Toast All the best Will Langford

[Gralin]

And in my view hawthorn is doing it wrong. List spots should be for people who are playing.

guys get injured all the time, some miss entire seasons with injury, they are still on the list and getting paid.

Will has retired from football the decision to have him on the list is one made by team at the Hawks who deal with TPP. They see more value to the club using a rookie spot than not.

It's interesting that you think they are dong something wrong when there is no rule that says all 47 list spots have to be used.

I think you will find we haven't had 47 players on the list for several years now, so it's not like he's taking a list spot from a player

He's on the list to save the club some cap space, not out of charity

 

[eldorado]

So is he actually going to play the season, or is it purely a cosmetic spot on the rookie list?

 

[HawkHead19]

Thought I'd post this here as a shout-out to 2 unique departing hawthorn characters:

http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/video/2018-05-08/lets-do-lunch-duryea-langford

 

[Ned Ryerson]

And in my view hawthorn is doing it wrong. List spots should be for people who are playing.

In my view - the people running our list management and salary cap structuring could do it with their eyes closed and you wouldn't have the first clue how to do it. I'll back them.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

So is he actually going to play the season, or is it purely a cosmetic spot on the rookie list?

The latter. He won't be playing.

 

[Bumps"N"Grins]

Thought I'd post this here as a shout-out to 2 unique departing hawthorn characters:

http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/video/2018-05-08/lets-do-lunch-duryea-langford

Ned doesn't like this as he doesn't like being told that he is a salad short of a meal.
Bing.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Ned doesn't like this as he doesn't like being told that he is a salad short of a meal.
Bing.

Anyone who enjoys the salad with their parma is the kind of person that enjoys a schooner over a pint - I don't have the time in my life to deal with that level of weirdness.

 

[kazzooka]

In my view - the people running our list management and salary cap structuring could do it with their eyes closed and you wouldn't have the first clue how to do it. I'll back them.

Of course, they are doing a great job. However in this single instance where we have a player that has a contract but we don't want him. He wants to stay so much that he would rather retire then play at another club. We are putting him on the list, he's eligible to play he's getting paid... How about he just plays...

 

[Gralin]

Of course, they are doing a great job. However in this single instance where we have a player that has a contract but we don't want him. He wants to stay so much that he would rather retire then play at another club. We are putting him on the list, he's eligible to play he's getting paid... How about he just plays...

what if he retired because he doesn't want to play for box hill only

 

[Bedi]

Of course, they are doing a great job. However in this single instance where we have a player that has a contract but we don't want him. He wants to stay so much that he would rather retire then play at another club. We are putting him on the list, he's eligible to play he's getting paid... How about he just plays...

I'm with you Kazzooka, it's all a bit bizarre. I'm guessing Langers is done with footy, and we're done with him -- so it's a mutual agreement. From a supporter's point of view it's far more preferable if both parties just stuck it out for one more year and see what happens, or otherwise make a clean break altogether.

 

[flinchfree]

Of course, they are doing a great job. However in this single instance where we have a player that has a contract but we don't want him. He wants to stay so much that he would rather retire then play at another club. We are putting him on the list, he's eligible to play he's getting paid... How about he just plays...

What do you do with a contracted premiership player who hurts your teams (at any level) by playing, regardless of how impressive a young man, how considerable his attitude and fortitude, and with how much love his name alone brings to a supporter base?
Exactly what we've done.
At first level his game doesn't translate, he's a 70's early 80's type lost in a new millennium game.
At BH he could dominate ball winning - but then that would destroy our chances of knowing what we have in our youngest and largely untried onballers at the feeder school.

Why muck his name further than has been done through trying for most of his career to shoehorn his skill set into non conforming holes. Should have been an Andy Collins backpocket type who destroyed the souls of big headed small forwards.
Instead, for a short burning bright period his wild ways all came through in a perfect confluence of time and opportunity and it was beautiful to ride. If you were a real observer of the game, even during that finals series you would have known to doubt those fortuitous bounces and whacks forward that fell into the right arms were not what you build real hope around. You'd have watched his game unto that point and never seen progression of the games basic ball skills, and nothing changed in the years that followed.

He gave it his absolute best, and we returned favour.
Well played all round.

 

[beta_condition]

I'm with you Kazzooka, it's all a bit bizarre. I'm guessing Langers is done with footy, and we're done with him -- so it's a mutual agreement. From a supporter's point of view it's far more preferable if both parties just stuck it out for one more year and see what happens, or otherwise make a clean break altogether.

We are making a clean break but he had a contract, we owe Langford he could of easily refused to renegotiate his contract.

 

[Turtles all the way down]

I still wonder whether his journey would have been different if he hadn't got the yips with set shots when we moved him forward in the 2nd half of 2017. He had a lot of missed set shots in that period, but otherwise looked really good as a pressure forward. If he'd nailed them, there could easily have been a continuing role for him there.

 

[Big Hotdog]

The rookie spot smacks of a club that see's the big picture.

Either that or rose coloured glasses that I wear are getting rosier.

And best of luck to Will and Taylor.
Spoke to Will one night at a Richmond game and found him a polite and engaging gentleman.

 

[Brant]

I still wonder whether his journey would have been different if he hadn't got the yips with set shots when we moved him forward in the 2nd half of 2017. He had a lot of missed set shots in that period, but otherwise looked really good as a pressure forward. If he'd nailed them, there could easily have been a continuing role for him there.

Agreed & I reckon his performance during that period has been largely overlooked in this thread.

He led, was a strong mark & applied good pressure. He also contested the high-ball, albeit in a gangly & somewhat unorthodox looking manner.

I thought he played a great few months there, but for the fact that he let himself down every time he kicked toward goal. It was bizarre.

Had he nailed 60% of those opportunities, he'd have been close to a 2-goal a week pressure forward & things may have been different...

Alas, he played 70-odd games more than most of us & has rewards that even greats like Robert Harvey never achieved...

Good job, Will - best of luck in the future.

 

[Cyril says]

Thought I'd post this here as a shout-out to 2 unique departing hawthorn characters:

http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/video/2018-05-08/lets-do-lunch-duryea-langford

That was hilarious. Would watch that at movie length!