Remove this Banner Ad

Luke Buckland

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

yes i'd say he will be delisted. In the games i saw he was ok but not outstanding and warranting a senior spot.

Also the mandatory 3 delistings i thought would have been:
sanderson
rahilly
slade
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I hope note, If you look at his year he was badly coached by Tudor, Tudor the one that should go. he was left in the back pocket and we all no that he is a runner thats what he did last year, the last 4 games were did they finally play him? on the wing and he was outstanding, even picking up over 30 touches in the last game against Bendigo, he should be given ago.
 
Correct Macpop, he was used horribly.

He should be given a chance, both because he brings something unique to our list and because given the lack of depth in the draft, we're likely to not find anyone better with our latter picks anyway.
 
Wymarra #1 said:
Hell probably be gone want he as will rahilly and chambers
Click to expand...

Chambers wont be delisted, nor should he.

Sanderson
Rahilly
Slade
Haynes
Mcarthy

I would also delist Lonergan but they wont.

Promote Buckland.
 
bulletproof said:
Chambers wont be delisted, nor should he.

Sanderson
Rahilly
Slade
Haynes
Mcarthy

I would also delist Lonergan but they wont.

Promote Buckland.
Click to expand...

Not bad. There is no-way in hell i would delist Chambers. He is good for the club. Not the best skill level going around but gives his all. With the way Otto and Kingy are with injuries, it is unlikely we will ever get them on the same field together. Chambers is a very handy backup.

I would fall the axe a little more than you. Players who are not going to feature in the seniors should go. The players i would delsit are as follows:

1. David Haynes (had his chance, has not taken it)
2. Paul Koulouriotis (not going to feature in the side, too many players simular in front of him)
3. Matthew McCarthy (spare me - Too many players who can't kick the pill)
4. James Rahilly (how much longer does he need?)
5. Will Slade (injury prone, does not seem interested in his footy)
6 Charlie Gardiner (it won't happen, but seriously, cut our losses and get what ever we can in trade week)
7. Sanderson to retire.

Posiblity:
8. Matthew Spencer (should get another year to have a real crack)
9. Andrew Mackie (last year to cement his spot)
10. Tim Callan (see above)

The above would give us another chance to score a few kids in the draft and hopefully feature in the finals for the next 5-8 years consecutively.
 
Its a shame that Rookie or sup players cant be used as an alternate to our third pick.
Last year we wanted Egan.We gave him time and training in our VFL side,expossed him to our methods and our coaches and at the same time we experienced him inside the club.He was less a mystery than a pick from somewhere else, we knew what he was and we wanted him.Problem was he was a sup player there is no tie to the club for them.After all the time invested,to get him we then had to risk him to all other clubs by nominating him in the draft. At the time it wasn't such a sexy pick, player in the VFL are sort of unfairly marked as "less thans" and as such we probably thought most wouldnt take him, but what a pick it looks now.Can anyone name a tall from last years draft who came close to doing what Egan did for us. I have no doubt a club would pick him for less than 60 odd now.
I feel the same might be with Bucky. In a weak draft it would be preferable to take this kid that we have put to years into.He is a know player and probably needs more time but in two years time he may well be a very hand type.
Problem is we probably dont want 4 delistings this year unless an opitunistic trade happens, (say 2 players bundled for 1 pick)
He may well have to nominate like Egan and then if he is there at around P47 we may take him.

PS , I believe his brother also had even potential but may have had motivation problems. Any one have an update Buckland Jr.
 
Paul Cahmbers shoulkd not be de-listed, i thought he would have been a better inclusion against sydney than charlie gardiner
 
Turbocat said:
PS , I believe his brother also had even potential but may have had motivation problems. Any one have an update Buckland Jr.
Click to expand...
I can give you the low down on Luke's brother Trent who is turning 17 i think.
2 words, don't bother.
The kid can play has a good size, but serious attitude problems, mid season just decides he doesnt want to play football then a month later says he wants to play again. He can play but thinks he is better than he is. Lets be honest though he is only young but he wont get a run at the Falcons therefore is virtually nil chance of playing AFL. Shame really he could be good coz i reckon he has more potential than Luke.
 
Jarrod Garth and Luke Buckland were delisted earlier today. Both unfairly IMO
 

Remove this Banner Ad

tayls said:
Source?
Click to expand...

He's probably going on the article that was briefly up on the club website this morning before being pulled.

The article indicated that Sheringham and Batchelor would be retained for next year, but didn't mention Bucky and Jenny.

I don't know if it was pulled because it was inaccurate, or whether they just didn't want the information released at this stage.
 
I have very reliable sources. I'm not sure what happened to batchelor and sheringham, but i know for a fact Buckland and Garth were told they weren't required for 2006
 
I was thinking about this the other day and the way I saw it:

Sheringham - Has to be retained on the rookie list because we are going to be chopping away at our small defenders, Sanderson - retired, Rahilly and Slade cut, and if we were to lose Wojcinski, DJ, Callan to injury again we would be screwed with a capital S.

Batchelor - I haven't seen much VFL, so I can't really comment on the guy's form but he has what we need in spades - pace. The guy walked in the door at 68kg, you really can't expect much 1st year up against fully grown men in the VFL. He had hamstring troubles if I recall, and so unless he was completely hopeless you would question the decision not to keep him on. When we took him on, surely they realised he would take more than one year to develop.

Garth - Man child that started the season in the VFL on fire but from a statistical viewpoint, goals kicked, didn't go on with it. Unfortunate dimensions for an AFL player, it would be difficult to see him slot into our forward line and I think delist is the right option.

Buckland - One that I was really on the fence with. Showed plenty towards the end of last season and has struggled to replicate it this year in a poorly coached, undermanned VFL side. Lack of small defenders, lack of depth in the draft point to promoting him, Rahilly, Slade, Haynes, McCarthy the delistings to accomodate this. I'm 50-50 each way on him.
 
I think Garth was unlucky in that he came to the club as a leading/marking forward and started the year on fire, but as soon as the actual VFL season started he was put on the interchange bench and by the end of the year being played in the backline, he needed more time to adapt to the forward line. Tudor has to go.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom