Bluemour Discussion Thread XV - Facts Not Welcome

[ShanDog]

Thank God you aren’t on the Board!

Yeah how dare I point out something silly like that. Thats not how you move up in the world. I've learned that lesson.

I meant what I said. I do have it on good authority. I know what good authority in this context is.
And I am also of the firm opinion that Richards is and will be a better player than LOB. In fact I think that is glaringly obvious. But it’s only my opinion.
If Richard’s lateness to the interview was a reason why he was passed over by Carlton at pick 10 then the List Management team erred, big time.
If you don’t agree with me fine. But don’t resort to cheap insults by calling me a troll.

I think you're confused. I didn't question your "authority" on anything. Have another read - Agro was asking for some sort of authority for an opinion about who would be a better player. Thats not how it works, as you've said yourself ("But it's only my opinion" etc).

 

[JustaBattler]

I meant what I said. I do have it on good authority. I know what good authority in this context is.
And I am also of the firm opinion that Richards is and will be a better player than LOB. In fact I think that is glaringly obvious. But it’s only my opinion.
If Richard’s lateness to the interview was a reason why he was passed over by Carlton at pick 10 then the List Management team erred, big time.
If you don’t agree with me fine. But don’t resort to cheap insults by calling me a troll.

Your post implies a level of dissatisfaction the Board is expressing with SOS and Co regarding both Dow and LoB picks - which I find to be a tad on the unrealistic side ...where it gets even more unrealistic is that the Board actually referred specifically to a player from an opposition team and asked why SOS and co "failed" to list him...really " failed" is the word a Board used ??

Now for sure we enter the realm of comedy.

 

[Heres Waite]

Your post implies a level of dissatisfaction the Board is expressing with SOS and Co regarding both Dow and LoB picks - which I find to be a tad on the unrealistic side ...where it gets even more unrealistic is that the Board actually referred specifically to a player from an opposition team and asked why SOS and co "failed" to list him...really " failed" is the word a Board used ??

Now for sure we enter the realm of comedy.

Exactly! I would hate to think that our board would be acting like that, and I really can’t see why they would. Are they going to question every decision SOS makes? Bolts? Are they going to micro-manage Liddle? I think this new administration understands that you let the baker bake the bread. This rumour sounds absolute rubbish- mostly because of how unprofessional the board sounds.

 

[Heres Waite]

Just wondering on what authority you base that assertion on?

Read it again ... “For what it’s worth, I think ...”

 

[thylacine60]

You must be right, apparently it doesn’t pay for posters (especially new ones) to start their posts with, “I have it on good authority”.


But unqualified opinions, no worries.

don't make me try to spell disingenuous this late at night..........

 

[I bleed Blue]

See my subsequent post.
I think Richards is definitely a better player than LOB.
That is my genuine, considered opinion.

So what if he turns out better than LOB.

Show me one draft where every pick turned out in the correct order.

Every club over looks players. LOB will still likely turn out a decent player for us. As long as he is not a bust it really doesn't matter so much.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

List managers don't get please explains over that sort of thing. Especially not this early.

Wonder if every club that passed on Fyfe sent warnings to their list managers. Lol.

If your opinion is they Ed Richards is better, cool. Don't put all that mayo and dressing on it to try to add weight to your opinion. Wasting everyone's time.

 

[rezzi]

I want to post parody rumours in response to the tripe that has been served up the last few days but I also don’t want to be banned..

Decisions decisions..

 

[Sheephead]

How many teams didn’t rate Sam Mitchell or a certain CHF who played for the *. We also had what I believed was the greatest draft haul of all time with Watson, Mitchell etc etc and where are they all now?

So what if he turns out better than LOB.

Show me one draft where every pick turned out in the correct order.

Every club over looks players. LOB will still likely turn out a decent player for us. As long as he is not a bust it really doesn't matter so much.

 

[HARKER]

I think you're mostly missing the point of that LOB/Richards post.

If indeed the board had a chat to SOS about the situation, it may have been more about his methods or reasons for his decision.
i.e. If Richards was earmarked for the #10, but 'dismissed' because he was late for a meet having a legitimate reason, did SOS have the right to do so?

The board does have the right to question the process of selections.
Another one that may have had a reason to be raised could have been; Why did SOS put a line through Stephensons name in 2017?

 

[Benaly28]

Hindsight recruiting is always easy.

Just put this in perspective:

Pick 4: LDU (playing VFL)
Pick 7: Hunter Clark (playing VFL)
Pick 8: Nick Coffield (playing VFL)
Pick 11: Aiden Bonar (playing NEAFL)
Pick 12: Darcy Fogarty (playing SANFL)
Pick 13: Jarrod Brander (playing WAFL)
Pick 14: Matthew Ling (Playing NEAFL)

Even Raynor is struggling a bit for form at the moment.

Not everyone hits the ground running at AFL level in their first couple of seasons. We'll know a lot more about these players in another two years time.

Could it also be that draft was not as strong as first thought.

 

[Neese]

I want to post parody rumours in response to the tripe that has been served up the last few days but I also don’t want to be banned..

Decisions decisions..

Simmo would take out his mouth guard and rant away

 

[blue healer]

You still haven’t got the point. I’m saying “Grammar” (which means ONLY Melbourne and Geelong Grammar) boys are typically soft.
Other grammar schools, like Carey and Caulfield, do not qualify as “Grammar”.
Over and out!

You'd think, by now the coaches at these schools would have addressed this if everybody knows.

I can't doubt the rest of your posts as I just don't know but I think this is pigeon holing a tad.

 

[HARKER]

Just on Richards; Many Dogs supporters wanted him dropped for our game and the above stats may showcase why, to some degree.
His possession count since hasn't exactly been much to write home about either.



I feel he may have been a better fit for us also given circumstances, but we do tend to build things up, somewhat more than the reality.
Richards is going.....and just going, according to Dogs supporters and they should know.

 

[Gavstar]

I think you're mostly missing the point of that LOB/Richards post.

If indeed the board had a chat to SOS about the situation, it may have been more about his methods or reasons for his decision.
i.e. If Richards was earmarked for the #10, but 'dismissed' because he was late for a meet having a legitimate reason, did SOS have the right to do so?

The board does have the right to question the process of selections.
Another one that may have had a reason to be raised could have been; Why did SOS put a line through Stephensons name in 2017?

Not sure the board would be having a say in those matters.

Perhaps Richards was late on purpose in an attempt to avoid being drafted by 6–16 club predicted to finish in the bottom two the following year?

 

[rezzi]

I think you're mostly missing the point of that LOB/Richards post.

If indeed the board had a chat to SOS about the situation, it may have been more about his methods or reasons for his decision.
i.e. If Richards was earmarked for the #10, but 'dismissed' because he was late for a meet having a legitimate reason, did SOS have the right to do so?

The board does have the right to question the process of selections.
Another one that may have had a reason to be raised could have been; Why did SOS put a line through Stephensons name in 2017?

I believe it was health related, he has/had a heart related ailment?
Also we were in desperate need for midfielders VS forwards.

 

[Curnivore]

Thank God you aren’t on the Board!

If he was you'd have actually spoken to someone on the board

 

[rezzi]

I meant what I said. I do have it on good authority. I know what good authority in this context is.
And I am also of the firm opinion that Richards is and will be a better player than LOB. In fact I think that is glaringly obvious. But it’s only my opinion.
If Richard’s lateness to the interview was a reason why he was passed over by Carlton at pick 10 then the List Management team erred, big time.
If you don’t agree with me fine. But don’t resort to cheap insults by calling me a troll.

Can you drop a hint as to what you good authority/source is pls. Just curious!

 

[CJMB]

View attachment 672863

Just on Richards; Many Dogs supporters wanted him dropped for our game and the above stats may showcase why, to some degree.
His possession count since hasn't exactly been much to write home about either.

View attachment 672868

I feel he may have been a better fit for us also given circumstances, but we do tend to build things up, somewhat more than the reality.
Richards is going.....and just going, according to Dogs supporters and they should know.

I was thinking a similar thing.

Wanted to confirm that all of this supposed buyers remorse & hindsight drafting was in regards to a 12 disposal, fairly loose playing back flanker and not someone like... I don't know... Tim Kelly (who's a different kettle of fish with the age profile plus the whole wanting to go back to WA ASAP thing).


Carlton has played 30 H&A games since Lochie arrived at the club and he's managed to be involved in 23 of them despite clearly needing more time to fill out. He's also had actual defensive roles this year. We've got to give him time, he could be a 10 year winger for us. Most of us are pretty happy with where Cuningham is at right now and plenty of questions were being asked of him this time last year.

I wonder if Brisbane supporters had the same over reaction when Powell-Pepper did so well in his first year or are they happy with McCluggage (or Berry for that matter) now? What about us... SPS or SPP? I know who'd I'd rather have on our list long-term.

 

[HARKER]

Not sure the board would be having a say in those matters.
Perhaps Richards was late on purpose in an attempt to avoid being drafted by 6–16 club predicted to finish in the bottom two the following year?

The board is though entitled to enquire about the reasoning for the change of mind.
If for instance SOS was upset about having to wait and therefore changed his mind on the player he wanted, then maybe he wasn't serving in the best interest of the club.

I believe it was health related, he has/had a heart related ailment?
Also we were in desperate need for midfielders VS forwards.

Yes, it was health related.
Shouldn't the methods used to derive to this decision be on the table for discussion though?
i.e. Did SOS receive professional advice on the matter, or did 'heart issue' spook him enough for him to simply put a cross next to the name.
Again, this is worthy of investigation and assessment.

 

[HARKER]

Carlton has played 30 H&A games since Lochie arrived at the club and he's managed to be involved in 23 of them despite clearly needing more time to fill out. He's also had actual defensive roles this year. We've got to give him time, he could be a 10 year winger for us. Most of us are pretty happy with where Cuningham is at right now and plenty of questions were being asked of him this time last year.

I wonder if Brisbane supporters had the same over reaction when Powell-Pepper did so well in his first year or are they happy with McCluggage (or Berry for that matter) now? What about us... SPS or SPP? I know who'd I'd rather have on our list long-term.

I understand that O'Brien is being groomed for such a role, but I just keep seeing him in the back-line and Williamson on the wing.

Reckon O'Brien would thrive being alongside Docherty and one could say the same about any other young player, but the fit just seems to be right.
Williamson to me, is a little more elusive than O'Brien, has the stamina and height to be a very difficult match-up coming form a wing.

I don't like the notion of SPS in the back-line at all.
Of course he'd be good, but reckon we'd lose more than for what may be gained having him play in the centre.

Docherty Jones Marchbank ............Macreadie to eventually take over from Jones.
O'Brien Weitering ******* ............ We still need some speed and smarts here, which may make life for Plowman difficult.

Can also see Stocker finding his home in the back-line.
Just seems to have the tools and the 'mongrel' to make good here. who knows?

 

[JustaBattler]

I guess the underlying question being asked is "could Carlton have done better than draftign Dow and LoB" I remeber that Dow burst onto scene and impressed all commentators with his explosive running power...

On teh doggies player - seemed odd to me that a player might be red lined for turning up late to an interview. Didn't seem odd to me that Clubs passe don Stephenson when there were question marks over his long term health re some heart issue - good on Collingwood for 'taking a punt' at pick #6 was it? - he has been a standout performer for them and apparently a very good character as well. Would Stephenson have slipped to #10? Was Stephenson a better fit for Carlton than Dow?

Carlton were in rebuild mode and maybe not inclined to take risks - maybe similar to the debate going on regarding Walsh V some other players who showed more factor X pre drafting - Club went for consistent performer and I think so far decision has been validated. Of course Stocker not playing lead up games because of a broken jaw may have seen him slip to #19 - and I have to admit so far I like what I am seeing from Mr Stocker.

Draft has always been a bit of a lottery and the main aim with higher picks is to not fail I would guess. Dow V a couple of the other mids doing well will be an interesting one- Dow has probably outperformed expectations - given he has been playing in a weak midfield at Carlton whilst getting games under his belt.

A few kilos on LoB and he (like young Jack this year ) might become a much stronger player - some players take longer for body to mature. Has shown enough kicking ability and run to understand what appealed.

 

[Herbie_53]

Can you drop a hint as to what you good authority/source is pls. Just curious!

Why is that necessary ?

 

[blue healer]

Why is that necessary ?

Credibility springs to mind.

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

I see LOB having many similarities to Isaac Smith....keeping in mind that Smith wasn't drafted until he was 21yo.
LOB still a 19yo, so we may need to be a little patient. Anyone who watched him in the practice match early this year against the Dawks would have got a taste of his potential.