Rumour Bluemour Discussion thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Since the 1990's those who have gotten to within a cats whisker of a milestone (e.g. 10 games) include

Andrew McKay 244
Aaron Hamill 92 (good riddence)
Mathew Lappin 196
Brad Fisher 99


There haven't been too many who almost met a milestone for us .........
 
Who cares about 200 games.
Does it do anything? Automatic life membership or something?

100 makes sense. Its the cut off for father sons. But 180 odd vs 200 doesnt seem like much of a difference to me

Let Carrots stay home and make amother set of triplets and let Whiley play


EFA ;):thumbsu:
 
Last edited:
I must say that I was a little "upset" that we didn't give Fisher 1 more game to get him to 100

That said there is a BIG difference to 1 more extra game and 18 extra games. Give Carazzo a game if he deserves it, but don't weaken the team to get him to a milestone.

Completely agree. If ever there was a case for gifting a game, it would be from 99 to 100. The father son angle is pretty insignificant. Very few sons turn out to be top flight quality.

I guess in the club's defense, we were approaching finals, Brad was on his way back from a knee injury and his last game was very ordinary IIRC.

I can't see Carrazzo getting gifted games for milestones. He'll play if he's better than the alternative. Although, you could make a case that if we are in rebuild mode, you could take a step backwards in playing younger guys if they are thereabouts, in order to build them up for next year and beyond.
 
I'd completely forgotten about Fisher. I had to google it.

Hard to forget the 99s.

I grew up with a guy who became a state cricketer. Paul Reiffel (Vic captain) declared the Vic innings with my mate on 99 not out. Would have been his first first-class century. Took him a while after that to make a 100 in a shield match.
 
Hard to forget the 99s.

I grew up with a guy who became a state cricketer. Paul Reiffel (Vic captain) declared the Vic innings with my mate on 99 not out. Would have been his first first-class century. Took him a while after that to make a 100 in a shield match.


Bit of a prick move. Was it overnight (could understand that) or during an innings break ??? Outside of that I say go 1 more over to let the guy have his milestone !!!!!!!
 
Carrazzo has played 182 games. 18 home and away games left in the season. If he continues to get games it is because we want to get him to 200.

That's pretty silly if we carry someone just because he/we wants 200 as a milestone. We should be playing someone on performance not on field seniority. Mentorship programs can be executed without playing.

Perfect example was Fisher.....
 
Hard to forget the 99s.

I grew up with a guy who became a state cricketer. Paul Reiffel (Vic captain) declared the Vic innings with my mate on 99 not out. Would have been his first first-class century. Took him a while after that to make a 100 in a shield match.

I have a cricket card from 92 with him on it
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

That's pretty silly if we carry someone just because he/we wants 200 as a milestone. We should be playing someone on performance not on field seniority. Mentorship programs can be executed without playing.

Perfect example was Fisher.....

I'm just saying ... mathematics.

The team still wants to win, Mick still wants to win. We've given games to inexperienced players like Jaksch, Smith, Boekhorst, Dick, Cripps, Buckley, Menzel, Byrne, Docherty. We still need those guys to develop with leaders around them.

While I would like to see Whiley and Graham come in, I'd be leaning towards replacing Curnow and Ellard but I agree that Carrazzo is on the precipice and won't offer as much going forward. I do think it is important for our culture that we honour our good servants to an extent as long as he can hold his own. Judd had made it known he was retiring last year but there is no way he would have been dropped to develop another youngster.

Everything in moderation.
 
Bit of a prick move. Was it overnight (could understand that) or during an innings break ??? Outside of that I say go 1 more over to let the guy have his milestone !!!!!!!

Wasn't overnight. Wasn't even at lunch/tea break.

From memory the plan was to declare x minutes before lunch. When that time came and my mate was getting close, he was given another two overs. Fell just short and decision was made that they couldn't spare another over. Pretty sure was in the 1st innings, so not like it was even setting a day 4 target when time is more critical.

Anyway, enough from me. I can be guilty of derailing threads when talking about footy....
 
Completely agree. If ever there was a case for gifting a game, it would be from 99 to 100. The father son angle is pretty insignificant. Very few sons turn out to be top flight quality.

I guess in the club's defense, we were approaching finals, Brad was on his way back from a knee injury and his last game was very ordinary IIRC.

I can't see Carrazzo getting gifted games for milestones. He'll play if he's better than the alternative. Although, you could make a case that if we are in rebuild mode, you could take a step backwards in playing younger guys if they are thereabouts, in order to build them up for next year and beyond.
Considering he would have to be gifted the remainder of the season (assuming we don't have an extra 3 games or so ;)), it leaves no wriggle room to be dropped for form, injury, or to let a kid in that's going good.
 
Mark Robinson:Describe Carlton’s predicament on the field.

Mark LoGiudice:
This would be a result of five to 10 years of poor administration and recruiting.


MR: Describe the actual predicament on-field?


ML: We don’t have enough depth on our list, full stop. We have great talent on our list, but I don’t think it runs deep enough.

That's our own president giving our list a whack.

With due respect to the president, what on earth would he know about list depth and football talent that any one of us here wouldn't know? He is just parroting the accepted line. He really shouldn't be commenting on football matters. He's not qualified to do so.
 
With due respect to the president, what on earth would he know about list depth and football talent that any one of us here wouldn't know? He is just parroting the accepted line. He really shouldn't be commenting on football matters. He's not qualified to do so.

MLG would get his advice from someone he really knows his s**t................Mathieson :)
 
I'm just saying ... mathematics.

The team still wants to win, Mick still wants to win. We've given games to inexperienced players like Jaksch, Smith, Boekhorst, Dick, Cripps, Buckley, Menzel, Byrne, Docherty. We still need those guys to develop with leaders around them.

While I would like to see Whiley and Graham come in, I'd be leaning towards replacing Curnow and Ellard but I agree that Carrazzo is on the precipice and won't offer as much going forward. I do think it is important for our culture that we honour our good servants to an extent as long as he can hold his own. Judd had made it known he was retiring last year but there is no way he would have been dropped to develop another youngster.

Everything in moderation.


You always put everything into perspective....agree to disagree I suppose.
 
You always put everything into perspective....agree to disagree I suppose.

I'm a moderator ... so my position is usually moderate. I weigh up all sides in my occupation as well. Forever picking splinters out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top