Universal Love Could the Fitz be the answer to the question people aren't asking (yet)?

Remove this Banner Ad

I think we got a bit overexcited about one solid game against a young player who got nowhere near it and is in poor form. Fitzpatrick needs to be dropped as we won't play Tom Boyd every week.
Fitz also benefited from some horrendous inside 50 disposal by the Dogs which made his job of intercepting a lot easier.
 
I think we got a bit overexcited about one solid game against a young player who got nowhere near it and is in poor form. Fitzpatrick needs to be dropped as we won't play Tom Boyd every week.

And I guess this is the main problem with the thesis proffered by this thread -- if he can't do it every week, I doubt we can bring him in for games where he might have a favourable matchup. Would be nearly impossible for him to build form and against the 'earn your place' mantra.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

You'd think he would be the logical match-up for every club that plays two ruckmen, one of which plays forward (Lobbe/Ryder; Jacobs/Jenkins, Nic Nat/Sinclair etc).

But he shouldn't be definitely picked every week, but that then makes it hard for him to gain confidence at AFL level.

I wonder if it could be a win-win if he was traded to another club which is desperate for a key tall defender?
 
I think we got a bit overexcited about one solid game against a young player who got nowhere near it and is in poor form. Fitzpatrick needs to be dropped as we won't play Tom Boyd every week.

He's a handy player to have around though. He hasn't embarrassed himself down back on talls or mediums (tunnel ball incident aside), can go forward and kick a goal and pitch hit in the ruck. He's only been in the side for a few games - I wouldn't mind seeing him get a few more.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top