- Joined
- 14 November 2005
- Posts
- 1,319
- Reactions
- 12
So if the list is thin what do we need when cut and fill time is at hand....
A second ruckman worth his salt would be nice, Paddy Ryder does his job ok, but he was also a good position player, both forward and back, so really he could be a third ruckman on the ground without upsetting the balance of the side and when the first or second ruck is out (injured or otherwise) he could step up.
Hille is not getting any younger, while not old enough to be close to retirement for a few years, it takes time to develop a good ruck unless like Collingwood did you go shopping for a current player. So we look down the list at Bellchambers and Laycock, they have had enough time to prove themselves. Bellchambers looked lack lustre yesterday and Laycock just looks lazy whenever he actually gets to play.
Hille is the first ruck, when he is out like at the present the bombers really struggle, did he make the difference to the 5 we won, no other ruckman we have has imposed himself on the game like Hille. When our mids get first hands they actually look ok even if they do lack pace.
One or preferably two fast midfielders would be nice.
Without going over board this would be a good starting point imho.
I really can't understand why Heath Hocking was left on Lecras for so long, or why for that matter he was in the backline at all, we know he isn't fast but his value is doing the bullock work in the centre like the role smokin Joe used to fill when the Dons were in their prime.
I think Knights will end up going, unfortunately I also have a feeling we will get a wooden spoon this year which will make the event transpire.
Essendon's predicament has been a long time in the making. About 10 years in fact. Our strength has also been our biggest weakness. We've always had a relative strong core, skilled talented group of players to build a team around. But alas, our recruiters have not been up to the task.
The Bombers have a heap of players that you might call "top up" players. They might add a missing element to a good side or turn an average side into a good one, but you cannot recruit "top up" players for a decade and expect quality results.
The last decade is littered with players that never made it. Unfortunately, not only does the turnover mean a failed recruit - it means the club never builds up a list of depth. Players such as Cupido, Reynolds, Johns, Davies, Bolton, Bannister, Richards etc were taking up valuable game time for 40-100games but always failing to ever actually "make it".
Their failures were in part patched over by the performances of players the calibre of Hird, Lucas, Johnson and Lloyd.
Now 10 years later, we have a group of players that were supposed to "add" to the group, now expected to win Premierships.
Duckman