View Full Version : 2004
JUDDanaut
9 Nov 2003, 18:20
I must say as a true West Coast supporter i always look forward to the upcoming seasons. Though now in 2003 heading into the 2004 season i feel a sense of disbelief and fright. For some reason i feel that we as a club next season will not do as well as previouse years, ie finals, mainly due to our defensive skills. This may be me , but what do you fellow supporters feel about the approaching season.
I think the thing which sort of worries/fills me with a great sense of anticipation is that the honeymoon years are now officially over for Worsfold.
We've disposed of the Judge legacy, had a few good years of development, but if we're going to enter an era of dominance with this current list, it has to begin next year. The expectations are a lot higher- *just* making the 8 was marginally acceptable this year, but it wouldn't be next season.
I think a lot of fans forgot how good this year was going until Gardiner, Embley and Fletcher went down. We're a bloody good side, but unless we have a godly run with injuries this year, we need a few people to step up next year, most notably Glass, McDougall and Cox.
We probably need a top 4 spot and at least one finals victory next year to keep on moving forward as a side. By this time next year, our current group of players will either be a serious premiership threat entering a 3-4 period of contention, a la Port, Brisbane, Adelaide and Collingwood over the last 2-3 years, or we'll still be missing something, in which case the clock is ticking for us to get it right with this current list. Teams very rarely stay put in footy- either we go forward next year and become a genuine top 4 side, or we decline.
I had a prophetic dream about our 2004 season. We started the year with some injury problems and played badly. Sometime within the first half of the year we had a 5 game loosing streak. Things weren't going too well, the media were questioning our players and our coaching staff... but the mid year break came at a good time. Woosha layed down the law and in the second half of the year, our players started to gel better and some fringe players really started to step up. The one I seem to remember is Adkins who kicked a very good goal to win us an important away game. We ended up having an 8 game winning steak and making the grand final where we lost to Collingwood.
The question is, would you want that to come true? :D
Au_Blue#24
9 Nov 2003, 20:43
cousins, gardiner, judd, kerr, embley, matera, fletcher, cox, dougs, gasper, sampi, wirrapunda - these are our best players and are good enough to win a flag with other players stepping up some more in 2004
Have Faith
Electric Blue
9 Nov 2003, 21:00
[The question is, would you want that to come true? :D [/B][/QUOTE]
The thing is , I dont want anyone to lose a grand final to Collingwood!!!!!
We have arguably the best ruckman in the league and an awesome midfield that will only get better
Our forward line cant kick enough goals, our defence concedes too many
When you rely on Phil Matera to be your main scorer and Trent Carrol to take a key defence role, your never gonna be a serious threat to the flag
Sorry for the doom and gloom folks ;)
Virtually the same squad as last year. Jako is a year older and a yard slower, Haynes, Read & McIntosh gone.
1. Absolutely must have Gaspar fit for at least 12-13 games.
2. We have to play with a taller forward line in 2004.
3. Gardiner needs more protection, therefore Cox needs to start playing decent footy before halfway through the season.
4. Seaby needs to be ready to step in at any time.
5. Lynch needs to stop fooling around with Woosha's missus.
6. Morrison needs to stay fit.
If all of the above happen - top 4 finish.
Originally posted by Jabber
Virtually the same squad as last year. Jako is a year older and a yard slower, Haynes, Read & McIntosh gone.
1. Absolutely must have Gaspar fit for at least 12-13 games.
2. We have to play with a taller forward line in 2004.
3. Gardiner needs more protection, therefore Cox needs to start playing decent footy before halfway through the season.
4. Seaby needs to be ready to step in at any time.
5. Lynch needs to stop fooling around with Woosha's missus.
6. Morrison needs to stay fit.
If all of the above happen - top 4 finish.
Agree with most of those points. For my mind, here are the 6 guys that can win us a flag.
1. Gaspar- No brainer. Must get 20+ games, must play his best footy at CHB. Frankly, had we got that alone from him this year, I'm convinced we would have finished top four and gone places in the finals.
2. McDougall- Nows his time. If he's going to be a star, 2004 will be his breakthrough year. If he does, then thats the answer to a forward woes.
3. Cox- must continue to develop, freeing up Gardiner to play forward if necessary, and covering us in the event of injuries. Every minute where Cox can hold down the ruck is another minute where we can play with a Gardiner/McDougall combo of tall forwards.
4. Glass- He doesn't have to turn into a superstar by next year, but he needs to become an acceptable, workmanlike defender who can go up against star forwards and prevent them from dominating.
5. Wirrpunda- Might sound like an odd one, but when Wirrpunda is playing his best football out of the backline, we're nigh on unstoppable. If he could get in a complete preseason for a change, things are really looking up.
6. Sampi- IMO, has perhaps the greatest potential for improvement of any player in our team. I would rate his skills, athleticism and footy brain as good if not better than any other current Eagle. If his attitude is good and he stays fit and works hard, we could have a 19 year old Gavin Wanganeen on our list next year, who can play as a deadeye, lightning quick half forward, a close checking defender or soup up our star studded midfield. Big talk, i know, but I'm confident Samps is someone with a huge future, and not just as a one dimensional goal sneak.
daddy_4_eyes
9 Nov 2003, 22:41
What worries me is the equalisation policy of the draft. Teams are increasingly having to spend time near the bottom for extended periods to be able to make a run for the flag.
Freo spent a good 7yrs at the bottom, and have accumulated probably the best group of talls in the AFL. Their midfield is their weakness, though with Bell, Hasleby and Pavlich running through there, and some kids coming through, they're not doing too bad.
St Kilda spent a long time down the bottom after their 'success' years under Alves. Now they have arguably the best group of youngsters any team has had in recent memory.
On the other hand teams like Richmond and Hawthorn, which are mid-table continually, have some guns here and there, but lists no where near premiership material.
What I fear is that our 2 years down the bottom may not have given us enough depth to be serious premiership threats. If we don't become premiership contenders in 2004, I fear St Kilda and Freo might overtake us. Bulldogs will have a decent list in 2005+ too. I bloody hope McDougall, Gaspar, Seaby, Johnson and Staker live up to all their hype. Because if at least 2 of them don't become guns, we'll be too reliant on our midfield (which is probably about the best in the AFL).
On a thread in the main board all the posters were picking WC to go out of the 8 next season. But I think all the people only remember the end of the season, where we struggled and then were ousted by Adelaide.
Nobody remembers the thrashing we gave the 3 time reigning premiers at the GABBA midway through the year and all the posters were calling us the best team in the league, definite challengers etc etc...
IMO our poor finish was because Gardiner, Fletcher and Embley were all injured at the same time. 3 of our absolute top range players who all have a huge impact on a game, all out with injury. That does hurt whichever way you look at it.
Bottom line is that if we can stay relatively fit then we are good enough to finish top 4. We have lost Read, Sierakowski, McIntosh, Haynes....who in all honesty didnt have a huge impact for us all last season. So in general we have the same side as last year with a year of development behind Doogs, Judd, Kerr etc etc
We will go better than people seem to believe.
I'm more worried about depth when injuries do occur.
IMO next season can't come quick enough.
We have an outstanding crop of young talls. The only problem is not too many of them are defenders, out of any club in the league we should be aware that you can train a young forward to play a defensive post.
Our forward line will be more potent next season then this season because;
- McDougall will be at full forward providing a target and kicking goals.
- Fido will still be as good as 2003.
- Along the lines of what Mead said, Sampi will be pushed further up the ground (IMO - HFF), and the more of the ball he has, the more goals we will score.
- Staker is silky smooth and now Mitchell White has retired, in some spooky way he has inherited the rest of his powers that he was already draining out of him for the last few seasons.
- If all else fails we will unleash the hulking bohemiath that is Q-Lynch.
Our midfield will be stronger because;
- they are all one year older. We don't have to worry about the age of our midfielders, whether they are slowing down, losing their quick hands etc ...
- our back up ruckman is almost a top-line ruckman in his own-right.
- hopefully Daniel Chick is over his injuries. We didn't see the best of him by a long shot in 2003.
our defense will be stronger because;
- well, we haven't lost much from 2003's edition have we?
- Glass will be an adequate FB, if not slightly better.
- Collica can get a full pre-season under his belt and forget 2003.
- hopefully we are teaching someone the art of playing CHB. I'm of the belief Travis could be very, very good, I'm just hoping it's as a CHB. If that fails, unleash Q-Lynch.
- Wirrpunda is still the most skilled defender going around.
- the first rule of defense, there is no Trent Carroll.
- the second rule of defense, there is no Trent Carroll.
rant over
thegur
Originally posted by thegur
- the first rule of defense, there is no Trent Carroll.
- the second rule of defense, there is no Trent Carroll.
However, if there was one player who I could play my "Embley card" with it would be Trent. He ALREADY has the physical make-up of our defensive answer.
Tall, pretty strong, not slow for a tall.
Just teach him how to play AFL football please.
rant officially over
thegur
Originally posted by thegur
However, if there was one player who I could play my "Embley card" with it would be Trent. He ALREADY has the physical make-up of our defensive answer.
Tall, pretty strong, not slow for a tall.
Just teach him how to play AFL football please.
rant officially over
thegur
True that. A month back, I was talking incessantly about football with my non football following gf (perhaps unsurprisingly, given said incessant talking about football, now ex-gf, :)) and she asked me why was it that this Trent Carroll guy i kept on slagging off was so crap? And it actually took me a while to answer. Physically, he's fine, he has a decent kick, and his skills aren't really that bad, so the best I could come up with is that he's a headcase, and a former docker, thus naturally predisposed to being crap.
I actually do hold out a slim hope of him turning out okay in 2004.
Like Embley, Carroll has a natural combination of size, strength, speed and agility.
Like Embley, Carroll is rumored to have a few off field issues and a hefty attitude problem
Like Embley, 9/10 Eagles fans wrote Carroll off as a dead loss.
Like Embley, Carroll was lucky to be retained at the end of the season, and will definitely be on his last chance this season.
That could all come to nothing, but what I'm guessing is pretty certain is that Worsfold has gotten in Trent's ear, and told him exactly where he stands- in other words, that there aren't going to be any more chances, and if he wants an AFL career, 2004 is going to have be the year where he turns it all around. There's gotta be at least some small chance of that working, although I'm not holding my breath.
Originally posted by Mead
I actually do hold out a slim hope of him turning out okay in 2004.
Like Embley, Carroll has a natural combination of size, strength, speed and agility.
Like Embley, Carroll is rumored to have a few off field issues and a hefty attitude problem
Like Embley, 9/10 Eagles fans wrote Carroll off as a dead loss.
Like Embley, Carroll was lucky to be retained at the end of the season, and will definitely be on his last chance this season.
That could all come to nothing, but what I'm guessing is pretty certain is that Worsfold has gotten in Trent's ear, and told him exactly where he stands- in other words, that there aren't going to be any more chances, and if he wants an AFL career, 2004 is going to have be the year where he turns it all around. There's gotta be at least some small chance of that working, although I'm not holding my breath.
Totally agree but all I can say is that I dont think many people were holding their breath over Embley either and he proved us all wrong. I just hope to god that Caroll (for his own sake) improves out of sight next year beause if he doesnt he'll be cleaning out his locker at Subiaco at this time next year.
Originally posted by thegur
However, if there was one player who I could play my "Embley card" with it would be Trent. He ALREADY has the physical make-up of our defensive answer.
Tall, pretty strong, not slow for a tall.
Just teach him how to play AFL football please.
rant officially over
thegur
Mission Impossible, unfortunately he is Football DUMB and always has been, funnily enough so is his brother at Melbourne. They both make the same mistakes, terrific blokes but DUMB!!
Chris_Judd
10 Nov 2003, 12:23
Originally posted by Mead
Agree with most of those points. For my mind, here are the 6 guys that can win us a flag.
2. McDougall- Nows his time. If he's going to be a star, 2004 will be his breakthrough year. If he does, then thats the answer to a forward woes.
You do realise that McDougall is only 20 years old!! I don't understand why supporters opinions are that he is at the crossroads and needs to produce.... people forget he is a big guy... who generally don't play their best until they are 24-25. I wonder what people would have thought if we had thrown Michael Gardiner in the trash bin when he was 20.
Voice of Reason
10 Nov 2003, 12:25
Originally posted by Mead
A month back, I was talking incessantly about football with my non football following gf (perhaps unsurprisingly, given said incessant talking about football, now ex-gf, :))
Like Embley, 9/10 Eagles fans wrote Carroll off as a dead loss.
Well done mate - if she can't handle the footy, you're better off without her.......
As the 1/10 who never lost faith in Embley, I doubt whether Carroll has it in him to make that transition. It'd be great if he could, but I just can't see it, whereas I could tell that Embley was going to be a really good player, as long as he got his head right.
As for 2004, I'm really looking forward to it. I don't know how it's going to go - the major concern would be lack of depth in the event of injuries, but that's true of all teams in this day and age of small lists, a salary cap and a very fast & physical game.
Originally posted by Chris_Judd
You do realise that McDougall is only 20 years old!! I don't understand why supporters opinions are that he is at the crossroads and needs to produce.... people forget he is a big guy... who generally don't play their best until they are 24-25. I wonder what people would have thought if we had thrown Michael Gardiner in the trash bin when he was 20.
There's a difference between ruckmen and forwards in terms of development (I can name a number of bloody good 20-22 year old forwards, but virtually nil bloody good 20 year old ruckmen), but at any rate, if you read what I actually wrote, I said that if McDougall was going to be a star, 2004 will be his breakthrough year.
I think that for a number of reasons. McDougall has always had quality and a good draft pedigree on his side. 2003 was a pretty good year for him, and he was definitely coming on by the end of the season- his last full game for the year was also the best for his career, which would suggest that if he picks up where he left off, things look good. In 2004, he'll go in fit (hopefully) stronger, and, with the demise of Willow and Haynes, the number one forward role. If he is ever going to become a star, I'm pretty convinced it will happen now. Physically, he might get stronger and smarter as the seasons go by, but '04 will be the first year where he'll be going up against defenders on relatively even terms as far as strength and size go. If he's going to be a star, it should show now. If he has a pretty average season '04 I'm not arguing that he should be written off, but if thats the case we're probably saddled with a solid, acceptable limited role player worth persevering with, rather than a Carey, Brown or Tredrea panacea to all our forward woes.
I'm hoping Doogs turns out into a player similar to Matt Richardson. Looks lanky and a little goofy, but has good upper body strength, can run all day, and has the height and strength to beat any defender in the league.
Some people will gaff at this, but doesn't matter which way you look at it, Richardson is one of the best players in the comp.
Originally posted by ozzult
I'm hoping Doogs turns out into a player similar to Matt Richardson. Looks lanky and a little goofy, but has good upper body strength, can run all day, and has the height and strength to beat any defender in the league.
Some people will gaff at this, but doesn't matter which way you look at it, Richardson is one of the best players in the comp.
I reckon thats about right, actually. He doesn't look like he's a Brown/Rocca tank, but he's got that freakishly agile quality which you sometimes get in the tall lanky ones. I remember against Brisbane, about the first thing we saw of him this year was him going to ground about 50, gathering the ball, spinning full circle out of a tackle and kicking it over his shoulder. Rather nifty for a bloke a few cm shy of 2m.
And his marking style on the lead is very richoesque- runs full tilt at the ball and sort of shimmies his butt out at the last minute to keep the defender away.
Everything we've heard about him suggests he has a very good attitude though, trains his butt off, and will do whatever he has to to play, so maybe thats the key difference between him and Richo.
Actually, am I the only person who gets the impression Doogs isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed? The interviews I've seen with him suggest he's either bloody thick, or possibly a genius taking the very subtle **** out of everyone.
Voice of Reason
10 Nov 2003, 14:44
Originally posted by ozzult
but doesn't matter which way you look at it, Richardson is one of the best players in the comp.
I look at it from the angles that it's a team game, senior players should be leaders and a forward's job is to put the scores on the board - 0/3 for Richo, I'm afraid.
Chris_Judd
10 Nov 2003, 15:09
Originally posted by Mead
Actually, am I the only person who gets the impression Doogs isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed? The interviews I've seen with him suggest he's either bloody thick, or possibly a genius taking the very subtle **** out of everyone.
Personally know him do we? Doogs is actually a really top bloke and a nice kid.... who comes from a great family. He's not "slow" as you are making him out to be... he is just a shy person by nature and extremely humble. After his 4-5 goal effort at the end of last year in a game I told him he was starting to look good in the AFL and his response was "just trying to get a game at the moment and hope I get picked next week"
He will be ok.. but he is still only 20.... don't compare him to a Kocrapske and a D1ckwoldt..... because as far as I am concerned they are a manufacture of the St Kilda propoganda machine.... and have barely done anything to live up to the hype put on them.... the bottom line is he has barely played 10 games... and can only be better if his body holds up.
Au_Blue#24
10 Nov 2003, 15:20
Originally posted by Chris_Judd
Personally know him do we? Doogs is actually a really top bloke and a nice kid.... who comes from a great family. He's not "slow" as you are making him out to be... he is just a shy person by nature and extremely humble. After his 4-5 goal effort at the end of last year in a game I told him he was starting to look good in the AFL and his response was "just trying to get a game at the moment and hope I get picked next week"
He will be ok.. but he is still only 20.... don't compare him to a Kocrapske and a D1ckwoldt..... because as far as I am concerned they are a manufacture of the St Kilda propoganda machine.... and have barely done anything to live up to the hype put on them.... the bottom line is he has barely played 10 games... and can only be better if his body holds up.
allright judster - if your gonna recieve any credibility, you're gunna have to give us some info on how you are privy to this inside knowledge. Otherwise people on the board are just going to concede that your sprouting crap - and lots off it !!
The Mission Man
10 Nov 2003, 16:13
Mead originally posted: I can name a number of bloody good 20-22 year old forwards, but virtually nil bloody good 20 year old ruckmen
You did say "virtually nil". (http://fremantlefc.com.au/default.asp?pg=players&spg=playerprofile&personid=14091)
Check out the hit-out stats for round 22.
Oh, and Dudd, your relentless tease about your insider status was always going to backfire. I'd 'fess up now, if I were you. The imprisonment rates for stalkers are still pretty low and you might be able to throw yourself on the mercy of the court.
Originally posted by The Mission Man
You did say "virtually nil". (http://fremantlefc.com.au/default.asp?pg=players&spg=playerprofile&personid=14091)
Check out the hit-out stats for round 22.
Oh, and Dudd, your relentless tease about your insider status was always going to backfire. I'd 'fess up now, if I were you. The imprisonment rates for stalkers are still pretty low and you might be able to throw yourself on the mercy of the court.
Yes, actually Sandy was the one exception I had in mind- probably because he's freakishly well developed for a guy his age, so he can deal with the physical side of rucking, indeed, he tosses most middle tier AFL ruckmen around like rag dolls.
Now before this agreeing with docker supporters thing gets to be a habit, I will say that at this stage, I still think Sandiland's a bit of a liability against more mobile ruckmen- bloody good in the taps, utterly one dimensional and useless around the ground probably due to his lumbering size, doesn't run defensively at all.
Maybe thats the area of his game which will develop as he gets older, since he already has the size. Sort of the exact opposite to Josh Fraser, who is great around the ground now, but needs to learn to ruck.
C_J, yes its obvious I was claiming to personally know McDougall, as the statement 'from the interviews i've seen...' makes so blindingly clear :rolleyes: And your pathological hatred for St Kilda aside, the **** you're saying about Reiwoldt exposes you as someone who knows jack all about football. Any team in the league would take him in a heartbeat.
I don't know why you think I'm having a go at McDougall- anything but, I rate him extremely highly and am very excited about his future. I don't know whether he's thick or not but he does do a pretty good impression of it in interviews. Thats not necessarily a bad thing, there is a long tradition of boofhead forwards dominating the competition. Being short of a few brain cells has never hurt Matty Lloyd.
daddy_4_eyes
10 Nov 2003, 17:45
Originally posted by Voice of Reason
As the 1/10 who never lost faith in Embley, I doubt whether Carroll has it in him to make that transition. It'd be great if he could, but I just can't see it, whereas I could tell that Embley was going to be a really good player, as long as he got his head right.
Gotta agree with you there. Embley showed signs of brilliance, albeit inconsistently. In 2003 he managed to keep the brilliance up for the majority of the season. Carroll on the other hand has never done anything above average, even his good games would be ranked as 'serviceable'.
You gotta admire him though. For a bloke with obvious talent limitations, the guy has played a hell of a lot of AFL footy.
Originally posted by Mead
I don't know why you think I'm having a go at McDougall- anything but, I rate him extremely highly and am very excited about his future. I don't know whether he's thick or not but he does do a pretty good impression of it in interviews. Thats not necessarily a bad thing, there is a long tradition of boofhead forwards dominating the competition. Being short of a few brain cells has never hurt Matty Lloyd.
Don't know why you are getting upset, it was a pretty reasonable post by CJ IMO. McDougall not the sharpest tool in the shed? Bloody thick? Come on Mead, that was a sledge I would expect from Freo Hitman.
As for Mission Man suggesting CJ come clean on not knowing McDougall, perhaps Mission Man can come clean on his comments about McDougall being a goth who sings at parties and all his other absurd sledges he made about McDougall at Shockerland.
Black Thunder
10 Nov 2003, 20:31
I think 2004 will be the first year we are serious premiership contendors but just not quite there - mainly because we're still developing out spine.
We need McDougall to fire up at CHF. I think we'll probably take a rotational role at FF with guys like Seaby, Gardiner, Cox, McDougall, Gaspar, Lynch all given time there at some point or another.
at CHB if Gaspar can get on the park, he'll probably spend the majority of his time there.
at FB Glass is servicable, and is not a bad 2nd best Key Defender, but no where near good enough to be the main key defender in a team.
The key to this year will be Gaspar I feel. Even if McDougall doesn't step up, I reckon there are a few others who are capable of producing the goods at CHF - Staker, Gardiner, Cox, Lynch, Gaspar (although I'd rather see him at CHB) etc,.
But if Gaspar can't get on the park, than we're gonna be stuck with the Carroll/Glass combination, unless one of our draftees is a quick developer.
2005 will be our year, and given most of the core guys in our squad are aged between 1978 and 1983, you can see us being up the top probalby till around 2009-10 - what happens after that will depend on our recruiting during those years we're at the top.
Streaker
10 Nov 2003, 21:53
Originally posted by Black Thunder
But if Gaspar can't get on the park, than we're gonna be stuck with the Carroll/Glass combination, unless one of our draftees is a quick developer.
This is one reason that I think we should draft Michael Johnson from Perth. He already has the physical attributes required to play and he has a good footy brain which Carroll lacks. He is approximately the same weight and height as Carroll, Glass and McIntosh.
Fremantle are said to be keen on him.
This is his profile.
Michael Johnson
Details:
Team- Belmont FC - Perth FC
D.O.B. -20th October 1984
Height -194cm
Weight -92kg
Position- Centre Half Back
Honours:
2003 WAFL Footballer of the Future
2003 9th Perth Football Clubs League F/B
2002 3rd Perth Football Clubs Reserves F/B
2001 2nd Perth Football Clubs Colts F/B
WAFL Stats:
2003: 20 games, 10 goals, 12.6 PPG. 3.55 MPG.
Profile:
Tall, outside defender/forward who is an intelligent footballer with very good ball skills. Can go forward and be dangerous. From Belmont FC.
The tall centre half back is another one of WA’s impressive draft hopes. Johnson, at 19 years of age, is one of the youngest players in the league team at Perth, but he is taking it all in his stride.
Michael played every game for the Perth League team this year. He is a tall, laconic sort of player that stepped up and played Centre Half Back for Perth after playing mostly in the forward line as a junior.
Very Skilled and has great composure- he gets the ball sometimes and it all seems to stop around him. Michaels a natural footballer who at times, and he did it a lot as a junior, makes something out of nothing. He is ready to step up to the next level. Perth Football Manager Laurie Liddelow expects him to become a forward in the future.
Johnson is also doing an AFL traineeship, and said he would do a university course in Physical Education if AFL football didn’t work out.
He is prepared to leave WA if an Eastern States team picks him, but wants to stay in his home State.
“It doesn’t really matter if I play for Fremantle or West Coast, but just to stay home would be great,” he said. “I am very close to my family. I know the place, and it would be easier to live here and be with my family and friends.”
I also like the idea of Ben Cosgriff for the same reasons. He seems to fit into the Daniel Chick category which is something that we will need if we are to take the next step.
carneagles
11 Nov 2003, 00:07
http://fremantlefc.com.au/cp2/c2/webi/person/014091aw.jpg
So that's what Stewart Copeland did after the Police broke up.
Originally posted by Sera
Don't know why you are getting upset, it was a pretty reasonable post by CJ IMO. McDougall not the sharpest tool in the shed? Bloody thick? Come on Mead, that was a sledge I would expect from Freo Hitman.
As for Mission Man suggesting CJ come clean on not knowing McDougall, perhaps Mission Man can come clean on his comments about McDougall being a goth who sings at parties and all his other absurd sledges he made about McDougall at Shockerland.
Well actually, if anyone's getting upset I don't think its me.
For ****s sake, I'm not trying to have a go at McDougall, and I'm not suggesting I have any inside knowledge on him, what I said was a based purely on the observation, that in the couple of post game interviews I've seen he was conspiciously unerudite, even for a footy player. The reason I mentioned it was because I was curious if anyone else had got the same impression. It wasn't a criticism of his onfield ability or anything like that. Like a lot of eagle fans i'm guessing, Doogs would be in my favorite 5 players at the club.
Frankly, the feature which stands out for me the most about the dockerland crowd is how ridiculously thinskinned they are about all their players, where any perceived criticism is cause for immediate accusations of disloyalty, et al. I'd hope we aren't getting that precious that suddenly any light hearted jibe about an Eagles player signifies the coming of the end times or something.
All sorted? Oh yes, and Doogs, if you're reading this, feel free to contact me to make an appointment to kick my candy ass for dissing you.
Originally posted by carneagles
http://fremantlefc.com.au/cp2/c2/webi/person/014091aw.jpg
So that's what Stewart Copeland did after the Police broke up.
freakish.
Black JuJu
11 Nov 2003, 02:00
Originally posted by Mead
I'd hope we aren't getting that precious that suddenly any light hearted jibe about an Eagles player signifies the coming of the end times or something.
I dunno mate, there was that Vic cheer squad member that freaked about everyone calling Brent Staker "Buffy".
Just don't start calling Doog's "Howser" again guys, no TV character related nicknames for players allowed !! ;) :D
Originally posted by Black JuJu
I dunno mate, there was that Vic cheer squad member that freaked about everyone calling Brent Staker "Buffy".
Just don't start calling Doog's "Howser" again guys, no TV character related nicknames for players allowed !! ;) :D
Oh I don't know, I reckon any nicknames are a bit risque. And first names are out unless you're on personal terms with the players in question. But best of luck to Master Cousins and his compatriots this year. ;)
Black JuJu
11 Nov 2003, 02:15
Yeah, I'm pretty sure, if we all work together as a group, we can phase out "Caaarrrnn Wirra !" and replace it with -
"Well Done Mr. David Wirrpunda"
It's nice, it's neat and I don't think it over steps the mark. ;)
Originally posted by Black JuJu
Yeah, I'm pretty sure, if we all work together as a group, we can phase out "Caaarrrnn Wirra !" and replace it with -
"Well Done Mr. David Wirrpunda"
It's nice, it's neat and I don't think it over steps the mark. ;)
Tsk tsk.. He's actually the son of a king from arnhem land.
"Well Done, His Royal Highness, The Right Honorable Mr. David Wirrpunda- ****ing welly it past the centre, you magnificant, royal bastard!'
carneagles
11 Nov 2003, 08:10
When it comes to the intelligence of footballers, it's best to keep an open mind. Remember Suma's Tip Top ads? In fact, remember any Suma interview. QED.
DISCLAIMER
Nothing in the above was intended in any way to ridicule, denigrate or humiliate Peter Sumich, who is a respected dual-premiership player and assistant coach, and any inference to the contrary is regretted and hereby retracted. He was a very good goalkicker as well, and a better No 4 than Antonowicz. Oh, and a superb market gardener, snappy dresser, and his personal hygeine is beyond reproach. No correspondence will be entered into, except maybe on the hygeine bit because frankly I'm just assuming that. The reader is reminded that this post is merely representative of personal opinion and is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice, financial advice or actual humour by a trained professional. Not actual size. May contain traces of nuts.
The Mission Man
11 Nov 2003, 11:10
The quite possibly unhinged Sera flailed at the keyboard for some time and came up with this: As for Mission Man suggesting CJ come clean on not knowing McDougall, perhaps Mission Man can come clean on his comments about McDougall being a goth who sings at parties and all his other absurd sledges he made about McDougall at Shockerland.
You're right, Sera, you insightful creature. They were absurd. Absolutely absurd! You got me there.
Dudd is obviously one of those annoying little men who walk up to players and ask them presumptive questions. Because he sees them on television a fair bit, he imagines they are his friends. When the players politely respond, he uses this as confirmation of their friendship.
"You seem to be getting the hang of this AFL caper," says the knee-sock wearing Dudd, pushing his way past the little kids.
"Er, yeah," says the player, walking past, wishing they were elsewhere.
Either that or he's Adrain Barich. The similarities are frightening.
And, Carny, I'd love to see Sandi211lands drum. He could bill himself as Great Sandy and take those rocking vibes to the kids.
Juddamania
11 Nov 2003, 12:53
Originally posted by Black JuJu
I dunno mate, there was that Vic cheer squad member that freaked about everyone calling Brent Staker "Buffy".
Just don't start calling Doog's "Howser" again guys, no TV character related nicknames for players allowed !! ;) :D
Buffy?!?:confused:
What's "Howser" from? *bad memory verging on braindead!*
Juddamania
11 Nov 2003, 12:55
Originally posted by The Mission Man
And, Carny, I'd love to see Sandi211lands drum. He could bill himself as Great Sandy and take those rocking vibes to the kids. [/B]
He'd scare the kids!!;)
Actually, he should market himself as a halloween costume...:D
Originally posted by carneagles
http://fremantlefc.com.au/cp2/c2/webi/person/014091aw.jpg
So that's what Stewart Copeland did after the Police broke up.
So that's what freebasing human growth hormone does to you
RogerMellie
11 Nov 2003, 14:25
Originally posted by carneagles
When it comes to the intelligence of footballers, it's best to keep an open mind. Remember Suma's Tip Top ads? In fact, remember any Suma interview. QED.[/i][/size]
My favourite Sumaism was when he was asked what his favourite food was. His answer? Soup. Not clam chowder, not meatball and escarole, not gazpacho. Just soup. As long as it's liquid, Big Pete's in hog's heaven. Similarly, when Troy Cook was asked what his favourite sandwich filling was, he answered 'meat'.
Au_Blue#24
11 Nov 2003, 15:37
Originally posted by RogerMellie
My favourite Sumaism was when he was asked what his favourite food was. His answer? Soup. Not clam chowder, not meatball and escarole, not gazpacho. Just soup. As long as it's liquid, Big Pete's in hog's heaven. Similarly, when Troy Cook was asked what his favourite sandwich filling was, he answered 'meat'.
coulda been one of Jamie Olivers soup, in which case it is a meal.
TheRealBuzz
11 Nov 2003, 15:48
Those questionnaires used to be great. It's a pity the new afl website doesn't have them.
My personal favourite was when they asked: "What do you consider the perfect night out?"
Naturally most of our blokes listed all their fav pubs and nightclubs. But not Josh Wooden who deemed "late night shopping at Big W" as the best way to paint the town red.
If it had been anyone else I would have suspected it was a gag, but I think Josh was quite serious.
quantum electrodynamics?
quality endorsed design?
Queensland ecstasy division?
carneagles
11 Nov 2003, 16:13
Quod erat demonstrandum, baby. "Ooh, you speak French!"
Sandilands said in his questionnaire last year that he was afraid of heights, which shows quite a wry sense of humour for a 211cm ruckman.
carneagles
11 Nov 2003, 16:17
Originally posted by Au_Blue#24
coulda been one of Jamie Olivers soup, in which case it is a meal. You may be thinking about that Campbell's soup endorsed by that fat ex-Sydney full-forward, whatshisface. That is described on the can, without a word of a lie, as "soup that eats like a meal". What the soup eats is anyone's guess.
I personally think its a mistake to have sporting identities in general, and footballers in particular, endorse products, speak to the media, act (I use the term loosely), or otherwise be exposed to the general public through the electronic media for any reason other than doing what they're paid to do.
Obviously there are exceptions to the rule (John Eales comes to mind) but not too many.
The Mission Man
11 Nov 2003, 16:38
A lot of needy single mums go late-night shopping at Big W, I expect.
Wry humour is pretty much your stock in trade when you're 6 foot one hundred. The insurance liabilities on performing physical comedy are astronomical. Slapstick is out, even if you hanker for the pratfall.
materamagic
11 Nov 2003, 16:53
It is always the same story when assessing how your team will fare in the coming season. Injuries and form are the biggest factors. Also attitude and playing as a team and repect and opportunity.
Our forward line ideally should be bolstered by more appearances by talls McDougall and Gasper who will be our key forwards for the next decade. Phil Matera is still the best pocket going around and can only benefit from these talls.
Our midfield are among the best in the AFL which is widely known across the seaboard. Judd, Cousins, Kerr, Fletcher, Embley, Chick and co most in their early 20's will be playing good footy together for a long time.
Veterans Jakovich and Banfield won't have the inpact they did 10 years ago but are still important for their experience, leadership and decision making on field. Jako can play back or forward and Banfield can play as an extra midfeilder or of the half back line.
Our defence since the last premiership has slowly deteriorated but we have Wirrapunda who is great at mopping up and setting up play. We urgently need key position players down back and a couple more up forward and we will be a chance at top 4.
You expect every team to lift a notch then we have to lift 2 notches.
Realistically I predict a spot ranging 3rd-6th:D
Juddamania
11 Nov 2003, 23:19
Originally posted by TheRealBuzz
But not Josh Wooden who deemed "late night shopping at Big W" as the best way to paint the town red.
If it had been anyone else I would have suspected it was a gag, but I think Josh was quite serious. [/B]
OMG really?!?:eek: LOL!!! Maybe I'll check out Karrinyup on late night shopping!!!
He does seem a bit :S... answers from the "current" profile thingy...
Usual bedtime: 9pm
Cannot live without: Old shorts
Best sound: Silence
Most admired player: Jeremy Humm
(which is a bit suss, coz Humm said Wooden was his most admired player!!!;) )
Black JuJu
11 Nov 2003, 23:59
Originally posted by Juddamania
Buffy?!?:confused:
What's "Howser" from? *bad memory verging on braindead!*
Doogie Howser MD
Late 80s, Early 90s, its a kid, he's a docter....that's about it.
Buffy, as in the lass who STAKES vampires.
DISCLAIMER
Nothing in the above was intended in any way to ridicule, denigrate or humiliate Peter Sumich, who is a respected dual-premiership player and assistant coach, and any inference to the contrary is regretted and hereby retracted. He was a very good goalkicker as well, and a better No 4 than Antonowicz. Oh, and a superb market gardener, snappy dresser, and his personal hygeine is beyond reproach. No correspondence will be entered into, except maybe on the hygeine bit because frankly I'm just assuming that. The reader is reminded that this post is merely representative of personal opinion and is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice, financial advice or actual humour by a trained professional. Not actual size. May contain traces of nuts.[/i][/size] [/B][/QUOTE]
I was having a half-hearted chuckle until I read the last sentence which made me break out into laughter, champagne comedy.
tune in later for "Other things i did today", highlights include 11am late breakfast.
thegur
Originally posted by Black JuJu
Doogie Howser MD
Late 80s, Early 90s, its a kid, he's a docter....that's about it.
Buffy, as in the lass who STAKES vampires.
check out this link ... they both look as young as each other!
http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/ShowMainServlet/showid-171/
thegur
Originally posted by thegur
check out this link ... they both look as young as each other!
http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/ShowMainServlet/showid-171/
thegur
How on earth did this show get 5 seasons. The mind boggles.
Juddamania
12 Nov 2003, 12:47
Hah hah! Of course I don't remember it, I was 3 when that show started!!! That show looked corny!!!
I thought the Buffy thing might have something to do with Stakes.
Originally posted by Sera
How on earth did this show get 5 seasons. The mind boggles.
Rumour has it that it was very popular with the WCE Members and Supporters.
Originally posted by YAKUZA
Rumour has it that it was very popular with the WCE Members and Supporters.
Only those acquainted with Andrew McDougal, who saw an amazing resemblance with the laconic, baby-faced genius.