Maxwell was an AA though. A feat VB has never and will never achieve. Not fit to tie his bootlacesUmmm.
One of these is not like the others.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

BigFooty Tipping Notice Img
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Opening Round
The Golden Ticket - Official AFL on-seller of MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Maxwell was an AA though. A feat VB has never and will never achieve. Not fit to tie his bootlacesUmmm.
One of these is not like the others.
You dont understand people or leadership then.Garbage.![]()

There is not a single player on that list who I would have ahead of VB. Not one. So.. with those 9 below him we:Take our current side, I'd have the following in front of him;
Johncock
Reilly
Martin
Lyons
Grigg
Kerridge
Riley
Tambling (maybe)
Crouch
VB is a genuine non entity at present. He has been terrible, and contributed almost nothing.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Sando loves him for some reason. In the press conference he mentioned how good VB was at shutting down someone (can't remember the Richmond player) during the game.

What was his role in the first half?Ah, so the COACH says he was playing a role asked of him. Fancy that.![]()
What was his role in the first half?
Ah, so the COACH says he was playing a role asked of him. Fancy that.![]()

Oh I agree, Sando has a lot to answer for not tagging Deledio earlier. I'm curious to know though what VBs role was in the first half. He wasn't tagging Deledio or Cotchin. Who had him so preoccupied that in the first half? Perhaps he was being tagged which would explain his low possession count. I'm also curious why having identified our tackling as a major issue only had 2 tackles for the whole game? Isn't he supposed to lead from the front?I'm just repeating what the COACH said. Not some anonymous keyboard warrior. The person who actually gave the lad a role to play. This is the same COACH, who should be asked why it took him a half a game to shut down Deledio - although, to his credit, it took him three quarters last week to make the move on Hannebury.
Can VB all you like. But I think in his case, there are extenuating circumstances as to why he is playing the role he is. And I don't believe it's out of choice.
He did nothing in the 1st half (as usual).. Went to Deledio and quietened him a bit, but Deledio was still ok after half time.. He should be cutting a player out more than he did if that's the role.. He also went at 42% disposal efficiency![]()
Look I am not arguing that he is playing well. I am arguing that he apparently (according to the COACH) is doing what is asked of him. I think it's unfair to can the guy if he is in fact doing what is asked of him. As NONE OF US are privy to what that is, I take my lead from the COACH.
Funny.. I don't recall him having any influence on the game at all after VB moved onto him at half time.Yes but he doesn't even do a role like that.. He went to Hanneberry and he still had 14 influential disposals after half time, only slowed down in the last quarter when the game was done and the whole Sydney team stopped.. He didn't cut Deledio out as much as he should when specifically sent to lock him down.. If he was having a Crowley or Ling type of influence, fair enough..
That's because you were asleep during second half.Funny.. I don't recall him having any influence on the game at all after VB moved onto him at half time.

It's funny how Vader has changed his tune to suit his argument. First of all VB kept Hannelbery quiet, then when pointed out he still had 14 possessions now he kept him to 14 ineffectual disposals.
Also doesn't explain why our best tagger, and Captain, wasn't on their two most destructive players when the game was there to be won.