View Full Version : Cameron Wood
I have heard some really good things about this bloke.
He is tall, aggresive, yet light fingered. He has the hands that we need, they can mould our future. There are many things that can be made of his work over the next few years.
We are in an era where 'our ruckmen can produce the goods'
How long have we been waiting for our ruckmen to produce the goods ?
I am really excited !
He can literaly furnish Collingwood with a future.
SIDE BY SIDE
7 Mar 2008, 05:16
If he stands up the flow on affect with Fraser not having to worry about being our number one ruckman and taking as many centre bouncers can be huge.
King Woodie
7 Mar 2008, 06:22
Love your optimism, Dudley, but it is well overstated at this point.
We are talking about an underweight kid who has played less than a handful of AFL games and was a third or fourth stringer for his previous club.
I think he will develop into a solid ruckman, but not of the calibre to win premierships with his own light fingers.
As you said you have "heard" (not seen) great things about him (most likely from supporters prone to the same hyperbole) so let's just see how he goes through this year before we start making room in the trophy cabinet.
I think he has more promise than any ruckman we have had on our list for some time. Let's hope he tuns that promise into performance over the course of the next few years.
I am excited to hear that he has taken a couple of strong marks and kicked a couple of goals in the practice games. That already puts him in a higher league than Richards and Bryan.
Since when is 105kgs underweight? He'll put on a few more over the next couple of years but he's no stick figure.
Interesting topic gang, all i can add is that gerard healey stated on 3aw , that he believes melbourne made a big mistake in not getting a direct swap between travis johnson and wood.he thinks cameron wood will be the recruit of the year.i hope he is right .
Having watched him several times last year and last week, I can confirm that we at worst have a serviceable ruckman. I think he will be our #1 ruck early on this year barring injury.
He taps to advantage; frequently. In fact, I think some of our mids will take time to get used to that. I noticed O'Bree expecting a ball to land at the ankles of the rucks (ie. roving to a neutral contest) whereas Wood got a clear tap into the path where OB should have been moving to.
If he is underweight, then I am yet to see a situation where he has been owned as a result. He's only 20/21, so we can't expect him to be bossing Lade around at throw ins, but he hasn't got 'rag dolled' like Richards did. At 205cms, he has weight above most similarly built rucks of 200cms due to superior height.
His contested marking is a feature. He rips them in from up high and against multiple bodies.
He kicks straight and has tidy skills. He has a tendency to do the ruckman thing and hand off frequently, but I think he should back his foot skills more to speed up play.
moe sizlak
7 Mar 2008, 08:18
Interesting topic gang, all i can add is that gerard healey stated on 3aw , that he believes melbourne made a big mistake in not getting a direct swap between travis johnson and wood.he thinks cameron wood will be the recruit of the year.i hope he is right .
That's promising considering Gerard Healy is a quality judge of talent (all-aus selector.)
He will be at least an above average ruckmen. His pack marking is the best i've seen of a ruckmen at collingwood. I was weary of the hype early on, however after seeing him play last week against Carlton, i'm convinced he has the necessary attributes to be a solid, damaging ruckmen in todays game.
King Woodie
7 Mar 2008, 09:07
At least an above average? That means that of 16 first string ruckman, he will be in the top 6ish in the league. That would be great.
I still think that people on these boards overrate our players before they have seen them, and then are over critical of them when they do and don't live up to the ficticious heights that they believed.
I do agree though, that Cam Wood has taken a few good pack marks (good sign) is a reasonably straight kick (good sign), and is not going to get any shorter or lighter. Indications at this stage are that he may turn into an average AFL quality ruckman and may take the number 1 ruck duties at the club.
It is still a concern, though, that he was replaced in a Brisbane side by a first season ruck (Leuy) after even getting the first crack at the team.
I am very excited about Wood, but just trying to keep everyone's feet on the ground.
vinnie_vegas69
7 Mar 2008, 09:13
He was excellent last week against Port.
He showed a lot of attributes that I didn't realise he possessed, including above-average field kicking for a ruckman, and strong overhead contested marking ability. He's also thicker in the body than I thought he'd be.
He's ready to contribute already, and he's still got the development potential to become our #1 ruckman - Definitely an exciting prospect, IMO.
At least an above average? That means that of 16 first string ruckman, he will be in the top 6ish in the league. That would be great.
No it doesn't - It means that given that 16 clubs all have 2-3 ruckman, and so amongst that group he'd be Top 20 or so.
Abba Lonie
7 Mar 2008, 09:27
As a Collingwood supporter I obviously don't have high expectations about any ruckman we pick up.
If Wood can play like Steve McKee would have if he had arms then I will be happy.
At least an above average? That means that of 16 first string ruckman, he will be in the top 6ish in the league. That would be great.
FFS, the caveat of him being 20 is always in place and all first string ruckmen in the league, perhaps with the exception of Carlton who have good young ones, are at worst 'good'. The top 6 are 'very good' and then the top couple are 'elite'.
An 'above average' ruckman would be able to command a second ruck position, and fill in the first if necessary. Wood already fits this bill for us. The issue is Fraser is probably only 'above average' in terms of rucking, and I reckon Wood will overtaken him quickly as he develops.
It is still a concern, though, that he was replaced in a Brisbane side by a first season ruck (Leuy) after even getting the first crack at the team.
I am very excited about Wood, but just trying to keep everyone's feet on the ground.
The expectations though aren't that he's going to become Len Thomson; it's that he might actually be able to play! And evidence to this point, based on exposed AFL form which some of us have seen, and practice games suggest that this is the case.
As for being fourth string behind Charman, a fit McDonald and arguably equal #1 draft pick in Leuey, is hardly cause for alarm. That Leuenberger was able to perform well first year is commendable for any ruck, and as such resulted in a tremendous amount of hype. Wood averaged four more hitouts per game last year out of interest, despite getting 'fourth string' game time.
Having watched him several times last year and last week, I can confirm that we at worst have a serviceable ruckman. I think he will be our #1 ruck early on this year barring injury. %^&* I hope you are right. He taps to advantage; frequently. Good lord, surely not!
I noticed O'Bree expecting a ball to land at the ankles of the rucks (ie. roving to a neutral contest) whereas Wood got a clear tap into the path where OB should have been moving to. Didn’t see the game but I believe it 100%.
IF Wood is a quality ruckman, people at Collingwood will finally understand what that means and wonder how the hell it took so long. We can’t get back the ones we threw away but FFS let’s hope we give ourselves a better shot at opportunities we earn from here on.
Timmy from Thomastown
7 Mar 2008, 10:16
We should hope for a huge 2008 from him but we shouldnt expect it or demand it.
daics cousin
7 Mar 2008, 11:22
Between woody and josh,hopefully both will stay fit,we will have that missing ingredient to take the premiership this year,and for a few year's to come.
I have afeeling that we will see a different Josh this year.Especially now that he is vice captain.
kbutcher24
7 Mar 2008, 11:49
he is an upgrade over bryan and richards put it that way
TheBrownDog
7 Mar 2008, 12:14
As someone who has probably seen close to every game he has played in the last couple of years (including Suncoast Lions games), I'd have to say that the chances of him being anything less than a "good" ruckman for you are minimal.
I don't think he'll ever reach the lofty heights of a Dean Cox but he should be able to reach a Jeff White/Darren Jolly level of competence.
You did pretty good getting him with pick #14 IMO. He'll do the job.
I've seen alot of his early Lions games of 2007 being in QLD and Wood taps to advantage regularly.
You could see at ball ups, a simple raised eyebrow and nod from Simon Black, where to put the footy and Wood rammed it down his throat. Admittedly this game was against Hawthorn when he won the rising star nomination and Hawks had Taylor and Campbell rucking.
I also saw some of the highlights against WCE and Cox could not push him under the ball, so he has the size and weight to contest.
I also think he'll be a servicable ruckman at worst.
TheBrownDog
7 Mar 2008, 12:55
I also saw some of the highlights against WCE and Cox could not push him under the ball, so he has the size and weight to contest.
When was that?
Sharks On A Plane
7 Mar 2008, 13:08
I have heard some really good things about this bloke.
He is tall, aggresive, yet light fingered. He has the hands that we need, they can mould our future. There are many things that can be made of his work over the next few years.
We are in an era where 'our ruckmen can produce the goods'
How long have we been waiting for our ruckmen to produce the goods ?
I am really excited !
He can literaly furnish Collingwood with a future.
Haven't you guys learnt from our failed experiment with a light-fingered ruckman? :D
When was that?
Albany game a few weeks ago, some highlights of the game were on the Pies website.
TheBrownDog
7 Mar 2008, 13:46
Albany game a few weeks ago, some highlights of the game were on the Pies website.
Ahh cool, thanks.
Gone Critical
7 Mar 2008, 14:54
Haven't you guys learnt from our failed experiment with a light-fingered ruckman? :D
Bit hard calling Big Nick a failure
Coin_Toss
7 Mar 2008, 15:28
The kid has ability, and that's something we haven't seen in a young ruckman for a while. That contested mark he took in the goalsquare last week where he rode the pack suggests to me he could be a player that can push forward and be used in the same mould of Koschitzke and/or Ottens.
As someone who has probably seen close to every game he has played in the last couple of years (including Suncoast Lions games), I'd have to say that the chances of him being anything less than a "good" ruckman for you are minimal.
I don't think he'll ever reach the lofty heights of a Dean Cox but he should be able to reach a Jeff White/Darren Jolly level of competence.
You did pretty good getting him with pick #14 IMO. He'll do the job.
Cam looks really good, but i still think he is a tad skinny this year he went from 97kg to 105kg, from watching him has he always put on wieght on will he struggle to gain more? ala fraser
asking you cause you seem to know most about him lol
The Royal Sampler
7 Mar 2008, 17:04
If someone's up to 105kg, it seems odd to suggest they'll struggle to put more on.
Anyway, very happy with Cam's progress, especially as a player who has suffered (seemingly) from two bouts of gastro in one preseason! :eek: I rated him highly at the Lions, held little hope that he'd be up for trade at the end of the season, and am now rapt that we made the effort.
Wood at #14 will have more impact and more immediately than anyone else we could have taken with that selection. Great recruiting IMHO.
Incidentally, can anyone who was at the intraclub before the Port game tell me how Lachlan Keeffe looked? I've got the fingers and toes crossed that he gets selected for Queensland's U18 Champs squad.
boom crash opera
7 Mar 2008, 17:11
is he playin tonight?
looks good does the wood. bring on the real stuff.
As someone who has probably seen close to every game he has played in the last couple of years (including Suncoast Lions games), I'd have to say that the chances of him being anything less than a "good" ruckman for you are minimal.
I don't think he'll ever reach the lofty heights of a Dean Cox but he should be able to reach a Jeff White/Darren Jolly level of competence.
You did pretty good getting him with pick #14 IMO. He'll do the job.
I think you underrated White. For a few years he was an elite ruckman. Jolly on the other hand has always been solid at least since he moved to Sydney.
Cam looks really good, but i still think he is a tad skinny this year he went from 97kg to 105kg, from watching him has he always put on wieght on will he struggle to gain more? ala fraser
asking you cause you seem to know most about him lol
He is a very solid unit. He has a pretty lanky frame but not Fraser like. I think he has filled out as much as he can and as much as he needs to. He doesn't need to put on more weight, perhaps a bit more muscle, but I think he's big enough already, he's much like Matthew Clarke in build.
He is a very solid unit. He has a pretty lanky frame but not Fraser like. I think he has filled out as much as he can and as much as he needs to. He doesn't need to put on more weight, perhaps a bit more muscle, but I think he's big enough already, he's much like Matthew Clarke in build.
thanks jabso
looked real good at princes park last week, looking forward to that in the HA season
Love your optimism, Dudley, but it is well overstated at this point. We are talking about an underweight kid who has played less than a handful of AFL games and was a third or fourth stringer for his previous club.
Gee, this is a bit harsh. Okay he may have been a third or fourth stringer at Brisbane, but in the last three years (when he's been there) Brisbane have had a couple of ruckmen who were premiership players - Charman is still there - and then they recruited Leuenberger at number four in 2006's superdraft, so it's not like Wood was a third or fourth stringer at just any old club. He also won a Rising Star nomination in round 2 last year. I suspect that Wood will be competitive right from the start and will get better until he eventually becomes one of the top half-dozen ruckmen.
The Royal Sampler
9 Mar 2008, 15:40
A week-old article on Wood, didn't think it deserved a new thread but it deserves a read. :thumbsu:
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23303596-5003410,00.html
Wood feared Beau McDonald would reduce opportunities
Article from: The Sunday Mail (Qld)
By Damien Stannard
March 02, 2008 12:00am
"IF Beau retired last year, it would have changed things." That's the blunt assessment of Collingwood ruckman Cameron Wood, who with the benefit of hindsight, may have never left the Brisbane Lions.
However as it turned out, Beau McDonald – one of Wood's main rivals for the Lions' No. 2 ruck spot – broke down and retired before a ball had been kicked in 2008.
Wood, 21 on Tuesday, has revealed how tough it was to defect after three years with the Lions.
He loves Brisbane, a city which had become home to the West Adelaide product and his mother Sue. Some of his best mates, like Jed Adcock, Scott Harding and Justin Sherman, are Lions and he agonised over leaving them behind.
But after being trapped behind McDonald, Clark Keating, Jamie Charman and later Matthew Leuenberger, Wood felt his window of opportunity was closing.
Despite starting last year in the seniors and winning an AFL Rising Star nomination, he spent most of the season playing in the reserves.
With Collingwood circling and one year remaining on his contract, Wood sought and was granted a trade last October.
"Collingwood was interested and I was open to ideas," he said.
"It was a really tough decision (to request a trade). I wasn't unhappy but I wanted more of an opportunity."
Wood's manager brokered the switch and it took a phone call from coach Leigh Matthews to satisfy the young ruckman he was leaving on good terms.
"Leigh called just after the trade was done and said thanks and good luck," Wood said.
"There was no ill feeling."
The 204cm ruckman has added more muscle to his giant frame and and now concentrating on improving his endurance.
Fitness permitting, he will form a powerful ruck pairing with Josh Fraser.
"Mick (Malthouse) and Leigh are similar in the way they like to use ruckmen," Wood said.
"But Mick probably places a little more emphasis on mobility."
Interesting read, especially the part that says the coaches like to use rucks in a similar way....
I am pretty happy with what i'm hearing about Cam, when we first got him some said he wasn't worth the pick we gave for him, but he seems to have come on well. Hopefully he will be a good asset and allow Josh more freedom across the ground.
Pie eyed
9 Mar 2008, 17:19
It really is a moot point to suggest we did not get a good deal with Wood.
He was the only ruckman up for selection....apart from Steven King who was a 1-2 year prospect anyway which would leave us without a long term ruckman when he retired.
Wood is the best possible deal as ....we have him.
You can speculate about what if's till you're blue.
We have Wood.
He has more potential as a Ruck than we have had for many years.
He has support.
Best outcome I would think. The option is we would have the same Ruck as last year:eek:.
Wood is definately worth a first round pick. He was touted as a high pick in the draft but surprisingly slipped. He has done nothing to discourage those that rated him in the first place. Ruckman are a valuable commodity anyway so that would inflate his price a bit as it were anyway.
Being 3rd in line behind Charman and Leunberger is nothing to sneeze at. Charman is one of the best ruckmen in the competition and Leunberger happens to be probably the best young ruckman in the competition. McDonald is a very good ruckman and if fit he would have been given way more chances than Wood to improve himself since Wood "has time" to develop.
Wood would probably get more opportunities had he been at any club other than Brisbane. Perhaps Port Adelaide the only exception.
As far as clubs using the ruckmen the same. I think it's more how they move around the ground. A lot of clubs just have them follow the other ruckman, drop back in the hole, while we like to make them an extra midfielder that can push forward at opportunistic times (not just rest there for periods of time).
I think he is worth 14 as well . Hell , I would have taken him at 14 in the draft and that's not taking into account the apprenticeship he's already done .
Good value for mine .
The Royal Sampler
9 Mar 2008, 20:36
It really is a moot point to suggest we did not get a good deal with Wood.
He was the only ruckman up for selection....apart from Steven King who was a 1-2 year prospect anyway which would leave us without a long term ruckman when he retired.
Ben Hudson, John Meesen and Brad Moran all changed clubs.
I think Wood was the best on offer besides Hudson. Hudson wanted a large-ish pay packet and agreed to go to the Bulldogs pretty early in trade week. If we wanted Meeson we would have chased him, I think we rated Wood highly. Moran was and still is a project player.
Wood was drafted 18th overall and we gave up pick 14 for him after 3 years of development.
vinnie_vegas69
10 Mar 2008, 22:41
Ben Hudson, John Meesen and Brad Moran all changed clubs.
Ben Hudson only has a few years left, considering the injuries he's had in his career, and probably would have cost us our #14 pick given that our other picks wouldn't have been high enough to satisfy Adelaide.
Meesen and Moran are a long way off being anything at all. King isn't the type of ruckman we tend to like using, not to mention being old and injury prone. We would have had to invest in yet another ruck if we got King, given the high likelihood of injury to him.
Wood may not have been the only prospect available, but he was the only one for us.
At this time next year I don't think many people will be disappointed with the trade.
I hate doing these things but.
Wood>>>>>>>>>>>>>Pick 14
Pie eyed
10 Mar 2008, 23:50
Ben Hudson, John Meesen and Brad Moran all changed clubs.
I stand corrected..I should have said only "developed ruck" available.
I stand corrected..I should have said only "developed ruck" available.Hudson is developed. Wood is undeveloped – like Moran and Meesen.
We had lots of options. We chose 1. 1 that was contracted like about 50 others. Hopefully we chose the best option. We should have chosen more than 1 even if Wood goes as well as the clubs realistically hopes.
Hudson is developed. Wood is undeveloped – like Moran and Meesen.
We had lots of options. We chose 1. 1 that was contracted like about 50 others. Hopefully we chose the best option. We should have chosen more than 1 even if Wood goes as well as the clubs realistically hopes.
Comparing Wood to Moran or Meesen is similar to comparing Macintosh (sp?) to Wood. Wood is far more developed/experienced than Moran, and a significantly better talent than Meesen.
Fact is, had he (or his agent) not requested a move, he wouldn't have been available. As long as we weren't willing to move any of our core young players, Wood was by far and away the best trade target. At worst he's a solid to good ruckman. His upside could see him develop beyond that.
Timmy from Thomastown
11 Mar 2008, 15:20
Ideally I too would have liked to recruit another ruckman, probably King. However I'm pretty sure King would not have wanted to come to Collingwood knowing he'd be third in the pecking order again, (and same probably applies for Wood). Having shown our hand on chasing Wood from Brisbane, King would have been pretty much off the market for us.
Hopefully Thoolen will have a solid year in the VFL in 2008, and turn up in 2009 an inch or so taller, and become a legitimate ruck option for us.
Comparing Wood to Moran or Meesen is similar to comparing Macintosh (sp?) to Wood. Wood is far more developed/experienced than Moran, and a significantly better talent than Meesen.
Fact is, had he (or his agent) not requested a move, he wouldn't have been available. As long as we weren't willing to move any of our core young players, Wood was by far and away the best trade target. At worst he's a solid to good ruckman. His upside could see him develop beyond that.Wood has played a handful of games. Slice it, dice any way you like that is what the reality is. 3 or 4 years ago people said Richards had promise. I like the sound of Wood from what I have heard. I haven’t seen much first hand. I make no comment on his quality. If he is all the club realistically hopes he is this year we still left ourselves short. I have absolutely no issue with the Wood deal. There were numerous other options and we should have taken 2 more of them and we should have flicked Bryan. I would love to have convinced Hudson to come to Collingwood and failing that we should have done a deal for King. On top of that we should have snagged another kid. Maybe the Gympie soccer dude is that kid in which case I am wrong and we should only have taken 1 experienced option.
Ideally I too would have liked to recruit another ruckman, probably King. However I'm pretty sure King would not have wanted to come to Collingwood knowing he'd be third in the pecking order again, (and same probably applies for Wood). Having shown our hand on chasing Wood from Brisbane, King would have been pretty much off the market for us.I’m obviously not certain but I would have thought we could have convinced King that the closest thing we have to a ruckman is Fraser and we’ve just taken an unproven kid. I wouldn’t think King would have much respect for Fraser as a pure ruckman. If King didn’t think he could get a game in the ruck at Collingwood then I guess he wouldn’t have been worth the trouble. Nothing is unconditional. He did go to St. Kilda who have Kosi and a handful of other possible ruckman including a former AA. Kosi is a better everything than Fraser – including hospital bed occupant unfortunately for him.
As I said though, my first preference was always Hudson. Remember we are trying to win a flag in the next couple of years not trying to find a teenage Polly Farmer with a pick at he pointy end of the draft. Hopefully Thoolen will have a solid year in the VFL in 2008, and turn up in 2009 an inch or so taller, and become a legitimate ruck option for us.Hopefully he will but FMD if we lose an important final in the ruck in 2008 will anyone be held accountable?
As I said though, my first preference was always Hudson. Remember we are trying to win a flag in the next couple of years not trying to find a teenage Polly Farmer with a pick at he pointy end of the draft.
Hopefully he will but FMD if we lose an important final in the ruck in 2008 will anyone be held accountable?
You can't always operate with the short-term as your only priority.
I like Hudson, but he would have cost us double (in terms of $), he's got a bad injury history, and he's only going to be around for a couple of years. At which point we'd be exactly in the same position as we are now, only with an older, even more banged-up Fraser.
As hard as it might be to admit, our best chance of winning a flag will probably be in 2009+. That's not to say we can't do it earlier, but you have to look at the age of your list and recruit accordingly.
Timmy from Thomastown
11 Mar 2008, 17:19
Hopefully he will but FMD if we lose an important final in the ruck in 2008 will anyone be held accountable?
We're more likely to lose a final in defence or in the midfield. You cant go around holding people accountable for things that happened seven years ago. We've patched our ruck deficiencies, but we're still vulnerable there. We now have some key position players capable of holding the fort in ruck if all goes pearshaped - we didnt have that option last year as those kids were too young and skinny.
bradrowe#32
11 Mar 2008, 17:48
I saw Wood on the weekend and he looked pretty good. He won some good taps and looked mobile around the ground.
I'd still like us to get another 2 ruckmen to develop in the next few drafts.
The Royal Sampler
11 Mar 2008, 17:56
There was someone on here a month or so ago who spoke to Derek Hine at a training session, and discussed Lachlan Keeffe (the Gympie soccer dude :D) with him. He got the impression that Keeffe was the reason that we did not seek to draft an U18 ruckman in the 2007 draft.
I guess that kinda contradicts my theory on Thoolen being a ruckman, but oh well.
I think Wood + King would have been ideal, with Keeffe still on the cards. As it is, we seem to have a good plan for the longer term, but are left exposed in the short term if injury strikes.
This talk is all moot when Cameron Wood from what I've seen is THE MESSIAH. In all seirousness I think he'll be the recruit of the year.
This talk is all moot when Cameron Wood from what I've seen is THE MESSIAH. In all seirousness I think he'll be the recruit of the year.
he has so much upside (age,potential)opposed to the other rucks that were available, even some of the other players that changed clubs.
so thats a fair call for recruit of the year
[QUOTE=MarkT;10297381]I’m obviously not certain but I would have thought we could have convinced King that the closest thing we have to a ruckman is Fraser and we’ve just taken an unproven kid. I wouldn’t think King would have much respect for Fraser as a pure ruckman. If King didn’t think he could get a game in the ruck at Collingwood then I guess he wouldn’t have been worth the trouble. Nothing is unconditional. He did go to St. Kilda who have Kosi and a handful of other possible ruckman including a former AA. Kosi is a better everything than Fraser – including hospital bed occupant
And IMO Kosi spends more in the Hos bed he's very injury prone
he has so much upside (age,potential)opposed to the other rucks that were available, even some of the other players that changed clubs.
so thats a fair call for recruit of the year
Is Wood is good.
Pie eyed
12 Mar 2008, 00:23
Kosi may be a better everything than Fraser but the fact remains he does not play for Collingwood.
The point is made that the Saints have quite a few ruckmen...were has it got them so far? They have been mooted as top 4 for how many years and how many "rebuilding" phases.
Collingwood led the league last year in centre take aways yet 12th in hitouts!
Now if we can actually improve the hitouts by 10% what difference will this make to our results?
Is Wood worth another 10%, taking into account that Fraser would probably ruck in the forward 50?
Collingwood kicked 4 fewer goals per game (11th @ 13.1) than Geelong (1st @17.2)...that is a far more telling stat.
You can't always operate with the short-term as your only priority. I’d go so far as to say you should never operate only in the short term and I have never suggested we should. I like Hudson, but he would have cost us double (in terms of $), he's got a bad injury history, and he's only going to be around for a couple of years. At which point we'd be exactly in the same position as we are now, only with an older, even more banged-up Fraser. A couple of years? Ruckman like him can play until mid 30s. The money surely can’t be an issue. Jesus if we didn’t have $1m available in the cap at the time something is seriously wrong. We let Tarrant go at the end of 2006 and Buckley, Clement and Licuria retired at the end of 2007. Hell $1m would be the starting point. I am sure we would have had the cap space for Judd so Hudson would have been dead easy and we’d still be able to accommodate a profile player had one become available. As hard as it might be to admit, our best chance of winning a flag will probably be in 2009+. That's not to say we can't do it earlier, but you have to look at the age of your list and recruit accordingly.We need not make many sacrifice in 2009 chances to increase 2008 chances.
We're more likely to lose a final in defence or in the midfield. Maybe. We are more likely to be vulnerable in defence if we get beaten in the middle and that is more likely with weak rucks. Meanwhile we have a durable ad reliable old warrior down back with some up and coming talent. We hope we have some up and coming talent in the ruck and well, that’s it. You cant go around holding people accountable for things that happened seven years ago. You can and SHOULD when they don’t learn the lessons that repeated finals losses have dished up. We've patched our ruck deficiencies, but we're still vulnerable there.That’s a contradiction to a point but regardless my issue is very simple.
There were clear opportunities to address the fundamental flaw in our list structure and we failed once again to adequately grasp those opportunities. We may get lucky and that will be fantastic but it irks me no end that we have to get lucky. Another ruckman would have significantly reduced the luck required and beyond that IMO taken to a higher level than possible as it is. In short we’d be a better side fully fit and the probability of being knocked out to to injury would be reduced.
We chose not to pursue this because not because we couldn’t swing it but because we made a judgement that is wasn’t warranted. I disagree with that judgement. So do you I reckon.
We now have some key position players capable of holding the fort in ruck if all goes pearshaped - we didnt have that option last year as those kids were too young and skinny.First of all that is a maybe but most importantly it is not nearly enough. Jesus this is what we had in 2003. Tex didn’t but it as ruckman and nor will Cox, Anthony or Reid. I’d like to try Cloke as I have said but we shouldn’t be reduced to that.
The point is made that the Saints have quite a few ruckmen...were has it got them so far? Exactly where we have been. Short of the mark which is why they now have a better ruck contingent. GT didn’t value the ruckman it cost him – same with MM. Lyon came in and immediately chased ruckman. in 2 drafts in a row recruited the best he could get his hands on. Time will tell if he has bridged the gap or whether it is too late. Maybe the Saints peak opportunity has passed. Collingwood led the league last year in centre take aways yet 12th in hitouts! I don’t know about you but I see a vast different in a centre clearance that is a quick cleared kick off the back of the square to a clean break through the middle and so does every forward that ever tried to take a mark and kick a goal. Collingwood kicked 4 fewer goals per game (11th @ 13.1) than Geelong (1st @17.2)...that is a far more telling stat.Goals kicked, goals conceded and numerous issues are all important. Adelaide have always had a poor forward line but two years ago they were one of the best scorers and last year one of the worst. Game plan, team structure etc are all vital ingredients.
Get a quality ruck to dish off quality ball use to a good midfield who can deliver to a good forward line. All we miss in that is a quality tap ruckman to replace Josh and also add to the ruck depth. The point is the players were there. One of them went free to good home.
Timmy from Thomastown
12 Mar 2008, 13:47
Exactly where we have been. Short of the mark which is why they now have a better ruck contingent. GT didn’t value the ruckman it cost him – same with MM. Lyon came in and immediately chased ruckman. in 2 drafts in a row recruited the best he could get his hands on. .
Last years ruck recruiting was a disaster for StKilda
They wasted two spots last year on Gardiner and Clarke. One of them could have been used on a real footballer late in the draft like Tyson Goldsack for example. They got quantity but they didnt get quality. It was short term fix without the fix. Then they have Kozi who is really a key position player and snaps in half upon contact, and Rix who is no different to Bryan. And talls like Blake who can pinch-hit.
This year they may have done better, but then again so may have Collingwood. Lets see how long Gardiner lasts before he breaks down again or offends off-field. King may be a good pick-up - like I said, I would have liked to take him as well as Wood, but the club has chosen development over read-made. Its probably a risk and we definitely need a third ruck option, but I'm not going to be all suicidal over it. We're better placed than the past few years.
Last years ruck recruiting was a disaster for StKilda It certainly didn’t help them win the flag last year but it may well lend a hand yet. IF Gardiner can stay fit and have an influence it will be a big plus. It’s a big if though. I tend to agree that last minute panicked moves last year didn’t add much to the cause but it was always going to be a big ask for a bloke that just walked in the door.
As I said th9ugh, it may well be too late anyway. Like us just before hand they may have missed their boat. Maybe ours has come around again? Then they have Kozi who is really a key position player I’m not sure about that. I reckon he could be a gun KP or a gun ruckman but he is very injury prone so I have doubts he will ever be anything like what his ability would indicate. The others you mentioned are duds, I agree. ….but the club has chosen development over read-made. But they made a choice they need not have made. They should have taken Wood AND Hudson/King and still thought about another kid. Maybe they have the kid already? There are two possibles. Its probably a risk and we definitely need a third ruck option, but I'm not going to be all suicidal over it. We're better placed than the past few years.Believe me I am far from suicidal over anything much less footy. The point is we are trying to win a premiership and we made a deliberate decision that I disagree strongly with. So we don’t get suicidal but what do we say in 12 months in history repeating repeats? Yeh, Groundhog Day worked out in the end but in the real world we all get older as we keep trying and more importantly so do players. It’s been too long already.
campbell
12 Mar 2008, 20:41
Cam will repay your faith in him.
lack of confidence when told he was not wanted in the main team at Brisbane.
Has worked really hard in the off season, and is loving the Pies people.
When he is met at the airport by 4 players when he moves, and the President calls you, its a huge thing.
Pie eyed
12 Mar 2008, 23:00
Exactly where we have been. Short of the mark which is why they now have a better ruck contingent. GT didn’t value the ruckman it cost him – same with MM. Lyon came in and immediately chased ruckman. in 2 drafts in a row recruited the best he could get his hands on. Time will tell if he has bridged the gap or whether it is too late. Maybe the Saints peak opportunity has passed. I don’t know about you but I see a vast different in a centre clearance that is a quick cleared kick off the back of the square to a clean break through the middle and so does every forward that ever tried to take a mark and kick a goal. Goals kicked, goals conceded and numerous issues are all important. Adelaide have always had a poor forward line but two years ago they were one of the best scorers and last year one of the worst. Game plan, team structure etc are all vital ingredients.
Get a quality ruck to dish off quality ball use to a good midfield who can deliver to a good forward line. All we miss in that is a quality tap ruckman to replace Josh and also add to the ruck depth. The point is the players were there. One of them went free to good home.
I don't think anyone on this thread is arguing that we do not need a quality ruckman. But the point is they don't grow on trees (at least over the last few seasons) and those that are around are all spoken for.
King, although a quality ruck, was definitely not a long or even medium term option. Of the others you mention two are well behind Wood in development terms and one is a little better developed but would have come at a higher cost.
I think the Pies, at the very least, did as well as they could getting Wood and he may yet prove to be outstanding. Many educated judges of such things rate him very highly and I hope they are right.
It seems to me that we are always going to be deficient in some area while there is a limit on our list and a draft.
We could still have a stronger midfield and have problems in defense. Although, on the face of it, Collingwood's forward stocks seem to be full to overflowing many are totally untried or unproven at AFL level.
Yet we have enormous potential in every area and that is the what it all hinges on. True we could certainly handle another ruck but we will have to find him from within in the short term and more than likely identify and develop another younger man ourselves in the long term.
We have taken a certain path in relation to the teams development and at the moment at least we have to see it through.
It is the teams that get the best "balance" in all areas who dominate.
Timmy from Thomastown
13 Mar 2008, 09:48
I don't think anyone on this thread is arguing that we do not need a quality ruckman. But the point is they don't grow on trees (at least over the last few seasons) and those that are around are all spoken for.
King, although a quality ruck, was definitely not a long or even medium term option. Of the others you mention two are well behind Wood in development terms and one is a little better developed but would have come at a higher cost.
I think the Pies, at the very least, did as well as they could getting Wood and he may yet prove to be outstanding. Many educated judges of such things rate him very highly and I hope they are right.
It seems to me that we are always going to be deficient in some area while there is a limit on our list and a draft.
We could still have a stronger midfield and have problems in defense. Although, on the face of it, Collingwood's forward stocks seem to be full to overflowing many are totally untried or unproven at AFL level.
Yet we have enormous potential in every area and that is the what it all hinges on. True we could certainly handle another ruck but we will have to find him from within in the short term and more than likely identify and develop another younger man ourselves in the long term.
We have taken a certain path in relation to the teams development and at the moment at least we have to see it through.
It is the teams that get the best "balance" in all areas who dominate.
Good post. We should not get all hung up on possibly being deficient in the third ruck department.
Its no more important for Wood to step up to replace Richards as it is for Brown and Anthony to step up and cover Presti while he's injured and Wakes who is nearly gone, for Thomas and Pendlebury to step up and cover Buckley and Burns, For Rusling Reid and Cloke to replace Tarrant who is gone and Rocca who is on the way out.
We need coverage in every position.
I don't think anyone on this thread is arguing that we do not need a quality ruckman. But the point is they don't grow on trees (at least over the last few seasons) and those that are around are all spoken for. Of course they don’t but when two throw themselves on the market and one is free to good home why wouldn’t you fill a need unless you didn’t recognise it as a large enough need? Bear in mind this is the 9th consecutive season we have not recruited enough ruckman t fill a void we had for a long time previously. We’ve had 1 quality ruckman since Peter Moore left and the next best was probably Manson who we ended up discarding anyway.
I don’t know how I make this simpler.
We are deficient in the ruck. We hopefully went part of the way to addressing that but we didn’t go far enough and the opportunity was clearly presented to go further. We chose not to go further as a matter of deliberate policy. This policy has cost us heavily. Maybe a premiership or three. That is about as higher cost as any policy this club has pursued in over 100 years of its existence and no one seems to be overly bothered.We have taken a certain path in relation to the teams development and at the moment at least we have to see it through.
Absolutely not. If we are not flexible and if we do not take opportunities that present themselves to address areas of need then we will continue to be battlers that have honourable losses in important finals. It is great to have a good plan but t is idiotic to stick to it regardless of alternative options that present themselves. This is true in football and in every single thing you will ever do in your own life. The reality is our plan is flexible. If you doubt that then ask yourself why we wanted Judd and why we tried to poach Brown. We saw opportunities. With Brown we in fact tried to create an opportunity. The fact is we made a judgement that our ruck stocks are sufficient and that is what worries me. It is a continuation of a failed philosophy. With luck Wood will be very good, Fraser will stay fit and we will win the flag. With better policy and follow through we’d need less luck. It is the teams that get the best "balance" in all areas who dominate.And our imbalance last year, and in 2002/3 was primarily in the ruck. That is precisely the point.
Good post. We should not get all hung up on possibly being deficient in the third ruck department.
We are deficient in the first, second and third ruck department. Slot in a number one and two and three get a whole lot better. We have a number 1 ruck who has rarely won in the ruck AND is injury prone. We’ve been making injury excuses for every year bar one since 2002. In the we didn’t need excuses he was a very player but he still got beaten monotonously in the ruck.
We need coverage in every position.I agree and had a replacement or two for Clement come onto the market I’d have been disappointed had we just ignored that too.
Pie eyed
13 Mar 2008, 10:37
We have taken a certain path in relation to the teams development and at the moment at least we have to see it through.
By this I mean we are locked in to a list for this season.
We have to make the most of what we have.
This is not to say we cannot address any deficiencies next season.
Funnily enough we may have totally different priorities come October this year.
Depending on this seasons performances we may be looking in a different direction.
Obese Arachnid
13 Mar 2008, 10:43
Of course they don’t but when two throw themselves on the market and one is free to good home why wouldn’t you fill a need unless you didn’t recognise it as a large enough need? Bear in mind this is the 9th consecutive season we have not recruited enough ruckman t fill a void we had for a long time previously. We’ve had 1 quality ruckman since Peter Moore left and the next best was probably Manson who we ended up discarding anyway.
I don’t know how I make this simpler.
We are deficient in the ruck. We hopefully went part of the way to addressing that but we didn’t go far enough and the opportunity was clearly presented to go further. We chose not to go further as a matter of deliberate policy. This policy has cost us heavily. Maybe a premiership or three. That is about as higher cost as any policy this club has pursued in over 100 years of its existence and no one seems to be overly bothered.
Absolutely not. If we are not flexible and if we do not take opportunities that present themselves to address areas of need then we will continue to be battlers that have honourable losses in important finals. It is great to have a good plan but t is idiotic to stick to it regardless of alternative options that present themselves. This is true in football and in every single thing you will ever do in your own life. The reality is our plan is flexible. If you doubt that then ask yourself why we wanted Judd and why we tried to poach Brown. We saw opportunities. With Brown we in fact tried to create an opportunity. The fact is we made a judgement that our ruck stocks are sufficient and that is what worries me. It is a continuation of a failed philosophy. With luck Wood will be very good, Fraser will stay fit and we will win the flag. With better policy and follow through we’d need less luck. And our imbalance last year, and in 2002/3 was primarily in the ruck. That is precisely the point.
Mark, while I don't disagree with what you have said....The point i will pick up on is, King was free to the Saints. Doesn't mean he was going to be "free" to us. Geelong may very well have said, "The Pies gave us a fright, thank God for their luck of Ruckmen."
We may well have been looking at a much higher pick to get King. All the while we know we are going "hard for Wood" (sorry) plus have a youngster on the boil in Keefe.
Mark, while I don't disagree with what you have said....The point i will pick up on is, King was free to the Saints. Doesn't mean he was going to be "free" to us. Geelong may very well have said, "The Pies gave us a fright, thank God for their luck of Ruckmen."
We may well have been looking at a much higher pick to get King. All the while we know we are going "hard for Wood" (sorry) plus have a youngster on the boil in Keefe.If we wanted him and he felt wanted why wouldn’t he have nominated us as his destination? Maybe Geelong would have balked at a low value trade and maybe we might have had to up the anti a little but from what I could gather Geelong did the right thing by King and needed to quickly deal with his departure to shore up Blake. In any case, the consensus is St. Kilda have a very good list and, they have been a rival of Geelong’s in recent years and they are as much acknowledged as ruck deficient as we are.
Of course we are speculating. There really is no basis to say Geelong wouldn’t have wanted to deal with us though. Port used an excuse that has been used once t my memory and they needed to justify a nil return when they demanded the world. Christ from Didak and a first round pick to zip and people still say they did the right thing.
By this I mean we are locked in to a list for this season.
We have to make the most of what we have.
Yeh ok, that’s fair enough.
TheBrownDog
13 Mar 2008, 23:23
Cam will repay your faith in him.
lack of confidence when told he was not wanted in the main team at Brisbane.
Has worked really hard in the off season, and is loving the Pies people.
While I think Wood will be great for the Pies (and have already said so in this thread)... weren't you talking up Marty Pask to Bulldogs supporters in a similar fashion this time last year?
While I think Wood will be great for the Pies (and have already said so in this thread)... weren't you talking up Marty Pask to Bulldogs supporters in a similar fashion this time last year?
Yes, but the Dogs haven't exactly got a great track record of developing young players...then again we haven't exactly got a great track record of developing ruckmen :(
Oh well. For now, glass half full!
TheBrownDog
14 Mar 2008, 00:13
Yes, but the Dogs haven't exactly got a great track record of developing young players...then again we haven't exactly got a great track record of developing ruckmen :(
Oh well. For now, glass half full!
Nah, glass is pretty full. Wood is quality.
moe sizlak
14 Mar 2008, 07:50
Nah, glass is pretty full. Wood is quality.
I agree. I don't usually really talk up players that are riding a wave of hype, but Wood can definitely play. I think by years end he will have established himself as a quality afl ruckman.
Gopies 2002
14 Mar 2008, 10:43
If we wanted him and he felt wanted why wouldn’t he have nominated us as his destination? Maybe Geelong would have balked at a low value trade and maybe we might have had to up the anti a little but from what I could gather Geelong did the right thing by King and needed to quickly deal with his departure to shore up Blake. In any case, the consensus is St. Kilda have a very good list and, they have been a rival of Geelong’s in recent years and they are as much acknowledged as ruck deficient as we are.
Of course we are speculating. There really is no basis to say Geelong wouldn’t have wanted to deal with us though. Port used an excuse that has been used once t my memory and they needed to justify a nil return when they demanded the world. Christ from Didak and a first round pick to zip and people still say they did the right thing.
For the significant portion of the season, the Cats went with Blake over King. Come the end of the season, they again wanted Blake over King. This is the same Blake who was no better than Richards in last years finals. Doesn't that give us some idea where they think King is at ?
We have tried the method of picking up old players near the end - it doesn't work. We are rebuilding through the draft and by recruiting a player like Wood who is still young. IMO that is clearly the way to go and we made the correct choice in relation to rucks to chase.
yeah-nah
14 Mar 2008, 10:53
Of course they don’t but when two throw themselves on the market and one is free to good home why wouldn’t you fill a need unless you didn’t recognise it as a large enough need?
Cos Wood wouldnt have agreed to come to Collingwood if he was gonna be 3rd banana behind Fraser and King. Thats the situation he was in at Brisbane.
Lazyboy
14 Mar 2008, 11:05
The pies made the right decision without doubt, but its still shits me MM has waited after 3 failed attempts at a flag to address an obvious problem. We should have targeted young quality rucks years ago.
King and Gardner are old and not elite. I wouldnt want them at collingwood, too high risk, and wont be around long enough.
We can now develop wood and josh as a combo and should reap the rewards for the next 5-6 years. We cannot just start plugging holes at this stage, expecially our defense, if we miss our chances for the next 2-3 years it wont matter as we will still be developing quality and upside for the team.
Things are looking up. Its looks to be a long term plan. The sooner Wellingham, Reid, Dawes and Brown are given game time the better. MM needs to grow the group again this year. If we can introduce another 5-6 kids into our seniour line up we will win a flag in the next five years. Wood is 1 step in the right direction. We now need replacments for Jimmy, Rocca, Wakes, Burns and OB, will also need to make improment on these players.
vinnie_vegas69
14 Mar 2008, 11:07
Cos Wood wouldnt have agreed to come to Collingwood if he was gonna be 3rd banana behind Fraser and King. Thats the situation he was in at Brisbane.
Bingo!
Also, I like the point that Geelong had Blake and King roughly even in terms of ability to perform - It says a lot about where King is at. People seem to assume when talking about him that he will be a better on-field ruckman than Cameron Wood this year, whereas I disagree with that. I think Wood is already a better player than King currently is.
Timmy from Thomastown
14 Mar 2008, 13:04
I agree and had a replacement or two for Clement come onto the market I’d have been disappointed had we just ignored that too.
The replacements for Clement are just as unproven as Wood.
popathon
14 Mar 2008, 16:23
The replacements for Clement are just as unproven as Wood.
And our defence is a bit of a worry aswell.
The replacements for Clement are just as unproven as Wood.The ones we have? Yes that’s why I said had replacements come onto the market that we passed up I’d be disappointed. They didn’t but the options did for the ruck.
For the significant portion of the season, the Cats went with Blake over King. Come the end of the season, they again wanted Blake over King. This is the same Blake who was no better than Richards in last years finals. Doesn't that give us some idea where they think King is at ? King was injured and then they wanted to keep developing Blake. Against us he was ordinary. When push came to shove they chose King when it mattered most. I actually don’t rate Blake as a ruckman at all right now. I haven’t seen enough to make a call on development but there is no way after the PF that I would have taken him into the GF. King proved why in the GF although in the end Port were so poor it didn’t really matter.
Look I have never been a huge King fan. I am not saying he is any kind of gun. What I am saying is he is a good tap ruckman and we have no one that has every proven anything and haven’t had since Monkey retired so King, who went all but free to good home, SHOULD have been targeted IF we failed to land Hudson who also wanted to leave his club. We have tried the method of picking up old players near the end - it doesn't work.We have picked up some WCE hacks that the coach liked. Meanwhile Sydney picked up Ball and won a flag. Essendon picked up Barnes who they previously rejected and won a flag. What doesn’t work is recruiting duds. We are rebuilding through the draft and by recruiting a player like Wood who is still young. IMO that is clearly the way to go and we made the correct choice in relation to rucks to chase.I don’t disagree. I do believe we left ourselves badly exposed to injury to Fraser who is injury prone and Wood who is a kid in ruck terms and even if we don’t get injuries we need Wood to develop rapidly to win in the ruck and advance our premiership chances. All this could be solved to varying degrees with Hudson, King, someone else we poach or kids in the draft in addition to getting Wood.
Bottom line is what happens if he hit another PF with Bryan as our ruckman or if Wood doesn’t end up capable of effective ruckwork this year?
Axl the great
14 Mar 2008, 17:01
Love your optimism, Dudley, but it is well overstated at this point.
We are talking about an underweight kid who has played less than a handful of AFL games and was a third or fourth stringer for his previous club.
I think he will develop into a solid ruckman, but not of the calibre to win premierships with his own light fingers.
As you said you have "heard" (not seen) great things about him (most likely from supporters prone to the same hyperbole) so let's just see how he goes through this year before we start making room in the trophy cabinet.
Dude we should be optimistic about this kid, last year our ruckmen clearly cost us a flag i have no doubt about that at all. A cardboard cut out of my grandma would have done a better job than Bryan and Richards. If he can at least break even in games we will go a lon g way this year.
Cos Wood wouldnt have agreed to come to Collingwood if he was gonna be 3rd banana behind Fraser and King.Says who? You reckon we couldn’t convince Wood to back himself against King? Guess what then he’s probably not cut out to ruck at AFL level. OK ignore that. Why couldn’t we convince him he relegate Josh to a tall forward role and ruck with King?
That Wood wouldn’t come is 100% baseless speculation and for it to prevent us trying to get someone else which I can’t imagine is the case is ludicrous. Cos Wood wouldnt have agreed to come to Collingwood if he was gonna be 3rd banana behind Fraser and King. Thats the situation he was in at Brisbane.No it isn’t. He was behind 3 ruckmen, not 2. 2 of those ruckmen were premiership players – against us. One retired after lists were finalised but that is beside the point.
In short Brisbane had more and better competition than Fraser and King.
I have to admit i am a bit disappointed.
He is going ok with tap work and bodying, he is more than serviceable, but he yet to show any endeavour in the furnishing department.
very very disappointing
I have to admit i am a bit disappointed.
He is going ok with tap work and bodying, he is more than serviceable, but he yet to show any endeavour in the furnishing department.
very very disappointing
Looks like we wasted all that money sending him to interior decorating classes then doesn't it?
dodgy_boy
4 Apr 2008, 20:22
I've been impressed, I remembering reading that he struggled big time in the first pre-season training, pulling up early and vomitting, but he has been doing well in the hit-outs, as long as he mans up on Ottens (unlike Guy richards), you guys should go alright.
Dundalis
4 Apr 2008, 20:33
Wood will be a great tap ruckman. The only criticism about him has been his endurance, which has possibly shown up a little bit in his first two games. But I'm willing to bet he starts to improve markedly as the season goes on and his confidence grows in a new team.
magpiewarrior
4 Apr 2008, 21:42
Have a look at the stats I'm sure that you will find we get far more of the ball out of the centre we he's in the ruck than with Josh in the ruck. Josh is better around the ground but if you look at Cams' around the ground quality with with the Lyins you can see that he is already coming along in leaps and bounds (sorry couldn't help the pun). He could already teach Josh something about timing his leaps in the ruck contest too.
the lemon wedge
4 Apr 2008, 22:04
Wood has been very good, but josh has averages 18 hitouts so far this season, and was very good against charman. Also when the opposition teams 2nd string ruck is on josh is able to dominate the hitouts and more importantly get them to advantage.
magpiewarrior
4 Apr 2008, 22:34
Wood has been very good, but josh has averages 18 hitouts so far this season, and was very good against charman. Also when the opposition teams 2nd string ruck is on josh is able to dominate the hitouts and more importantly get them to advantage.
Are you kidding or what? I'll have whatever your having before watching or games. By "getting them to our advantage" do you mean it to our advantage that we then get to tackle whichever opponent gets the ball from Joshs' tap.
[/B][/U]
Are you kidding or what? I'll have whatever your having before watching or games. By "getting them to our advantage" do you mean it to our advantage that we then get to tackle whichever opponent gets the ball from Joshs' tap.
No he's not kidding Josh is actually has a high hitout to advantage ratio. However he usually gets a small amount of hitouts. But against Brisbane he had double the amount of Charman's hitouts to advantage, unfortunately in the mud it didn't translate to great clearances (although we smashed them in the clearances, we didn't have any great running clearances).
Looks like we wasted all that money sending him to interior decorating classes then doesn't it?
Very good point, i agree.
That stuff is all well and good after his career in footy.
He should move into quality material now.
I still reckon he shows any interest bumelia lanuginosa it would help.
what do you guys reckon?
vinnie_vegas69
6 Apr 2008, 22:51
Very good point, i agree.
That stuff is all well and good after his career in footy.
He should move into quality material now.
I still reckon he shows any interest bumelia lanuginosa it would help.
what do you guys reckon?
I reckon you're a huge bell-end.
But aside from that, Wood's coming along very nicely.
I reckon you're a huge bell-end.
But aside from that, Wood's coming along very nicely.
ooh you know how to flatter a bloke, thanks.
I am glad to hear Wood's coming along very nicely, that was all i was hoping for.
Some decent polish now and he will be the finished article.