Medhurst

[hoogs]

Was just curious of what you all think of Medhurst.

I thought he was a great player for us and a good bloke when he came into my work. He'd always be the proactive person in the conversation when you talked to him about footy, asking questions about what I thought of different players and stuff.

As for the player Medhurst, he was a solid contributor who still managed pretty well despite the criticisms of some. I'm thinking that the Tarrant Medhurst trade might have been a win win win situation for Medders, Freo and Collingwood.

Polak can go rot for holding us to ransom, but I sincerely hope Medhurst wins the Coleman this year. Provided we win the flag of course.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Lost my faith in Taz back in 2004, around the same time I lost all my admiration for Medhurst. Now though, Medhurst has looked OK for us, plus we've got a gun kid as well. Now, if only the AFL were like Footy Fanatic...

 

[FIGJAM]

He'll be handy for us. I've always freaked out about Malthouse's unwillingness to play a leading small forward, and still to this day reckon it's Leon Davis' best position.

Travis, Rocca and at times Buckley and Fraser will provide more conventional taller targets, whilst Medhurst can provide a hopefully irritating 'tall playing' small forward option.

Leon may get a genuine half forward spot and hopefully pin a few of these guys on the chest, although I do get a bit frustrated with him in terms of where our fans rate his footskills, and where I rate them. He can put in some zingers, no doubt, but he can also over/under kick some gimmes.

Didak won't be far away which will obviously help delivery and Thomas floating through the forward line may provide a bit of spark.

So basically, our forward line should be ok and Medhurst should go ok. Our defence is tight. Just whether we can win the ball in the middle though...

 

[VEEBEE]

i like the look of him.was dangerous in the game against the saints until he went off injured.if we can keep pebs in the goal mouth , meddo can be a very affective crumbing type.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I think he'll be good for us. He is a strong overhead mark for his size, like a Russell Robertson type, and thats what we'll miss with Tarrant gone. In a couple of years he'll have Reid Brown and Dawes around him as well as Cloke, so Medhurst will be one of the senior players we'll rely upon for leadership (and goals) during our transition phase into the post Buckley/Clement/Burns/Rocca/Tarrant/Licuria era.

 

[didaka]

He deffinately adds a new dimension to our forward-line. He can play as a crumber, marking small, or leading from the square. I like the options he brings along.

 

[nick_savo]

Lets hope he wasn't a dud trade and can really stand up for us his year.
I wish Tarrant well at his new club, but not too well so he makes us look silly for trading him, He will help Pavlich out a fair bit.

 

[Aristotel]

He deffinately adds a new dimension to our forward-line. He can play as a crumber, marking small, or leading from the square. I like the options he brings along.

Indeed.

And remember that it was partly due to Jeff Farmer's above average performances (9 goal matches etc) over the past two seasons that prevented Medhurst getting selected at Fremantle.

Unfortunately for the Dockers, Farmer's suspended for the 1st 6 weeks and Medhurst plays for Collingwood! I realise they now have Tarrant, but he's a different sort of player.

 

[Lonie_from_50]

For someone of his enormous capabilities and talent, Medhurst was simply a brilliant man to come to the Pies along with the prized no.8 selection.

He does have a big difference between his best and worst, however most small forwards have that problem. He is a goalkicker, and if he performs, he can kick 30 or 40 goals in a season.

 

[Therussian]

For someone of his enormous capabilities and talent, Medhurst was simply a brilliant man to come to the Pies along with the prized no.8 selection.

He does have a big difference between his best and worst, however most small forwards have that problem. He is a goalkicker, and if he performs, he can kick 30 or 40 goals in a season.

2 blokes at my cricket club had a bet a few seasons back that medhurst would kick 700 in his career (no beer involved)
and for every goal under/over the other would pay a dollar.
we all had a good laugh at that, but now i hope he makes it

 

[Dj Chriss]

I know its off topic buttt, Russian i love your sub nik only if owens wasnt injured

 

[hoogs]

He deffinately adds a new dimension to our forward-line. He can play as a crumber, marking small, or leading from the square. I like the options he brings along.

One thing he isn't is a crumbing forward. He is a almost a KPP and played his best footy for us in this role.

 

[Twiggys_Torpedo]

I think we did well out of the trade, more for the additional top 10 pick than for Medhurst. He'll be handy, but I think he'll have a hard time holding a position in the team.
Having said that, I really hope he kicks 40 or more for the year, thats what Taz gave us and we really wanted more from him. 40 would be a good return for Medhurst.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

From the moment I heard him mentioned in relation to the Tarrant deal I was pleased, I think he has a lot to offer. Of course, I also wanted Polak and a draft pick, so 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

 

[Rocky Rambo]

Lost my faith in Taz back in 2004, around the same time I lost all my admiration for Medhurst. Now though, Medhurst has looked OK for us, plus we've got a gun kid as well. Now, if only the AFL were like Footy Fanatic...

You're a bandwagoner

 

[Tarkyn_24]

I've supported Collingwood since I was six.

I didn;t like Tarrant. If someone doesn;t like Lonie, is it any different??? No. There shouldn't be. Does it mean they are a bandwagoner? No, it doesn't. Surely even you can get it through your head that someone who supports Lockyer, Maxwell, Kinnear and Rusling isn't a bandwagoner.

 

[hoogs]

From the moment I heard him mentioned in relation to the Tarrant deal I was pleased, I think he has a lot to offer. Of course, I also wanted Polak and a draft pick, so 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

Yeah, really, we should have just given you a straight swap , Tarrant for Polak, maybe a third round pick or something. Problem is that Polak is a little girl and Wallace said he'd mother him if he came to Richmond, so he threatened us with the preseason draft if we didnt do a trade with the Tigers.

In the end we did well in the draft and got Collard. Probably would have got Jetta instead, but they were the two we wanted first. Anyway, point is don't be dissapointed you got Medhurst instead of Polak. Medders can turn a game, Polak can play looseman in defence.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

You never would have gotten Tarrant with a straight swap, much as Mike Sheahan likes to forget the first round draft pick, it was always going to be required. You gave Polak away for practically nothing anyway, as it got you an improved first-rounder which you traded away ultimately. I can only assume that Collingwood demanded a top-10 pick for Tarrant, hence your need to trade up from 13 to 8.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Exactly - Fremantle traded Polak, Medhurst and Pick #13 for Chris Tarrant.

Clearly, a straight swap for Polak doesn't make any sense.

 

[hoogs]

Exactly - Fremantle traded Polak, Medhurst and Pick #13 for Chris Tarrant.

Clearly, a straight swap for Polak doesn't make any sense.

Tarrant and Solomon, the latter being a bonus like MacPharlin when Croad came over.

And I said a draft pick 'also', maybe a third round or late second or something.

Either way, we got Collard who was a steal and predicted first round pick. As I said, win win win. Tigers lose though.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Tarrant and Solomon, the latter being a bonus like MacPharlin when Croad came over.

McPharlin>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Solomon

McPharlin was always highly rated. Solomon was always a pretend hardman.

 

[toommy]

I've supported Collingwood since I was six.

I didn;t like Tarrant. If someone doesn;t like Lonie, is it any different??? No. There shouldn't be. Does it mean they are a bandwagoner? No, it doesn't. Surely even you can get it through your head that someone who supports Lockyer, Maxwell, Kinnear and Rusling isn't a bandwagoner.

you were a rap for kinnear!!!!!!!!! you just lost all credibility then and there

 

[theGav56]

Excuse me for dropping in, but this is quite an interesting discussion. Like the other Freo supporters posting on here I do not think Medhurst will do the crumbing for you. Just not his skill, and you have better players in terms of that skill. He is much better as a target.

I think that pick 13 + Polak would have been a better deal for Collingwood than pick 10 + Medhurst, and would be interested to know what you think and why the club did take this option.

Obviously pick 10 is a better pick, but in that draft quality was still well and truly available at 13. Also Polak seems to address a need for tall players that your side has, whereas small forwards doesn't seem a deficiency, even with a key small injured. I am not a Polak fan, but he may have allowed Pebbles to play at FF rather than being run all over the park at CHF where he seems to struggle for stamina.

 

[hoogs]

Excuse me for dropping in, but this is quite an interesting discussion. Like the other Freo supporters posting on here I do not think Medhurst will do the crumbing for you. Just not his skill, and you have better players in terms of that skill. He is much better as a target.

I think that pick 13 + Polak would have been a better deal for Collingwood than pick 10 + Medhurst, and would be interested to know what you think and why the club did take this option.

Obviously pick 10 is a better pick, but in that draft quality was still well and truly available at 13. Also Polak seems to address a need for tall players that your side has, whereas small forwards doesn't seem a deficiency, even with a key small injured. I am not a Polak fan, but he may have allowed Pebbles to play at FF rather than being run all over the park at CHF where he seems to struggle for stamina.

It was pick 8 and would you want Polak playing FF for Freo this year or Medhurst, even if we were slightly shorter.

 

[doppleganger]

Excuse me for dropping in, but this is quite an interesting discussion. Like the other Freo supporters posting on here I do not think Medhurst will do the crumbing for you. Just not his skill, and you have better players in terms of that skill. He is much better as a target.

medhurst will be a leading target, just like he was at freo.

I think that pick 13 + Polak would have been a better deal for Collingwood than pick 10 + Medhurst, and would be interested to know what you think and why the club did take this option.

depends on whether polak can turn things around, he hasn't shown to much at AFL, medhurst has

pick 8 and medhurst thrown in for taz was a fair trade

not sold on polak

Obviously pick 10 is a better pick, but in that draft quality was still well and truly available at 13. Also Polak seems to address a need for tall players that your side has, whereas small forwards doesn't seem a deficiency, even with a key small injured. I am not a Polak fan, but he may have allowed Pebbles to play at FF rather than being run all over the park at CHF where he seems to struggle for stamina.

pick 8 better then pick 13

we dont need KP players

Rocca at FF, T.Cloke CHF.....Rusling, Reid, Dawes other long term tall KP prospects

down back have

Presti, Clement, Wakelin, Maxwell.......Anthony, O'Brien, N.Brown other long term KP prospects

Pebbles will play FF this year, and Medhurst may alot in next to him, he is a 50+ goal a year forward if in form, not bad for an extra add on!