Got a lot of time for Hardy. He has reminded me of David Flood; An excellent clubman and someone who could fill a role at either end of the ground and always give 100% but even when he strung a batch of games together he was always at risk of making way for someone else.
Deserves a chance at another club so hopefully something can be worked out.
I'd keep him if possible.
I actually thought our forward line looked better this year when he was third tall, instead of playing a third lumberer.
When he was 3rd (Anzac day & St K) the forward line was poxy, he barely got a touch and was subbed out so I'm not sure how you worked that out. The two games he played where the forward line worked (rd 1 NM & 2 Haw) he was effectively the 4th tall - Ambrose, Carlisle & Daniher all played.
For mine he doesn't offer enough. If we're to have a mid-sized forward they have to be prepared to work & lead and hit-up. They have to defend and shepherd. Good footskills. Unless you're kicking multiple goals every week, you have to do *something* else in most (preferably all) of those areas.
His speccies are great when they work but having him sitting around looking for it effectively means we're missing either a crumber at ground level, or someone who'll lead up to take the pressure off the midfielders.
He can take a great mark & kick goals. But he does get worked out, and when that happens he doesn't offer anywhere near enough in other areas.
Got a lot of time for Hardy. He has reminded me of David Flood; An excellent clubman and someone who could fill a role at either end of the ground and always give 100% but even when he strung a batch of games together he was always at risk of making way for someone else.
Deserves a chance at another club so hopefully something can be worked out.
Not sure this is an entirely accurate analogy.
David Flood was a decent role-player in an era when we were regularly playing/winning finals, who was unlucky to be left out of the 1993 GF team (people tend to overlook this and focus instead on Kickett - one performed his role diligently in the PF, one barely had a touch for 5-6 weeks, who was more unlucky?)
Hardingham is a very limited player who's struggled to make an impact in a mid-table team.
Give me Flood any day of the week.
Perhaps Peter Cransberg is a better similarity i.e. too good for twos footy, not good enough for ones.
Got a lot of time for Hardy. He has reminded me of David Flood; An excellent clubman and someone who could fill a role at either end of the ground and always give 100% but even when he strung a batch of games together he was always at risk of making way for someone else.
Deserves a chance at another club so hopefully something can be worked out.
Not sure this is an entirely accurate analogy.
David Flood was a decent role-player in an era when we were regularly playing/winning finals, who was unlucky to be left out of the 1993 GF team (people tend to overlook this and focus instead on Kickett - one performed his role diligently in the PF, one barely had a touch for 5-6 weeks, who was more unlucky?)
Hardingham is a very limited player who's struggled to make an impact in a mid-table team.
Give me Flood any day of the week.
Perhaps Peter Cransberg is a better similarity i.e. too good for twos footy, not good enough for ones.
I didn't mean to compare their footballing abilities, more their role as being excellent blokes to have around the club and when they did get a chance in the seniors they both always gave their best but never really nailed down a spot in the team.
BTW agree with you completely about Flood and the '93 GF.
so he'll take Mark of the Year for another club :(
And miss the goal from 4m out
More like he'll drop mark of the year in the defensive 50 and the opposition will kick an easy goal.
Got a lot of time for Hardy. He has reminded me of David Flood; An excellent clubman and someone who could fill a role at either end of the ground and always give 100% but even when he strung a batch of games together he was always at risk of making way for someone else.
Deserves a chance at another club so hopefully something can be worked out.
Not sure this is an entirely accurate analogy.
David Flood was a decent role-player in an era when we were regularly playing/winning finals, who was unlucky to be left out of the 1993 GF team (people tend to overlook this and focus instead on Kickett - one performed his role diligently in the PF, one barely had a touch for 5-6 weeks, who was more unlucky?)
Hardingham is a very limited player who's struggled to make an impact in a mid-table team.
Give me Flood any day of the week.
Perhaps Peter Cransberg is a better similarity i.e. too good for twos footy, not good enough for ones.
Probably the guy who had played every senior game for the year. As opposed to a guy who played a few games for the year and was not considered in the best 20.
Asked to be traded, what is he worth?
that is the first time i have laughed out loud since sat night. Thankyou
Let me guess - Stants trying to chase down Goldstein?
Got a lot of time for Hardy. He has reminded me of David Flood; An excellent clubman and someone who could fill a role at either end of the ground and always give 100% but even when he strung a batch of games together he was always at risk of making way for someone else.
Deserves a chance at another club so hopefully something can be worked out.
Not sure this is an entirely accurate analogy.
David Flood was a decent role-player in an era when we were regularly playing/winning finals, who was unlucky to be left out of the 1993 GF team (people tend to overlook this and focus instead on Kickett - one performed his role diligently in the PF, one barely had a touch for 5-6 weeks, who was more unlucky?)
Hardingham is a very limited player who's struggled to make an impact in a mid-table team.
Give me Flood any day of the week.
Perhaps Peter Cransberg is a better similarity i.e. too good for twos footy, not good enough for ones.
Probably the guy who had played every senior game for the year. As opposed to a guy who played a few games for the year and was not considered in the best 20.
Not disputing that Kickett was unlucky - clearly he was, given he effectively made way for Wallis who (at the time) was far from a regular selection - but Flood was unlucky too (though he was always going to make way for Harvey) despite history very much overlooking this fact.
Both had right to feel aggrieved, but Flood went on to be a servicable performer for another few years despite his career being stymied at times by some of Sheedy's more hare-brained ideas for defensive posts (recuriting a washed-up Tim Darcy, playing the likes of Matthew Banks, Robert Stevenson, Peter Berbakov).
Not disputing that Kickett was unlucky - clearly he was, given he effectively made way for Wallis who (at the time) was far from a regular selection - but Flood was unlucky too (though he was always going to make way for Harvey) despite history very much overlooking this fact.
Probably the guy who had played every senior game for the year. As opposed to a guy who played a few games for the year and was not considered in the best 20.
Got a lot of time for Hardy. He has reminded me of David Flood; An excellent clubman and someone who could fill a role at either end of the ground and always give 100% but even when he strung a batch of games together he was always at risk of making way for someone else.
Deserves a chance at another club so hopefully something can be worked out.
Not sure this is an entirely accurate analogy.
David Flood was a decent role-player in an era when we were regularly playing/winning finals, who was unlucky to be left out of the 1993 GF team (people tend to overlook this and focus instead on Kickett - one performed his role diligently in the PF, one barely had a touch for 5-6 weeks, who was more unlucky?)
Hardingham is a very limited player who's struggled to make an impact in a mid-table team.
Give me Flood any day of the week.
Perhaps Peter Cransberg is a better similarity i.e. too good for twos footy, not good enough for ones.
Both had right to feel aggrieved, but Flood went on to be a servicable performer for another few years despite his career being stymied at times by some of Sheedy's more hare-brained ideas for defensive posts (recuriting a washed-up Tim Darcy, playing the likes of Matthew Banks, Robert Stevenson, Peter Berbakov).
I actually thought our forward line looked better this year when he was third tall, instead of playing a third lumberer.
When he was 3rd (Anzac day & St K) the forward line was poxy, he barely got a touch and was subbed out so I'm not sure how you worked that out. The two games he played where the forward line worked (rd 1 NM & 2 Haw) he was effectively the 4th tall - Ambrose, Carlisle & Daniher all played.
For mine he doesn't offer enough. If we're to have a mid-sized forward they have to be prepared to work & lead and hit-up. They have to defend and shepherd. Good footskills. Unless you're kicking multiple goals every week, you have to do *something* else in most (preferably all) of those areas.
His speccies are great when they work but having him sitting around looking for it effectively means we're missing either a crumber at ground level, or someone who'll lead up to take the pressure off the midfielders.
He can take a great mark & kick goals. But he does get worked out, and when that happens he doesn't offer anywhere near enough in other areas.
Sounds like we need a Duopolo type... and a Gunston and Bruest before that so we can have a 4th.
What does that even mean?
Becomes a lot better player the less people see him play.
He is not, never has been and never will be a good third forward. Jumping high does not make you a good player.
He is a capable defender however Bags is better. He is also a flipping awful kick.
Disagree that he has never been a good third forward, or a good third tall. We all know what his crux was and if he ever sorts out his kicking/decision making by foot he will be a very good player.
I'm amazed how many players can't seem to improve their disposal the way Jobe did
I improved my disposal, but then forgot how to get the ball!Disagree that he has never been a good third forward, or a good third tall. We all know what his crux was and if he ever sorts out his kicking/decision making by foot he will be a very good player.
I'm amazed how many players can't seem to improve their disposal the way Jobe did
Let me guess - Stants trying to chase down Goldstein?Asked to be traded, what is he worth?
that is the first time i have laughed out loud since sat night. Thankyou
I improved my disposal, but then forgot how to get the ball!Disagree that he has never been a good third forward, or a good third tall. We all know what his crux was and if he ever sorts out his kicking/decision making by foot he will be a very good player.
I'm amazed how many players can't seem to improve their disposal the way Jobe did
He is a dumb footballer and that part is very hard to improve.
He panics under pressure and his disposal is woeful.
I actually thought our forward line looked better this year when he was third tall, instead of playing a third lumberer.
When he was 3rd (Anzac day & St K) the forward line was poxy, he barely got a touch and was subbed out so I'm not sure how you worked that out. The two games he played where the forward line worked (rd 1 NM & 2 Haw) he was effectively the 4th tall - Ambrose, Carlisle & Daniher all played.
For mine he doesn't offer enough. If we're to have a mid-sized forward they have to be prepared to work & lead and hit-up. They have to defend and shepherd. Good footskills. Unless you're kicking multiple goals every week, you have to do *something* else in most (preferably all) of those areas.
His speccies are great when they work but having him sitting around looking for it effectively means we're missing either a crumber at ground level, or someone who'll lead up to take the pressure off the midfielders.
He can take a great mark & kick goals. But he does get worked out, and when that happens he doesn't offer anywhere near enough in other areas.
Sounds like we need a Duopolo type... and a Gunston and Bruest before that so we can have a 4th.
What does that even mean?
It means we dont even have a decent 2nd and 3rd to have a 4th even as good a duopolo. What else could it mean? that you cant read?
3rd tall.
Puopolo is about 4'2". Breust is about 6'0". Then I remember you're the peanut who thinks Malceski is basically the same type of player as Hurley, and realise I should've just called you a peanut first off and saved the time.
He’s bagged to much. Far from the perfect footballer, but he’s great mark and can be a headache in the forward line. Thought he should have played as a third tall more this year. Felt we needed him against North.
Probably should have picked up Barlow though.
He's bagged to much. Far from the perfect footballer, but he's great mark and can be a headache in the forward line. Thought he should have played as a third tall more this year. Felt we needed him against North.
Probably should have picked up Barlow though.
You think????
He's bagged to much. Far from the perfect footballer, but he's great mark and can be a headache in the forward line. Thought he should have played as a third tall more this year. Felt we needed him against North.
Probably should have picked up Barlow though.
This kind of forward thinking will make you king, no doubt.
