Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Recent Posts
91
The Sports Desk / Re: God help me - the Test Cricket thread
Last post by DJC -
Comprehensive win as was always the most likely outcome. 

Excellent bowling from Neser in the Poms' second innings and Steve Smith certainly seemed to have an important engagement that he he was keen to get to ASAP.

Pat Cummins will be back for the Adelaide Test and Lyon will probably pass the drinks tray to someone else.  Which two bowlers will miss out?
92
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: List Building - More than one way to skin a cat
Last post by DJC -
It's easy to underestimate the importance of our NGA in building our list. Yes, we have two highly-rated draft picks in Harry Dean and Jack Ison who are yet to play a game , but they're not unknown quantities.

Dean, in particular, has been at Princes Park for years, spent much of his rehab from a broken shoulder there, has had Nic Newman working with him on his video reviews and has been following the club dietician's eating plan for a couple of years,  He knows most of the players well and has taken part in training drills and match sims for years.  Ison hasn't had quite the same exposure, and he doesn't have a club legend father.  He is still known around the club, knows the players and the training drills and has been mentored by Sam Walsh. The fact that neither Dean nor Ison are newbies walking into Princes Park for the first time gives them an advantage over Talor Byrne, and many other youngsters who were taken in this draft.  The club also knew exactly what it was getting when if committed to both lads, and that's another advantage.

They still have to put in the work and hope for good fortune but they're ahead of the field.

Cody Walker is following a similar path to Dean and should have a seamless transition to senior footy - provided the AFL doesn't screw us with its changes to father-son rules.
93
The Sports Desk / Re: Formula 1
Last post by LP -
Quote from: Thryleon – on
I dont get all the fuss.  Sure, Piastris fortunes were somewhat out of his own hands, but he had a bit of an ordinary run that saw him back back to the field. 

Its as much a bottle job as anything else.
Yes, I tend to agree, which is why I was barracking for Max in the end.

But it's stuff like the below image that is the slightly distasteful residue, keeping in mind other drivers were penalised for the same or less, some you may recall were even penalised for this happening after contact while cornering, they hadn't voluntarily driven off the track.

Runoff zones and margins are there for safety, not a shortcut. If Norris hadn't regained that place by driving off the track, Max wins the title! My concern is that Norris has done similar several times and not been penalised, while others have a one strike policy applied!
94
The Sports Desk / Re: Formula 1
Last post by Thryleon -
I dont get all the fuss.  Sure, Piastris fortunes were somewhat out of his own hands, but he had a bit of an ordinary run that saw him back back to the field. 

Its as much a bottle job as anything else.

95
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: List Building - More than one way to skin a cat
Last post by shawny -
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: Lods – on


That's changing the focus again....you've moved away from the age debate to the talent debate

Average age is pretty meaningless when you're talking in averages only a year or two different.
No its going back to the original point.
Our list got weaker.

The opposition to this justify this by saying we got younger as we were too old.
I'm pointing out relative to the opposition, we got older.
The players we recruited, half of them were older than our average age.
That flies in the face of the arguement that we are rebuilding/rejuvinating and getting younger.
THIS was the justification for destroying our prelim list and the reason we are nosediving.

I'm calling BS on the rejuvination of the list as a viable strategy given we've barely moved the age needle, and done so less than most who are not doing the same thing.

All this falls back to the same question which i can't get a straight answer on.

WHY does everyone have so much faith in the current list management team?
The reasons i've had so far are contradictory at worst, and weak at best.

i can’t believe how much your position has changed especially in the last 6 months

You were always one of the very much glass half full over the last decade and now what seems in a very short time have flipped.

do you agree?
96
The Sports Desk / Re: Formula 1
Last post by LP -
Another season over, but fans can't help but be left feeling a bit disenchanted with the result. Whether it's real or not the competitor begging and apparent favouritism leaves most experiencing events as a touch distasteful. We want one on one not one versus a team.

I get that in a team there is an "A" and "B" driver, not always for the reasons people think, sometimes it's capability, sometimes other peripheral issues. But in sport we want the best of the best to perform unhindered, and this season's result seems to fall well short of that.

So I accept the team decisions, what I don't understand is how drivers escape officialdom. Yet it seems every year the driver / team that escapes scrutiny for various infractions ends up the victor. The evidence this season is pretty stark reminder to fans that all is not equal. In the last 4 or 5 races we had the eventual champion escape penalty, not once or twice but on four occasions, while other drivers were penalised 5s, 10s or subsequent even grid places for far lesser infractions. As much as I'd like to think it's a sport, it's hard to dismiss the events. Perhaps I understand the lack of penalty int he final race, because the price paid would be massive, but the genesis of the problem was months old. We can explain away one or perhaps even two escapes as lucky, but when the numbers start to add up the cynicism is earned.

The whole season makes me feel like I've just watched a dodgy Olympic diving session where the Russian or China judges give contestants except compatriots a fail.
97
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: List Building - More than one way to skin a cat
Last post by Thryleon -
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: Lods – on


That's changing the focus again....you've moved away from the age debate to the talent debate

Average age is pretty meaningless when you're talking in averages only a year or two different.
No its going back to the original point.
Our list got weaker.

The opposition to this justify this by saying we got younger as we were too old.
I'm pointing out relative to the opposition, we got older.
The players we recruited, half of them were older than our average age.
That flies in the face of the arguement that we are rebuilding/rejuvinating and getting younger.
THIS was the justification for destroying our prelim list and the reason we are nosediving.

I'm calling BS on the rejuvination of the list as a viable strategy given we've barely moved the age needle, and done so less than most who are not doing the same thing.

All this falls back to the same question which i can't get a straight answer on.

WHY does everyone have so much faith in the current list management team?
The reasons i've had so far are contradictory at worst, and weak at best.
People have faith in the current list management team, because of the car crash that has surrounded our footy club in this department outside of Silvagni.  Austin is not a departure from his approach.  He is more of the same, just with a different name.  You dont like him because you dont agree with his strategy (or the clubs direction) but thats more of a philosophical question that can only be discussed in theory.  The second we do something different, you lose the ability to prove or disprove something.   Hence why you come across like screaming into the void, and most people on here going, well, you cannot actually assert that and be proven correct.  All you can do is point to a failing and say I told you so.  Even that failing though is potentially based on a pre conceived idea.  Austin didnt strengthen our list for 2026.  He didnt do it for 2025 either.  That much is true, but the list composition that got us to a prelim in 2023 was as much by his machinations as it was by SOS.  Do we get there without his moves to secure, Cerra, Hewett and Saad?  Probably not but that flaky underbelly that we have all hated at our club has persisted during both recruiters regimes.  SOS did a good job with us.  It could have been better, and he will rightly admit that, but he played the hand he was dealt.  Austin effectively did similar.  We are glossing over something else here too.  To me, the thing that stopped us more than anything else was dumb luck.   A run of season ending injuries ive not seen in a footy club before since 2015. 

Back to recruiting, you can prioritise younger and also bring in mature agers at the same time.  To me, the focus was that best 23 around Sam Walsh's age, and that remains true, even with the 27 year olds we have brought in.  We were attempting to shift our key performers from the pointy end of the list (Docherty, Cripps, Saad, Acres, McGovern, Williams) to a mid tier.  This was also an effort to make us more attractive to stay at for a guy like TDK.  In his mid 20's and being offerred big dollars to go.  We are adding youthful talent, stick around. 

Thing is, HOF was good.  ACL.  Jagga appears to have all the right stuff said about him.  ACL.  We have Dean joining the fray, and we also have Walker coming in, but then the AFL have pulled a fast one on us.  Instead of getting the guys without the premium draft picks, ala Daicos and all the Brisbane Father sons like Fletcher and Ashcrofts x2 we have had to pony up to get them.  So that means looking at futures rather than the now.  It had to mean sacrificing selecting a key tall to net in additional draft picks next year.  To me, that was as simple as they wont help us now, and we will need them moving forward to flesh out the following.

Just to post it again, because its become a bit lost:

From the youngsters who are a mix of Bonafide AFL players and not, here is the result (I chose 25 as a cut off, so 26 year olds miss out at the date of writing i.e. Cerra, Cotters, Fogarty, Boyd, Lewis Young, Ainsworth, Florent, Hayward who are all about 27 as they are not the future):

Cowan (21)----------O'Farrell(19)--------M. Carroll(20)

H.Charleson (19)----------Duffy(22)--------Dean(18)

Camporeale. L(19)--------Camporeale. B(19)--------O. Hollands(22)

Walsh (25)--------------Reidy(25)----------------Chesser(22)

Ison(19)-----------O'Keefe(21)------------Motlop (22)

Byrne(18)-----------Kemp(24)----------------Moir(21)


Int from:

Lord (21), Wilson(20), Monahan(21), Jagga (20), Evans(24), Young(24)

To this group we might add Will White(21), or Elijah Hollands(23) depending on how that final list spot falls, or a complete other option.


This team is not the finished article but from where I can sit, we have focussed on bringing in the draft picks to flesh the above side out, we have dumped salary to also leave us room to secure the futures of this lot, and bring in other dial movers and still acquired some handy players for the top layer whilst giving us a strong hand for a more sustained addition of talent during the years when the draft is going to be heavily weighted to Tassie.

Rightly or wrongly, our club has made the decision to neglect the short term and gamble on a few players that are not dial movers but solid citizens (to be frank, using history as a guide, our rise was fleeting, and too much went wrong to sustain us up there and most of the truly big clubs never really feared us as Geelong has been the only side with bonafides we have consistently troubled over the last 5 years) in an effort to carry us forward.  Thing is, this might be enough if it all goes well enough, which thus far it hasnt.  I wouldnt be banking on it all going swimmingly either, as that just doesnt happen at Carlton, but you never say never.  Irrespective, I see enough in what we are doing to prevent us bottoming out once Cripps goes, and potentially to get us back up the ladder fairly quickly and hopefully removing that flaky under belly in the process. 

Maybe im too optimistic about it, but I can see what they are trying to do, and that is enough for me.  @kruddler you seem to be most negative about what they are doing and I understand that too, as there is no time like the present and we need to be getting better now, but old Carlton used to walk that road.  Old Carlton would top up with a couple of players and then put us in the mix.  Thing is, old Carlton is dead, and any attempts we make to resuscitate it seem to end up causing premature bottoming out, and doesnt look to be a sustainable way of moving forward.  I have a cousin who is similarly minded.  He is in his late 40's and always likes to bag me out for not understanding the old Carlton way because im only in my early 40's, but I remember what it was like.  Thing is, that was over half my lifetime ago, and I dont see the point in attempting to emulate old Carlton.  The competition has 5 extra teams now, and attempting to be old Carlton has simply delivered our worst performing 20 years in the clubs history, with a few highlights.  So am happy there is a plan, we are executing it, and it seems to have its heart in the right place.  Will the results marry up?  Im not sure, but I for one am happy to have a proffessional approach which will hopefully avoid years of pain.  I can handle a couple of dissapointing years, but not another decade of "rebuilding".

Finally looking at Liverpool.  They went out, and got the gun high priced recruits this off season.  The team is not performing, their previous A graders are struggling because too much change, some of the acquisitions have been non complimentary and the end result?  The worst start to a Premier League season in over a decade.  Beware the big profile recruits.  It hasnt worked for us much (Judd aside) and even then the price may have been a bit too high to have been worthwhile.
98
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: List Building - More than one way to skin a cat
Last post by Lods -
It probably applies to a certain extent to both sides in this debate.
But one of the features of it is the inflexibility of some thinking.

Convinced that they are right, folks are often unable to see or accept an alternate point of view.
There is a tendency to speak in absolutes...e.g."If we lose player X, we're screwed"
We're never 'screwed', we're just challenged and it's at that point others step up.
You never completely lose the "whole player" because that ignores the qualities the replacement brings to the job.
And challenge present opportunity.
At that point you sometimes see abilities surface in a player that may have been repressed due to the secondary role they had played in the past.

We see players like Tom, Jack and Charlie depart and what some see isn't their average performances...it's always their best performances.
Others see the lack of effort, recent form and injury history.
Same with players coming in.
Depending on your point of view regarding list management we look at and give more emphais to the positives or negatives.

Looking at in terms of 'one to one' replacement is a pretty pointless activity because players bring different strengths and weaknesses.
As a result a superior skilled player with a less committed attitude and an injury history may be more than compensated by a less skilled player with consistency of effort and durability.
What is most important is not the individuals but how they fit into and 'enhance' the team.
"We haven't got a replacement for Charlie"
I suspect we have it more than covered.
McKay's role will change, and he'll become the key target, but he also now has a bit of goalkicking talent around him.

Look, an injury list similar to the last two years and a bit of off field disruption and it could all go pear shaped again.
I don't think anyone doubts that.
But it's not the inevitability that some people feel it will be.
At this point of the year we have no idea of the make-up of the team for the first game.
Arguments about age and talent out/talent in are all pretty irrelevant.
The only thing that counts is how the 'new' team comes together.



99
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: List Building - More than one way to skin a cat
Last post by Baggers -
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: Lods – on


That's changing the focus again....you've moved away from the age debate to the talent debate

Average age is pretty meaningless when you're talking in averages only a year or two different.
No its going back to the original point.
Our list got weaker.

The opposition to this justify this by saying we got younger as we were too old.
I'm pointing out relative to the opposition, we got older.
The players we recruited, half of them were older than our average age.
That flies in the face of the arguement that we are rebuilding/rejuvinating and getting younger.
THIS was the justification for destroying our prelim list and the reason we are nosediving.

I'm calling BS on the rejuvination of the list as a viable strategy given we've barely moved the age needle, and done so less than most who are not doing the same thing.

All this falls back to the same question which i can't get a straight answer on.

WHY does everyone have so much faith in the current list management team?
The reasons i've had so far are contradictory at worst, and weak at best.

Whoa there, K.

"Our list got weaker," you say. Well, losing a few good players will do that... however, that's only half the story as they have been replaced but you seem to assume that the newbies are nowhere near the quality of those we lost. Seems to me that's a premature assumption. 2026 needs to unfold for us to get a read on how this trade turns out for each side.

I would suggest that we 'nosedived' in 2025 for a number of reasons strong reasons which have been well documented (leadership/injuries/gameplan), the least of which would have had anything to do with the age of the list or any suggested list rejuvenation - whatever that was. I don't get your logic that because of list age and attempted 'rejuvenation' we'll continue to nosedive?

"WHY does everyone have so much faith in the current list management team?" You ask, then write that the stated reasons from others on here are contradictory or weak. Wow. For a start, not everyone has unbridled faith in our current list management... but most seem to, myself included. Why? Leadership, experience and track record and I refer to GW and CD. Excellent reasons for cautious optimism... plus, they're our leaders and deserve our support and every opportunity.

Let's say you've just taken up a new leadership role at a new organization and you've a track record of success in your recent past, but those around you tell you that you'll fail because your predecessors failed. Mmm. Pretty jaundiced logic, eh?
100
Robert Heatley Stand / Re: List Building - More than one way to skin a cat
Last post by kruddler -
I don't care what pick a player was taken (paddy dow says hi)
I don't care how many games a player has played in a row....says nothing about output

I reiterate, if these players are so good why did sydney let them go for a washed up hack like charlie and throw in every first rounder they could in the process?
Sydney's recruiters are no slouches.

Blind freddy can tell our 2026 list will be stronger in 2026??

Blind freddy will have an expose for being wrong.
You will not.