I agree VB. And the fact that the goal scoring stats of our other players is presented in such a basic manner is also a bit lazy from many journos.
The fact, as we were so oft reminded during Fevola’s tenure at FF, was we sent so many of our F50 entries to the lovable buffoon. That is, we denied countless opportunities to all of other forwards. Therefore without Fev, ALL forwards will now get a vast increase in the number of scoring opportunities (well, assuming we can still deliver the same amount of ball into our F50).
It also pisses me off that the club is criticised for not drafting a tall forward to replace Fevola, as if a 17-18 year old could possibly fill the void anyway. Whereas the actual fact is the club did better than drafting a new kid by securing Henderson in the Fevola trade. That is, a highly-rated key forward with a couple of years AFL development under his belt.
Nobody knows if the outcome of the trade will bear fruit, but the fact the club is being wahcked for bot recruiting a key forward says a lot more about the people making the criticisms than it does about the club.
Moreover, the club had decided that Fevola simply had to go. It appears the club hierarchy felt a zero return for trading Fevola was better than keeping him. So, rather than concentrate on the immediate on-field aspect, why not back the club for finally, albeit perhaps a bit belatedly, having the balls to make a finite stand on Fev.
If we go backwards, we go backwards. In this instance, I would agree it was better to make a stand, regardless of the consequences such a move might make to our on-field fortunes.
Besides, the trade happened three or four months ago now, can we finally just get on with it, FFS!
