Buchanan and Rising Star Nominations

[Bear]

Originally posted by chammond
He has certainly been more consistent than Schneider was last year, has played more full games, and has been used in more roles. As far as I can see, he is nearly as accomplished in front of goal as Schneider, is a better mark, has more aerobic ability, is stronger, and has better defensive skills.

Some very arguable points there... but overall, Schneider's 2003 was full of class, with very few mistakes.

Whilst Bevan's 2004 has been solid, with some great, gutsy performances, he has also made plenty of mistakes - both obvious and subtle - as you would expect in his first year.

Schneider's year was better IMO.

Note: If you were to compare Kelly and Bevan in their first year, Bevan would clearly come out on top IMO.

[anne]

Bevan doesn't hoon around or show off - he is probably more of a team player.

[sharp9]

Buchanan would have been a certainty for a nomination...Kolouritis? Hartigan? and a few others, I mean, come on.

Hammy is Heath James...guess I was a little too sideways on that one!

[Barry Schneider]

Buchanan is too old for a rising star nomination.You have to be under 21 at 1st Jan this year.He is turning 22 this year.

[chammond]

Originally posted by silent lurker
What about Goodes's first year?

It depends on your definition of 'first year' I guess.

Goodes actually spent his first year playing in the reserves, mostly at full back.

But you're definitely right that his first full year in the seniors was outstanding, which is why he won the Rising Star award.

His Rising Star season was undoubtedly better than Bevan's . . . no argument from me there.

[Nolie]

Originally posted by chammond
Almost agree.

I hadn't forgotten Schneider's first year, nor O'Loughlin's, nor Saddington's, which were also excellent. In my opinion, Bevan's performance surpasses all those.

What else is there?

I agree. Bevan has been outstandibg as is an absolute star.
I think he will get close to wining the National award.