I kinda went on about this last year as well. its my old bone. it started with ‘honour conor’.
I think Parish is tracking ok, but he hasn’t developed as quickly as i’d hoped after his first season.
Plenty seem to be expecting him to join Zerrett and McGrath and be the primary players in our midfield for years to come. Yet the same people bag Heppell. I can’t see Parish ever being as good as Heppell.
I hope i’m wrong.
He’ll be a very solid player and if he’s about our 4th or 5th best mid for most of his career then we’ll be in good shape.
Hopefully this weekend Parish has 30 disposals, 6 tackles and a goal and people jump on here and get stuck into me
1 Like
Parish currently isn’t fit enough. The way I see it is that he can’t do what he wants to do with his current fitness. For the time being he needs to play his role and figure out the best way to maximise his effort. I’d love to see him getting the recognition for putting his body on the line and for the defensive acts. That’s where he has to maximise his effort. To me he does too much running when we have the ball, if he used 5-10 of them sprints for defensive acts it would better serve the team.
Think KM changes his tune from thread to thread - In this thread claims Parish is not developing as expected, yet in a different thread claims we need patience with players - Then in this thread states we need to nail our midfield picks, yet KM claims he wanted Curnow and Francis in the 2015 draft - Which one is it ? We are wasting too much time on a player who is tracking well.
ahhh yes, the old ‘prolific poster’ trap.
Has claimed many a victim that one.
My picks were Francis & Weiderman. Hmmmm.
I am claiming that Parish is not projecting to be the player we need.
It’s not that difficult to understand.
Do we continue to develop him in that role or do we give some other players more opportunity?
As I stated clearly, we need more A-Grade players in midfield if we are going to improve as a side.
We currently have Merrett and Heppell is probably a level below.
Then we have a raft of players that have either reached their peak or need more playing time.
McGrath for mine will get there. But after that there is a lot of unknowns. It’s my personal opinion that Parish doesn’t project to be a star. Some in here have agreed with me.
Considering his draft range and the level of development he has received I feel that we really need him to take the next step.
Do you think he will?
1 Like
I reckon you should give McKenna go.
2 Likes
Haha, I have been on his bandwagon from day one.
He’s not fringe enough to cop my full wrath.
The more fringe they are the higher expectations I have.
wait, so we DONT need clearance midfielders, who are tenacious and defensively minded?
and are you seriously suggesting we drop him to develop someone else in Parish’s position?
come on man, you are either trolling or just being completely nonfuckingsensical
2 Likes
Parish is doing fine and will play an important role in the midfield for years to come - Whether he is an A Grader or B Grader is not important if all the pieces fit together - How many A Grade midfielders did Richmond or the Bulldogs or the Hawks have in their teams.
He’s a third year who is leading the club in clearances and centre clearances.
Many would think this is impressive and probably say he’s tracking on course to be our leading clearance mid by his 4th-5th year.
Of course you and I can see why this is a problem.
But maybe run through it once more, just for the others.
15 Likes
Basically, Langford hasn’t got the chance to show off his A grade talent, because pesky B grade Parish has stolen all of his development time.
And what’s worse, people complain about Langford, but nobody complains about Parish even though he was a high draft pick who is playing well.
4 Likes
Who said drop him?
All I’m suggesting is we start looking at alternative measures for our midfield because I don’t think Parish will be what we anticipated.
I doubt he gets to the Cousins level that so many expect.
That’s what we need though. We need to find a couple more stars.
I have no problem with them pumping so many games into him but I think they need to start looking at alternatives.
Langford needs to be persisted with and Begley needs to see more midfield minutes. And I’m not opposed to that being at VFL level like others are.
All I’m challenging people to consider is where the improvement is going to come from.
This board has lots of easy targets but also has its favourites.
I’m not one to criticise players and I’m not saying Parish is a bust. I just don’t think he will justify his high price tag is all.
I hope I’m wrong.
i Love stat picking.
Come back to me when he’s a top line mid that’s winning games for us. That’s what we need.
So where do you think the issue is Yaco?
To me the midfield is the obvious problem.
Parish is a midfielder. You shift him somewhere else and he will be wasted.
You are not challenging anyone to consider where the improvement will come from, becuase people have answered that question over and over again in this thread and others by saying it an incremental thing that will happen over time. Repeating the same question in the face of it being satisfactorily answered is not ‘challenging’, its just annoying.
Your mentality seems to be that if Parish doesnt turn into a deadset GUN right now then he is not improving, therefore we ought to consider other options for inside midfielders, OR that if his trajectory isnt indicating that ht will be a cousins like GUN in the future, then he is a waste. Its shortsighted, juvenile and completely out of touch with the reality of how the vast majority of AFL players develop/ requirements of an AFL list.
Langford needs to be persisted with yes, but I dont see what that has to do with Parish, two players can play as inside mids… Begley is tracking fine where he is.
You are insinuating that Parish is a ‘board favourite’ and therefore exempt from criticism. The reality is that hes a 3rd year player and performing at the level you would expect. You have not once indicated any areas where he can improve, nor have you expressed what criticism he has escaped. So unless you can actually critique his game, can you please drop this line?
And what the fark are you on about with Parish needing to ‘justify his high price tag’… fark what sort of money do you think hes on?
Your whole train of thought it so completely off the mark its not funny. Perhaps in a couple of years time if Parish has gone backwards, or simply not improved one iota, then your point may hold some credence, but to say it now is 100% paranoia and insecurity.
5 Likes
I would rate our midfield in the middle of the pack with the scope to get into the top 5 in the next two years - And if Parish continues to develop as expected he will be the cornerstone of the midfield - I am more worried about our defence which often gets off scott free in any analysis - It’s always the defence is PROTECTED because of the failings of the midfield.
What midfields do you have behind us, can’t be many.
His high price is in relation to where he was drafted. Somehow I think you already knew that.
I did clearly state above where he needs to improve if we are to improve as a side. He needs to get his hands on it more and also be more damaging. He is basically a player that does well around stoppages but does little in link up play.
Being a inside player he handballs as much as he kicks so he needs to win the ball more outside and influence play more. He currently averages 21 possessions a game and if he were to improve to 25 or more this season and became more damaging then I think that would be a big boost.
In a game where midfielders regularly rack up high numbers I don’t think that’s a high expectation.
I’m still very much kid off with where the team is going but midfield is clearly our biggest problem and I think the biggest boost we can get is not from the guys that we know but the unknowns.
Parish is approaching the 50 game mark and the majority of that has been in the midfield. I think it’s reasonable to expect more from him.