Tambling (merged)

[GEDS1]

Re: PSD Target

I reckon RT is quite physical at the contest and is capable of being better than an average AFL player but application is questionable and injuries have played a part in not getting continuity into his game. 2009 with us he was very good, could take a mark, lay a bump and kick a goal from a set shot and link up well.

 

[jb03]

Re: PSD Target

July 2016.

Richard Tambling autobiography, page 32..........."that 'Franklin/Tambling' thread on PRE scarred me for life"............

Seriously, I'd blame Wallace & co. for Tambo's failures.

Really? I'd blame Tambling.

 

[TigerForce]

Re: PSD Target

Really? I'd blame Tambling.

Maybe in later years, but for a kid who was picked early in the draft, you'd think they would develop him in a proper way (including any indigenous issues on & off-field). He's not the only failure we've had but probably the most costly.

We all know now that Wallace & co were pathetic when it came to player development.

Just like anyone's kids, at a younger age the responsibility is on the parents to teach and learn, and then it's up to the kids from teenage years to show what they've learnt.

 

[Leysy Days]

Re: PSD Target

He showed plenty of vision and composure during 2009. That's why most people (you included IIRC) were calling for him to play off halfback.

Leysy was calling for him to be played off half back because he said very early on he didnt have the game to play in the middle. At least off half-back the game comes to him & he can follow a man rather than try & make the play himself.

He athletic prowess & overhead ability could be used better there & the flaws in his game that have been outlined wouldnt have such a large effect. Alas it seems those flaws might be too hard to overcome even playing back there.

As for half of 2009 that was decent. Meh. The other 6 and a half years speak far more for his true ability.

 

[Joe Lynn Turnip]

Re: PSD Target

Wallace starting Tambling in the guts for his first 3 years games was pure idiocy.

But anyway - why indeed are we still discussing Tambling - especially when we still have the poor man's Tambling in Edwards stinking up our list?

 

[Disco08]

Re: PSD Target

Leysy was calling for him to be played off half back because he said very early on he didnt have the game to play in the middle. At least off half-back the game comes to him & he can follow a man rather than try & make the play himself.

He athletic prowess & overhead ability could be used better there & the flaws in his game that have been outlined wouldnt have such a large effect. Alas it seems those flaws might be too hard to overcome even playing back there.

As for half of 2009 that was decent. Meh. The other 6 and a half years speak far more for his true ability.

That's a terribly flawed way of looking at it, and you know it. For his first 5 years he followed a steady upward trajetory culminating in a good year in his 5th year. Most of his good play in that year came playing as an attacking mid too. For whatever reason he derailed in 2010, going right back to form similar to hs 2nd year, but clearly football ability alone wasn't the main reason. Seems to me a fair part of it must have been demands on his part about where he wanted to play. Hardwick obviously wasn't going to be dictated to and Tambling struggled. That screams to mental strength and not ability to me. If there's one thing we've seen from Hardwick and co. it's that they put a lot of importance on character and leadership. Perhaps Tambling didn't fit with this and that's why things turned out as they did.

 

[tigertim]

Re: PSD Target

That's a terribly flawed way of looking at it, and you know it. For his first 5 years he followed a steady upward trajetory culminating in a good year in his 5th year. Most of his good play in that year came playing as an attacking mid too. For whatever reason he derailed in 2010, going right back to form similar to hs 2nd year, but clearly football ability alone wasn't the main reason. Seems to me a fair part of it must have been demands on his part about where he wanted to play. Hardwick obviously wasn't going to be dictated to and Tambling struggled. That screams to mental strength and not ability to me. If there's one thing we've seen from Hardwick and co. it's that they put a lot of importance on character and leadership. Perhaps Tambling didn't fit with this and that's why things turned out as they did.

Your excuse for Hislop was injuries, your excuse for Tambling is mental strength. Any chance you'll ever admit they just weren't up to it?

 

[shamekha]

Re: PSD Target

That's a terribly flawed way of looking at it, and you know it. For his first 5 years he followed a steady upward trajetory culminating in a good year in his 5th year. Most of his good play in that year came playing as an attacking mid too. For whatever reason he derailed in 2010, going right back to form similar to hs 2nd year, but clearly football ability alone wasn't the main reason. Seems to me a fair part of it must have been demands on his part about where he wanted to play. Hardwick obviously wasn't going to be dictated to and Tambling struggled. That screams to mental strength and not ability to me. If there's one thing we've seen from Hardwick and co. it's that they put a lot of importance on character and leadership. Perhaps Tambling didn't fit with this and that's why things turned out as they did.

Thats a fair leap of guess work from someone outside the club..

 

[Col.E.Kurtz]

Re: PSD Target

The ghost of Bling still haunts PRE..

 

[Ian4]

Re: PSD Target

why is tambling being discussed in the PSD target thread? can a mod move this discussion to a relevant place, like the 'ancient history board' or the 'been over this a thousand times before board'.

yeah i'm over the RT talk. move it to the RT thread (i have just bumped it). lets start talking about mccaffer

 

[Ian4]

Re: Tambling [Merged]

bump.

 

[Disco08]

Re: PSD Target

Your excuse for Hislop was injuries, your excuse for Tambling is mental strength. Any chance you'll ever admit they just weren't up to it?

There's plenty of players who just aren't up to it. One of my favourites, Pattison, was one of them and I'm happy to admit it.

Using injuries for someone like Hislop isn't an excuse, it's a reason. Like many players before him injuries were too big an obstacle to overcome when trying to reach the elite level. How anyone could have watched a kid who ran a sub 3 second 20 metre sprint "run" like he did when playing for us in 2010 and not think injuries had taken a significant toll is beyond me. It defies all reasonable logic IMO. If he'd had a couple of injury free years to show his worth and failed I'd happily admit he wasn't up to it. As it is I'm not saying he would definitely have made it without injury, only that his opportunity was severely effected by injury. There's a big difference.

Tambling was a talented player, no two ways about it. Junior experts don't make consensus stuff ups where raw talent is concerned and players don't get picked in the top 5 by accident. He also displayed plenty of ability throughout his development years and played the game at a high level in 2009. You just don't achieve that without ability. To me, the logical conclusion when taking his pitiful 2010 into account is he lacked the mental strength required. Ambling and The Witness were both very apt nicknames for him and there's no way he earnt them through lack of talent. Seems far more likely he lacked the desire and application wouldn't you say?

Thats a fair leap of guess work from someone outside the club..

True. You tell me why you think Hardwick played him in the roles he did.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Re: Tambling [Merged]

Yesterdays newspaper. Crows problem now.

 

[bullus_hit]

Re: Tambling [Merged]

The Tambling saga has ended well, we now have McDonald and two high draft picks. Time to move on.

 

[Streak]

Re: Tambling [Merged]

Without wishing to play semantics, I made the comment here (Leysy, Barnzy and others) that Tambling was a skillful footballer.

Are you trying to tell me he didn't have the skills?

You are patently wrong then. Tambling was a high draft pick principally because he did have the skills. If we had not drafted him, there is no doubt he was going top 5 in a strong draft.

Anyone who doesn't agree needs to try and get hold of some tape of him playting in the NT and check him out. He has all the skills.

What he couldn't handle was the step up to AFL level. On this I disagree with no one.

But anyone who says he wasn't a skillful footballer has no idea what they are talking about.

 

[bullus_hit]

Re: Tambling [Merged]

You are patently wrong then. Tambling was a high draft pick principally because he did have the skills. If we had not drafted him, there is no doubt he was going top 5 in a strong draft.

I'm not so sure I subscribe to the theory it was a strong draft. There were about a dozen AFL quality players and very little beyond pick 7, along with all the retreads, the RFC has had the lion share of the litter and it makes for some pretty depressing reading. I just hope our latest addition doesn't follow in the footsteps of those now on the football scrapheap.

 

[Lidsand]

Re: Tambling [Merged]

i miss him

 

[Tigertool]

Re: Tambling [Merged]

Without wishing to play semantics, I made the comment here (Leysy, Barnzy and others) that Tambling was a skillful footballer.

Are you trying to tell me he didn't have the skills?

You are patently wrong then. Tambling was a high draft pick principally because he did have the skills. If we had not drafted him, there is no doubt he was going top 5 in a strong draft.

Anyone who doesn't agree needs to try and get hold of some tape of him playting in the NT and check him out. He has all the skills.

What he couldn't handle was the step up to AFL level. On this I disagree with no one.

But anyone who says he wasn't a skillful footballer has no idea what they are talking about.

Dead on.

Unfortunately, Tambling won't be the last bungled top 5 pick. 18 year olds are basically a lottery, it's impossible to tell what they will be able to produce in the future. Sometimes they might peak at 18 and that may be the best they can produce.

At that moment, in the draft, whether you like it or not, Tambling was the best available player at pick 4. Other supporters can try to bag us for picking him ahead of Franklin. I'll tell you right now, give that number 4 pick to the other 15 clubs and they would have done the same thing as us. Zero doubt.

That's life, you win some, you lose some.

 

[Leysy Days]

Re: PSD Target

That's a terribly flawed way of looking at it, and you know it. For his first 5 years he followed a steady upward trajetory culminating in a good year in his 5th year. Most of his good play in that year came playing as an attacking mid too. For whatever reason he derailed in 2010, going right back to form similar to hs 2nd year, but clearly football ability alone wasn't the main reason. Seems to me a fair part of it must have been demands on his part about where he wanted to play. Hardwick obviously wasn't going to be dictated to and Tambling struggled. That screams to mental strength and not ability to me. If there's one thing we've seen from Hardwick and co. it's that they put a lot of importance on character and leadership. Perhaps Tambling didn't fit with this and that's why things turned out as they did.

You accuse leysy of having a flawed way of looking at it & then piece up all these mythical conclusions directly after. :headscratch

He was a battler his whole career apart from a run of games in one season. Leysy explained very early on whilst everyone still had high hopes the limitations he had & why he wouldn't work out. Those exact reasons are what is still holding him back today.

 

[Leysy Days]

Re: Tambling [Merged]

Without wishing to play semantics, I made the comment here (Leysy, Barnzy and others) that Tambling was a skillful footballer.

Are you trying to tell me he didn't have the skills?

You are patently wrong then. Tambling was a high draft pick principally because he did have the skills. If we had not drafted him, there is no doubt he was going top 5 in a strong draft.

Anyone who doesn't agree needs to try and get hold of some tape of him playting in the NT and check him out. He has all the skills.

What he couldn't handle was the step up to AFL level. On this I disagree with no one.

But anyone who says he wasn't a skillful footballer has no idea what they are talking about.

He was skillful as a Div 2 under 18 footballer Streak no question. Unfortunately nothing more. AFL football takes a higher skillset than what he possessed.