Who the hell is responsible for recruiting Ackland

AGRO · **Posted:** Sun May 13, 2007 9:51 pm

I am happy for Ackland and Cloke to be used as "cannon fodder" until Aisake and Hampson are ready for action.

Possibly a waste of money for Ackland to be given a 3 year contract, but I would have hated Aisake to be thrown into the fray before he was ready.

Seeing Setanta hold his own in the ruck on Saturday only warms the cockles of my heart for Aisake to be ready for action in 2008.

TruBlueBrad · **Posted:** Sun May 13, 2007 9:56 pm

Jarusa wrote:

You t have to read this threadwhen Ackland first came to Carlton to see the mood of TC about this player.

Some good judges. :wink:

Phew. had an awful feeling I supported it at the time. Pretty sure now that later in the thread I supported signing him early in that he needed the commitment from us so he knew whether to re-sign with St Kilda....and it was the appointment of Crossisca I supported

chubbyruss · **Joined:** Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:59 am **Posts:** 8631

Jarusa wrote:

You t have to read this threadwhen Ackland first came to Carlton to see the mood of TC about this player.

Some good judges. :wink:

Just read the thread. There are certainly some fine judges on TC.

It is a must read. you will piss yourself laughing.

TC should run the Football Dept

Dodo27 · **Posted:** Sun May 13, 2007 10:45 pm

I Love watching Auckland when he runs at full pace, looks like a Penguin on the move.... GET RID OF HIM

preacher · **Joined:** Mon Dec 05, 2005 10:40 pm **Posts:** 166

It went something like this.

French retired unhappy with the coach. He was willing to carry on for another year to assist but just had had enough of DP. So, he walks preferring to travel the country side rather than play AFL/VFL fo another year.

At the time, the club thought that French retiring was no great loss and figured he could be covered with someone like a C Cloke - if we could snap him up assuming he was to be delisted..

The unexpected retirement of DiLuca really threw a spanner in the works. Archie was to be plan B just in case we had a string of injuries but he too cracked them with DP and left. He too, wanted to travel the world rather than play AFL/VFL footy.

This sent DP and his MC searching for a replacement. At the time, it was panic stations as it looked like we could enter the 07 season with McClaren and ??????? as our ruckmen. So, they sourced out Ackland and to entice him over had to offer him a three year deal. Remember, the Saints were in dissaray then - the coach had been sacked and they had no one at the helm. Ackland bought it and DP was a relieved man. Shortly after we claim Cloke and all was rosy there for awhile at least.

And for those that think the Saints were sorry to see him go - yes and no. Yes, because they too (due to poor list management) lacked a genuine quality ruckman but they were also sceptical whether Cain and his knee could go the journey.

So, it appears that in our haste, we did not seek out a medical opinion on Cain but instead just snapped up what we thought was the only viable ruckman around at the time to cover the most glaring weakness on our list.

Rambo Stallone · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 3:23 am

maxyblue wrote:

spent the night having to listen to a bunch on sanctimonious filth supporters feeling good about themselves ... worse part is that much of what they said was on the money ...

our amateurish, dysfunctional admin allowed the madman (pagan) to trade for duds like longmuir, chambers ... he put together wonderful highlight clips of them, brought them over on 2 year contracts, then never played them ... can we find "the genius" a gig as a wedding video producer?

but then he went and wastes picks on mott, mclaren, Ackland ...

but one fine day we decide to join the 21st century and appoint a fair-dinkum manager of footy operations (icke) ...

so then what do we do? castrate him and leave footy matters to sticks ... :roll:

we will NEVER punch on equal terms with the big boys while we allow sticks to carry on as a (very) poor mans greg miller ... another of the never-ending legacies of buffoon jack's reign is the walk-on-water status afforded to sticks ...

ENOUGH IS FLOWER ENOUGH ...

where is our line in the sand moment?

where / when do we have the guts to enpower someone like icke with the responsibility for making / taking the HARD decisions?

sticks is the personification of our amateurish state ... wants to be mates with everyone AND be a director ... :roll:

... if he wants to be matey-matey then give him some bullshit club ambassadorial role and leave the hard decision making to those with the balls to get their hands dirty for the club ...

he cannot be trusted with the crucial decision re the future of carlton ... i'm appalled that pratt is seemingly going to defer this to sticks ... :evil:

Well Mott was a high pick that was a 1 year deal that could have worked but didn't but the others were not.

Synbad · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 7:26 am

The days when Pagan was a man for the times are behind him.
He was hellbent on bringing Kbobel and Spriggs to the ckub too.
Amazingly the gods chipped in and stopped it from happening by sending these two to other clubs.
You have to wonder whats going on clubs heads...

Bookie · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 8:23 am

He goes like a Zantuck

bondiblue · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 10:34 am

I checked that thread Jarusa.

Yeah there were some good judges.

I think I was sitting on the fence on Cain, but as a ruckman, he doesn't has the height, and I wanted to take a punt on Griffith, and perhaps use cain in the future as a FP (DeLuca style), or maybe he could fill a KP / tall position in the backline.

My quote

Quote:

Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:54 pm Post subject:

Welcome aboard Cain.

It's about time we moved forward into the new millenium.

In the 70's a benckmark was set with the introduction of the 6 foot (185cm) wingman.

In 2006, Carlton set the new benchmark with the introduction of the 6' 5" (196cm) wingman.

What? He's our ruckman!!

I'll wait to see what else is there in the PSD before I pass judgement. I was hoping we could snag a 200+cm ruckman from somewhere...we still may, if we delist Davies and Bryan.

He could turn out OK...I suppose the recruiters/Pagan had to do something...?!?!! He was loved by the Saints supporters, and they'll be spewing...but Blake wont miss his aggression. He's aggressive...I like that part.

Well he'll at least be more mobile than French, McLaren and Bryan. He jumped all over French in the game against the Saints early this year, let alone running rings around him and McLaren. But he's still not a genuine height for the boundary throw ins....but yeah better than what we've got.

I remember him missing a couple of games early in 2006 with a groin concern, and the Saints really missed him...he carried that complaint for the rest of the season.

His scalps in 2006 included Jeff White, Peter Everitt and David Hille. He's a hard worker and runs well, and provides a linking option for the saints. I just hope that he has got over his groin complaint and runs just as hard as he has for Carlton.

Still too short for a ruckman for mine.

DeLuca 202
Ackland 196...down the track may become our BP if Hartllett doesn't stand up.
McLaren 196

Aisake 202

Bryan's a goner, and McLaren will be a goner in 2007.

Ackland's significant 3 year offer doesn't worry me. He's only 24, and the salary cap is going up over the next 3 years...I bet it isn't that bad to take, given the Saints were struggling to stay under the cap with huge contracts to a plethora of stars.

Please oh please recruit a 200cm ruckman at pick 17 or 19 and pick 67 or 80 (Griffith will be interesting if he's mobile enough).

That will give us midfielders in picks 1, 19, 35, 51, 67.

Well atleast I wont HAVE TO watch McLaren and Bryan as our first 2 rucks in 2007.

ATM I feel dudded!! :cry:

Teach him a lesson given he has taken his position as first ruck for granted. Drop him for Aisake, and then I hope he fights his way back in the team and gets in on merit (and not injury).

I understand and agree with post Conundrum:

if the recruiters (whoever they are) were not going to take a genuine ruckman (200+ cm), then Cain was always insurance till Aisake, Hampson and Jacobs matured/ made the grade...given there was no trees for wood (or was there????).

ryan2000 · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 10:50 am

Geez we're doing well with the recruiting aren't we?

Longmire.
Chambers.
McLaren
Ackland

New Rule...........No recruiting players from other teams that are struggling to get a game! It's just not going to work.

Cloke has been ok! Pitty he was injured, i would have liked to see how he went!

I have no problems with us recruiting a good performing VFL/SANFL/WAFL ruckman provided that:-
a) They can actually Ruck
b) They are taller than 196cm
c) They are not crap!

The Griffiths bloke would have been a risk, but a better risk than Ackland!

Interstate teams know how to do it, you wont see them recruiting duds that aren't getting a game with their current team, they will go for rookies that will prove their worth like 'Cox' or 'Sandilands'.

How about we do the same.

Wojee · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:17 am **Posts:** 35135

He's been disappointing this season.

Fabulous · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 11:10 am

Great judges are Carlton... We give a Cloke a 1 year deal and Cain a 3 year deal.

Cain only came to Carlton because we offered him a 3 year deal, remember St Kilda offered him a 2 year deal but knew he was on the outer....

Why else would you leave title contenders for the wooden spooners?
Less competition for a game, and an extra year on an AFL salary...

DownUnderChick · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 11:12 am

It's not so much that he can't ruck that has pissed me off but his total lack of second efforts.

Many times on Saturday, Fraser pushed forward or back and there was Ackland still waiting in the centre circle.

He was recruited as our Number 1 ruckman and has made no effort to lead as he seems happy to sit on his arse and let the other guys do all the work.

I leave most recruiting decisions to the experts as I figure they know more than me, but why the flower did we sign him up for 3 years when he obviously is lacking in some fundamentals of rucking in the 21st century i.e. mobility?

gerry atric · **Joined:** Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:35 am **Posts:** 2125

Quote:

Can't be critical of the Football Club because we were not blessed with a lot of choices to fill the short term void.

Conundrum, you are kidding, are you on the Board? How could anyone without a vested interest not be critical of the club? Ackland has not given us more choices, we rucked Santy ahead of him. If we wanted to know something about Ackland, maybe we should have asked a few Saints fans.

Quote:

This sent DP and his MC searching for a replacement. At the time, it was panic stations as it looked like we could enter the 07 season with McClaren and ??????? as our ruckmen. So, they sourced out Ackland and to entice him over had to offer him a three year deal. Remember, the Saints were in dissaray then - the coach had been sacked and they had no one at the helm. Ackland bought it and DP was a relieved man. Shortly after we claim Cloke and all was rosy there for awhile at least

And preacher Ackland is no good, so how does any of the above justify recruiting a ruckman who we don't trust toi ruck. What sort of a tinpot little operation are we? Do we have anyone keeping an eye on players from other clubs over the year. I mean it was pretty obvious over the last two years we were going to have a high PSD, why didn't we take Mathew Clarke for short term, at least he can palm the ball.

So does anyone actually know who we can blame. I need someone's face to put in the middle of my dart board. MMarkH if you read this, give us a name. There are a lot of angry supporters out here who had thought DAvenport/O'Reilly/Mansfield/ Mick MArtyn et al deals were a thing of the past. But maybe it is the whole club that is a thing of the past.

AIRCAV · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 1:05 pm

spot on Agro.

20/20 hindsight is damn easy, but the simple fact is that we had no ruck. Do we let our kids get smashed in the ruck and thereby deny players like Murphy or do we recruit a cheap gap stopper to give them some respite whilst they develop?

dannyboy · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 1:42 pm

Cain was never Able

Elwood Blues1 · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:10 am **Posts:** 4827

dannyboy wrote:

Cain was never Able

He was able enough to get himself a three year deal....

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 1:47 pm

AIRCAV wrote:

spot on Agro.

20/20 hindsight is damn easy, but the simple fact is that we had no ruck. Do we let our kids get smashed in the ruck and thereby deny players like Murphy or do we recruit a cheap gap stopper to give them some respite whilst they develop?

Atmosphere feels warmer in this thread - I may camp in here for a while. :wink:

blu944 · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 2:01 pm

Ackland was a result of the greater problem of list management at the club. No developing ruckmen, a bunch of failed names like Mott, McLaren and Bryan and a #1 ruckman who retired before time. What you're left with was a list minus a mature ruckman and a PSD pick to get whoever was out of contract, unfortunately that was Cain Ackland and 3 years was the only way to get him to walk.

Cyclonus · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2007 2:02 pm

AIRCAV wrote:

Do we let our kids get smashed in the ruck and thereby deny players like Murphy or do we recruit a cheap gap stopper to give them some respite whilst they develop?

Cain Ackland on a three-year deal doesn't sound cheap to me.

Ackland looks like he has the ability, but just can't be [REDACTED] putting in.

Time to throw Aisake in with Setanta.

Who the hell is responsible for recruiting Ackland

Who is online