Pendlebury-type?The basic version is his biggest weapon is his ability to get through the traffic via either pace or side step.
Good mark.
Good kick.
Okay clearance game.
Not a bulldozer .
Similar although it would be a big call to say he had his vision and time. Explosive with a good side step is one thing a lot of people say about him. His midfield craft is a bit of a blank canvas.Pendlebury-type?
The difference being that guys like Michael Tuck were playing in a strong side so they needed to show they deserved a game and because the list was 60 with no yearly draft meant you could let guys run around for two or three years developing before getting a senior game.As Lyon said about JUH this morning, if its good enough for a player like Michael Tuck to play 80+ games in the reserves before playing over 400 in the seniors its good enough for any player to earn his keep.
You only have to look at Draper and Ridley as recent examples.
Plus he along with other draftees hasn't played for a year.
As for Ham and Cahill - I thought Ham was OK, Cahill though should be in VFL.
Pendlebury with a side of Gary Ablett (both versions) and rounded off with the goal nous of Tony Lockett. Keep expectations modest.Pendlebury-type?
Didn't realise my name was Nick Reiwoldt.Anyone hear Nick Reiwoldt froth over him? hahaa
Anyone know if he played basketball as a kid?Shanked a few kicks, but seems to have that 360 awareness that is rare.
The only word that suits is “erect”
Priapic?I'd favour the elegance of "tumescent" in this context