Kent Kingsley - Undersized for a full forward?? As if!!

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Posts
25
Likes
0
AFL Club
Geelong
#27
A hack that was the leading goal scorer at your club for about half dozen years.. :eek:
ur whole clubs a joke so i wouldnt be putting sh*t on our EX leading goal scorer who is about to be playing for YOUR pathetic excuse for a club we will see who has the last laugh at the end of the season :D

but then again it doesnt matter if richmond dont make the finals they are happy 2 finish 9th thats a win for them :thumbsu:

good luck with richo and kent cant wait 2 watch that disaster! :p
 

Inferno

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Posts
5,655
Likes
2,991
Location
Tramland
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Charlotte Hornets
#28
I was browsing through the Sunday Age's preview for the season ahead when I saw this comment about one Kent Kingsley - "Undersized for a full forward and will benefit from not being the key target." I also remember Kent saying something similar at the end of last season when Geelong delisted him.

That struck me as rather strange, so I decided to investigate further. Kingsley was listed as being 193cm and 95kg, but is this really undersized when compared to the following?

Daniel Bradshaw: 191cm, 95kg
Brendon Fevola: 191cm, 98kg
Matthew Lloyd: 192cm, 91kg
Chris Tarrant: 192cm, 95kg
Nathan Thompson: 194cm, 100kg
David Neitz: 191cm, 100kg
Warren Tredrea: 194cm, 98kg

Interesting that Kent is pretty much the same height and weight when compared to the players listed above. So is Kent Kingsley really undersized as a full forward, or is he just trying to deflect attention away from the fact that he is really a hack?
Looks like a typo. Probably meant 'undersized heart'.

and you with a gerbil.....by the way Doris did ya scratch your nuts this morning???
Terrible comeback :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:
 
Top Bottom