TOPIC:

anchorman wrote: He would have been playing for Swans and not the Eagles is what I am saying.Back then he wasn't needed or wouldn't be needed.
No need for what!!

That is not what I am trying to say. I am of the opinion that if nic nat was in a better team you would more than likely see a different player. How would Sandilands go at the west coast being their number 1 ruckmen surrounded by crabs.??????

Natainui is a very good athlete and he is good at bounce downs. Doesn't have a footy brain and his inability to get in the right places to get the ball and mark the ball will stop him from being anymore than what he is today - inconsistent. Clarke continues to improve all the time and has now gone past Naitanui in all but centre bounces and we know how little they affect the result in todays footy.

JB wrote: Natainui is a very good athlete and he is good at bounce downs. Doesn't have a footy brain and his inability to get in the right places to get the ball and mark the ball will stop him from being anymore than what he is today - inconsistent. Clarke continues to improve all the time and has now gone past Naitanui in all but centre bounces and we know how little they affect the result in todays footy.

Well the centre bounce is where the the game starts. Many games have been won from quick take aways from the centre of the ground., so I have to disagree with you on that point. As anchor would say that last comment is a stupid thing to say. You have the right mix in the middle and you are on you way.

anchorman wrote:

Before the Bounce wrote:

anchorman wrote: He would have been playing for Swans and not the Eagles is what I am saying.Back then he wasn't needed or wouldn't be needed.
No need for what!!

That is not what I am trying to say. I am of the opinion that if nic nat was in a better team you would more than likely see a different player. How would Sandilands go at the west coast being their number 1 ruckmen surrounded by crabs.??????

Read my previous post about it.He would still be a far better player than NN purley because he is a footballer he knows the game NN hasn't learnt it yet.
And just to add to what I have said before, If NN was at a higher ranked club he wouldn't be playing in the league side, he would be playing in the twos.
He should be given time to develop in the ressies he will become a better player sooner.

Fair comment, but I feel any average player will lift or impress more in a team surrounded by quality. Thats my opinion!

Before the Bounce wrote:

anchorman wrote:

Before the Bounce wrote:

anchorman wrote: He would have been playing for Swans and not the Eagles is what I am saying.Back then he wasn't needed or wouldn't be needed.
No need for what!!

That is not what I am trying to say. I am of the opinion that if nic nat was in a better team you would more than likely see a different player. How would Sandilands go at the west coast being their number 1 ruckmen surrounded by crabs.??????

Read my previous post about it.He would still be a far better player than NN purley because he is a footballer he knows the game NN hasn't learnt it yet.
And just to add to what I have said before, If NN was at a higher ranked club he wouldn't be playing in the league side, he would be playing in the twos.
He should be given time to develop in the ressies he will become a better player sooner.

Fair comment, but I feel any average player will lift or impress more in a team surrounded by quality. Thats my opinion!

I

I feel he would find it a hell of a lot tougher than where he is now.

Well the centre bounce is where the the game starts. Many games have been won from quick take aways from the centre of the ground., so I have to disagree with you on that point. As anchor would say that last comment is a stupid thing to say. You have the right mix in the middle and you are on you way.

Cox and Natainui are supposed to be the best combo in the AFL and you lose consistently. Sandilands dominated for many years when Freo wre well down. Centre bounces can't beat a good midfield. Geelong and Hawthorne have won quite a few flags in recent years with lessor ruckmen than WC or Dockers.

JB wrote: Well the centre bounce is where the the game starts. Many games have been won from quick take aways from the centre of the ground., so I have to disagree with you on that point. As anchor would say that last comment is a stupid thing to say. You have the right mix in the middle and you are on you way.

Cox and Natainui are supposed to be the best combo in the AFL and you lose consistently. Sandilands dominated for many years when Freo wre well down. Centre bounces can't beat a good midfield. Geelong and Hawthorne have won quite a few flags in recent years with lessor ruckmen than WC or Dockers.

Sandilands dominate for many years yeah right., was only a month or so ago and he receive a right old bake from Lethal. They more than likely are the best combo in some journo's opinion but as I have been trying to get through to you lot they are surrounded by fuking crabs. I would not say Haile or Ottens where lessor ruckmen.

If you cant mark consistantly or get into where the ball is, has nothing to do with "playing with crabs" Gary Demspsey won a brownlow with footscray who had a bucnh of crabs too. He domintated around the ground despite the players he had around him.

anchorman wrote: Name me a team that he would be number two ruckman for in the top four or eight.
He may get games if the number one ruckman for the teams was out.

North, GCS, Port, Geelong.

UNKA2 wrote: If you cant mark consistantly or get into where the ball is, has nothing to do with "playing with crabs" Gary Demspsey won a brownlow with footscray who had a bucnh of crabs too. He domintated around the ground despite the players he had around him.

Interesting I just read a article on the dogs 1970's team and they where describe as relatively strong. During the 75 season they won 11 games to finish 2 games out of the finals.