Richard Douglas

[sworc36]

Im a bit surprised it has been mentioned on here yet but was listening to Rowey on AA yesterday and made a statement that if he had the choice of RDouglas or BGibbs he would chose RDouglas every single time. Now I really like Rowey (ulnlike a lot of people who dont) and you would think that being a Coach down at the Bay he would see both of these boys play, so I'm hoping he is correct on this one. If this is the case we have a real gem in this kid. To any of you Glenelg supporters out there, who do you think is the better player at this point in time?

 

[Mad Dog]

Regardless of the objectivity (or otherwise) of the comparison - Rowey lost me at the first Mini-Scaff commercial......

 

[birdmanptr]

Im a bit surprised it has been mentioned on here yet but was listening to Rowey on AA yesterday and made a statement that if he had the choice of RDouglas or BGibbs he would chose RDouglas every single time. Now I really like Rowey (ulnlike a lot of people who dont) and you would think that being a Coach down at the Bay he would see both of these boys play, so I'm hoping he is correct on this one. If this is the case we have a real gem in this kid. To any of you Glenelg supporters out there, who do you think is the better player at this point in time?

Douglas is ready to play now and might have already played had he not hurt his knee where as Gibbs is not quite built for AFL yet but its going to be interesting in 2-3 years time.

 

[kimirocks]

I rate Youg Richie Douglas pretty highly. I would have to think if he was the size of Bryce Gibbs and could still do what he can now, yes he would be an absolute gem. Bryce is a once in 5 years kind of player. If I were to choose, I would probably go with him (Gibbs), but by what I've seen of Douglas, he's gonna be a real star. Just needs more body.

 

[Alex99]

Douglas is ready to play now and might have already played had he not hurt his knee where as Gibbs is not quite built for AFL yet but its going to be interesting in 2-3 years time.

B Gibbs will play round 1 2007

The same cannot be said for R Douglas

 

[Mad Dog]

B Gibbs will play round 1 2007

The same cannot be said for R Douglas

Can you look into your negative crystal ball and tell us all why not ?

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Whoever starts the first "Douglas wants to go home" or "Gibbs for Douglas" thread should be banned.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

B Gibbs will play round 1 2007

The same cannot be said for R Douglas

That's pretty obvious considering Gibbs will go to one of the bottom 3 sides in Port, Essendon, Carlton. Of course they will play a physically mature player like Gibbs come rnd1. As Douglas is playing in a top 4 team, with an established midfield, there's a pretty good chance he won't play round 1. However in saying that, it is crucial that players like Douglas are given opportunities next year.

 

[Alex99]

Can you look into your negative crystal ball and tell us all why not ?

Culture

How can we fit Goodwin, Edwards, Ricciuto, Thompson, Shirley, Bode, Burton, Mcleod, Reilly, Mattner, Porplyzia, Massie, Doughty, Knights, Douglas, Vince and Van Berlo into 8 midfield positions

Kids don’t play before senior player.

 

[Mad Dog]

Culture

How can we fit Goodwin, Edwards, Ricciuto, Thompson, Shirley, Bode, Burton, Mcleod, Reilly, Mattner, Porplyzia, Massie, Doughty, Knights, Douglas, Vince and Van Berlo into 8 midfield positions

Kids don’t play before senior player.

Craigy will pick his best 22 - surely you're not telling me he should give cheap games away. In case you haven't twigged yet - if Rowey's comment is accurate - he will be a Monty for Round 1 2007............all I'm doing is pointing out the futility of being negative about the future and underestimating what a pre-season might unfold........

 

[The Smith Revolution]

What are you blokes on??? Gibbs is going to be the next big thing. Not to be compared with anyone else. Spewing we missed out on him.

 

[birdmanptr]

B Gibbs will play round 1 2007

The same cannot be said for R Douglas

Want a side wager on that?

 

[crowsarethebest]

Is Gibbs better than Douglas even at the moment? Gibbs kicked 6 goals last week then backs it up with 4 this week. Not many people can have an impact both in the midfield and forward line, and he is still 17-he turned 17 in March.

 

[KUNG FU]

Douglas is & will be a great player for the AFC. Its fairly safe to say we were quite lucky to pick him up at all. But for my money Gibbs is a better player now, tomorrow and 10 years down the track.

 

[neddy36]

Over the last 3 weeks I have been to every Bays game. If we are going on a head-to-head basis, Gibbs is leading Douglas 2-1. But that is only the last 3 weeks. Earlier in the season (especially the Centrals game at Adelaide Oval), Douglas demonstrated pure class with a deft goal-kicking touch.

I think Douglas will crack the Crows as a small forward with spells in the midfield. Whether it happens in 2006 or early 2007, thats another story.

 

[Stiffy_18]

I really like Douglas and he does remind me a bit of Cousins in terms of style of game he plays BUT, Gibbs is just a freak. I have watched him a couple of times now and the kid really is a can't miss prospect. I heard James Fantasia call him a prototype footballer. He is a perfect example what recruiters are looking for. Size, skill, versatility, genuine football talent, great leadership ability etc...

I like Douglas but I would pick Gibbs over him any time without once questioning myself. What Gibbs is doing as a 17 year old is quite remarkable. It been a long long time since I have seen a kid that good, that is comfortable playing any position on the field. He is a match winner as a forward, midfielder and exceptional as a defender. The kid can play anywhere.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Craigy will pick his best 22 - surely you're not telling me he should give cheap games away.

Giving away cheap games is one way to look at it. Another is that it might be an investment in our future.

You don't get a Ricky Ponting, Ian Healy, Shane Warne or a Glenn McGrath unless they are exposed to the top level during their crucial early years. That might mean giving them an opportunity before they have 'earned it' through weight of runs or wickets.

Our current players that could be considered champions - Ricciuto, Hart, Goodwin, McLeod and Edwards - all made their debuts pretty early in the piece. That might have been a sign of the times with us not having the same depth as we do now but it was also a result of some bold and intuitive selections. Goodwin showed that selecting young players doesn't necessarily compromise your ability to win a premiership either.

Knights, Douglas, Maric and Meesen have not received the opportunities I believe they should have. Van Berlo has, which is one plus.

I think that most people on the board have been a bit frustrated at Reilly's slower than expected development. In my opinion this is a dreict result of his lack of games during the Ayers years. We don't want to do the same thing to our current crop of up-and-comers.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Goodwin showed that selecting young players doesn't necessarily compromise your ability to win a premiership either.

Goodwin has earned every game he played in his first year. He kept his spot because he was performing, not because he was a youngster with bright future.

Knights, Douglas, Maric and Meesen have not received the opportunities I believe they should have. Van Berlo has, which is one plus.

Just like Goodwin, Van Berlo has really earned his games. They weren't given to him. He played 11 games in his first year for a team that was minor permier. The kid has worked his backside off both on the training track and the game and its the reason why he is getting the games.

Craig has rewarded for this year. Thats why players like VB, Knight, Vince, Maric and Porplyzia have played games and have kept their spots in the side. Meesen didn't get a game because quite simply, Maric has outperformed him this year.

Giving games to players just because they are young is not the way to go and if these youngsters are performing, they will get their fair share of AFL games. Its very rare that youngsters come into quality sides and hold their spots.

I think that most people on the board have been a bit frustrated at Reilly's slower than expected development. In my opinion this is a dreict result of his lack of games during the Ayers years. We don't want to do the same thing to our current crop of up-and-comers.

Reilly made his debut in his first year on AFL list and looked like fish out of the water. He played 6 games the following year (remember that he did have a pretty bad year with injuries), 14 games in 2004, 23 games last year and every game this year.

Its not like he has been starved of opportunities. He got his fair share of games considering his form at the time. Its very usurual for a player to come into a quality side and get games in his first year.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Reilly made his debut in his first year on AFL list and looked like fish out of the water. He played 6 games the following year (remember that he did have a pretty bad year with injuries), 14 games in 2004, 23 games last year and every game this year.

Its not like he has been starved of opportunities. He got his fair share of games considering his form at the time. Its very usurual for a player to come into a quality side and get games in his first year.

An interesting recollection. Nigel Smart retired midway through 2004 and during one of his many interviews said that none of the senior players could figure out why Reilly was not getting a regular game.

You don't give players a game just because they are young. You give them a game because you see something in them that indicates that they have the ability to be a champion at your club. Edwards was terrible early in his career. Hentschel didn't get a possession in his first game. Shane Warne had a test bowling average of over 300 at one stage. Steve Waugh didn't make a test century in his first four years of test cricket.

Luckily the Crows/Australian selectors at the time didn't have your safety first attitude. The best example of this was the selection of Clarke last season when Hudson was injured. Clarke was in South Adelaide's reserves yet we resurrected his career instead of giving Maric an opportunity.

 

[Stiffy_18]

An interesting recollection. Nigel Smart retired midway through 2004 and during one of his many interviews said that none of the senior players could figure out why Reilly was not getting a regular game.

You don't give players a game just because they are young. You give them a game because you see something in them that indicates that they have the ability to be a champion at your club. Edwards was terrible early in his career. Hentschel didn't get a possession in his first game. Shane Warne had a test bowling average of over 300 at one stage. Steve Waugh didn't make a test century in his first four years of test cricket.

Luckily the Crows/Australian selectors at the time didn't have your safety first attitude. The best example of this was the selection of Clarke last season when Hudson was injured. Clarke was in South Adelaide's reserves yet we resurrected his career instead of giving Maric an opportunity.

Safety first attitude?

AFC have shown that they are more than happy to give players games when the opportunity arises. Graham Johncock was given games as soon as they thought he was ready and hasn't looked back since. Van Berlo is the same. Hentschel struggled in his first game but was still given a go twice that year because club saw something in his they liked. We gave Maric games this year. Knight played a couple of games last year. Its not like the club says these players have to play SANFL for 3 years before they are given a game. Maric was emergency a number of times last year and it would have been a very dumb move to bring him in ahead of Clarke for the finals. Have you seen how Maric was destroyed in the ruck in his first couple of games this year? He would have been killed by Cox and the likes in the finals. Clarke actually was quite good when he came in for Huddo. It was Biglands that let us down not Clarke.

As for Clarke playing South reserves, it had nothing to do with his form and everything to do with South Adelaide not wanting to play him in the seniors and hence why he has transfered over to Glenelg for this season. South didn't want to play him because they had a couple of young ruckmen that they wanted to play in front of him because those boys are their future.

 

[Drummond]

Maric was emergency a number of times last year and it would have been a very dumb move to bring him in ahead of Clarke for the finals. Have you seen how Maric was destroyed in the ruck in his first couple of games this year?

Maric destroyed in his first couple of games? If anything, his first couple of games were his best. He had 17 hit-outs in only his second AFL game against Essendon and he clearly got the better of the ruck duels, especially in the last half. He also followed that up by 16 hit-outs against Brisbane.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

AFC have shown that they are more than happy to give players games when the opportunity arises.

That's the problem though. Because we have been around the mark over the last two seasons the opportunities to promote young players purely on their current form have been scarce. It's great that Maric, Vince, Knights etc have had a taste but it hasn't been enough IMHO.

I deal with this question a lot in my line of work (which is in sport) and if players aren't fully tested during their first few crucial, development years then they will never reach their full potential. Do we want Douglas to be the next Tyson Edwards or are we happy for him to be the next Michael Doughty?

I'll forget that you said that Maric would have been destroyed by Cox in the finals. As it was Cox only took 14 marks against us. Phew! Thank goodness for the Doc.