Kane Tenace questions

[WE Are Geelong]

Actually, the second half of last season Mackie was playing very good footballl. He always had the skills though, and once he adjusted to senior football and cleaned up the off-field stuff, he was fine.



As many others have agreed, Tenace has a clear lack of ability. Why is this ridiculous? I'm sure if you look past your Tenace love and actually watch some of his performances you'll be able to accept the criticism as fact.



I don't see the relevance here to Hunt? Unless...

You were unhappy when I mentioned in another post weeks ago that after Tenace's pitiful performance Hunt would most likely come in at his expense (and he did).. Still angry ?

Why would I be angry? I wish Hunt well in his career and always have.

I was unhappy with people exaggerating about Tenace and his playing ability. Something they are doing here again. I dont have a problem with people talking their minds. When they talk rubbish I am just happy to point it out.

Getting off the purile emotionalism you like to indulge in...I will get back to talking footy.

Hunt has been on the list 7 years and has not reached his potential. You claim he is essential to our team make up...yet after 7 years he is a fringe player. In trying to prove this point you are suggesting Tenace has no playing ability? This is why Hunt gets mentioned.

There is still alot of upside to tenace as a younger player for starters. If he didnt do his hammy pre season because I watched him playing pre season this year I am sure he would have had a better year. I see that as upside for next season. Mackie actually came good in the last 5-6 rounds of last season...get your facts straight. The point is Mackie has established himself in his 5th season. Hunt should have established himself by year 7 and still hasnt and Tenace still has time to.

I think Hunt is playing ok so dont get me wrong. I am not going to exaggerate his playing one way or the either to prove a point....thats my point. I think other than getting toweled by Welsh...Tenace was going ok also....but people here make the ridiculous assertion he can only run and cant play otherwise. This is modern AFL footy...get real its a laughable suggestion.

In all honesty answer this...if you are correct for one second that he has no playing ability...why has he played so many matches this season? Why is he an emergency this week obviously suggesting he is in our top 25-26 players. How can one fringe player in Hunt be so good...and the other fringe player in Tenace be so bad?

Thats the point. Its about presenting something in a ridiculously one sided fashion just to get a point across. Its immature...Its boring.

 

[Rosso]

I think the above qualifies as an exaggeration.

If Tenace shows obvious deficiencies in his game, of course supporters are going to see them as negatives and comment on them.

Yeah I've told him a million times not to exaggerate.

 

[cat in sydney]

In all honesty answer this...if you are correct for one second that he has no playing ability...why has he played so many matches this season?

Apart from hobart cat, I'm not sure people have said that he has NO ability and can only run.
My point above was that his disposal technique with kicking is one of the worst I've seen, very susceptible to inconsistency. And it is that inconsistency which has kept him out of the side.
If he had consistency in his disposal, he would be in the 22, because he has good speed, and an ability to break away from packs in the backline.

IF he can improve his disposal efficiency, then he would be a regular. But because kicking is such a BASIC part of playing football, then people tend to get frustrated and minimise his value to the team.
When you claim that everyone is saying that Tenace can only run and nothing else, you are the one exaggerating.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Apart from hobart cat, I'm not sure people have said that he has NO ability and can only run.
My point above was that his disposal technique with kicking is one of the worst I've seen, very susceptible to inconsistency. And it is that inconsistency which has kept him out of the side.
If he had consistency in his disposal, he would be in the 22, because he has good speed, and an ability to break away from packs in the backline.

IF he can improve his disposal efficiency, then he would be a regular. But because kicking is such a BASIC part of playing football, then people tend to get frustrated and minimise his value to the team.
When you claim that everyone is saying that Tenace can only run and nothing else, you are the one exaggerating.

Are you suggesting people arent exaggerating the negatives about Tenace? I consider that a joke. Plenty are saying here he just cant play...take off the blinkers.

Statistics tell us his disposal has IMPROVED (carrying on your love of caps to make a point) this season. That doesnt get mentioned by people like you.

Its subjectivity that his kicking style doesnt suit your aesthetic taste....but you say it in a way to further your argument for the sake of appearing right.

I have always said he needs to improve too...but he is in that development period where he is most likely to do that as a player. History tells us that is the case with the majority of players coming through the ranks. No one has made that point and neither have you.

My point is simple in this thread just produce a consistent or balanced argument. You have a point of view but then go too far to the negative to just try and prove it. You are by no means the worst in this thread by the way...but trying to make out I am the one exaggerating here just feels like I am back in a primary school playground chatting to some kid under 10 again who argues for the sake of it without any sensible purpose.

'People' ARE saying he can only run and thats it in this thread where did I say 'EVERYONE' thinks that? (gotta laugh this is becoming a dumb joke thread)...if YOU didnt say that about HIM but still feel slighted by MY remark due to some sheep-like association syndrome YOU feel, stop being so sensitive. If that specific comment doesnt relate to you why be so paranoid about it all?

 

[DanA]

Are you suggesting people arent exaggerating the negatives about Tenace? I consider that a joke. Plenty are saying here he just cant play...take off the blinkers.

Statistics tell us his disposal has IMPROVED (carrying on your love of caps to make a point) this season. That doesnt get mentioned by people like you.

Its subjectivity that his kicking style doesnt suit your aesthetic taste....but you say it in a way to further your argument for the sake of appearing right.

I'd argue that it is not subjective at all. There is a basic kicking action which involves certain biomechnical movements. Most people have a very similar action and rarely does an unusual kicking action work with a high level of success, Ben Johnson from Collingwood is perhaps the exception. Tenace needs to fix it a bit if he wants to be a reliable kick.

On another note I think Hawkins holds the ball funny, if you watch closely he definitely holds it to upright.

 

[cat in sydney]

Statistics tell us his disposal has IMPROVED (carrying on your love of caps to make a point) this season. That doesnt get mentioned by people like you.

What do you call the post at the top of page 2? I said exactly that. You wouldn't be exaggerating though would you?

Its subjectivity that his kicking style doesnt suit your aesthetic taste....but you say it in a way to further your argument for the sake of appearing right.

It's not that it doesn't suit my aesthetic taste, but that his kicking style is widely acknowledged as being susceptible to inconsistency because of the way he drops the ball.

I have always said he needs to improve too...but he is in that development period where he is most likely to do that as a player. History tells us that is the case with the majority of players coming through the ranks. No one has made that point and neither have you.

Fair point. Yes, he is still developing, and my hope is that he can improve in the areas he needs to. However, kicking style is one that is very difficult to change once you are as old as he is (he would have been kicking the same way since he was 4). That is why I have expressed my doubts about his future. And don't take that to mean I want him delisted, or have called him a 'hack' like you seem to think. He has several upsides, but that is one downside that may be fatal in terms of his career. I hope not, but I'm yet unconvinced.

'People' ARE saying he can only run and thats it in this thread where did I say 'EVERYONE' thinks that?

"It's also in response to a littany (sic) of responses suggesting all Tenace can do is run..." - We Are Geelong, page 2.

That is a quote by you in one of your posts in this thread. All I count is CatFan79 saying that he has 'lack of ability' on one occasion, and hobart cat saying 'can run, that is all' on one occasion.
To me, that is not a 'littany' of responses. Everyone else who posted was saying that Tenace has many upsides, but that their opinion was that they didn't outweigh the downsides. Does that make sense?
Never did I say that no-one was saying that, but you were exaggerating by saying a 'litany' (prolonged recitation, monotonous account) of responses.
I exaggerated, you exaggerated. Let's move on.

 

[linelefty]

To be frank,

Kane Tenace needs responsibility and some surety of his place in a team. Trade him to Carlton, Melbourne or Richmond for a 2nd or third rounder. We cant get the best out of him so we cant expect too much in return.

Love,
Frank

 

[WE Are Geelong]

What do you call the post at the top of page 2? I said exactly that. You wouldn't be exaggerating though would you?



It's not that it doesn't suit my aesthetic taste, but that his kicking style is widely acknowledged as being susceptible to inconsistency because of the way he drops the ball.



Fair point. Yes, he is still developing, and my hope is that he can improve in the areas he needs to. However, kicking style is one that is very difficult to change once you are as old as he is (he would have been kicking the same way since he was 4). That is why I have expressed my doubts about his future. And don't take that to mean I want him delisted, or have called him a 'hack' like you seem to think. He has several upsides, but that is one downside that may be fatal in terms of his career. I hope not, but I'm yet unconvinced.



"It's also in response to a littany (sic) of responses suggesting all Tenace can do is run..." - We Are Geelong, page 2.

That is a quote by you in one of your posts in this thread. All I count is CatFan79 saying that he has 'lack of ability' on one occasion, and hobart cat saying 'can run, that is all' on one occasion.
To me, that is not a 'littany' of responses. Everyone else who posted was saying that Tenace has many upsides, but that their opinion was that they didn't outweigh the downsides. Does that make sense?
Never did I say that no-one was saying that, but you were exaggerating by saying a 'litany' (prolonged recitation, monotonous account) of responses.
I exaggerated, you exaggerated. Let's move on.

Its good to see someone on here who doesnt take me too seriously with the jibes....and responded in kind which is even better. I've already moved on...

The 'littany' (which I 'misspelled'..is that right?) was also in reference to a thread a few weeks back where people went off the reservation about Tenace....similar to if you fast forward to post 35 in this thread which is the kind of ultra negative agenda styled post I was talking about.

This is for you also DanA..I agree he needs to work on his kicking action. I have always said he needs to improve. I dont think he will become an elite level player...but I think a regular in the 22 over the next 5 years if we persist ...with the potential to play well over 100 games. Particularly if some of our quicker guys cop injuries in the future you need that depth today. Having too many mid sized guys the 'same' on the list has proven to be an unsuccessful recipe in the past.

 

[DanA]

To be frank,

Kane Tenace needs responsibility and some surety of his place in a team. Trade him to Carlton, Melbourne or Richmond for a 2nd or third rounder. We cant get the best out of him so we cant expect too much in return.

Love,
Frank

I'd rather Tenace than a 3rd rounder. He is of AFL standard, and is only just outside Geelong's best 22 at the moment. We are unlikely to get anything close to that with pick 30+. If we could get a top 20 pick I would consider it though.

 

[unwoken]

It's good to see many different view points being put forward. Some people will clearly disagree with mine...

I am glad tenace has supporters, but am actually shocked.

To set the scene, he was a top ten draft pick (number 7) in 2003.

I still have no idea if he is a left or right foot kick, as his disposal is so terrible on both sides. Any stats which show his effectiveness improving I would suggest could be misleading, as his team mates are much better this year, making him (superficially) look better.

I believe he is the worst player on the Geelong list. He could potentially be one of the worst players in the AFL. His disposal is horrendously shocking. I rate him along similar lines to the ex-cat David Clarke - recruited for athletic ability and clearly not good enough; or maybe Peter Street (interesting characteristics but just not good enough).

Giving him a game before Prismall is criminal in my opinion (has happened this year).

It is very easy to get obsessed about speed etc. Was anyone listening to Tim Lane earlier this year saying that Bartel will never be a top line AFL player because he is not quick enough??? How ridiculous was this statement? Believing that Tenace is a top line player simply because he 'has' pace is just as silly IMO.

If tenace wasn't a top draft pick (and a top 10), i think he would have been gone long ago. Somebody (recruiter or coach?) is being protected, as getting rid of him would prove how bad a choice it was to get him in the first place.

Doesn't deserve another game for Geelong. Shouldn't be taken as a trade by any club. If so, will end exactly as David Clarke did.

 

[unwoken]

You clearly aren't using a royal 'we' in your title Weagl.

I can stay asleep and still see more than you, obviously.

have a nice day!

 

[unwoken]

Ooh. It's good to see how friendly folks can be around here. Makes me glad to have made your acquaintance. Pleased to meet you Dana. Would you care to elaborate on your argument?

Feel free to respond by looking at my original post if you like.

I would also be interested in knowing what your credentials are, considering you have the confidence to state that I know 'nothing' about football. Could you please elaborate for me?

 

[Rosso]

Really only struggled when he was pitted one out against Welsh in the Bombers game. He looked lost which, considering he has probably played 95%of his career as a midfielder, isn't too surprising. Was actually more than did his job early in the year racking up some OK numbers down back.

As for the almightly efficiency arguement, yes he does turn the ball over from time to time but hey, so does everyone. Sometimes it's only the stuff ups that you remember and not the good work done previously. Let's not forget his kick under pressure that set up Moons to ensure the 2006 NAB Cup victory.

 

[CatFan79]

I believe he is the worst player on the Geelong list.

Thats going a bit too far.

Giving him a game before Prismall is criminal in my opinion (has happened this year).

Prismall has the talent and skills Tenace can only dream of.

It is very easy to get obsessed about speed etc.

This is my main argument too.. The misconception people have that pace = fast, effective ball movement.

If tenace wasn't a top draft pick (and a top 10), i think he would have been gone long ago. Somebody (recruiter or coach?) is being protected, as getting rid of him would prove how bad a choice it was to get him in the first place.

Perhaps not gone, but the club will persist with him for longer because of where he was taken in the draft, unfortunately..

I agree with the David Clarke comparison too, although Kane might have slightly more ticker.

 

[DanA]

Feel free to respond by looking at my original post if you like.

I would also be interested in knowing what your credentials are, considering you have the confidence to state that I know 'nothing' about football. Could you please elaborate for me?

"I still have no idea if he is a left or right foot kick"

"If tenace wasn't a top draft pick (and a top 10), i think he would have been gone long ago"

"Somebody (recruiter or coach?) is being protected, as getting rid of him would prove how bad a choice it was to get him in the first place."

"Shouldn't be taken as a trade by any club. If so, will end exactly as David Clarke did."

"Rate him along similar lines to the ex-cat David Clarke - recruited for athletic ability and clearly not good enough; or maybe Peter Street (interesting characteristics but just not good enough)."

"Giving him a game before Prismall is criminal in my opinion (has happened this year)."

Umm that should be enough. My credentials are nothing special. I have played over 15 years of footy in mostly in suburban leagues like BFL, GFL, & SFL.

Interestingly I played in the same team as David Clarke, he was a very very good footballer and match winner for the Falcons. Would have been a 1st round draft pick had he not been father son. Couldn't getting his kicking up to scratch for AFL though. Is still a good football in SA though I think.

It is some of the above comments I quoted that seals it for me though. Regardless of anyone's credentials.

 

[catempire]

unwoken, a terrible post which deserves picking apart...

To set the scene, he was a top ten draft pick (number 7) in 2003.

An interesting point made by WAG. Mackie was a top 10 pick in 2002. Only just blossomming now. A little over a year ago we were having these same debates about Mackie's perceived deficiencies. Tenace deserves as much time as Mackie had.

I still have no idea if he is a left or right foot kick, as his disposal is so terrible on both sides.

Actually, that's probably more because he can kick both sides. Unlike half the players on our list.

Any stats which show his effectiveness improving I would suggest could be misleading, as his team mates are much better this year, making him (superficially) look better.

A classic example of when the stats don't suit you, telling us why they must be misleading. Stats are fact. A more likely explanation for the improvement in his stats is that he has actually improved. I know, shock horror!

I believe he is the worst player on the Geelong list. He could potentially be one of the worst players in the AFL.

Worst call in your post. If I could be bothered I’d make a list that would easily exceed the number of IQ points you possess.

His disposal is horrendously shocking.

Exaggeration is a theme in this thread…

I rate him along similar lines to the ex-cat David Clarke - recruited for athletic ability and clearly not good enough; or maybe Peter Street (interesting characteristics but just not good enough).

Wrong. Recruited for his speed and, perhaps surprisingly, his good skills on both sides.

It is very easy to get obsessed about speed etc. … Believing that Tenace is a top line player simply because he 'has' pace is just as silly IMO.

Has anyone actually suggested this? Quotes please.

If tenace wasn't a top draft pick (and a top 10), i think he would have been gone long ago.

Meaningless dribble.

Somebody (recruiter or coach?) is being protected, as getting rid of him would prove how bad a choice it was to get him in the first place.

Consiparacy theories – the last resort of the clueless.

Doesn't deserve another game for Geelong.

Wrong. He’ll play plenty more.

 

[darren forssman]

It's not that it doesn't suit my aesthetic taste, but that his kicking style is widely acknowledged as being susceptible to inconsistency because of the way he drops the ball.

i agree, his disposal has a lot to do with the way he drops the ball onto his foot, much like joel corey and his one handed kicks.

they just need someone to work with kane to correct this obvious flaw. and why it wasnt done earlier in his career is bewildering.

 

[catempire]

i agree, his disposal has a lot to do with the way he drops the ball onto his foot, much like joel corey and his one handed kicks.

they just need someone to work with kane to correct this obvious flaw. and why it wasnt done earlier in his career is bewildering.

I reckon it's because in his junior days it wasn't a problem. The technique deficiency didn't hinder him from being a good user of the ball. Now that he's stepped up to the pressure of AFL football where nearly every possession is under pressure, the flaw has been exposed.

 

[unwoken]

Yes I was a little inflammatory in my post, and it seems to have had an effect... Maybe one that is greater than I anticipated.

There is no point replying to every response, but here are a few:

A classic example of when the stats don't suit you, telling us why they must be misleading. Stats are fact. A more likely explanation for the improvement in his stats is that he has actually improved. I know, shock horror!

Unforturately catempire, in this you are wrong. Stats should, at best, not be taken at face value), as they can be manipulated to suit a point. Take the following for example. These are stats from this year:

Player Klangers Per Game
Street 1.5
Blake 1.6
Byrnes 1.6
Gaspar 2.0
Wojinski 2.2
Tenace 2.3

I deliberately picked players who it could be argued have poor disposal. Players like Street, Blake, and Byrnes all have fewer Klangers per game than Tenace. Gaspar was thrown out of Richmond (sadly), and he had fewer klangers per game...

Under your logic catempire, where 'stats are fact', it could be argued that your statement implies Gaspar was a better user of the ball than Tenace. I doubt that is your argument.

Worst call in your post. If I could be bothered I’d make a list that would easily exceed the number of IQ points you possess.

I like the first sentence catempire, as it is probably correct. For the second part, there are so many things I would love to write here, but I will refrain. I will simply state that I have taken an IQ test and have nothing to worry about. One could argue that your first statement that i quoted (above) proves exactly that about yourself... I won't though, as I am attempting to reduce the hostility in this friendly discussion.

...

DanA thank you for the response. I appreciate that more than personal insults.

FYI I played 3 years APS firsts, captained two sides, have won B&F's, other trophies, and played under-age at North. I feel that i at least have a valid opinion and enough intelligence to state one.

I assume then, that you rate him above Prismall?

I assumed that people would at least recognise the humour in the left/right foot statement. My point is that i do not believe that he has good enough foot skills, on either side, for a decent AFL player. IMO speed does not compensate.

It is also my opinion, that considering he was drafted in 03 as number 7, that he does not have enough ability to justify the faith that was shown in him, or the high position. I know that he is exceptional, but Selwood at number 6 as a first year player is already clearly better.

CatFan79 , maybe I should have gone about my argument more like you, and would have escaped some of the vitriol that has been directed at me


Peace guys. Maybe I asked for it by writing an inflammatory post. I just think it is worth considering who the available replacements are in the 2nds, and how good they are. It is MY belief, that we have better options, who can make the Geelong team stronger.

I am arguing that even if you think Tenace is good, do you think that he is better than all available alternatives?

I am happy to write more, but am not interested in any more insults (except perhaps from anyone i previously insulted and who have not yet had the chance to respond!)

...

 

[catempire]

Unforturately catempire, in this you are wrong.

How? Because of this...?

Stats should, at best, not be taken at face value), as they can be manipulated to suit a point. Take the following for example. These are stats from this year:

Player Klangers Per Game
Street 1.5
Blake 1.6
Byrnes 1.6
Gaspar 2.0
Wojinski 2.2
Tenace 2.3

I deliberately picked players who it could be argued have poor disposal. Players like Street, Blake, and Byrnes all have fewer Klangers per game than Tenace. Gaspar was thrown out of Richmond (sadly), and he had fewer klangers per game...

Under your logic catempire, where 'stats are fact', it could be argued that your statement implies Gaspar was a better user of the ball than Tenace. I doubt that is your argument.

You've actually just proved my point, if not paraphrased my argument (especially the bolded). That being, stats are used by people when they suit their argument and in other circumstances, are attacked for their validity.

Stats are fact. It is people that manipulate their meaning. You have proved nothing with your post above.

I like the first sentence catempire, as it is probably correct.

I'm glad we can agree on that. It was a shocker!

You'll quickly develop a reputation for zero credibility with ridiculous statements like "Tenace is the worst player in the league" type posts.

For the second part, there are so many things I would love to write here, but I will refrain. I will simply state that I have taken an IQ test and have nothing to worry about.

By all means, go ahead. It was a pretty harmless jibe and you'd want to be able to take it on the chin because you'll cop much worse on this board than that (although not from me, I should emphasise).

One could argue that your first statement that i quoted (above) proves exactly that about yourself.

By all means, tell us how "one" could. It's not at all obvious by the incoherent mess you gave us instead.

 

[cat in sydney]

Quite amusing that an innocent question posed by an opposition fan has caused another thread resulting in Cats fans arguing about his value.

The poor OP probably didn't mean to be a troll.

 

[DanA]

...
DanA thank you for the response. I appreciate that more than personal insults.

FYI I played 3 years APS firsts, captained two sides, have won B&F's, other trophies, and played under-age at North. I feel that i at least have a valid opinion and enough intelligence to state one.

I assume then, that you rate him above Prismall?

I assumed that people would at least recognise the humour in the left/right foot statement. My point is that i do not believe that he has good enough foot skills, on either side, for a decent AFL player. IMO speed does not compensate.

It is also my opinion, that considering he was drafted in 03 as number 7, that he does not have enough ability to justify the faith that was shown in him, or the high position. I know that he is exceptional, but Selwood at number 6 as a first year player is already clearly better.

A good effort if it was at Grammar and you probably should have tried out down at the Falcons if it was a College.

I do not rate Tenace above Prismall but I think it is naive to think they are interchangeable. Prismall is an inside attack midfielder, Tenace is an outside midfeilder/Back Flank. Serve different purposes. My argument however would of been more plausible prior to Bomber replacing Enright with a Ruckmen???

At the time Tenace was pick he expected to go early. He was an AA as a junior who played 2 years in the U18 carnival. He had good skills, good pace and is not short. Well worth a punt at pick 7. Half the people that went before him are duds. In fact you would struggle to find reckon 7 guys in that entire draft better than Tenace. Big difference between Selwood's

 

[thegerman]

I don't really have a problem with Kane, as stated earlier, he is fast, his foot/handball skills are improving. He is getting fitter.

However, the main part of his game he needs to improve is his confidence. He has the speed to take guys on, in a few games this year I've seen him do just that. He doesn't carry this from week to week.

That is an improvement he needs to make to stay within the team. I think he is a valuable member of the squad, whether he accepts his place in that, builds his confidence and takes on opponents, I guess that is up to him.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

A good effort if it was at Grammar and you probably should have tried out down at the Falcons if it was a College.

I do not rate Tenace above Prismall but I think it is naive to think they are interchangeable. Prismall is an inside attack midfielder, Tenace is an outside midfeilder/Back Flank. Serve different purposes. My argument however would of been more plausible prior to Bomber replacing Enright with a Ruckmen???

At the time Tenace was pick he expected to go early. He was an AA as a junior who played 2 years in the U18 carnival. He had good skills, good pace and is not short. Well worth a punt at pick 7. Half the people that went before him are duds. In fact you would struggle to find reckon 7 guys in that entire draft better than Tenace. Big difference between Selwood's

Fascinating the glorious resume that was read out by unwoken and yet he describes the reason Prismall has missed football this year is because of Tenace. Dont worry about IQ...try footy now how...try Selwood when you wonder why Prismall is out of the side and get a football brain unwoken while you are at it. That is an elementary mistake that cant go overlooked. To me from now if you get a comment right it could just as well be a fluke.

Unwoken...Catempire's dissection of your original post that I describe as the post you make when you are fast asleep as your name suggests...should be put up into the BF hall of fame for trying to raise the bar on this board.

The German that is a fair and balanced post. We have often disagreed in the past but that is solid thinking. Confidence is an issue with him and not discussed so far as often as it should have been. Having said that it does support the notion given his stage of development that there is alot of upside to him if he gets it right.

 

[unwoken]

That is right. Stats are fact. And i can prove to you, using your own logic, that Tenace should be sacked.

This (below) is NOT my belief. I am showing why I never come to a conclusion based on statistics alone, no matter what they say. I am using logic (a philosophical argument)


catempire: "Stats are fact"

unwoken: provides stats which show Gaspar (2007) with less clangers per game than Tenace.

logical argument: If stats are fact, stats prove Tenace has made more errors per game than Gaspar (2007).

statement: Gaspar was sacked this year because of his errors

statement: 'Facts' prove that Tenace makes more errors per game than Gaspar.

conclusion: if Gaspar was bad enough that he was sacked becuase of his errors, then Tenace (who makes more) should also be sacked.


...

As i said, that is not my argument. I was illustrating my previous point (as you didn't see where i was coming from).

Come on man. I am asking you to back off. Do you feel the need to mark your territory? You won't prove anything. I can put plenty of effort into insulting you if you really want me to?


....

DanA. Thank you. That is the best argument i have seen about Tenace. I did check that draft and agree with you about the players who were available at that time. Most of the good ones were father/son or way down the list.

That is something that i didn't really consider before.

I am still frustrated by what i perceive as a lack of development. I do believe that a guy at an AFL club for around four seasons should be able to hit a target a lot more often than he does. He gets the ball fine. He can read the play fine. He can run. Four seasons with average kicking is what concerns me.

For the sake of peace, I will concede that my initial post was inflammatory. I therefore apologise for inciting people like catempire, WAG, DanA, and anyone else .

I do stand by my last two posts however, although i accept arguments re the draft that year (looks like most of the good deals were done in the trade period (Gram, Guerra, Croad, Nathan Brown).


peace out dudes.