with some pretty handy players still around.

[Bentleigh]

The glass is 1/2 empty eh?

i think the tigers were preparing to get roughead at 4 and when that didnt eventuate it would have put them out alittle. personally, i think their midfield is considerably stronger than forwards, backs or rucks. i dont think they wasted pick 4 on tambling, he will be a gun (more than likely) but i think they would have prefered a gun KPP than another midifelder.

Indeed, after deciding on Deledio we were banking on Roughead at 4. However, we did not want 'a gun KPP' over Tambling. Fact was Plough had great trouble in picking Tambling or Lids with the no. 1 pick and to get both was a pure guns in his eyes. I beleive Deledio and Tambling were by far and away the players he wanted, over Roughead, Franklin and to a lesser extent Griffin. I understand you mean that after getting 1 good on-baller a good KPP would have been ideal. However, to get 2 gun mids is worth missing the chance for Roughead/Franklin in my and Ploughs eyes.

personally i think they could have done alot better after pick 4. but i dont see even a fraction of these underage guys that the recruiting staff at richmond have. (btw, who was in charge of recruiting? is beck still there or was miller the head decision maker?). each of the guys they picked have deficiencies apparant to me but the recruiting staff think they were the best available so we will leave at that.

Yep, we could have done somewhat better than what we now have. Overall thou we have done well and have set outself with every chance for future success. I beleive Miller is our no. 1 bloke in that area and he along with Wallace makes those choices. From the picks we had ive very happy indeed with Millers picks ups last draft.

Each player after 4 has there own deficiencies. Id say 12, 16 and 20 we have done pretty well.

meyer is a forward flanker. didnt even play midfield in the SA side which says alot IMO. not saying forward flankers are a waste of time but i have been reading richmond supporters views that he will be a midfielder. i think he is along way off that happening. maybe in 6 yrs after his body and game style matures.

Meyer was a very highly rated player, as high as the 5/6 spot on some phantom drafts I saw. Nine I beleive on footydraft. After picks 1/3/4 Meyer is the next best midfeilder in the draft, imo. 6 yrs? I reckon ur over doing it abit mate... Meyer is huge in the leg area and will devlop his upper body with time. Im very happy to have this bloke at the club, hes got every chance to become a gem for us. When he is 20/21 he should be ready for the onball role. I dont expect him to play first 22 in '05 but '06 onwards he should come into his own on the flanks/pockets before maturing into a true onballer.

I beleive he did infact play onball for SA (swapping with HFF). His game style is top rate with some stunning skills.

pattison is top age and an awkward kick. i havent seen much of him at all, but i was suprised the tigers overlooked a gift in wood to get him. i would have thought the prospect of banking away the ruck for the next 10 yrs woud have been to good to be true.

Pattisons skills are quite good. He does have a non-text book kicking style, but from what ive heard it isnt a huge problem. He is arugable the best KKP in the draft (after Roughead), easily in the next tier of KPP. He looks a real player which will be a ruck/KPP in the Darcy/Simmonds molde.

Wood would have been a fantasic get. Im a big wrap on him and wish him the best up North. However, 16 is quite high for a beanpole ruckman. Many clubs passed him up thus sharing similar thoughts. The bloke could be a gem, however, beanpole ruckman are quite dodgy and he could have gone either way. Giving the option I would have gone Pattison but Wood is a great player.

mcguane was taken much earlier than expected, and u could say the same about polo (to a lesser extent). mcguane is a pretty big risk IMO, a risk that i dont think the tigers should have taken at 36 with some pretty handy players still around.

Agreed. Im not happy with McGuane. 36 is too high for a project KKP, 1 which could each way. In fairness however, he was our 6th pick and Miller does seem to know alot about the kid. 36 was never going to be a star player but I would have liked someone abit more solid which had more liklyness of being a good stand AFL player. However, the kid is 17 or so, trust in Miller and get behind him. To pick up Limbach quite late (52) makes up for it.

Polo, I am a big wrap for and very happy to have him at Punt Road.

[unirossa26]

where did this idea that ollie thursfield was a gun and was massive. brighton grammar year 10s are crap... bottom of the table get off ur high horse

[OneEyedHawk]

Pattisons skills are quite good. He does have a non-text book kicking style, but from what ive heard it isnt a huge problem. He is arugable the best KKP in the draft (after Roughead), easily in the next tier of KPP.
You are absolutely dreaming if you think Pattison is better than Lance Franklin. Franklin was touted as the #1 pick for a good percentage of the year and Garry Lyon said on SEN the Monday after the draft that Kevin Sheahan told him that he thinks (possibly) the best player to come out of this years draft will be Lance Franklin, in his opinion.
I'm a big wrap for Pattison too and would have loved him at Hawthorn but lets not get too carried away. In the next best tier, definately, but is not the best KPP after Roughead.

[Bentleigh]

You are absolutely dreaming if you think Pattison is better than Lance Franklin. Franklin was touted as the #1 pick for a good percentage of the year and Garry Lyon said on SEN the Monday after the draft that Kevin Sheahan told him that he thinks (possibly) the best player to come out of this years draft will be Lance Franklin, in his opinion.
I'm a big wrap for Pattison too and would have loved him at Hawthorn but lets not get too carried away. In the next best tier, definately, but is not the best KPP after Roughead.

At the moment Pattison is prolly the better player seeing as he top age and Franklin is 17(?).However, Franklin does look a potential gun but out of the top 5 he has the highest chance of failing imo. You'd want Franklin on your books over Pattison though. Still, they are both kids and could be anything at this stage.

Pattison is indeed a good player and im happy to have him at the club. I made the statment becasue I think so highly of Roughead. At the end of the day Pattison is the clearly in the next tier of KPP.

[Ghost of Punt Road]

I think you'll find most good teams are obsessed with KPP, as you put it. The last time those players you mentioned (along with Johnny Hay) were consistently on the field together we were a good team ie.2001, 1 kick out of GF. Coincidentally the last time Richmond were half a side was also that year when Ottens was firing and when the Kellaways and Gaspar were actually worth something.
The only difference now is we realized and addressed this whereas you didn't. Wallet seems to prefer building his team around midgets.


we recriuted FOUR talls in the draft, Limbach and McGuane being forwards, Pattison a forward/ruckman, and Thursfield a defender.

Add to that the many other talls we already are developing, Archibald, Moore, Shulz, Jackson, and the established Stafford, Knobel, Gaspar, Richardson, Simmons, Morrison,and Hall and you will see we didn't forget KPP.

How many talls did the Hawks take in the 04 drafts? Less than us!

[Ghost of Punt Road]

i think the tigers were preparing to get roughead at 4 and when that didnt eventuate it would have put them out alittle. personally, i think their midfield is considerably stronger than forwards, backs or rucks. i dont think they wasted pick 4 on tambling, he will be a gun (more than likely) but i think they would have prefered a gun KPP than another midifelder.

personally i think they could have done alot better after pick 4. but i dont see even a fraction of these underage guys that the recruiting staff at richmond have. (btw, who was in charge of recruiting? is beck still there or was miller the head decision maker?). each of the guys they picked have deficiencies apparant to me but the recruiting staff think they were the best available so we will leave at that.

meyer is a forward flanker. didnt even play midfield in the SA side which says alot IMO. not saying forward flankers are a waste of time but i have been reading richmond supporters views that he will be a midfielder. i think he is along way off that happening. maybe in 6 yrs after his body and game style matures.

pattison is top age and an awkward kick. i havent seen much of him at all, but i was suprised the tigers overlooked a gift in wood to get him. i would have thought the prospect of banking away the ruck for the next 10 yrs woud have been to good to be true.

mcguane was taken much earlier than expected, and u could say the same about polo (to a lesser extent). mcguane is a pretty big risk IMO, a risk that i dont think the tigers should have taken at 36 with some pretty handy players still around.

I agree with you about taking McGuane at 36. He may turn out alright, but to take him so early seemed odd. I can only think having his cousin employed at the club had something to do with it. Inside knowledge or something.

[BobbyDavis]

I agree with you about taking McGuane at 36. He may turn out alright, but to take him so early seemed odd. I can only think having his cousin employed at the club had something to do with it. Inside knowledge or something.
I beg 2 differ with when u say getting Mcguane at 36 was 2 early. This kid will be a gun. He's only 17, he stands at 192cm, is super athletic, has good aggression and is a top mark. He can easily play forward or back, with his aerobic capacity allowing him to play midfield as well. Not only did he stand out 4 QLD in the champs playing at CHF and ruck, but he also excelled playing senior footy in the QAFL. He still is a little raw but which 17-18 year old key position player isn't? His 1st year mite b with coburg but look out in 2006. So 36 isn't 2 early 4 Mcguane especially when Tom Williams with similar attributes went at 6.

[Bentleigh]

I beg 2 differ with when u say getting Mcguane at 36 was 2 early. This kid will be a gun. He's only 17, he stands at 192cm, is super athletic, has good aggression and is a top mark. He can easily play forward or back, with his aerobic capacity allowing him to play midfield as well. Not only did he stand out 4 QLD in the champs playing at CHF and ruck, but he also excelled playing senior footy in the QAFL. He still is a little raw but which 17-18 year old key position player isn't? His 1st year mite b with coburg but look out in 2006. So 36 isn't 2 early 4 Mcguane especially when Tom Williams with similar attributes went at 6.

Great read.

I also beleive McGaune was very high and we could have gotten a better option. However, you seem like you have seen the kid a few times and i am more confident in him after reading that.

Playing ruck at 192cms made me chuckle

:)

[occy437]

where did this idea that ollie thursfield was a gun and was massive. brighton grammar year 10s are crap... bottom of the table get off ur high horse

his a year young so he shouldve been in year 9 but can match it with the bigger boys easily he is a massive unit

[OneEyedHawk]

we recriuted FOUR talls in the draft, Limbach and McGuane being forwards, Pattison a forward/ruckman, and Thursfield a defender.

Add to that the many other talls we already are developing, Archibald, Moore, Shulz, Jackson, and the established Stafford, Knobel, Gaspar, Richardson, Simmons, Morrison,and Hall and you will see we didn't forget KPP.

How many talls did the Hawks take in the 04 drafts? Less than us!
My point was that I thought Richmond would have used some of their early picks to get KPP's rather than more midfielders. I know that they took 4 but aside from Pattison at 16 (whom I like alot) they were all late picks, which are speculative at best. You have said even yourself that McGuane was a questionable choice. Given the current needs of the Richmond list I just thought that using some of their early picks, thereby increasing the chances of getting a gun, would have been their number one priority at the draft.
As for how many talls did Hawthorn take, we took KPP's with 5 of our 6 picks (if you include 1 ruckman), the only midfielder being Lewis at 7. Plus another KPP with our only rookie draft pick, so I think you'll find that we did in fact pick up more KPP's than Richmond.

[Infamy]

I know that they took 4 but aside from Pattison at 16 (whom I like alot) they were all late picks, which are speculative at best.

Late picks are always speculative at best, but so are kpp in general
With the exception of players like a Reiwoldt (even he was said to only go at #1 because he was said to have the personality traits to handle the pressure better than Koschitzke) kpps are speculative no matter what. Later round picks you speculate with, so it makes sense to use them on speculative players does it not?

[theorangeapple]

we recriuted FOUR talls in the draft, Limbach and McGuane being forwards, Pattison a forward/ruckman, and Thursfield a defender.

Add to that the many other talls we already are developing, Archibald, Moore, Shulz, Jackson, and the established Stafford, Knobel, Gaspar, Richardson, Simmons, Morrison,and Hall and you will see we didn't forget KPP.

How many talls did the Hawks take in the 04 drafts? Less than us!


but franklin and roughead are much stronger chances of being topliners than all of those. (ex richo)

[theorangeapple]

I beg 2 differ with when u say getting Mcguane at 36 was 2 early. This kid will be a gun. He's only 17, he stands at 192cm, is super athletic, has good aggression and is a top mark. He can easily play forward or back, with his aerobic capacity allowing him to play midfield as well. Not only did he stand out 4 QLD in the champs playing at CHF and ruck, but he also excelled playing senior footy in the QAFL. He still is a little raw but which 17-18 year old key position player isn't? His 1st year mite b with coburg but look out in 2006. So 36 isn't 2 early 4 Mcguane especially when Tom Williams with similar attributes went at 6.

then the question must be posed why wasnt he talked about more predraft? and if all that u say is true then why wasnt he taken earlier?

[Bentleigh]

but franklin and roughead are much stronger chances of being topliners than all of those. (ex richo)

I doubt anyone is doing anything but agreeing the KKP's the Hawks picked up with 2 and 5 have a higher chance of being comming top line than players than Richmonds later draft picks (bar Pattison). Whats your point?

Richardson & Simmons are all ready establised players, to a lesser extent Morrison & Hall. Tad silly comparing them to 17 year old kids.

I doubt either of those players have a stronger chance of being a top liner than Daniel Jackson. However, Jacko isnt a KKP so its not relivent.

[theorangeapple]

I doubt anyone is doing anything but agreeing the KKP's the Hawks picked up with 2 and 5 have a higher chance of being comming top line than players than Richmonds later draft picks (bar Pattison). Whats your point?




the point i was making was in response to bobbydavis saying that u guys had drafted more tall than the hawks. i was mainly speaking on the draftees not the established types. the hawks drafted 2 but they are quality. u guys drafted 4 who are alot more suspect.

yes they did use their first 2 picks so that should be expected however the likely hood is that only one of those 4 u drafted will play 100games.

[tiger of old]

I wouldnt say Franklin is a KPP in fact far from it.Unless he puts on some meat in his upper body he will be more of your Chris Tarrant type.
Franklin would not have suited our needs.we needed a Kpp[Roughead].Pattison was the next best as to what we needed.A player who can hold down a KP as well as play in the ruck and is mobile[something that TW likes re: Darcy].


cheers!

[Hammerfire]

From what i have heard Franklin has the dream body and athleticism for a CHF.

He is also expectedto grow a bit more, and be able to ruck a little.

I wouldn't of wanted him at 4.

[Infamy]

Agreed, doctors say that Franklin will grow to 198cm, certainly tall enough to ruck, or play a big mobile kpp ala Goodes or Riewoldt
Kinda why he's been likened to Goodes

[OneEyedHawk]

Late picks are always speculative at best, but so are kpp in general
With the exception of players like a Reiwoldt (even he was said to only go at #1 because he was said to have the personality traits to handle the pressure better than Koschitzke) kpps are speculative no matter what. Later round picks you speculate with, so it makes sense to use them on speculative players does it not?
Most KPP's are speculative ,I agree, but by drafting the very best, or best 2 ,you give yourself a much better chance of nabbing a gun 200+ gamer KPP which is what sides are built around. The later picks are much more hit-and-miss and you could end up with a whole lot of nothing.

[OneEyedHawk]

I wouldnt say Franklin is a KPP in fact far from it.Unless he puts on some meat in his upper body he will be more of your Chris Tarrant type.Franklin would not have suited our needs.we needed a Kpp[Roughead].Pattison was the next best as to what we needed.A player who can hold down a KP as well as play in the ruck and is mobile[something that TW likes re: Darcy].


cheers!
Franklin is 196cm and growing, and 87 kgs and growing. At 17! Of course he needs to put some meat on his upper body but show me a 17 year old that doesn't. He will be plenty big enough to hold any position on the ground.
You say Franklin was unsuitable for you guys as you needed someone who could hold down a KPP plus play ruck and who is mobile, like Pattison. Franklin meets all the above criteria with ease and has skills to burn so I don't know who you have him confused with.
Also, what position does Chris Tarrant play?

[tiger of old]

Franklin is 196cm and growing, and 87 kgs and growing. At 17! Of course he needs to put some meat on his upper body but show me a 17 year old that doesn't. He will be plenty big enough to hold any position on the ground.
You say Franklin was unsuitable for you guys as you needed someone who could hold down a KPP plus play ruck and who is mobile, like Pattison. Franklin meets all the above criteria with ease and has skills to burn so I don't know who you have him confused with.
Also, what position does Chris Tarrant play?first of all his body shape tells me his upper torso you see today will be what you see throughout his career.Yes most 17yr olds do fill out but Franklin wont be one of them.Im not saying thats a bad thing for him as it will have benefits for other reasons.All im saying is you need to have a physical presence to hold down a KP expecially CHF.This is where you can compare him to a Chris Tarrant[taller version].If the Hawks decide to take him down a different path and play him as a mobile ruckman then Goodes is a good comparison but weather he can adapt to playing a ruckman,s role remains to be seen.


cheers!

[Micketts]

This 70 more posts long than games he will play. Lets be realistic.

[Bentleigh]

This 70 more posts long than games he will play. Lets be realistic.

Lets hope not :)

[Micketts]

Lets hope not :)
Yeh I hope he plays 200 games and wins a brownlow and ten flags but there is not point pumping him up and putting unfair pressure on the kid. :D

[BobbyDavis]

then the question must be posed why wasnt he talked about more predraft? and if all that u say is true then why wasnt he taken earlier?
Obviously wasn't talked about cos nobody did their homework on him. I know the tiges rated him in the top 30 so were extremely happy 2 get him at 36. Clubs can tend 2 shy away from skinny, development types but the tiges thought he was 2 good 2 pass up. U could say the same about the eagles and rosa. Not tipped 2 go in the top 50 but the eagles rates extremely highly. So it comes down 2 a club thing.

[cschreuder61]

I wouldnt say Franklin is a KPP in fact far from it.Unless he puts on some meat in his upper body he will be more of your Chris Tarrant type.
Franklin would not have suited our needs.we needed a Kpp[Roughead].Pattison was the next best as to what we needed.A player who can hold down a KP as well as play in the ruck and is mobile[something that TW likes re: Darcy].


cheers!
you trying to say you'd take pattison over franklin? cause that's just silly.

[Bentleigh]

you trying to say you'd take pattison over franklin? cause that's just silly.

Pattison seems more likly to make it. Granted Franklin has more potential.

Pato does indeed suit Richmond. A Darcy type CHF/ruck which we do need.

[Infamy]

Stop the crap
If it was a choice between Franklin & Pattison at 16 we would have been running around the draft table with our pants down screaming out Franklins name
If we didn't get the spoon we would have taken Tambling and Franklin at 2 & 5

[Bentleigh]

Stop the crap
If it was a choice between Franklin & Pattison at 16 we would have been running around the draft table with our pants down screaming out Franklins name
If we didn't get the spoon we would have taken Tambling and Franklin at 2 & 5

Shut up moron.

No one is doubting we doubt have taking Franklin over Pattison.

[dipper86]

Stop the crap
If it was a choice between Franklin & Pattison at 16 we would have been running around the draft table with our pants down screaming out Franklins name
If we didn't get the spoon we would have taken Tambling and Franklin at 2 & 5


Exactly, finally a richmond supporter that has common sense,

Bentleigh you are no where,

[dipper86]

Shut up moron.

No one is doubting we doubt have taking Franklin over Pattison.


you are doubting it, your saying that pattison is more likely to make it than Franklin. which implies that pattison is a better pick up than Franklin at number 5,

you my friend are the biggest moron.

[Bentleigh]

you are doubting it, your saying that pattison is more likely to make it than Franklin. which implies that pattison is a better pick up than Franklin at number 5,

you my friend are the biggest moron.

I didnt imply anything dipstick. Say it 100 times; "i shall not assume"

Pattison looks to have less scope of inprovment yet has all the facists to make it. He is very fit, runs all day. For a ruckman he is agile (although not for for a KKP) with the abilty to play KKP/ruck. He is a monster of a bloke highet and weight wise and should make it.

Franklin looks very dodgy. He could be a star but looks as if he could go either way.

Of course I would have takening him at 16 as he was the next best KKP. Fact remains though he would not suit Richmond neally as much as Pattison does. We need a ruckman for the future, a Dacry type.

[tiger of old]

you trying to say you'd take pattison over franklin? cause that's just silly.
i could have sworn i said Pattison was the next best option after Franklin for us.

cheers!

[dipper86]

I didnt imply anything dipstick. Say it 100 times; "i shall not assume"

Pattison looks to have less scope of inprovment yet has all the facists to make it. He is very fit, runs all day. For a ruckman he is agile (although not for for a KKP) with the abilty to play KKP/ruck. He is a monster of a bloke highet and weight wise and should make it.

Franklin looks very dodgy. He could be a star but looks as if he could go either way.

Of course I would have takening him at 16 as he was the next best KKP. Fact remains though he would not suit Richmond neally as much as Pattison does. We need a ruckman for the future, a Dacry type.

looks like i assumed right, cause you are still saying the same thing, what makes franklin less likely to make it than pattison, is it because he is thin, Franklin can do everything just as good as pattison but even better, he is quicker more agile athletic and a better kick, they say Franklin is going to grow to 198 cms, thats just about ruckman height., there has to be some method to your madness. What you should be saying is that Franklin could be a star or he could just turn out to be a pattison, it could go either way, thats why Franklin was 5th pick and pattison 16th.

[OneEyedHawk]

looks like i assumed right, cause you are still saying the same thing, what makes franklin less likely to make it than pattison, is it because he is thin, Franklin can do everything just as good as pattison but even better, he is quicker more agile athletic and a better kick, they say Franklin is going to grow to 198 cms, thats just about ruckman height., there has to be some method to your madness. What you should be saying is that Franklin could be a star or he could just turn out to be a pattison, it could go either way, thats why Franklin was 5th pick and pattison 16th.
That is exactly it, in a nutshell. Seems like everyone here can see that, bar one.

[Bentleigh]

looks like i assumed right, cause you are still saying the same thing, what makes franklin less likely to make it than pattison, is it because he is thin, Franklin can do everything just as good as pattison but even better, he is quicker more agile athletic and a better kick, they say Franklin is going to grow to 198 cms, thats just about ruckman height., there has to be some method to your madness. What you should be saying is that Franklin could be a star or he could just turn out to be a pattison, it could go either way, thats why Franklin was 5th pick and pattison 16th.


Out of the top 5 Franklin is by the far the least likly to make it, imo.

Footy Draft:

Although the tools are clearly there, I’m not sold yet. Question mark over his temperament, particularly when things aren't running his way. Very left-sided. Body language can be poor at times, and he can be undisciplined. Comes from a close family, which might concern some Victorian clubs.

It’s a risk taking him, but probably a justified one given the possibilities. Could be the next big thing in the competition, but could also disappoint. Tough one.

Is that exacly not what I have been saying? The kid could be a star, best of luck to him. However, he does look like one which could go either way. Ill say it again for you sunshine. Id rather Franklin at Punt Road but at the end of the day I am happy with Pattison and he does should the overall list better.

Pattison has less potential and you'd doubt he will ever be a superstar. However, he does look like someone in the Darcy molde and could be a important player over tha next decade (if not more) for us.

During the 2nd half of last season Pato came alive and proved himself to be a player. At 18 he is 198cm/87kg top 5 or He could be a monster. Not to mention he came top 10 in the 3km run, abit special for a bloke of his size.

From all reports he is made of the right stuff. His list of honours:
Winner of TAC Cup Coaches Award 2004
Centre Half Forward in TAC Cup Team of the Year 2004
Northern Best and Fairest 2004
Backs this up. With a great work ethic, strong mark, 2nd efforts and leadership material he does look like he will make it.

[OneEyedHawk]

Out of the top 5 Franklin is by the far the least likly to make it, imo.

Footy Draft:

Although the tools are clearly there, I’m not sold yet. Question mark over his temperament, particularly when things aren't running his way. Very left-sided. Body language can be poor at times, and he can be undisciplined. Comes from a close family, which might concern some Victorian clubs.

It’s a risk taking him, but probably a justified one given the possibilities. Could be the next big thing in the competition, but could also disappoint. Tough one.

Is that exacly not what I have been saying? The kid could be a star, best of luck to him. However, he does look like one which could go either way. Ill say it again for you sunshine. Id rather Franklin at Punt Road but at the end of the day I am happy with Pattison and he does should the overall list better.

Pattison has less potential and you'd doubt he will ever be a superstar. However, he does look like someone in the Darcy molde and could be a important player over tha next decade (if not more) for us.

During the 2nd half of last season Pato came alive and proved himself to be a player. At 18 he is 198cm/87kg top 5 or He could be a monster. Not to mention he came top 10 in the 3km run, abit special for a bloke of his size.

From all reports he is made of the right stuff. His list of honours:
Winner of TAC Cup Coaches Award 2004
Centre Half Forward in TAC Cup Team of the Year 2004
Northern Best and Fairest 2004
Backs this up. With a great work ethic, strong mark, 2nd efforts and leadership material he does look like he will make it.
The one thing I don't get is why you think Franklin doesn't suit your needs and that Pattison does. Franklin is what, 1 cm shorter than Pattison and still growing. He will be exactly the CHF/Ruckman that you say you needed. Only he has skills to burn and could be absolutely anything. Even worst case scenario sees him being ahead of the next best kpp IMO.

[dipper86]

Out of the top 5 Franklin is by the far the least likly to make it, imo.

Footy Draft:

Although the tools are clearly there, I’m not sold yet. Question mark over his temperament, particularly when things aren't running his way. Very left-sided. Body language can be poor at times, and he can be undisciplined. Comes from a close family, which might concern some Victorian clubs.

It’s a risk taking him, but probably a justified one given the possibilities. Could be the next big thing in the competition, but could also disappoint. Tough one.

Is that exacly not what I have been saying? The kid could be a star, best of luck to him. However, he does look like one which could go either way. Ill say it again for you sunshine. Id rather Franklin at Punt Road but at the end of the day I am happy with Pattison and he does should the overall list better.

Pattison has less potential and you'd doubt he will ever be a superstar. However, he does look like someone in the Darcy molde and could be a important player over tha next decade (if not more) for us.

During the 2nd half of last season Pato came alive and proved himself to be a player. At 18 he is 198cm/87kg top 5 or He could be a monster. Not to mention he came top 10 in the 3km run, abit special for a bloke of his size.

From all reports he is made of the right stuff. His list of honours:
Winner of TAC Cup Coaches Award 2004
Centre Half Forward in TAC Cup Team of the Year 2004
Northern Best and Fairest 2004
Backs this up. With a great work ethic, strong mark, 2nd efforts and leadership material he does look like he will make it.

No one was comparing him to the top 5, is this what your baseing your argument around, what Footy draft has said, one persons opinion about a player who isnt even a recruiter or expert. where as Kevin Sheahan the talent manager was asked on SEN. Who do you think will be the best player of this draft? he said Lance Franklin. How do you explain that then? I personally dont think he will be the best, but Kevin seems to think theres something special with this boy. an experts oppinion of a boy who he has seen first hand and observed on numerouse occations, cause thats his job.

[sante]

Thursfield is a gun :)

[tigertRANCE]

meyer is a forward flanker. didnt even play midfield in the SA side which says alot IMO. not saying forward flankers are a waste of time but i have been reading richmond supporters views that he will be a midfielder. i think he is along way off that happening. maybe in 6 yrs after his body and game style matures.
You obviously haven't seen him train as i have. He is ALL CLASS. Choco Royal on SEN stated in an interview the other day what a gem Meyer will be. Will not take 6 yrs to play midfield and have an impact. Will play a few games next year and have a significant impact in 2006.



mcguane was taken much earlier than expected, and u could say the same about polo (to a lesser extent). mcguane is a pretty big risk IMO, a risk that i dont think the tigers should have taken at 36 with some pretty handy players still around.
Again Orange, McGuane has been in our best few in the last 2 praccy match hitouts we've had. The real surprise packet so far this preseason. Kicked 4 goals in the first simulated match; lead quick and well, marked beautifully and cleanly, and kicked truly. So far your predictions of the players we drafted have been way off the money. Hope it continues. ;)

Go Tiges!!!

[londontiger]

The one thing I don't get is why you think Franklin doesn't suit your needs and that Pattison does. Franklin is what, 1 cm shorter than Pattison and still growing. He will be exactly the CHF/Ruckman that you say you needed. Only he has skills to burn and could be absolutely anything. Even worst case scenario sees him being ahead of the next best kpp IMO.


Agree, Franklin would have definitely suited the Tigers needs, but hey, when you leave Tambling available at pick 4, what else are we going to do?

[OneEyedHawk]

Agree, Franklin would have definitely suited the Tigers needs, but hey, when you leave Tambling available at pick 4, what else are we going to do?
Im not arguing the merits of Tambling vs Franklin, though I can't understand how a side already with a mass of light onballers would pick up another small midfielder, no matter how good he is supposed to be. Even after Deledio AND Tambling, they still went for Myer.
I was arguing with another ..... who was saying that Franklin didn't fit Richmonds needs and that Pattison was a much better fit , which is ridiculous.

[Infamy]

We're actually the 6th tallest team in the league, so I dunno about the whole mass of light onballers
Other than Roughead & Franklin, there weren't many other kpps considered as Top 10 picks, Meyer was considered a Top 10 pick by a lot of the Phantom drafts and when you still have 2 more Top 20 picks to go after Pick 12, why not get the best player available.

Now the Dean Polo decision I think probably could have been used on another kpp, that would be a much better point to argue rather than Danny Meyer.

[cogs24]

lets talk aobut this when they have all played a couple of games with the big boys rather then judge them on what they have done playing in the under18s

[Bentleigh]

Thursfield is a gun :)

:)

[OneEyedHawk]

lets talk aobut this when they have all played a couple of games with the big boys rather then judge them on what they have done playing in the under18s
Makes sense.

[Bentleigh]

Will Thursfield


He needs a fooking hair cut.

Poof.

[Bentleigh]

will thursfield

:)


http://au.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/tgsfamilydayphotos/detail?.dir=2195&.dnm=8559.jpg&.src=ph

[richcogs]

God archibald you should be a talent scout when your older, how did you no he was going to make the big league so soon. Good luck to him this week. GO THE TIGERS.

[CyberKev]

Its a pretty fair effort for Thursfield to have made the top side so soon. Lets hope he goes well, as it would be another fine boost for the rookie list concept.

I hadn't even realised that he'd been upped. Did he get elevated for Brown?

[cogs24]

yeh he got elevated for brown. i didnt know he was elevated either until they put the story on the website