Kouta wrote:
Adam Chatfield wrote:
Hurley would have been great, instead we have a lazy, soft poor mans Richard Tambling in Chris Yarran. Ok that was harsh but nothing has shown me thus far that overlooking Rich isn't going to leave us with egg on our faces. Yarran has class, but doesn't work hard enough.
Yarran has played just three games and you're calling him a soft Richard Tambling.
Yarran oozes class, skill and poise.
Yarran is nothing like a poor man's Tambling with his build and physique.
Adam Chatfield wrote:
I saw Essendon* tonight, they actually have a structure, with key position players! Hooker and Pears are raw, but they have a role. Who have we drafted who can play key position? Why did we pick up Armfield at pick 46 when we could have got Hooker? Essendon* lack our midfield class, but are miles in front of us with their key position talent they have coming through.
Austin?
Hooker had five goals kicked on him by Franklin a week after Bower held Buddy to two goals.
Who is Hooker?
I look at Cale Hooker and see another Kepler Bradley...
The Yarran comment was harsh, but his work ethic and fitness are very questionable to say the least. He has class though, I remember a quality kick he did in the 3rd where he pin pointed a pass 50 metres, which is something I have never seen Tambling do!
Austin - I like Austin, and think he has potential. My point is Essendon* have a lot of key position options coming through in Pears, Hooker, Daniher, Hurley, Neagle & Gumbleton (if he ever gets on the park). Hooker may turn out to be Kepler Bradley, which is still preferable to turning out like Hartlett. My basic point was, overall there is precious little in terms of key position talent coming through on our list. We have a-grade midfield talent for sure, and other guys in Robbo, Bower, Jammo, Hammer, who are getting there at their various levels of development.
I would love Warnock in our side as I think it would make a massive difference to our structure, allowing Kreuze to spend more time up forward