List Mgmt. Should Ryder get a new contract?

Joined
Mar 16, 2019
Posts
882
Likes
4,039
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
This board for the past 4 years: Why doesn't bloody Ken Hinkley recruit a mature age ruck so we can have some ruck depth in case we get an injury?

This board when we finally recruit a mature age ruck so we have some ruck depth: Our second ruck isn't putting in dominating performances when he doesn't get to play as #1 ruck. Let's delist him!
You do realise those aren't contradictory stances, right?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Posts
49,420
Likes
115,005
Location
SA
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Toronto Raptors
You do realise those aren't contradictory stances, right?
Well, it's not if you believe that if Lycett gets injured we'll be completely fine relying solely on Ladhams (0 AFL games) and Hayes (0 AFL games, and fresh off of an ACL). Or if, such as in your case, you don't really care whether or not we'll be fine relying on them. Which is an opinion you're entitled to, but it's definitely not an opinion that's going to be shared by the people being paid to run the club.
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2019
Posts
882
Likes
4,039
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Schulzenfest When I was here in the past four years, the cries to recruit a mature age ruck were most commonly about drafting one as a backup, which we didn't do. We recruited (and pay for) a first 22 player.

Thats OK in that we have two rucks as an option, but its bad because its currently exposing each of them when they rest in our forward line. And it didn't seem to give us enough of an edge to nullify a prime ruck like Grundy, even though he was rucking solo. So maybe its not ok. Not the point right now.

And maybe you're proposing that Ryder basically be delisted and put on the rookie list or something similar, making him purely a depth ruckman who'd only come into the side if Lycett is injured. But as you want to talk about the people being paid to run the club, that also seems like its very unlikely to happen - if he's on the list, then I expect this time next year you'll still be throwing Ladhams and Hayes (0 AFL games) around as a reason to never rely on our younger rucks.

Were we all pissing ourselves over trading out Polec and maybe having to play depth players instead? Why are we making rucks a huge exception, especially with the huge gap in our list waiting to knock the **** out of us.

Over the next three years we are going to lose a bunch of senior players for entirely natural reasons. As one of the oldest players, Ryder is first cab off the rank, particularly if his form at AFL level is subpar in anything but his ideal conditions. Hanging on and hanging on is going to cause an absolute ******* exodus - of older players retiring at once, and maybe a few frustrated young players lobbing up for a trade.

But sure.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Posts
61,936
Likes
50,664
Location
West Perth
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Ryder, broadbent, RGray, Westhoff, Boak and Rocky will all have their careers assessed due to age with clear candidates at the moment due to performance

I think Motlop, Hartlett, Watts, Trengove, SGray and McKenzie could also find themselves as part of that review for similar reasons
 

Janus

Dominus Ex Machina
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Posts
18,459
Likes
46,589
Location
Portland, Oregon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bulls
After rewatching the Showdown, I can unequivocally say yes.

When Dixon gets back* and Lycett/Ryder are the second string in the forward line, things will be better.

*Yes, everything hinges on Dixon. That's why he's a true key position forward.
 
Top Bottom