Michael Jezz wrote:
1. His athleticism and his talent as a truly creative footballer suits the forward line rather than the back line.
Really? He is not a great kick for goal so can waste his chances, and down back his vertical leap means he can spoil players like Riewoldt, and he provides great run out of defense.
Michael Jezz wrote:
2. We don't have a genuine CHF other than Waite so it will only rob peter to pay paul.
We don't have a genuine CHB either, and last time I checked people round here think the game has progressed to the point you don't need a genuine CHF anymore.
Michael Jezz wrote:
3. He does not hit targets coming out of the backline. A sprayed kick in the forw.
He misses set shots for goal too. I would not want to rely on him to kick a goal in the siren from 45m out to win us the game. Historically, the poorer kicks play down back (Silvagni, Mckay etc).
Michael Jezz wrote:
4. His only success has been against the athletic Center Half Forwards. Big Bodied Center Half Forwards beat him every time..
So what? So you don't play him on the big bodies players. Your arguement is hopelessly one dimensional and inflexible. Modern football is about match ups. We have Setanta for the monkeys, and Waite for the athletic types. What's wrong with that?
Michael Jezz wrote:
5. Denis Pagan, suffered for you and tried this experiment and it failed dismally.
Waite looked ok in defense in my view. Remember, he has only played about a dozen or so games there, and last year was his first year with a full pre-season. And he did come 3rd in the B&F, so not sure that he has failed there.
Just playing devil's advocate mate. I personally wish we had a great defender so we could keep Waite up forward, but I am open minded about where he plays because I think down back we are lacking class and I can see good arguements either way. You though seem to be just seeing the one arguement which seems a bit narrow minded.