Tambling (merged)

[Disco08]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

list, by number, the ones you wouldn't want playing for Richmond right now.

From the list of 30 above.

 

[tigersforever06]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

I'm going to give all you haters a list of players that have shown less the Tambling in AT LEAST their first 2 (usually 3, sometimes 4) years, and I want you all to list, by number, the ones you wouldn't want playing for Richmond right now. Keep in mind that although their performances were less than impressive early in their careers, their respective coaches played them in the seniors as much as possible, presumably to give them experience so that when their development reached the desired level they were truly ready to fire. Wild theory huh?

1. Andrew McLeod
2. Scott Thomson
3. Simon Goodwin
4. Graham Johncock
5. Brent Reilly
6. Luke Power
7. Andrew Walker
8. Dane Swan
9. Ben Johnson
10. Jobe Watson
11. Josh Carr
12. Paul Chapman
13. Jimmy Bartel
14. Joel Corey
15. Jess Sinclair
16. Travis Johnstone
17. James McDonald
18. Cameron Bruce
19. Aaron Davey
20. Kane Cornes
21. Shaun Burgoyne
22. Chad Cornes
23. Steven Salopek
24. Peter Burgoyne
25. Lenny Hayes
25. Ryan O'Keefe
26. Jude Bolton
27. Amon Buchanan
28. Andrew Embley
29. Daniel Cross
30. Lindsay Gilbee.

Also keep in mind that these are only roughly similar type players to Tambling (many of them were better equipped to take on the AFL when they were drafted - more size, VFL experience, etc.) and I only looked at the better players at each club. Widen the range in those areas and the list of players would include more than three quarters of players in the AFL right now.

Patient enough to say all of 2007 & 2008.

Afterall, young Richie has had issues etc, and is still young.

gpb has seen the light. :clap

5, 8, 10, 23, 27, 29, 30

Big deal, this has no relevance whatsoever. Thats 7 out of 30 players, bear in mind Richie was pick 4.

BTW ive listed those players who showed less then Tambling in their first 3 years. But i would take all of the above playing for Richmond

 

[Disco08]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Of course it's relevant. It shows that no matter what players do early in their careers they can't be judged until they've fully developed. How much simpler do you want it?

 

[Disco08]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

BTW ive listed those players who showed less then Tambling in their first 3 years.

Every player on that list has worse yearly ratings in their first two years than Tambling. Like I said, many of them take until their 4th or 5th year to do anything of note.

bear in mind Richie was pick 4

There's plenty of high picks in that list too. I think you should bear in mind that clubs draft players (anywhere in the draft) as much, in fact far more, on potential than on what they can contribute immediately.

 

[Redford]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Heard an interesting discussion about Tambling on the radio on the weekend. He was copping a bit of criticism, but Tim Watson was likening him to Michael Long where he was saying that besides his playing style being similar, young skinny Aboriginals quite often take a while to come on. He said that Tambling reminded him of Long and the fact it took Long 5-6 years to really hit his straps.

I hope he’s right.......

 

[Mr Brightside]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Had a mate who was a Mcleod an I remember at the time thinking this Mcleod of the Crows is a dud :.

Funny Disco I was watching a few of the high draft picks over the weekend mainly in comparison with Lids, who had been written off early,Goddard,Cooney,Walker an I though gee supporters are harsh an impatient on kids.

Heres a name for ya Silvia the kids lucky his not a Tiger ;D,

 

[Mr Brightside]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Heard an interesting discussion about Tambling on the radio on the weekend. He was copping a bit of criticism, but Tim Watson was likening him to Michael Long where he was saying that besides his playing style being similar, young skinny Aboriginals quite often take a while to come on. He said that Tambling reminded him of Long and the fact it took Long 5-6 years to really hit his straps.

I hope he’s right.......

People underestimate the mental factor of this game,take Harts an White both full on kids who back themselves an both made good impacts in there first years

 

[Disco08]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Here's another way to look at it.

Tambling put up ratings of 46.3 and 59.4 in his first 2 years. Nice, steady progression.

Now, if there's one thing that's almost unheard of in young players it's the player that puts up similar numbers to Tambling and then stagnates and finally disappears. You get a few that burst on to the scene and fizzle out just as fast, but in general the ones that aren't going to make it never get their rating above 50, ever, let alone in their second year.

 

[tigersforever06]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Here's another way to look at it.

Tambling put up ratings of 46.3 and 59.4 in his first 2 years. Nice, steady progression.

Now, if there's one thing that's almost unheard of in young players it's the player that puts up similar numbers to Tambling and then stagnates and finally disappears. You get a few that burst on to the scene and fizzle out just as fast, but in general the ones that aren't going to make it never get their rating above 50, ever, let alone in their second year.

Too much emphasis on statistcs, not enough on watching the actual game.

The queries on Tambling are real and concerning

Forget what Statstics say. Statstics dont measure a player's lack of pressure on the oppostion, or how hard he goes in for the ball

 

[Tigers of Old]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Tim Watson was likening him to Michael Long where he was saying that besides his playing style being similar, young skinny Aboriginals quite often take a while to come on. He said that Tambling reminded him of Long and the fact it took Long 5-6 years to really hit his straps.

Pretty sure our coach believes the same thing too. 8)

Ritchie has the speed & skill no doubt.
The consistency will come with strength & experience.

Have a look at the way Shaun Burgoyne's come on after a few seasons.

People who write Tambling off do so at their peril.

Of course there's always exceptions to the rule... :-X

 

[Disco08]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Here's another way to look at it.

Tambling put up ratings of 46.3 and 59.4 in his first 2 years. Nice, steady progression.

Now, if there's one thing that's almost unheard of in young players it's the player that puts up similar numbers to Tambling and then stagnates and finally disappears. You get a few that burst on to the scene and fizzle out just as fast, but in general the ones that aren't going to make it never get their rating above 50, ever, let alone in their second year.

Too much emphasis on statistcs, not enough on watching the actual game.

The queries on Tambling are real and concerning

Forget what Statstics say. Statstics dont measure a player's lack of pressure on the oppostion, or how hard he goes in for the ball

Mate, I watch the game. I just don't smash the TV every time one of our kids makes a mistake or doesn't play like Chris Judd.

Of course statistics don't show everything, but dismissing them altogether is very silly. When you look back on player's careers, statistics, particularly all-in-one ratings tend to paint a very accurate picture. Obviously it's harder to see this while it's happening, but that's where patience comes in.

 

[tigersforever06]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Here's another way to look at it.

Tambling put up ratings of 46.3 and 59.4 in his first 2 years. Nice, steady progression.

Now, if there's one thing that's almost unheard of in young players it's the player that puts up similar numbers to Tambling and then stagnates and finally disappears. You get a few that burst on to the scene and fizzle out just as fast, but in general the ones that aren't going to make it never get their rating above 50, ever, let alone in their second year.

Too much emphasis on statistcs, not enough on watching the actual game.

The queries on Tambling are real and concerning

Forget what Statstics say. Statstics dont measure a player's lack of pressure on the oppostion, or how hard he goes in for the ball

Mate, I watch the game. I just don't smash the TV every time one of our kids makes a mistake or doesn't play like Chris Judd.

Of course statistics don't show everything, but dismissing them altogether is very silly. When you look back on player's careers, statistics, particularly all-in-one ratings tend to paint a very accurate picture. Obviously it's harder to see this while it's happening, but that's where patience comes in.

The queries regarding Tambling are not about lack of ability

Its more lack of compsure, lack of confidence, lack of hard work, lack of possessions, lack of pressure on the oppoistion.

 

[Disco08]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Can you tell me how the 30 guys I listed managed to put up worse numbers than Tambling yet be so much better than him in these areas?

 

[tigersforever06]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

too much focus on statistics :

Stastical Foley was the least effective kick in the leauge last year.

Would you delist him because of that?

 

[Tigermad2005]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

The player taken at 4 again looked good on the weekend.
Not going to say any names.

 

[Turbo Tiger]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Tim Watson was likening him to Michael Long where he was saying that besides his playing style being similar, young skinny Aboriginals quite often take a while to come on. He said that Tambling reminded him of Long and the fact it took Long 5-6 years to really hit his straps.

So we have a coach that needs 3 or 4 more years to get us in a winning position – and a top draft pick that needs 5 or 6 years. What is going on with our club?

Anyone see Jetta or Varcoe on the weekend? They look ready to go, not to mention Franklin who continues to influence the outcome of games while Tambo just runs around looking out of his depth.

Ritchie has the speed & skill no doubt.
The consistency will come with strength & experience.

Give up – the kid is terrible!

 

[Tigers of Old]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

The player taken at 4 again looked good on the weekend.
Not going to say any names.

The player taken at 2 played reserves on the weekend.

I'm pleased you thought Ritchie played well though. ;D

 

[Tigermad2005]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

The player taken at 4 again looked good on the weekend.
Not going to say any names.

The player taken at 2 played reserves on the weekend.

I'm pleased you thought Ritchie played well though. ;D

But at Richmond he would have been in the side and getting it about 20 times.

 

[Redford]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

Yeah, I can understand the frustration with Tambling. But not prepared to give up on him just yet. He has shown improvement (albeit not earth shattering) in a poor side and I expect this will continue.

Certainly, if he stagnates this year, then 2008 becomes that cliched "crunch year" for him.

 

[checkside]

Re: I thought Ritchie Tambling was ok. [Merged]

The player taken at 4 again looked good on the weekend.
Not going to say any names.

Yeah because one goal is briliant from a so called key forward :