Rohan Connolly weighs in with his "Blueprint"

bluehammer · **Posted:** Mon Jul 02, 2012 5:38 pm

Rhino I think the playing opportunities are directly related to development. Develop well = more opportunities on field.

The Rhino · **Joined:** Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm **Posts:** 6923

What I say?

DocSherrin III · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm **Posts:** 17212

Despite Ratts wanting to keep Shaun Grigg, he was a lost cause at Carlton - even though he would have played plenty in 2012 given injury. As for Sammy - clearly getting in Warnock made his decision easier. However had we told him he was in front of Hampson and paid him more coin, I reckon he would have stayed. Both deserved to play more footy. Essentially we've developed them both...Adelaide and Richmond have given them the confidence. It's always nice when you feel wanted.

aboynamedsue · **Joined:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:09 pm **Posts:** 6047

DocSherrin wrote:

Despite Ratts wanting to keep Shaun Grigg, he was a lost cause at Carlton - even though he would have played plenty in 2012 given injury. As for Sammy - clearly getting in Warnock made his decision easier. However had we told him he was in front of Hampson and paid him more coin, I reckon he would have stayed. Both deserved to play more footy. Essentially we've developed them both...Adelaide and Richmond have given them the confidence. It's always nice when you feel wanted.

What makes you say that Grigg was a lost cause at Carlton, Doc? He played 8 out of the last 9 games and only missed the final in 2010 because of injury.

DocSherrin III · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm **Posts:** 17212

aboynamedsue · **Joined:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:09 pm **Posts:** 6047

4thchicken wrote:

George Harris wrote:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/blueprint-to-avert-carlton-crisis-20120701-21azd.html

Normally dont mind him as a journalist (compared to others) but there were some errors that stood out for mine.
1. Development seection - underestimates the impact of injuries - luke mitchell is still a current injury issues - not just last year. Also a bit harsh to criticise not having given casboult the opportunity as barring injury, he would have played by now. Similarly ROK - saying that he's played one game in 4 years overlooks his injury history
2. criticism of trading jacobs & grigg - we didnt have a choice in either of those 2 trades and given the option the club would have re-contracted both players. How can it be a mistake to trade a player that is leaving? how is that a reflection on development? (as opposed to playing opportunities)

I agree. Pretty good article by Connolly but I think it wrongly suggests that we sought to trade Grigg & Jacobs.

aboynamedsue · **Joined:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:09 pm **Posts:** 6047

DocSherrin wrote:

$$$$

OK, so let's get that clear - Grigg chased the money and that's why he left. And if we hadn't traded him he would have walked into the Pre-Season Draft and we would have got nothing in return.

DocSherrin III · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm **Posts:** 17212

Shaun had an elevated opinion of where his spot was on the pecking order. I don't blame him - that's just the way he is. I've always thought a lot of that was due to his father being an Australian Rugby Union star who played for nothing given the amateur nature of the game in the 80's. I didn't think he got the most out of himself while at Carlton. He didn't view playing for the Bullants an opportunity to impress, rather a demotion. He's clearly matured at Richmond and they use him very effectively. But he's guaranteed a game and match payments. That guarantee could never be given at Carlton.

Pafloyul · **Joined:** Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:15 pm **Posts:** 4842

4thchicken wrote:

George Harris wrote:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/blueprint-to-avert-carlton-crisis-20120701-21azd.html

2. criticism of trading jacobs & grigg - we didnt have a choice in either of those 2 trades and given the option the club would have re-contracted both players. How can it be a mistake to trade a player that is leaving? how is that a reflection on development? (as opposed to playing opportunities)

If you don't think we could have handled those situations better then I'm surprised you even think we have a problem.

Pafloyul · **Joined:** Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:15 pm **Posts:** 4842

DocSherrin wrote:

Shaun had an elevated opinion of where his spot was on the pecking order. I don't blame him - that's just the way he is. I've always thought a lot of that was due to his father being an Australian Rugby Union star who played for nothing given the amateur nature of the game in the 80's. I didn't think he got the most out of himself while at Carlton. He didn't view playing for the Bullants an opportunity to impress, rather a demotion. He's clearly matured at Richmond and they use him very effectively. But he's guaranteed a game and match payments. That guarantee could never be given at Carlton.

All the same, you must admit that the declaration that they wanted 'a player' in return reeked of ham-fisted obstinacy. It played into Richmond's hands.

4thchicken · **Joined:** Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:44 am **Posts:** 3136

Pafloyul wrote:

4thchicken wrote:

George Harris wrote:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/blueprint-to-avert-carlton-crisis-20120701-21azd.html

2. criticism of trading jacobs & grigg - we didnt have a choice in either of those 2 trades and given the option the club would have re-contracted both players. How can it be a mistake to trade a player that is leaving? how is that a reflection on development? (as opposed to playing opportunities)

If you don't think we could have handled those situations better then I'm surprised you even think we have a problem.

Jacobs we possibly could have - but then again, I rated jacobs as the best of our tap ruckmen and would have played him ahead of the others. Then again, I would have picked cotchin ahead of kreuzer given how narrow the gap in ability/potential between the 2 was (on the basis that it would take longer for kreuzer to mature physically/be ready - I want 10 yrs of solid service from pick 1, not wait 4-5 yrs for 5 yrs of solid service).

Obviously the club was enamoured by the greater athleticism of hampson, kreuzer and warnock and rated them ahead on potential and had him 4th in the pecking order. Thats a judgement call, that combined with what we paid for the ruck men (pick 1 for kreuzer, pick 17 for hampson, 2nd and 3rd round picks for warnock) - not one that I agreed with but one I can understand and live with

I still don't agree that it was a mistake to trade jacobs though given that he was going to leave.

Synbad · **Posted:** Mon Jul 02, 2012 9:53 pm

Who is to say Jacobs wouldnt have been shit of he stayed?
Or Grigg???

Eddie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 27, 2011 2:06 pm **Posts:** 1098

JohnM wrote:

Rohan's good.

He regurgitates the BEST stuff from footy forums. Most other journos aren't nearly as discriminating.

You are right, most of what he wrote has been discussed here and i am sure on other forums. The part about having 13 players on our list that havent yet played a single senior game was raised on here over the weekend.
Hello Rohan.

Synbad · **Posted:** Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:07 pm

Eddie wrote:

JohnM wrote:

Rohan's good.

He regurgitates the BEST stuff from footy forums. Most other journos aren't nearly as discriminating.

You are right, most of what he wrote has been discussed here and i am sure on other forums. The part about having 13 players on our list that havent yet played a single senior game was raised on here over the weekend.
Hello Rohan.

actually was on the radio... and in pubs all over melbourne...

you dont have to be einstein to know we havent played a stack of players.

the only people that would beleieve were down to the bare bones are ..... supporters....some supporters

bluehammer · **Posted:** Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:31 pm

The Rhino wrote:

What I say?

Sorry mate, 4thchicken, not you. My mistake.

london blue · **Joined:** Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:08 pm **Posts:** 3251

POW..........forget the fact he is a bummer fan.

....and if he did get his info here then at least congratulate him for making sense of the pages and pages of emotive voice.

well summarised Rohan....(just in case you are logged on)

Pafloyul · **Joined:** Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:15 pm **Posts:** 4842

4thchicken wrote:

Jacobs we possibly could have - but then again, I rated jacobs as the best of our tap ruckmen and would have played him ahead of the others. Then again, I would have picked cotchin ahead of kreuzer given how narrow the gap in ability/potential between the 2 was (on the basis that it would take longer for kreuzer to mature physically/be ready - I want 10 yrs of solid service from pick 1, not wait 4-5 yrs for 5 yrs of solid service).

Obviously the club was enamoured by the greater athleticism of hampson, kreuzer and warnock and rated them ahead on potential and had him 4th in the pecking order. Thats a judgement call, that combined with what we paid for the ruck men (pick 1 for kreuzer, pick 17 for hampson, 2nd and 3rd round picks for warnock) - not one that I agreed with but one I can understand and live with

I still don't agree that it was a mistake to trade jacobs though given that he was going to leave.

Well, if you remember that Sticks flagged the idea of trading one of the ruckmen well before the end of that season. Perhaps Jacobs sensed that he was at the back of the pecking order and thought that his best option was to seek greener pastures, so to speak.

To be honest I was in favour of trading him, too, but the fact that it was Jacobs to Adelaide or nothing reeks of plans going awry. We certainly didn't get a chance to trade a surplus ruckmen in a way that favoured us. Perhaps it's Karma for trading for Warnock. I really do believe we went all gung-ho in that instance and overrated him in the process.

Big Kahuna Boot · **Posted:** Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:45 pm

..i think we're getting carried away with the Jacobs bit.. ..he's a decent ruck sure, and from the rookie list he's really come good.. ..but last season he was getting roughly the same hit-outs but was nowhere near his effectiveness, as he is this season.. ..it's more about midfield set-ups, vs a ruck's ability to get hand to ball..

Pafloyul · **Joined:** Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:15 pm **Posts:** 4842

Synbad wrote:

Who is to say Jacobs wouldnt have been shit of he stayed?
Or Grigg???

True, but that's just as damning in that it shows a disturbing lack of faith in our own judgement and steadfastness as much as it shows that we can't develop players.

camel · **Posted:** Mon Jul 02, 2012 11:33 pm

You're only as good as you're last game, and Jacobs' last hit out for Carlton was as good as any of our remaining rucks have put up in the time since he left the club.

With the benefit of hindsight perhaps we should have worked harder to keep him and offloaded one of Hampson or Warnock.

Rohan Connolly weighs in with his "Blueprint"

Who is online