TalkingCarlton :: View topic - Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?

SUCH was the vitriolic supporter feedback to Carlton selecting three mid-sized footballers in last week's national draft that Blues recruiting manager Wayne Hughes had to explain his case to the club's board.

Reading the HS article is very misleading and the way he has written it is abit on the nose. Anderson has shaped the facts to make it look like the Board has not been happy and have reacted with a 'please explain' due to an alleged supporter backlash. This is simply incorrect and the Board have done no such thing.

Your opinion is great but it is baseless.

You are arguing about 1st round talent selections so lets look at it.

If you take away the 'no brainers' in Murph, Gibbs and Special K you are left with

04 Russell. Showed plenty in 09 and top 10 in our B&F. How are the rest of the 04 1st rounders travelling?
05 Kennedy. Wouldn't we kill for him in the team going into 2010.
07 Hampson. I'll sneak him into the 1st Rd for the sake of your argument. He's raw but his obvious upside is enormous.
08 Yarran. Stunning skills and looks good in this years preseason. His best is easily AFL at the highest level.
09 Lucas. A genuine top 10 choice by most.

Sorry Ryan but I suspect your argument is kneejerk reaction.

Regards Cazzesman

Author:	DownUnderChick [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 8:07 am ]
Post subject:	Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/why-we-didnt-replace-fevola/story-e6frf9jf-1225805942217 Quote: SUCH was the vitriolic supporter feedback to Carlton selecting three mid-sized footballers in last week's national draft that Blues recruiting manager Wayne Hughes had to explain his case to the club's board.

Author:	woof [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 8:26 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
What a rubbish story. Fev would not have been traded if boards reacted to vitriolic supporters.

Author:	Crusader [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 8:46 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
Davies currently stands at 191cm... same height as Fev.

Author:	kots1234 [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 8:53 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
We didnt replace Fev....because a guy like Fev can't be replaced. To suggest that by merely picking a tall was going to satisfy this is a joke. The supporters out there that are carrying on like pork chops need to get a grip of themselves. We could have selected 3 talls and it would not make one bit of difference. Butcher aside, the others were not rated and therefore not chosen.

Author:	isdonis.george [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:18 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
There's a lot of woolly thinking out there amongst a lot of supporters. The HUN's going down fast in my book, IMO they know they're playing with words to drum up a story off-season. I mean, why replace someone you've been at such pains to "let go"? We also "let go" the deeply flawed "kick it to Fev" game plan. "kick it to Fev" might not have been what the coaches wanted but it was what Fevola demanded. We also got rid of the "tail wagging the dog" syndrome in that area and its bad effects on the team. Omly a dill would want to "replace Fev"

TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

Why We Didn't Replace Fevola? http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=26934	Page 1 of 4

Author:	CarltonClem [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:24 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
Clearly a lot of supporters actually know very little about the game, both Carlton supporters and others. Even if you've played it, doesn't mean you actually understand it, the finer nuances of it etc. A supporter does not a footy HR officer make. The general public can only make judgments on football ability. What if a player has issues worse than Fevola? We won't know, only recruiters would know. Recruitment is not just a process of watching videos, going to games etc. Ever tried to hire someone in the non-football workplace? Interviews are fascinating people-watching opportunities.

Author:	teagueyubeauty [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:26 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
Its an embarrassment and an absolute indictment that this has got into the papers, amateurish on a 2002-2007 level. Will the numpties on the board ever learn. Not only do they think they can run a club now they think they're bloody experts on list management and recruiting. All that article proves to me is how highly Hughes rated Lucas compared to Talia, quite obviously the pressure from within the club outside of the list managers and recruiters would have been excrutiating to get the next "Fev" These plonkers think they grow on trees If they employ people and pay bloody good money to deliver then you back them, if it doesn't work then you sack them. They're the experts in the specialised roles at the club. Can't believe the amateurism this club exudes, though not as regularly as 2002-2007, sometimes. If you want to have a word with the recruiters then by all means do so BUT don't let theis $hit get out into the press. Makes them look like fools. Fancy worrying about what we say in here

Author:	DocSherrin III [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:56 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
+1 While they're holding stupid meetings regarding recruitment, can the Board please explain why when the club signed Barry Cable during the 1964 season he remained in Perth and despite winning numerous Sandover and Simpson medals in the seasons following - was not enticed to travel east, his contract let go - only for him to sign with North Melbourne and become one of the greatest indigenous rovers the game has ever seen?

Author:	jim [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:56 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
Lots of rationalisation to justify we went the correct we drafting, not wanting to feel we made an error in direction (the player himself is a gun). Every man and his dog knew we need a KP player and we passed it up. So far we've replaced Fev with only a kid, hopefully a very good kid. We needed more. If WH thinks that KP talls are only any good early in the draft this mean we'll never pick one up? That is flawed thinking. Tippett went pick 43. They have Talia there as well now. They didn't waste any time picking him up. Can't have been too bad. You have to draft one eventually. Wonder why we chased Bradshaw so hard and threw many, many $$$$ at him.

Author:	Barnesy [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:02 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
We didnt replace Fev because none of the kids were able to stay up late at night and drink as much and make complete fools of themselves as consistently as Fev did. Fev the footballer cannot be replaced.

Author:	Sydney Blue [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:15 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
When did 6ft 2 become short Next thing they be saying 8 inches isn't long Hendo must scratching his head saying what the F..k and I

Author:	Cazzesman [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:20 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
Just to clarify something in Andersons article that conflicts with what he said on the Radio 3AW this morning. His written article in the HS makes it sound as if WH had to explain the selections to the Board after the fact. WH and SR actually explained their strategy to the Board two days prior to the draft with their normal predraft presentation. On the Radio this morning Anderson stated that WH and SR presented their 'Best Player' intentions to the Board prior to the draft so all the Board members were well informed. Reading the HS article is very misleading and the way he has written it is abit on the nose. Anderson has shaped the facts to make it look like the Board has not been happy and have reacted with a 'please explain' due to an alleged supporter backlash. This is simply incorrect and the Board have done no such thing. And thats why WH rarely talks to the media.

Author:	ryan2000 [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:35 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
I understand the whole 'Best Player' stratergy, and its a fair and resonable way to approach any draft.................. But i'm slowly loosing faith in our ability to pick first round talent. We seem to know how to bag ourselves a gem with later picks. But Apart from the obvious #1 draft picks (which is almost imossible to stuff up) we haven't had a great track record with first round picks. Lucas looks like another Kade Simpson (whom i love) and could well be a gem of a player, but will his development be comprimised with the likes of Murphy, Gibbs, McLean, Simpson, Walker, Judd, etc tc etc getting games before him? Ditto Davies? And even Yarran? Look, i don't think any of us can judge WH decision to pick Lucas over Talia (or anybody else) as he knows more than us and has accsess to the facts and stats required to make such a decision whilst 90% of us have but a few minutes of YouTube footage to go off. But i am getting a bit scared of our history of first round picks. (before anybody jumps on here and has a whinge at me - this is MY opinion and i'm entitled to it thanks very much!)

Author:	showbag [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:40 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
well clearly I am a shit judge too because i would have taken Yarran over Rich (by a mile) and Lucas over Talia easily. I'm loving Hughes work with early picks

Page 1 of 4	All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	DownUnderChick [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:44 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
Following Cazz's post, can those that bagged the Board please apologise for their comments relating to the article.

Author:	Cazzesman [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:50 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
Your opinion is great but it is baseless. You are arguing about 1st round talent selections so lets look at it. If you take away the 'no brainers' in Murph, Gibbs and Special K you are left with 04 Russell. Showed plenty in 09 and top 10 in our B&F. How are the rest of the 04 1st rounders travelling? 05 Kennedy. Wouldn't we kill for him in the team going into 2010. 07 Hampson. I'll sneak him into the 1st Rd for the sake of your argument. He's raw but his obvious upside is enormous. 08 Yarran. Stunning skills and looks good in this years preseason. His best is easily AFL at the highest level. 09 Lucas. A genuine top 10 choice by most. Sorry Ryan but I suspect your argument is kneejerk reaction. Regards Cazzesman

Author:	buzzaaaah [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:55 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
Cazzesman wrote: Reading the HS article is very misleading and the way he has written it is abit on the nose. Anderson has shaped the facts to make it look like the Board has not been happy and have reacted with a 'please explain' due to an alleged supporter backlash. This is simply incorrect and the Board have done no such thing. I can't believe the HS would do that. :sarcasm: Its a garbage paper. They had Fev to sell papers for a month after the GF. Then Luke Ball (and they're still milking that cow). There's no-one else. So WH is up for a few days before the next sucker comes along.

Author:	MadBlue [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:26 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
CFC is a bit of a rabble at the moment ! Hope we make the 8 next season or lots of questions will be asked and heads could roll !

Author:	ryan2000 [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:27 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Why We Didn't Replace Fevola?
Cazzesman wrote: Your opinion is great but it is baseless. You are arguing about 1st round talent selections so lets look at it. If you take away the 'no brainers' in Murph, Gibbs and Special K you are left with 04 Russell. Showed plenty in 09 and top 10 in our B&F. How are the rest of the 04 1st rounders travelling? 05 Kennedy. Wouldn't we kill for him in the team going into 2010. 07 Hampson. I'll sneak him into the 1st Rd for the sake of your argument. He's raw but his obvious upside is enormous. 08 Yarran. Stunning skills and looks good in this years preseason. His best is easily AFL at the highest level. 09 Lucas. A genuine top 10 choice by most. Sorry Ryan but I suspect your argument is kneejerk reaction. Regards Cazzesman I thought you'd be the first to post Caz. Look, i know your involvment with the club and its recruiting can fill you with emmotions and that's great & i admire that about you, but this is my opinion. Doesn't mean its wrong, doesn't mean it's right....... but i'm entitled to it nonetheless. A kneejerk reaction? To what? I will reserve judgment on Lucas and Yarran as it's too early to call on those two. -Josh Kennedy Sure, he's a favouirte on here and i think he has a strong and honest heart in him and for that i love him, but i would have easilly picked Mitch Clarke or Ryder over him. With that said, Josh is still a good pick and looks to be finding his feet with West Coast finally. Hell, we picked him as a Forward over Ryder & Clarke who were KPP/Ruckmen and what happens in JR's first season? We play him in the ruck???? And in answer to your other question re:- wouldn't we love him going into 2010. YES, we would,....... but who is to blame for that? We Are? Cause it would appear now that we have no KPP's on our list to replace fevola because of our drafting stratergies.............. - Jordan Russell Had a good end to the season after he was dropped (which at the time was very much a needed thing to do besides the fact that many supporters thought it was wrong - but Ratts was proven correct in his judgment to send JR back to the two's!). I hope he continues on his good form, but to be honest if he were in any other team besides us (and maybe richmond) chances are he would have been delisted already. - Hampson has shown that he is still very very Raw. Great Leap on him and good athleticism, but at the moment that's about it. HOWEVER, i think in about 2 more seasons he could be something. So this isn't such a bad pick. I myself wanted us to pick a good key forward to prepare ourselves for the loss of Fevola in 5 years or so (which later turned out to be a tad earlier but nobody could see that coming). Tippet was being spoken about as a potential KPP at the time and Adrejs Everitt and Brown were others. However, in respect to WH........... Hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing. I'm not in anyway saying that Lucas is not the right decision for pick 12........... But I as a paid up supporter of this club reserve the right to question it.