Carl Peterson

[sane]

Sounds like the boys got some skills...

"
"Clontarf Football Academy mentor and former Dockers coach Gerard Neesham fondly remembers the day Peterson was asked to go head-to-head with West Coast ruckman Mark Seaby.


“Ash Prescott [Claremont’s coach] had no one to go up against Seaby, so he threw Carl in the ruck and asked his players to go defensive,” Neesham said. “However, Carl ended up jumping over the top of Seaby. He’s just an amazing athlete. I have never seen someone jump as high as this bloke.”


Peterson’s jumping prowess has attracted more than AFL recruiters. Neesham remembers the day Peterson asked him to help repel athletics scouts who were beating Peterson’s door down after he cleared 198cm in a high-jump competition"

http://richmondfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/6301/Default.aspx?newsId=40008

 

[Runandhyde]

he cleared 198cm in a high-jump competition"

http://richmondfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/6301/Default.aspx?newsId=40008

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[PLSC]

if you think he is playing ruck at afl level give yourself a slap and wake up

waste of a pick imo we should of gone tall which would of been a lot less risky then a pencil who has had op the last few years

 

[jezza]

waste of a pick imo we should of gone tall which would of been a lot less risky then a pencil who has had op the last few years

Like who? He was pick 60 in the draft, not a big risk.

 

[PLSC]

how can you say he is not a risk?

he is a pencil from wa who has had groin problems and is seen as a highlight reel not an andrew collins type solid mid

as i said its less risky going for a tall at pick 60 then someone like peterson

 

[Goldust]

NEEDS to spend a pre-season with Norm Peterson from Cheers!!!!

That should bulk him up!!!

 

[jezza]

how can you say he is not a risk?

he is a pencil from wa who has had groin problems and is seen as a highlight reel not an andrew collins type solid mid

as i said its less risky going for a tall at pick 60 then someone like peterson

Not a risk in the sense that not many players picked that late in the draft are successful.

 

[lids2004roar]

GM said if he didn't have OP all year he probably would have gone a fair bit earlier in the draft. He could be a good find, he looks to have a body type of a young Byron Pickett if you ask me.

 

[PLSC]

Not a risk in the sense that not many players picked that late in the draft are successful.

yeh so just because its a late pick its worth throwing away is it?

this guy is going to need the same time a tall wouldve needed and i know which one i would prefer

 

[jezza]

Who's thrown it away? Could be a very good player.

 

[Tambo]

I like him.

Legs are skinny though.

 

[Obelix]

To me it's more of an educated punt than bad recruiting. If we're going to "throw" a pick 60 away, we may as well do it on a fairly raw, skinny, though freakishly talented kid. I'll wait a couple of years before I even think about judging this one.

In 2003 Raines and Jackson were drafted at about the same age and both were fairly raw late picks. In fact I recall Jackson had far bigger raps. As it stands, they're both entering their 4th year and Raines looks like he'll be a 200 game superstar while Jacko will be lucky to add to his 40-odd games.

You just never know.

 

[santa claws]

if you think he is playing ruck at afl level give yourself a slap and wake up

waste of a pick imo we should of gone tall which would of been a lot less risky then a pencil who has had op the last few years

i agree we should have gone tall.disagree it was a watse of a pick.i have said pick 58 should have been used on jarryd allen all australian 193cm 86kg can play both ends of the ground. connors could have been taken with pick 60 if stkilda didnt pick him up with 59.
jesse white was one we could have taken at 60.bulldogs took a genuine kpp kid called oshea bottom aged with a great leap.caleb mourish was one i liked from east freo. if you were to look there were plenty of talls we could have speculated on surely one of picks 58 60 or 73 could have been used on a tallor even the rookie system for that matter.
having said this i think peterson has talent and am happy to take a punt on him.

 

[beaver fever]

yeh so just because its a late pick its worth throwing away is it?

Geez give the guy a break he hasn't even played a game yet ffs.

 

[Weaver]

The problem with going tall late is; how many raw big blokes who aren't in the 22 can a team carry on a list of 44?

Thursfield, Hughes, McGuane, Graham and Reiwoldt. Add in Moore and every Match Committee meeting the coaches would be looking at basically 38 blokes to pick from.

It is not as though the club didn't address the big-man problems either. They used early picks to secure Polak and Reiwoldt and added Kingsley (rightly or wrongly) in the PSD.

Clearly they realised that adding more talls so that we would have 10 of them at Coburg was not going to help much.

Our problem is not a lack of tall options. It is a lack of tall options that are ready or able to play.

Richardson, Knobel, Pattison, Simmonds, Graham, Gaspar, Polak, Hall, Thursfield, Graham, McGuane, Hughes, Moore, Schulz, Reiwoldt, Kingsley. That is more than a third of our list devoted to filling 6-7 spots on the field.

Finding spots on the ground for tall players can be tough. Finding a spot on the ground for someone like Petterson (if he is good enough) easy.

Recruit Jarryd Allan and he become the 16th guy competing for one of 7 spots. Recruit Petterson and he becomes the 28th guy competing for one of 15 spots. Much better chances of getting a result with the pick with a utility (hence Clingan and King in the rookie draft).

 

[Gman]

The problem with going tall late is; how many raw big blokes who aren't in the 22 can a team carry on a list of 44?

Thursfield, Hughes, McGuane, Graham and Reiwoldt. Add in Moore and every Match Committee meeting the coaches would be looking at basically 38 blokes to pick from.

It is not as though the club didn't address the big-man problems either. They used early picks to secure Polak and Reiwoldt and added Kingsley (rightly or wrongly) in the PSD.

Clearly they realised that adding more talls so that we would have 10 of them at Coburg was not going to help much.

Our problem is not a lack of tall options. It is a lack of tall options that are ready or able to play.

Richardson, Knobel, Pattison, Simmonds, Graham, Gaspar, Polak, Hall, Thursfield, Graham, McGuane, Hughes, Moore, Schulz, Reiwoldt, Kingsley. That is more than a third of our list devoted to filling 6-7 spots on the field.

Finding spots on the ground for tall players can be tough. Finding a spot on the ground for someone like Petterson (if he is good enough) easy.

Recruit Jarryd Allan and he become the 16th guy competing for one of 7 spots. Recruit Petterson and he becomes the 28th guy competing for one of 15 spots. Much better chances of getting a result with the pick with a utility (hence Clingan and King in the rookie draft).

Good analysis, totally agree

“He could be a gifted forward, could play midfield or at half-back, and he’s a fantastic mark,” Neesham said. “He’s a brave player and has the same intent as a guy like James Hird when he goes for a grab – only eyes for the ball.”

 

[polakthetiger]

Good points, however, by tall, I think we are talking 200cm+ (or around the mark). I don't think too many in that list of players you have there would be 'competing for that spot'. In fact only Simmonds and Graham are tall enough to be a ruckman in that group.

So, yes we have quite a few tall options now that may become good players, but not enough 'tall' options. Take out Knobel for obvious reasons, and we are 'short' a couple of young ruckmen IMHO.

 

[PLSC]

The problem with going tall late is; how many raw big blokes who aren't in the 22 can a team carry on a list of 44?

Thursfield, Hughes, McGuane, Graham and Reiwoldt. Add in Moore and every Match Committee meeting the coaches would be looking at basically 38 blokes to pick from.

It is not as though the club didn't address the big-man problems either. They used early picks to secure Polak and Reiwoldt and added Kingsley (rightly or wrongly) in the PSD.

Clearly they realised that adding more talls so that we would have 10 of them at Coburg was not going to help much.

Our problem is not a lack of tall options. It is a lack of tall options that are ready or able to play.

Richardson, Knobel, Pattison, Simmonds, Graham, Gaspar, Polak, Hall, Thursfield, Graham, McGuane, Hughes, Moore, Schulz, Reiwoldt, Kingsley. That is more than a third of our list devoted to filling 6-7 spots on the field.

Finding spots on the ground for tall players can be tough. Finding a spot on the ground for someone like Petterson (if he is good enough) easy.

Recruit Jarryd Allan and he become the 16th guy competing for one of 7 spots. Recruit Petterson and he becomes the 28th guy competing for one of 15 spots. Much better chances of getting a result with the pick with a utility (hence Clingan and King in the rookie draft).

complete rubbish

richo and gaspar will retire within 2-3 years
graham is not ready
hall and kingsley are duds
moore, riewoldt and thirsty arent massive kpps, more 2nd talls
schulz has done nothing in 5 years
freo were happy to let polak go
mcguane i like alot but still small

your saying we wont be able to play a kp for 2 years so its unfair on match commitee but can you tell me when peterson will play?

even if he didnt have op he would be lucky to get a game this year like edwards unless he does something like a dale thomas edwards is nowhere near playing

you make stuff sound so complicated and smart weaver but underneath lies a big pile of ****

 

[tigerdan]

At least Weaver argues his points PLSC. You just spurt random points that make no sense.

I don't know why you are so wound up about guys who have only been in the system 1-2 years. FFS give it a rest until we can make a valid assessment.

 

[Weaver]

Good points, however, by tall, I think we are talking 200cm+ (or around the mark). I don't think too many in that list of players you have there would be 'competing for that spot'. In fact only Simmonds and Graham are tall enough to be a ruckman in that group.

The problem with adding an extra young ruckman is that it is basically deadweight. We have seen that even with Simmonds, Knobel, Pattison and Hall all having injuries in the last month ... we still aren't going to play Graham. An 18 year old ruckman wouldn't have added any more depth at pick 56.

If we add two more young ruckman as you suggest we basically have 6 guys for 2 spots (Knobel, Pattison, Simmonds, Graham, 2 kids). That is a big investment in one spot on the ground.

Instead of committing a 2-year contract to a 3rd-rate ruck prospect, surely it makes sense to target a highly rated one in a strong draft next season. With Kreuzer, Bellchambers, Sullivan, McEvoy etc.

I think the Richmond recruiters have gotten this spot-on. Next year is going to have 10 better ruckmen in it than anyone we could have gotten this year.

 

[polakthetiger]

Yes, somehow I missed Patto...unbelievable considering he is on for the start this week! Still, we will need Knobel to stay on then for at least 2, and more like 3 years, unless as you said, if we go in with the 1st round next draft and get a nearly ready to go monster!

 

[santa claws]

complete rubbish

richo and gaspar will retire within 2-3 years
graham is not ready
hall and kingsley are duds
moore, riewoldt and thirsty arent massive kpps, more 2nd talls
schulz has done nothing in 5 years
freo were happy to let polak go
mcguane i like alot but still small

your saying we wont be able to play a kp for 2 years so its unfair on match commitee but can you tell me when peterson will play?

even if he didnt have op he would be lucky to get a game this year like edwards unless he does something like a dale thomas edwards is nowhere near playing

you make stuff sound so complicated and smart weaver but underneath lies a big pile of ****

its not just numbers on the list either.or height for that matter what has to come into consideration is perfromance. age. scope for improvement. time on the list.also to be considered is players who are 190cm plus but are not kpp. ie moore although only 189cm p bowden 191cm utility flanker. j bowden 188cm punching out of his weight division because theres no one else. mcguane third tall option will never play kp.thursfield body type says third tall option will never handle the gorillas.assuming every single young tall makes it we are still short of talls. we have talls who should have been long gone as well. hall gaspar richo retires sheesh.

how many of our talls are ready at this point in time and remember you need 8 to play on game day 4kpp 2 third option and 2 ruckmen. plus you need another 5 at various stages of development ready to fill a hole because of injury.and then you have your projects.
we have fb GASPAR past it imo. chb POLAK in his 6th yr sheesh i have grave doubts about him. P BOWDEN flanker just because hes tall doesnt mean he plays tall. chf PATTISON needs to play chf but is not ready for the position.ff RICHARDSON not a long time left in the game. at least we have got a developing replacement for him in riewoldt or hughes. HALL chb funny isnt it. KINGSLEY ff hopefully is overtaKEN QUICKLY BY A KID. KNOBEL ruckman. one of only 3 on the list with serious deficiencies. MCGUANE great hands good leap3rd option forward if he makes it. SCHULZ see polak done even less and even more concerned.have a feeling we have hung onto this bloke in hope.SIMMONDS very good around the ground ruckman. okay at ruck contests but does struggle against the the good giant ruckmen ie cox sandilands king hence the need for a knobel type to stand up.

all of mcguane thursfield hughes riewoldt pattison and graham are very much developmental types. theres no guarentee that any of them will make the grade although i will say im reasonably confident about 4 of them.

so putting players into position this is our situation

fb thursfield gaspar



chb j bowden* polak
p bowden* hall
k moore*


chf riewoldt
pattison


ff mcguane richo schulz
kingsley hughes




ruck simmonds
knobel
graham

the forward line looks well covered but remember richo wont be there for ever. kingsley is not required and mcguane schulz and pattison have big queries about them at this stage for various reasons. the back half is in dire straights. hall and gaspar are past it. polak is a gamble in fact those in charge have put all their eggs in one basket wheres the back up if he fails. wheres the future fb for that matter.thursfield well its only my opinion but hes more suited to a mobile role going with your ashley hansens who by the way is not fantastic overhead nick riewoldt. although i worry if a riewoldt were to park himself in the square. thats 3 players thats the here and now and the future.
the 3 players with asteriks not genuine talls and i would rather develop a genuine running type to do the role they are currently doing. ie deledio of hb or jon casserly down the track.in a way the bowdens are in positions that should be left for youngsters.

this leaves ruckmen. simmo good player knobel would like to replace him if possible. and graham who knows if he will make it or not. in effect 1 ruckman up to scratch.
in a nut shell what im saying is we have few talls of quality we have lots of kids who are not ready and may not make it.imo we have 14 genuine talls and every single one aged over 22 bar 2 players have question marks over them.

finally i apologise for such a long winded post the frustrating part is i still havent expressed myself the way i wanted.

 

[hello1]

Peterson is a classic excitement machine. He will take 4 years to get built and get used to Melbourne. He will excel at the 3rd man up at ruck stoppages - Re Adam Simpson.

 

[Foxtrot]

complete rubbish

richo and gaspar will retire within 2-3 years
graham is not ready
hall and kingsley are duds
moore, riewoldt and thirsty arent massive kpps, more 2nd talls
schulz has done nothing in 5 years
freo were happy to let polak go
mcguane i like alot but still small

your saying we wont be able to play a kp for 2 years so its unfair on match commitee but can you tell me when peterson will play?

even if he didnt have op he would be lucky to get a game this year like edwards unless he does something like a dale thomas edwards is nowhere near playing

you make stuff sound so complicated and smart weaver but underneath lies a big pile of ****

Too right PLSC! I've had a gutfull of Weaver's considered and interesting views on Richmond list management - not to mention his complete unwillingness to respond to aggressive personal abuse.

You tell him!!

 

[PLSC]

The problem with adding an extra young ruckman is that it is basically deadweight. We have seen that even with Simmonds, Knobel, Pattison and Hall all having injuries in the last month ... we still aren't going to play Graham. An 18 year old ruckman wouldn't have added any more depth at pick 56.

If we add two more young ruckman as you suggest we basically have 6 guys for 2 spots (Knobel, Pattison, Simmonds, Graham, 2 kids). That is a big investment in one spot on the ground.

Instead of committing a 2-year contract to a 3rd-rate ruck prospect, surely it makes sense to target a highly rated one in a strong draft next season. With Kreuzer, Bellchambers, Sullivan, McEvoy etc.

I think the Richmond recruiters have gotten this spot-on. Next year is going to have 10 better ruckmen in it than anyone we could have gotten this year.

patto is not a pure ruckman and knobel is a dud our only ruckman is simmo, the problem with waiting for a ruck next draft is that its going to take that 1-2 years longer for them to develop when we couldve already had one getting a partnership going with graham at coburg

lol at saying 6 ruckman on a list of 42 is way too much, tell me how many back pocket/flankers we have in our list?

oh but i guess thats alright

i love how you beef up your numbers to make it sound like you have afi when you dont