View Full Version : Would Tom Lonergan have been delisted if it weren’t for his injury last year?
cat_fanatic_21
19 Jul 2007, 18:19
I was astounded to read on another thread that some people think Lonners would not be on our list if it weren’t for the loss of his kidney. I thought his form was pretty solid (particularly against Melbourne in round 21) for a bloke who has played only seven AFL games and who finished 2nd in the VFL B&F.
Perhaps I have formed a biased opinion.
Interested in other Geelong supporters thoughts on the matter…
crosby123
19 Jul 2007, 18:21
I thought he was finally starting to show something in the backline when he got injured. Would have been kept.
Mr.Chicken
19 Jul 2007, 18:30
I thought he was finally starting to show something in the backline when he got injured. Would have been kept.
My thoughts exactly. The injury happened at the worst time and it is a pity he did not recover quicker as he had a real chance to slid into the side when Harley was out but now that he is back in and we have 3 solid tall backmen, I fear Longeran is going to have trouble breaking into the AFL side for the rest of the season.
thejester
19 Jul 2007, 18:32
It's impossible to say. As has been said, he reinvented himself as a backman and showed a bit in doing so. His game against Melbourne was pretty good. Then he gets KO'ed, and doesn't play again. If he'd kept showing good form in the seniors, then yeah, he would have been kept. If he'd crashed and burned again...50/50 chance, given Hunt's form.
Sons_of_a_Gun
19 Jul 2007, 18:32
I personally think that lonergan would not have got another year. Agreed he played well in that match but i just dont think it would have been enough.
cats2rise
19 Jul 2007, 18:52
I think he would have been close, but he would have stayed. Had a great game or two leading up to his injury. Would have been kept for back up.
I personally think that lonergan would not have got another year. Agreed he played well in that match but i just dont think it would have been enough.
If Spencer can get another year, a carbon rod.. i mean Lonners woulda gotten another year. :p
(All the best Tom. Agree with the others on here. You were def showing something in the last couple of games you played in)
Stripey PJs
19 Jul 2007, 19:16
I personally think that lonergan would not have got another year. Agreed he played well in that match but i just dont think it would have been enough.
I think he juuust did enough.
His career was at that dreaded stage where top VFL performances won't earn you senior selection, aka Koulariotis Valley. IMO, he was..granted..a couple of games in a below-par season to determine whether he could still make the grade before any decision was finalised. Up forward he was an accurate kick for goal yet didn't take enough marks for his height to turn that accuracy into a consistent weapon.
But still he led the VFL goal-kicking before a top-heavy forward line saw him pushed into defence, and history show that it was in defence that he played his best match against Melbourne. He arrived. He showed something. Guts. (yuk yuk) We hadn't seen it before and if we hadn't seen it then, well, delistment beckoned. He'd eaten enough pies over the years, and had severely let the team down in a narrow loss against the Doggies when we depended on him to stand up in Kingsley's absence. Today I believe he has something to offer, forward or back. I would like to see him promoted next season, or at least kept on the rookie list. Otherwise we'll be light on for talls ready to step straight into the firsts if other predicted delistings transpire, in a year we should again be challenging for the flag.
Besides, if you want to deflate the team spirit we've built, delist Tom Lonergan.
Geelong_Sicko
19 Jul 2007, 20:57
Besides, if you want to deflate the team spirit we've built, delist Tom Lonergan.
:thumbsu: This is a very good point.
Ling Sting
20 Jul 2007, 09:24
He would have been left for cover as he could play back and forward. McCarthy and KK were always going to get dropped before Tom IMO.
Yeah he was gone, no doubts about it
Besides, if you want to deflate the team spirit we've built, delist Tom Lonergan.
How would that deflate team spirit? Football is a business you can't afford to have players that are just hanging on. I'm sure everyone at the GFC would realise this.
Budda 230
20 Jul 2007, 10:34
I think he would have been in a bit of trouble. Before the game he got injured, his senior form was nothing short of terrible.
Looking at it in another way, the form he showed in that Melbourne game in defence could have saved him. It would have been a tight decision. Either way, we'll never know. I'm just glad to see his progress this year.
Whether he gets promoted from the rookie list will also be a tight call. With Grima pushing for promotion too, it will be an interesting part of the off season.
I can clearly remember thinking he was gone.
Given the time he was granted (ample) and the performances he'd put up to date (not enough/convincing), it wouldn't have surprised me to have seen him shown the door.
Stripey PJs
20 Jul 2007, 18:25
How would that deflate team spirit? Football is a business you can't afford to have players that are just hanging on. I'm sure everyone at the GFC would realise this.
Don't you believe a word of it, Riz. :) Do players take pay-cuts because they view football as a business? Sure every club has its mercenaries, but most players are decent people capable of compassion who cannot parrot the platitudes of pragmatic managers without feeling a dampening of the spirit. Businesses are built on people, people feel. A laissez-faire approach develops competition and infighting (Enron's working environment being a classic example, which led swiftly to hubris) not the team spirit we're showing.
Remember the post-match celebrating following Lonergan's VFL return? Even the most embittered observer smiled that day; it cleansed the soul and provided a source of strength. Now there's a perception the club made a promise, of sorts, to give Tom a chance if he wanted to continue playing, and this year was always a write off. After the effort Lonergan's shown he'll deserve -in the players' eyes- a decent season to prove himself, that chance. I don't believe even the delistees of '07 will begrudge him that, any thoughts of bitterness being quickly quashed by guilt. Some credit an emotional Paul Chapman spray for the way our season's turned around, what price would we pay if the players believe management has treated such an inspirational teammate unfairly?
No Rizzo, Tom has until the end of season 2008.
Then he's fair game.
catempire
20 Jul 2007, 18:28
Yeah he was gone, no doubts about it
Computer says no.