Delistings

[Captain]

I think the large number of retirements has saved a few players from being delisted. However I reckon there will be 3-4 players that have to go. For mine...

Delisted:

Playfair
DOK
Brabazon

Lucky (all these will have to have a big 2010 and play regularly)

Buchanan
Bevan
Laidlaw
Schmidt

So with 6 retirements, 3 delistings would mean:
2 rookie promotions (Thonrton, Pyke)
5 picks in national draft
1 pick in PSD
1 player from a draft pick trade/swap

[chuckie]

What do we do with Jake Orreal his 2 years as a rookie are up, do we delist him and then try and re draft him via the rookie draft, do we promote him to the senior list or just let him go.

[Plugger46]

Brabazon and Playfair should be the only two IMO.

Will be absolutely amazed if they delist D.O'Keefe after his first serious season.

[bigswan]

I think that 5 selections in this draft is too much. You have to be sure that the players you are drafting low in the draft have more potential than those on the list. I think that DOK and Braba will be reprieved but Playfair is a risk due to his injury. I also doubt whether Laidlaw can withstand the rigours of AFL footy.

[caj23]

Don't understand the rush to promote Pyke

He clearly needs more time to develop and to be honest we looked better with LRT relieving against Brisbane.

Not there's much merit in promoting Orreal either as he is in the same boat

Hopefully Currie can be injury free at the beginning of 2010 and can come in as Jolly's understudy

As for delistings, mine would be

Brabazon and Playfair if he can't come up

[hammo]

I think Dan O'Keefe will be given another year to prove himself. Hopefully for him an injury free pre-season and a chance to push for senior selection in round 1.

Playfair and Brabazon will be the only two delistings for mine.

[Bleed Red Blood]

Brabazon and Playfair should be the only two IMO.

Will be absolutely amazed if they delist D.O'Keefe after his first serious season.

So often I just have to quote your post and say "Seconded."
Rarely I do 'cause I'm a wanker and stubborn and want to say exactly what I mean.
But in this case it is.
And I still didn't just say "agree". But there you go.

[Captain]

Will be absolutely amazed if they delist D.O'Keefe after his first serious season.

3 years on the list, injury prone, has never amazed in the ressies and other young guys are picked ahead of him. I will be absolutely amazed if we DON'T delist him.

[Bleed Red Blood]

3 years on the list, injury prone, has never amazed in the ressies and other young guys are picked ahead of him. I will be absolutely amazed if we DON'T delist him.

I don't think you can claim "injury prone". He had that recurring groin (?) injury in his first two seasons, and with that behind him will hopefully build form and with a good pre-season show why he was taken first round.

[Captain]

I don't think you can claim "injury prone". He had that recurring groin (?) injury in his first two seasons, and with that behind him will hopefully build form and with a good pre-season show why he was taken first round.

Would love for you to be right, we need a classy midfielder. Just don't reckon you will be right...

[Industrial Fan]

Brabazon, Laidlaw.

That is all.

[BSA5]

DOK should be kept. First season not hampered by injury, showed some serious class in the ressies at times (going off reports), but inconsistent. Inconsistency is what you'd expect from a guy that had played almost no footy in two years.

Braba should go, I reckon. His main strength is his ability to find the ball, but we already have those types developing. Bird is averaging one of the highest possessions:TOG% ratios in the team, Jack is winning 15 touches a game playing as a hard tagger, and I'd expect him to be freed up soon, Hanners screams ball-magnet, MOD finds plenty of it, and basically seems like a quicker and more agile version of Braba, and McVeigh knows how to rack them up (he only averages 21 touches a game, but this is more through inconsistency; out of 18 games, 6 have been 26 possessions or over, 6 have been 16 possessions or under, with the other 6 between the two, which is statistically odd, as you'd expect a bell-curve, with much more in the middle region). Braba has had 4 basically injury-free seasons at the club, and has 4 poor-to-moderate games to show for it.

Orreal has apparently been elevated.

Thornton should be elevated.

Laidlaw is a tough one, you'd think after slotting 8 goals for the ressies, if the coaching staff were still keen to keep him, they'd give him a run in the last game. We should know better than to make concrete assumptions based on Roos' selections, as they are often highly enigmatic, but it isn't a great sign him. Could be in trouble.

Buchy should be trade bait. He has stagnated here, I reckon a new club would help him capture past form. Perhaps the Saints would like to reunite him with his old partner in crime, the Schneiderman (has anybody noticed that Buchy's form dip coincided exactly with Schneider leaving?). Perhaps a trade for Maguire?

Playfair I kinda hope goes. I'm just can't get excited about him as a player. We don't really lack that many talls; Grundy has come into his own down back, Richards is to come back to the side, LRT is in top form, CBolts is still up and about, Pyke might find a home in a loose role down back at times next year, Currie has shown promise both up forward and in the ruck, Jolly can pinch-hit up forward, White is young, promising and appears durable, Johnston is an unknown quantity, Goodes is starting to make CHF his own, and I reckon Barlow, who has been playing on the wing and down back lately, could play as a tall forward as well or better than Henry. Add to that guys like Vespa, who has shown ability as a small lead-up FF (Mark Williams style) and Ryan O'Keefe, who if we're absolutely desperate can pinch-hit as a genuine forward, as can Paul Bevan and Luke Ablett, then I think structurally speaking we don't need Hank as cover all that much.

[Captain]

Pyke might find a home in a loose role down back at times next year

I know it wasn't your main point, but I almost choked when I read this! What would Pyke be doing down back? Can't quite see him intercepting the incoming ball like Hodge and Maxwell...

I would have Pyke stone cold last in players who should play the loose man down back.

[Donners]

Can't see more than two being cut given how many players we have lost.

Has Thornton really done enough to get a promotion? I can't remember seeing anything of note in the few games he did play.

Laidlaw and Brabazon would have to be on extremely shaky ground, with four games between them in as many years.

Playfair is the most obvious one to go.

[gossipcom]

Going by Roos comments (am on phone so don't have the actual quote) it looks like Playfair if his hammy comes good will survive.

[BSA5]

I know it wasn't your main point, but I almost choked when I read this! What would Pyke be doing down back? Can't quite see him intercepting the incoming ball like Hodge and Maxwell...

I would have Pyke stone cold last in players who should play the loose man down back.

I don't think he would be our primary choice, but what better way to learn the game? Don't worry about an opponent, just watch what's happening upfield and play on instinct. Obviously I don't think he should be there Rd 1, I don't think he should be in the team Rd 1, barring another interrupted preseason for Currie/Orreal. But at times, I don't think it would be too bad a move to chuck him down back in patches and get him to fill up space, maybe just as a rest from rucking. He's big, strong, and very mobile. He could cover a lot of leading space.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't my idea of a master plan that will turn Pyke into a superstar overnight. His main role would still be ruckman. Thing is, Pyke seems to get caught between making attacking position and worrying about his opponent. Place him as a loose man in defence (when it is a viable strategy, that is), and just tell him to plonk himself about 40 metres out in the corridor. Perhaps do this for most of the game in the ressies, with relieving stints in the ruck, and do the opposite in senior games, if he earns them.

Remember that Pyke was a fullback in union. Positionally speaking, full back in union and loose-man in Aussie Rules are the closest analogous positions between the two codes. Both rely on judging the intentions of an opposition player upfield, on reading the ball off the boot, judging flight, aerial ball skills, fitness, and positioning. Union also requires good tackling skills and speed in that position, something useful but not necessary as a loose man in AR.

[Donners]

Going by Roos comments (am on phone so don't have the actual quote) it looks like Playfair if his hammy comes good will survive.

That's one hell of an "if". I remember they found some magic cure for Tingay when he was on our list, and we never saw him again.

[Plugger46]

3 years on the list, injury prone, has never amazed in the ressies and other young guys are picked ahead of him. I will be absolutely amazed if we DON'T delist him.

He barely played for the first two years. With all of the retirements and a couple of de-listings I can't see the club de-listing a first round draft pick when he's had an interrupted development - especially when this is apparently a shallow draft.

I'm not saying he'll make it but he deserves at least one more year to show what he's got. Brabazon's had 4 years and he's been fully fit throughout that time!

[Bloody Hell]

Remember that Pyke was a fullback in union. Positionally speaking, full back in union and loose-man in Aussie Rules are the closest analogous positions between the two codes. Both rely on judging the intentions of an opposition player upfield, on reading the ball off the boot, judging flight, aerial ball skills, fitness, and positioning. Union also requires good tackling skills and speed in that position, something useful but not necessary as a loose man in AR.

No...just no. Are you wearing a tin foil hat?

[caj23]

No...just no. Are you wearing a tin foil hat?

Agreed - would prefer it if Roosy pulled on the boots again and played that role

[BSA5]

No...just no. Are you wearing a tin foil hat?

Of course not. Aluminium foil is far more effective.

Honestly, I'm not expecting Pyke to become our Luke Hodge, or become an important cog in our side (in any position). I'm saying he should be trialled in the role in the ressies, and if he takes to it as well as he has ruckwork, and the opening is in the team for him as a ruckman as it has been this year (i.e. Currie gets injured/is @@@@, Orreal isn't ready, etc), then it may be worthwhile sticking him down there for patches rather than just benching him. I'd never trust him with a direct opponent down back, but it would be good for his development, good for our rotations, and would only happen if he had proven himself at reserves level first.

And I want to make it clear that I'm not saying full back in Union and loose man in defence in AR are essentially the same position. But in terms of the skills involved, they have the most in common. In order to make it as a full back in union, one must have a talent for reading play and judging the flight of balls, aerial skills, and consciousness of your positioning. While the way in which you utilise these skills are very different in AR (ball will travel through the air differently, and the positioning in relation to other players is completely different), he has shown aptitude for these things in one context; with a bit of experience he should be able to switch.

[Primmy]

Pyke is kind of like a retrograde player along the lines of Big Monkey. He will have his place. It will probably not be a major position, etc, but his size and his ability to learn will hold him in good stead for a place somewhere. His tap work is great, and getting better. Wait my children, wait and see what the enigmatic one has in store for us.

[Captain]

Wait my children, wait and see what the enigmatic one has in store for us.

Pyke as a player isn't the concern in this instance. It's the thought of him playing loose man in defense.

[Bloody Hell]

Of course not. Aluminium foil is far more effective.

Whatever keeps out the voices.


Honestly, I'm not expecting Pyke to become our Luke Hodge, or become an important cog in our side (in any position). I'm saying he should be trialled in the role in the ressies, and if he takes to it as well as he has ruckwork, and the opening is in the team for him as a ruckman as it has been this year (i.e. Currie gets injured/is @@@@, Orreal isn't ready, etc), then it may be worthwhile sticking him down there for patches rather than just benching him. I'd never trust him with a direct opponent down back, but it would be good for his development, good for our rotations, and would only happen if he had proven himself at reserves level first.

Loose man isn't a position. It is something that is agreed between opposition coaches. If I were an opposition coach and Pyke was loose - he'd be manned up, quick and exploited. I have no problem with Pyke moving into defense or up forward - and have suggested as much to develop his game. Will never have the skills to play as a loose man.


And I want to make it clear that I'm not saying full back in Union and loose man in defence in AR are essentially the same position. But in terms of the skills involved, they have the most in common. In order to make it as a full back in union, one must have a talent for reading play and judging the flight of balls, aerial skills, and consciousness of your positioning. While the way in which you utilise these skills are very different in AR (ball will travel through the air differently, and the positioning in relation to other players is completely different), he has shown aptitude for these things in one context; with a bit of experience he should be able to switch.
To me this is the real whacky part of your posts. I've played alot of union at fullback, and a few of games of AR at CHB. Completely different.

It's like saying that being an opening bowler in cricket is closest to playing CHF in AR - therefore the skills translate. The only similarities are fitness, coordination and a funny shaped ball - though not the same shape.

[BSA5]

Loose man isn't a position. It is something that is agreed between opposition coaches. If I were an opposition coach and Pyke was loose - he'd be manned up, quick and exploited. I have no problem with Pyke moving into defense or up forward - and have suggested as much to develop his game. Will never have the skills to play as a loose man.

Of course it's not a set position. It is a role at times though. I said only when the game called for it.



To me this is the real whacky part of your posts. I've played alot of union at fullback, and a few of games of AR at CHB. Completely different.

It's like saying that being an opening bowler in cricket is closest to playing CHF in AR - therefore the skills translate. The only similarities are fitness, coordination and a funny shaped ball - though not the same shape.

Hardly. Is it that difficult to say that a particular role/position in one sport will have greater than typical similarities to a particular role/position in another sport? To play fullback effectively, one must be a good judge of ball flight, have a knack for being able to see and interpret a lot of information at once (reading the play), and maintain a regular awareness of where you are in relation to others. Pyke has proven that he has these particular qualities to the extent that he could utilise them at an international level, though in a different context. Rather than just "fitness, co-ordination and a funny-shaped ball", these are quite particular characteristics that not every professional athlete would consider a strength. Aside from which, fitness, co-ordination and a funny-shaped ball is pretty much required for every position in Aussie Rules, and every role in cricket, and every position in rugby, and..... you get the point.

[SimonH]

Back to the topic: a very, very good year to be a Swans-lister approaching his mid-20s who still hasn't made an impact. Salad days.

There is zero record of out-of-contract rookies getting poached by other clubs, so we can safely delist and re-rookie Orreal in my view (if we have to). Certainly no point in upgrading him as the only way he'd be played is if we had gross long-term injuries to a number of talls... which would create the LTIL space for him to be upgraded and played in 2010 anyway.

So minus 6 retirees, plus 2 (Thornton and Pyke) and then minus how many others? We don't want to look at adding more than 6 senior listers in one year, and can't trust we'll accumulate anyone by trading. For mine, that says only 2 other players to be dropped.

I have nothing against Tim Schmidt, who looks like a solid player when up and going. But 2010 for a 2003 draft player would be pushing it beyond generous, and starting to get into the realms of absurd. With Freo dumping Adam Campbell today, 17-gamer Schmidt is now the only player out of 80-odd taken in the 2003 ND to have played fewer than 20 games and remain on an AFL list... the second least successful, Mr 2009 Renaissance Zac Dawson, has played exactly twice as many on 34. Schmidt offers nothing that we can't get from one or several of about a dozen midfielders or midfield prospects, most of them younger than him.

Doubtless we'll keep Playfair if tests reveal his hamstring will be 100% in time for a full pre-season. But doubtless we'd keep a 19yo Plugger Lockett if he dropped into our laps via a NSW local rookie listing. Both are roughly the same chance of happening.

Braba could be generously described as a 'depth player'; doesn't do that much wrong but doesn't do anywhere near enough to really hurt an opponent. Perhaps keep him for one more year if we lose both of the above. Maybe. Thornton's still marginal as a long-term prospect; and Thornton's well ahead of Braba.

Laidlaw shouldn't even be seriously considered for dumping in my view. He offers something a little different from other candidates, and appears to be very likely to be AFL standard if up and going. If not able to get on the park and push for selection in 2010, he'll pick himself for delisting.

[Legs Akimbo]

Of course it's not a set position. It is a role at times though. I said only when the game called for it.



Hardly. Is it that difficult to say that a particular role/position in one sport will have greater than typical similarities to a particular role/position in another sport? To play fullback effectively, one must be a good judge of ball flight, have a knack for being able to see and interpret a lot of information at once (reading the play), and maintain a regular awareness of where you are in relation to others. Pyke has proven that he has these particular qualities to the extent that he could utilise them at an international level, though in a different context. Rather than just "fitness, co-ordination and a funny-shaped ball", these are quite particular characteristics that not every professional athlete would consider a strength. Aside from which, fitness, co-ordination and a funny-shaped ball is pretty much required for every position in Aussie Rules, and every role in cricket, and every position in rugby, and..... you get the point.

Bsa5 - for what it is worth, I think you logic sound but your conclusion is incorrect. I think Pyke is a ruckman and will become a really good one (i.e. not a backman). That will happen when learns the game and plays on instinct. give two years. Ruckman take time and he has the physical kit, but it is really obvious that at present he is just trying to get the technique right. The quality of some of his ruckwork is really impressive. let him be a ruckman.

[Bloody Hell]

Of course it's not a set position. It is a role at times though. I said only when the game called for it.



Hardly. Is it that difficult to say that a particular role/position in one sport will have greater than typical similarities to a particular role/position in another sport? To play fullback effectively, one must be a good judge of ball flight, have a knack for being able to see and interpret a lot of information at once (reading the play), and maintain a regular awareness of where you are in relation to others. Pyke has proven that he has these particular qualities to the extent that he could utilise them at an international level, though in a different context. Rather than just "fitness, co-ordination and a funny-shaped ball", these are quite particular characteristics that not every professional athlete would consider a strength. Aside from which, fitness, co-ordination and a funny-shaped ball is pretty much required for every position in Aussie Rules, and every role in cricket, and every position in rugby, and..... you get the point.

I do get the point.

You're saying it doesn't matter what sport you play whether union, volleyball, basketball etc, if you can play Aussie Rules - you can play Aussie Rules...as long as you're fit and coordinated...and can deal with a funny shaped ball...which was my point -

I don't think you can draw parallels with other sports. It's the individuals abilities and AR is a very different sport, which you seem to get.

Karmichel Hunt.

[Bloodmaniac]

I would like to see Nathan Gordon on the books. Very good solid player. The kid has a great future.

[Plugger46]

Back to the topic: a very, very good year to be a Swans-lister approaching his mid-20s who still hasn't made an impact. Salad days.

There is zero record of out-of-contract rookies getting poached by other clubs, so we can safely delist and re-rookie Orreal in my view (if we have to). Certainly no point in upgrading him as the only way he'd be played is if we had gross long-term injuries to a number of talls... which would create the LTIL space for him to be upgraded and played in 2010 anyway.

So minus 6 retirees, plus 2 (Thornton and Pyke) and then minus how many others? We don't want to look at adding more than 6 senior listers in one year, and can't trust we'll accumulate anyone by trading. For mine, that says only 2 other players to be dropped.

I have nothing against Tim Schmidt, who looks like a solid player when up and going. But 2010 for a 2003 draft player would be pushing it beyond generous, and starting to get into the realms of absurd. With Freo dumping Adam Campbell today, 17-gamer Schmidt is now the only player out of 80-odd taken in the 2003 ND to have played fewer than 20 games and remain on an AFL list... the second least successful, Mr 2009 Renaissance Zac Dawson, has played exactly twice as many on 34. Schmidt offers nothing that we can't get from one or several of about a dozen midfielders or midfield prospects, most of them younger than him.

Doubtless we'll keep Playfair if tests reveal his hamstring will be 100% in time for a full pre-season. But doubtless we'd keep a 19yo Plugger Lockett if he dropped into our laps via a NSW local rookie listing. Both are roughly the same chance of happening.

Braba could be generously described as a 'depth player'; doesn't do that much wrong but doesn't do anywhere near enough to really hurt an opponent. Perhaps keep him for one more year if we lose both of the above. Maybe. Thornton's still marginal as a long-term prospect; and Thornton's well ahead of Braba.

Laidlaw shouldn't even be seriously considered for dumping in my view. He offers something a little different from other candidates, and appears to be very likely to be AFL standard if up and going. If not able to get on the park and push for selection in 2010, he'll pick himself for delisting.

Why would you de-list a player who has shown that he's up to the level when fully fit (Schmidt) but keep a player who has clearly shown that he isn't (Brabazon).
With the amount of senior players leaving, we need players in Schmidt's age bracket who are capable footballers, so I see absolutely no point in de-listing him, unless his body is shot.

As for Playfair. One of the worst pick-ups of all time, surely he will go.

[Captain]

Even if Playfair is injury free, he still can't kick.

[Plugger46]

Even if Playfair is injury free, he still can't kick.

Correct. He can take a mark but that's about it.

[blinddog]

Wasn't leaping Leo a forward when he joined the Swans

[Bear]

Pyke, on what he has shown this year, has no chance of being elevated, let alone loose man in defence or any ather bizarre suggestion.

A potential back-up ruckman is his only hope. This will take at least 2 years to be able to play the game properly, by which time he'll be 27ish... my money would be on Currie, Orreal, or next draftee to fill the role(s) by the time Pyke gets a reasonable understanding of the game.

[Hartijon]

Of course not. Aluminium foil is far more effective.

Honestly, I'm not expecting Pyke to become our Luke Hodge, or become an important cog in our side (in any position). I'm saying he should be trialled in the role in the ressies, and if he takes to it as well as he has ruckwork, and the opening is in the team for him as a ruckman as it has been this year (i.e. Currie gets injured/is @@@@, Orreal isn't ready, etc), then it may be worthwhile sticking him down there for patches rather than just benching him. I'd never trust him with a direct opponent down back, but it would be good for his development, good for our rotations, and would only happen if he had proven himself at reserves level first.

And I want to make it clear that I'm not saying full back in Union and loose man in defence in AR are essentially the same position. But in terms of the skills involved, they have the most in common. In order to make it as a full back in union, one must have a talent for reading play and judging the flight of balls, aerial skills, and consciousness of your positioning. While the way in which you utilise these skills are very different in AR (ball will travel through the air differently, and the positioning in relation to other players is completely different), he has shown aptitude for these things in one context; with a bit of experience he should be able to switch.


I am not disrespecting you,you argue logically and well..its just some of your concepts are false premisses to base an argument on. The loose man in defence concept for example,We discussed this before...its a strategy not a position,if allowed by the opposition coach (highly unlikely) and not exploited to be used against us(highly unlikely)it is a role only the most highly talented ball player can play.Brownlow medal winner Goodes could possibly play it as a strategy and beat the opposition counter on him.Luke Hodge did this in the GF last year beating Rooke. Ther is NO WAY Pyke and loose man in defense should be used in the same sentence..unless you want us to get thrashed?

[Go Swannies]

Pyke, on what he has shown this year, has no chance of being elevated, let alone loose man in defence or any ather bizarre suggestion.

A potential back-up ruckman is his only hope. This will take at least 2 years to be able to play the game properly, by which time he'll be 27ish... my money would be on Currie, Orreal, or next draftee to fill the role(s) by the time Pyke gets a reasonable understanding of the game.

Do you just have this on a Word document somewhere so you can cut-and-paste and post it whenever Pyke's name is mentioned? If not, you should.

For what it's worth, I suspect that the Swans will think a very fast big man who reads the flight of the ball well but needs to develop an instinctive feel for the positional moves of the game is worth developing. I'd expect that he was given some guarantee (as Tiger and his family were) that he'd be rewarded for moving to Oz. And, because of injuries, we've seen him a year too early. Remember Roos said early this season that he never expected him to play this year - or be ready to play - and he was very impressed with where he was at, considering the incredibly short time he's played the game.

[hammo]

Do you just have this on a Word document somewhere so you can cut-and-paste and post it whenever Pyke's name is mentioned? If not, you should.

For what it's worth, I suspect that the Swans will think a very fast big man who reads the flight of the ball well but needs to develop an instinctive feel for the positional moves of the game is worth developing. I'd expect that he was given some guarantee (as Tiger and his family were) that he'd be rewarded for moving to Oz. And, because of injuries, we've seen him a year too early. Remember Roos said early this season that he never expected him to play this year - or be ready to play - and he was very impressed with where he was at, considering the incredibly short time he's played the game.

I doubt that any "deal" is in place. Pyke was given a spot on the rookie list with no guarantees. It was his manager who sent a DVD to the Swans, not the Swans pleading to him to relocate.

I have no problem with Bear repeatedly balancing and inserting some reality into the debate. Considering Mitch Clarke's display last week, let alone the freakishly talented ruckman developing in the West, I'm surprised there are so many people who still choose to ignore the glaring deficiencies in Pyke's game.

[Go Swannies]

I doubt that any "deal" is in place. Pyke was given a spot on the rookie list with no guarantees. It was his manager who sent a DVD to the Swans, not the Swans pleading to him to relocate.

I have no problem with Bear repeatedly balancing and inserting some reality into the debate. Considering Mitch Clarke's display last week, let alone the freakishly talented ruckman developing in the West, I'm surprised there are so many people who still choose to ignore the glaring deficiencies in Pyke's game.

Dunno. I really admire the skills of Judd and GAblett too but I'm glad I have Kirk in my team. Jolly at his best is some distance below Cox at his best. Surely it's leaving the coaches to make the most of what we have, rather than lamenting what we don't. Personally, I've gained a lot of satisfaction from watching the kids develop this year - and that included Pyke's deft touch as a junior ruckman when he should still have been chilling in Canberra learning the rudiments of the game.

[Plugger46]

I have no problem with Bear repeatedly balancing and inserting some reality into the debate. Considering Mitch Clarke's display last week, let alone the freakishly talented ruckman developing in the West, I'm surprised there are so many people who still choose to ignore the glaring deficiencies in Pyke's game.

So you're saying he needs to be one of the best ruckmen in the game? Of course he has deficiencies - he's been playing the game for 12 months.

No-one here is saying he will be a superstar or even guaranteeing that he'll make it but writing him off at this stage is just irrational. If he comes good at 27 great, we've got a solid ruckman for the next 5 years. If he doesn't, then I reckon he will have been worth the punt.

[BSA5]

I have no problem with Bear repeatedly balancing and inserting some reality into the debate. Considering Mitch Clarke's display last week, let alone the freakishly talented ruckman developing in the West, I'm surprised there are so many people who still choose to ignore the glaring deficiencies in Pyke's game.

Nobody is ignoring his deficiencies. To say that he has come along very well in 12 months doesn't mean that he has suddenly become a gun and is perfect and will be a star. He's incredibly raw and limited, nobody is denying that, but he has blown all expectations about his development out of the water (most were thinking he wouldn't get a game for two years, yet it was more like two months), and the unfortunate fact is that due to injuries and lack of ruck depth, Pyke was our best option as a second ruck for a good chunk of the year.

[Jewels]

Nobody is ignoring his deficiencies. To say that he has come along very well in 12 months doesn't mean that he has suddenly become a gun and is perfect and will be a star. He's incredibly raw and limited, nobody is denying that, but he has blown all expectations about his development out of the water (most were thinking he wouldn't get a game for two years, yet it was more like two months), and the unfortunate fact is that due to injuries and lack of ruck depth, Pyke was our best option as a second ruck for a good chunk of the year.

Anyone who saw him play at Rouse Hill in the pre-season would have to be amazed at the progress he has made.

[royboy42]

Anyone who saw him play at Rouse Hill in the pre-season would have to be amazed at the progress he has made.

I'm hanging on for the ride..reckon if he gets to be holding down a spot in '11 we've invested well.A good 5 years from him..starting from scratch and cost us buggerall.
Don't anyone think Roos played him this year for any reason than that he sees something, and so do I!

[liz]

No-one here is saying he will be a superstar or even guaranteeing that he'll make it but writing him off at this stage is just irrational.

"Irrational" is being kind.

[Captain]

I don't think you can claim "injury prone". He had that recurring groin (?) injury in his first two seasons, and with that behind him will hopefully build form and with a good pre-season show why he was taken first round.

Guess I was right:p