Dangerfield

Remove this Banner Ad

After all the criticism that Adelaide copped for not picking Ebert, it is ironical that Adelaide actually rated Ebert higher than (probably) every other club.
Haha, that does rather amuse me. :D

There's no point in talking Ebert down. Our recruiting staff obviously really liked him to rate him at (was it?) 7. He didn't really tickle my fancy that much, but I can see why he is rated. Very good, solid player who will get the job done for a long time I imagine.
 
Haha, that does rather amuse me. :D

There's no point in talking Ebert down. Our recruiting staff obviously really liked him to rate him at (was it?) 7. He didn't really tickle my fancy that much, but I can see why he is rated. Very good, solid player who will get the job done for a long time I imagine.


Curse in disguise?

Recruiters, and now since fans have become so involved at draft level, love potential.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

After all the criticism that Adelaide copped for not picking Ebert,
it is ironical that Adelaide actually rated Ebert higher than (probably) every other club.


Can one of our resident English nazis explain to me why this is a word? Surely it only does what ironic does except sound much gayer.
 
Can one of our resident English nazis explain to me why this is a word? Surely it only does what ironic does except sound much gayer.

That's exactly what it does..........I have no idea why.
 
Not as bad as David Wildy a while ago who said there was a young kid called "Rice" who was tipped to go in the top two or three. Then someone else mentioned that it was "Rich" but he was adamant they were two different people. He used this logic to explain why Port were probably going to get Natanui.

This time of year the ill-informed media come out in hordes.

None of them have any interest in the youngsters during the season, or would see any games.

Yet now they turn into drafting experts.

You'll hear things like Adelaide need young forwards because they dont have any...etc

Also they'll tell everyone about rich naita and watts, ask them beyond the top 3 yet alone the 2nd round and they'll go to water.
 
Can one of our resident English nazis explain to me why this is a word? Surely it only does what ironic does except sound much gayer.
I'm pretty sure that it's not a word. My English teacher had a go at me a few years ago for using it.
 
I was going to say that but then I went and checked it in a few dictionaries and it was there. Don't ask me, I'm fairly sure it's not a word either but I'm not going to argue with a dictionary.
Me >>> Dictionary ;)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I was going to say that but then I went and checked it in a few dictionaries and it was there. Don't ask me, I'm fairly sure it's not a word either but I'm not going to argue with a dictionary.
:eek: ironical it is a real word; pretty much has the same meaning as ironic though, but don't know why we need more words with equal meaning.
 
Daniel Rich is just ****ing awesome at footy. Very classy and has a lot of polish in his game - polish isn't exactly Paddy's strong suit. Think back to a few years ago when you'd look at Bryce Gibbs' testing times and he was not outstanding in any particular area, but he just understands how to play footy. Reads the play well, goes to all the right spots, and my favourite thing of all, he's a beautiful kick. Penetrating left foot. He's also a very good clearance player and is smart around the stoppages.

Nice write up. So would you put him on par with Gibbs?

I'm torn between Rich and Naita leaning toward Naita but not 100%.
 
I was wondering what everyone's expectations are on Dangerfield?

If Danger turned out to be another Reily would he even break par?

perhaps there are more people with the expectations of a potential Chris Judd from West Coast?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top