Roast Sam Davidson

[Tiger_Of_Old]

We had 3 picks though. Only used 2

If we used 3 Alger would be elsewhere.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

inserted himself into the play almost all game tonight.
played great and wish him well in his career.
will be a interesting watch going forward.

Be interesting when the dogs get players back.
Even Dow looked great against the Bloos.

 

[Muddiemoose]

??? if he is not in the midfield what is he??

midfield is not centre, it is between the arcs

if he is not midfield he is either back, forward or ruck, only have to look at the fantasy categories as a indicator but not gospel

Wing, high half forward, half back, utility

Plenty of positions operate between arcs

Sure you can dumb it down to the three basic 3rd of the field but this is a footy forum I like to think we are beyond that basic shit and can look at positions properly

 

[Mr Magic]

Wing, high half forward, half back, utility

Plenty of positions operate between arcs

Sure you can dumb it down to the three basic 3rd of the field but this is a footy forum I like to think we are beyond that basic shit and can look at positions properly

half back is back, half forward is forward, when players move beyond their natural setup within the arcs they are mids otherwise what are they?

When Buddy Franklin runs up the ground in the centre he is not a forward, he is a mid, just because he is tall, can take a mark, run like a hare and kick a long goal if he is between the arcs he is still a mid. Buddy Franklin did not have to be tied to a goal square but when he was in the midfield in terms of location he is a mid because a forward is about kicking goals, backs are about defending/stopping goals, rucks ruck and everything else is mid and utility is a BS word for a mid/or really a combination of roles including ruck/forward etc...


there is no such thing as high half forward in my book, you are a forward and if you drift up from the forward arc you become a mid.

You can label a role as high half forward but that just means a player plays both as a forward and mid depending on there location and what they are doing in relation to the goals and the team versus the opposition

In fact utility is more about a hybrid/combination role whether mid/forward, forward/mid, back/forward, forward/back, mid/back, back/mid, ruck/mid, forward/ruck, ruck/forward, back/ruck etc...

 

[Muddiemoose]

half back is back, half forward is forward, when players move beyond their natural setup within the arcs they are mids otherwise what are they?

When Buddy Franklin runs up the ground in the centre he is not a forward, he is a mid, just because he is tall, can take a mark, run like a hare and kick a long goal if he is between the arcs he is still a mid. Buddy Franklin did not have to be tied to a goal square but when he was in the midfield in terms of location he is a mid because a forward is about kicking goals, backs are about defending/stopping goals, rucks ruck and everything else is mid and utility is a BS word for a mid


there is no such thing as high half forward in my book, you are a forward and if you drift up forward you are a mid.

You can label a role as high half forward but that just means a player plays both as a forward and mid depending on there location and what they are doing in relation to the goals and the team versus the opposition

In fact utility is more about a hybrid/combination role whether mid/forward, forward/mid, back/forward, forward/back, mid/back, back/mid, ruck/mid, forward/ruck, ruck/forward, back/ruck etc...

Might be how you see it but that’s not how coaches see it even at lower grades

It’s not so much about the position on the ground but about where the player lines up in relation to the play, ball, team mates and opponents are

Quite often a team will do a full press and every player on the field will empty a 3rd of the ground
That doesn't mean Broad is now a midfielder
He is still a defender and his role in the side is to defend even if he manages to get hold of a turnover and kick a goal

He’s still a defender

& I’m not really interested in getting into a semantics argument with you

 

[Mr Magic]

Might be how you see it but that’s not how coaches see it even at lower grades

It’s not so much about the position on the ground but about where the player lines up in relation to the play, ball, team mates and opponents are

Quite often a team will do a full press and every player on the field will empty a 3rd of the ground
That doesn't mean Broad is now a midfielder
He is still a defender and his role in the side is to defend even if he manages to get hold of a turnover and kick a goal

He’s still a defender

& I’m not really interested in getting into a semantics argument with you

you are talking in two dimensions I think

the game does not have limits on dimension


I bet Michael Voss thinks like that, when Broad is in the midfield he is still a defender.


I am not sure how you see it, and I cannot speak for you, naturally. When Broad is in the midfield he is a midfielder but that does not mean he lost his job to defend.

I come from the school, everybody defends, so forwards defend, rucks defend, defenders defend, and mids defend.

Just because Broad drifts in the midfield does not mean he does not defend. I understand what you might be saying in the sense his primary role is to defend versus midfield. The question might be to me or you, you might think he has to defend as a defender but to me he defends as a midfielder. What does that mean? Well you might think he needs to defend more the player he was attached to on the bounce in the opposition forward line as a defender, whereas I might be thinking while he has an eye on his opponent he is also defending space and a combination of attacking outlets that could come his way as a mid knowing he could be pushed back even more as a defender as he gets closer to his back arc when the opposition advances towards their goal.

I do get that, even though Broad goes up the ground and I write he is a mid, that does not mean Broad and his other previous defenders in the midfield do not have to form so kind of defensive formation, even as mids, to protect from opposition advances and surges to kick goals when they get the ball and try and push through

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Listen I’m prepared to move on but that’s rubbish , he’s an outside mid that gets 20-30p a game . Ours get 8-9 while direct opponent gets 30+ ,,,, that’s why u get beaten ,,, ground control to major Tom ,,, you win more positions , youre in the game

We had Jack Ross in the same age range similar role play a similar game but probably a lot better v Blues.

Ross plater rating v Blues 20.8

Davidson player rating v Blues 11.6.

Davidson looks a decent player but absolutely squibbed a front on contest v Cotttrell 11:47 to go second term allowing Cottrell to sweep the ball away unopposed. Totally jumped out of the way. Richmond is trying to build a Premiership team and that is not what you want happening GF day under any circumstances.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

It has everything to do with managing primary list spots and 2024 draft picks. At the time of the MSD we had contracts in front of four out of contract players (Baker, Graham, Pickett and Dusty), plus seven 2024 national draft picks.

At the end of the 2024 season, those MSD guys need to go on to the rookie list; which was already full at the time. Which means you either cut a rookie guy you don’t want to cut (one or more of Tresize, Campbell, Bauer, Young, LeFau) or promote them to the primary list and run the risk of losing a national draft pick (you can’t take more picks to the draft than you have list spots).

So worse case scenario from a list management standpoint is you have four guys re-signing, and 2-3 guys you need to promote to the primary list (or cut some of those mentioned above). We know hindsight that 0 of the 4 OOC players signed on for 2025, but that wasn’t known at the time.

I’m sure there are those that will say well why did you keep Dow and KMac, the response to that is there was a reason they were the last two re-signed. I suspect that if Dusty or Pickett went around again, or Baker and Graham decided not to go west both would have been delisted.

Some may also say ‘what about Bolton and Rioli’s list spots being free’ but both were contracted (IF it was known they’d request a move at the time of the MSD), and even if you did move them, it would be for draft capital which at the very least would mean you can’t fill those spots with a rookie list promotion as they’re needed for the very picks you get in return.

You can argue that Davidson should have been over Gray or that the third pick they took and didn’t use due to the risk of list spots (I.e. no player being deemed worthy to justify the risk to list spots) was the wrong decision at the time; but at the end of the day there were very logical reasons at the time only two picks were used.



Two of which (D’Ambrossio and Durham) we had no chance of selecting in their respective MSD years.

There are no excuses. You can write 100 lines about it but it’s very simple.

There was a list spot available for 6 months to give a VFL player a taste.

and everyone here suggested exactly who.

When that guy is getting compared to Peter Matera in his 3rd game,
You can see the magnitude of the balls up

 

[Phar Ace]

Geez, Massimo D’Ambrosio, Sam Durham, Sam Davidson. Who is responsible for these 3 f@ck ups?

Such an imprecise vocation because we managed to get Will Martyn, Noah Cumberland and Samson Ryan (cough) from underneath Brisbane's nose. I get the first two, however I've never understood Ryan. Saw him play up here at Sherwood and had all the hallmarks of the oft used term 'dud'. Hate the term, he's a better play than that, but seriously wishful thinking turning him into AFL standard.

Never understood letting Durham slip though, less so Josh Dunkley, who trained with us and played 5 VFL games for us.

In Blair we trust! With so much raw talent available in the last draft, not selecting Davidson was always going to bite on the bum for while. A quarter of our list is aged 20-22. He just didn't fit our age profile, sadly. Still, it wouldn't have been too hard to make room. The good signs were there for all to see - he was no secret!

 

[Phar Ace]

It has everything to do with managing primary list spots and 2024 draft picks. At the time of the MSD we had contracts in front of four out of contract players (Baker, Graham, Pickett and Dusty), plus seven 2024 national draft picks.

At the end of the 2024 season, those MSD guys need to go on to the rookie list; which was already full at the time. Which means you either cut a rookie guy you don’t want to cut (one or more of Tresize, Campbell, Bauer, Young, LeFau) or promote them to the primary list and run the risk of losing a national draft pick (you can’t take more picks to the draft than you have list spots).

So worse case scenario from a list management standpoint is you have four guys re-signing, and 2-3 guys you need to promote to the primary list (or cut some of those mentioned above). We know hindsight that 0 of the 4 OOC players signed on for 2025, but that wasn’t known at the time.

I’m sure there are those that will say well why did you keep Dow and KMac, the response to that is there was a reason they were the last two re-signed. I suspect that if Dusty or Pickett went around again, or Baker and Graham decided not to go west both would have been delisted.

Some may also say ‘what about Bolton and Rioli’s list spots being free’ but both were contracted (IF it was known they’d request a move at the time of the MSD), and even if you did move them, it would be for draft capital which at the very least would mean you can’t fill those spots with a rookie list promotion as they’re needed for the very picks you get in return.

You can argue that Davidson should have been over Gray or that the third pick they took and didn’t use due to the risk of list spots (I.e. no player being deemed worthy to justify the risk to list spots) was the wrong decision at the time; but at the end of the day there were very logical reasons at the time only two picks were used.



Two of which (D’Ambrossio and Durham) we had no chance of selecting in their respective MSD years.

Great post!

 

[Phar Ace]

No as Ross goes inside , he’s playing wheee tresize and banks play I think reason we weren’t interested was we had him as med forward and reasoned kelti and Bauer ahead of him , which on that basis maybe

Inclined to agree with this if you look at where he played at VFL for the most part.

 

[Phar Ace]

It’s not Yze, despite being blamed for everything. To be honest, I don’t see why we need a separate thread dedicated to this. Good luck to him; he played two good games, and suddenly he’s the next best thing.

Yep, it was Carlton last night, even we looked good against Carlton!

 

[tigerfan1961]

Seriously, 4 pages devoted to what ifs? He’s a Dogs player now, good luck to him. He could very easily become another Dean Polo or he could be a steady reliable player but he’s a Dogs player now and I could not care less that he’s not on our list. We could have taken him, like every other club that participated in that MSD, but we passed.
Who cares! Chris Toce took two players in Blight and Gray as he and Blair obviously thought they were more of a need and we didn’t use the 3rd pick as we clearly planned on needing that final list spot in the future plans. As TOO pointed out above, no Alger if we clogged the list to full capacity by selecting Davidson. He’s just a player to me, but he did contribute very well to their win last night.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Such an imprecise vocation because we managed to get Will Martyn, Noah Cumberland and Samson Ryan (cough) from underneath Brisbane's nose. I get the first two, however I've never understood Ryan. Saw him play up here at Sherwood and had all the hallmarks of the oft used term 'dud'. Hate the term, he's a better play than that, but seriously wishful thinking turning him into AFL standard.

Never understood letting Durham slip though, less so Josh Dunkley, who trained with us and played 5 VFL games for us.

In Blair we trust! With so much raw talent available in the last draft, not selecting Davidson was always going to bite on the bum for while. A quarter of our list is aged 20-22. He just didn't fit our age age profile, sadly. Still, it wouldn't have been too hard to make room. The good signs were there for all to see - he was no secret!

To be fair re Ryan, he is a very strong VFL player, which is well above QAFL level, so his talents have taken him that far. When you saw Ryan at Sherwood, would you have thought he was capable of being a dominant VFL ruck/forward?

 

[Phar Ace]

Might be how you see it but that’s not how coaches see it even at lower grades

It’s not so much about the position on the ground but about where the player lines up in relation to the play, ball, team mates and opponents are

Quite often a team will do a full press and every player on the field will empty a 3rd of the ground
That doesn't mean Broad is now a midfielder
He is still a defender and his role in the side is to defend even if he manages to get hold of a turnover and kick a goal

He’s still a defender

& I’m not really interested in getting into a semantics argument with you

Ur in good company there!

 

[Sir_Loin]

I joined BF in 2015. This is clearly hands down the worst thread in that time. Get a ****ing grip

 

[Phar Ace]

To be fair re Ryan, he is a very strong VFL player, which is well above QAFL level, so his talents have taken him that far. When you saw Ryan at Sherwood, would you have thought he was capable of being a dominant VFL ruck/forward?

I had my doubts, and why I said I'd not be comfortable calling him a dud, but watching his talent at centre bounces vs boundary throw-ins, and what occurred around the ground one-on-one's was often eye wincing. Always hoped elite coaching would help, but that lack of core was not getting better with age. Dow could move him off the ball!

 

[Lord of the Wings]

I joined BF in 2015. This is clearly hands down the worst thread in that time. Get a ****ing grip

 

[Handsuper47]

a "gun" lol he was playing against Carlton

 

[PetterdHoisted]

Seriously, 4 pages devoted to what ifs? He’s a Dogs player now, good luck to him. He could very easily become another Dean Polo or he could be a steady reliable player but he’s a Dogs player now and I could not care less that he’s not on our list. We could have taken him, like every other club that participated in that MSD, but we passed.
Who cares! Chris Toce took two players in Blight and Gray as he and Blair obviously thought they were more of a need and we didn’t use the 3rd pick as we clearly planned on needing that final list spot in the future plans. As TOO pointed out above, no Alger if we clogged the list to full capacity by selecting Davidson. He’s just a player to me, but he did contribute very well to their win last night.

What ifs are one thing

But what it says about the competence of management is another

And doc won’t go in a straight line, but the trajectory…30+ in his 3rd game and Bevo calling him Peter Matera

Insert gif #oce#oceans12u couldn’t see this?!’

 

[prodigy]

a win for the bf recruitment department, a loss for richmond

I take pride in this

 

[prodigy]

I like Blight and Gray

No biggie
Stop over reacting kids

We had a third pick and we passed...

 

[LTT]

It was the mid season one that stung. Such an obvious choice.

And we had a list spot in the midseason draft. The only downside would have been that we would have had to create a list spot at the end of the year if he had succeeded. That’s not even a downside.

 

[Wooden Robot]

Listen I’m prepared to move on but that’s rubbish , he’s an outside mid that gets 20-30p a game . Ours get 8-9 while direct opponent gets 30+ ,,,, that’s why u get beaten ,,, ground control to major Tom ,,, you win more positions , youre in the game

Exactly.
We got a paltry 297 possessions all game against the Power and were duly smacked.
You have to win and get the ball to win games.

 

[prodigy]

It’s not Yze, despite being blamed for everything. To be honest, I don’t see why we need a separate thread dedicated to this. Good luck to him; he played two good games, and suddenly he’s the next best thing.

I don't get this perspective. "He has played two good games" it's not like the sample size is 50... He has played a total of 3 games. Two of those games were excellent.

It's okay to say we got it wrong.