Nankervis !! | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Nankervis !!

Baloo said:
The Hamspter got better and better as the year went one. He even took contested marks in the forward line. Scored from one or two of them as well.

At the stoppages he'll be even more damaging now that the 3rd man has been banned. Write off the Mighty Hampster at your peril.
Here we go.

12 months of the Hampson Holden ???
 
CC TIGER said:
Did one on the rubber plate in the centre circle I think ? Just about the best I've seen easy

did 3 in total! yeah, one on the rubber disc and sued the AFL.

amazing to do 3 knees and still play ruck in 2 flags + AA
 
Sintiger said:
Here we go.

12 months of the Hampson Holden ???

You're thinking this
betts.jpg

but it will be more like this
d9105ea54339b9aa10012ea114414a6a
 
Even though i think Hammer is pitiful as a complete ruck man, i do agree he was our best option last year and he did improve to be pitiful, as opposed to complete and utter liability (which he still pretty much was)..

Due to our lack of options he very may get another run if Nank has injuries as i think other than that little dummy big Ivan last Friday was more a spectator and is cooked unfortunately...

I am not religious however its worth a pray or two for Nanks to stay healthy as our backup options are awful, lets hope Soldo makes giant inroads this year and can be that backup next year!
 
Brodders17 said:
i do predict there will be lots of 'fuchs' if Hampson plays regularly this year, especially alongside Nankervis.

;D
 
Brodders17 said:
i do predict there will be lots of 'fuchs' if Hampson plays regularly this year, especially alongside Nankervis.

Sounds like a really good year! Now we're all rooting for the Hammer.

PS - Is this related to his back injury?
 
Sintiger said:
All I said was that it was worth a go to try and see how Griff and Vickery went together in the ruck.

I think Nankervis will be fine as first ruck in most cases a I would partner him with Griffiths and add a 3rd tall to the forward line rather than add a ruckman to who does little else when we come up against a side who has a strong ruck division.

I just don't rate Hampson

Sin, Vickery was tried in the ruck and found badly wanting. Why are you trying to re-write history? Alternatively, answer - so why did RFC willingly trade him, then seek and obtain Nankervis? You only responded to bits of my post too.

Nank will almost certainly be our first ruck, because Hampson is injured anyway. But what if he cops an injury sometime? And who is the 3rd tall forward? (C. Moore maybe? I like him, but not sure he's ready yet. Elton?)

Really over this, you have the same opinion as many on SH. Fine. But it's not borne out by all the stats. Not going over it all again, though. Hammer would be playing with a much better midfield this year and NTMU ruling will assist his type.
 
leon said:
Sin, Vickery was tried in the ruck and found badly wanting.

You keep saying this but our clearance numbers were basically the same as when Hampson rucked.

I know you love your hitouts but they mean one fifth of SFA in all but rare examples.
 
leon said:
Really over this, you have the same opinion as many on SH. Fine. But it's not borne out by all the stats.

It is borne out by all the stats.

We win more and get more clearances when Hammer DOESN'T play.
 
Let's not forget Nakker's last two games have been against Jacobs and Toby has performed well on both occasions (one a final)
 
leon said:
Sin, Vickery was tried in the ruck and found badly wanting. Why are you trying to re-write history? Alternatively, answer - so why did RFC willingly trade him, then seek and obtain Nankervis? You only responded to bits of my post too.

Actually, you're rewriting history a bit here. We didn't trade Vickery willingly, he was taken as a free agent.

And as you say, Vickery was not playing ruck, he was playing forward. We recruited Nankervis to replace our ruckman (Hampson) not our forward. RFC are very clear about Hampson's limitations.
 
leon said:
Sin, Vickery was tried in the ruck and found badly wanting. Why are you trying to re-write history? Alternatively, answer - so why did RFC willingly trade him, then seek and obtain Nankervis? You only responded to bits of my post too.

Nank will almost certainly be our first ruck, because Hampson is injured anyway. But what if he cops an injury sometime? And who is the 3rd tall forward? (C. Moore maybe? I like him, but not sure he's ready yet. Elton?)

Really over this, you have the same opinion as many on SH. Fine. But it's not borne out by all the stats. Not going over it all again, though. Hammer would be playing with a much better midfield this year and NTMU ruling will assist his type.
Vickery may have been a barely adequate ruck, but i would still rather a barely adequate ruck who offered something else than an ok ruck who offered nothing else. It all comes down to one thing... I don't rate Hampson, never have.

The reason I only responded to bits is because I like to keep my comments brief. Online for 15 minutes and then gone usually.
 
Looks like it's going to be Nankervis for Rd 1 with possibly Maric.

Ch 7 reported Hampson struggling to be fit with a back issue. Was seen running laps and was visibly stuffed afterwards.

Shrewd recruitment Tigers!
 
waiting said:
Looks like it's going to be Nankervis for Rd 1 with possibly Maric.

Ch 7 reported Hampson struggling to be fit with a back issue. Was seen running laps and was visibly stuffed afterwards.

Shrewd recruitment Tigers!

I love Evarn, but if he plays more than 4 games this year, its going to be a loooonggg year
 
lamb22 said:
It is borne out by all the stats.

We win more and get more clearances when Hammer DOESN'T play.
Wins, what's that got to do with anything? :eek: