Warfe.

[footyhead]

Charlie
Senior Player


" If Hunt - a young tall with potential to fill in a KPP spot - gets axed and Warfe - an old, battered warhorse who can no longer stop his opponent getting the ball let alone get it himself - survives, I will be very irate".

Exactly !!

I hope that Roosy does not think that 1 good seasone asuperstar coach makes.
this team can not afford favouratisim for old team mates yet.
Warfe is a hack always was a hack and always will be. He should not be on the list.
If the Swans don't improve next year I am going to hold Roos responsible for this move. If they do ok I'm still a bit pissed !


__________________
It's MISTER Kirk to you, Buckley!

[anne]

Maybe they are charging us the $75 extra to pay for Warfe's salary.

[Plugger46]

As most would know, I've been a Warfe fan over the years, but I'm very surprised that he's still on the list.

[Dpw]

No surprise, he has a year to run and that should be that unless he turns it around, highly unlikely!

[dimelb]

Warfe was a good player, but IMO his injuries have caught up with him. Even this year he has done some good things, and his delivery into the forward 50 can be as good as anyone's with half a chance. Seems to me he can read a game. I suspect his staying on has to do with his contract - and I hope we get some value from it next season.

[gloveski]

Soft decision should have paid his contract
I will be even more p****d if Mcglone gets delisted........surely he should have been promoted he may be slight but what more does he have to do he was in the best players week in week out.

[robbieando]

Originally posted by gloveski
he was in the best players week in week out.

So was Bennett and Bomford won our 2nd Best and Fairest in 1996.

[bigswan]

Warfe

Much as you hate to see young players delisted, Hunt has done little in two seasons other than being injured. Warfe has played firsts and will continue to play firsts next season. He should be allowed to see out his contract. By the way who won the Reserves best and fairest and where did Hunt come?

[footyhead]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by gloveski
[B]
I will be even more p****d if Mcglone gets delisted........

Mcglone needs to be given a go , if he is not , that in combination with the Warfe , seymore and Nicks retainment, means that our footy club is still at least partially run by old school thinking morons, and it makes me want to go and barrack for the likes of essendon or the peis , who at least have the balls to really back their young players.

[liz]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by footyhead
[B]

Originally posted by gloveski

I will be even more p****d if Mcglone gets delisted........

Mcglone needs to be given a go , if he is not , that in combination with the Warfe , seymore and Nicks retainment, means that our footy club is still at least partially run by old school thinking morons, and it makes me want to go and barrack for the likes of essendon or the peis , who at least have the balls to really back their young players.

Hang on a moment - if the Swans really wanted McGlone they would have found a way to keep him. Maybe they intend to draft him if he's still available, or maybe they don't think he has what it takes to make it at the top level, or maybe they're still manoeuvering - who knows? But I find it doubtful they would (have?) let him go purely for reasons of room on the list.

Also, a fact that seems to have escaped some people's notice is that each of Seymour, Nicks and Warfe has a contract. We all bemoan players who show a lack of loyalty to clubs. Maybe it should work both ways.

Furthermore, as Cliff pointed out, we can't afford to have too many inexperienced players on the list, and all three of these players - especially Nicks - could well still have a fair amount to offer the Swans.

[penga]

Originally posted by dimelb
his delivery into the forward 50 can be as good as anyone's with half a chance

you cant be serious about that statement

[barry]

Lets accept that not every young kid on our list is going to turn into a Schneider or LRT.

I'm quite happy to keep Nicks and Seymour for another year.
Warfe is a toss up, but he does provide depth and experience in a young team.

[footyhead]

Originally posted by lizz
"Hang on a moment - if the Swans really wanted McGlone.. "

Lizz, McGlone was the stand out rookie in the seconds, he deserves his shot on the list.

---

"Also, a fact that seems to have escaped some people's notice is that each of Seymour, Nicks and Warfe has a contract".
---

I doubt many have forgetten it, I have seen you mention it at least 3 times. I think that in the case of Warfe his contract should have been paid out.
And don't give me that crap that they can't affoard it..... !!

"Furthermore, as Cliff pointed out, we can't afford to have too many inexperienced players on the list, and all three of these players - especially Nicks - could well still have a fair amount to offer the Swans."

This I agree with to a degree, but I really think that Warfe is the exception.
Furthermore, warfe may well be a liability , as an old slow and undependable player who has been given chance after chance after chance 9more than many others) and who is always mediocre. What kind of message does that send to tha young ones ???

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by footyhead
Lizz, McGlone was the stand out rookie in the seconds, he deserves his shot on the list.

Who thinks he was the stand-out rookie? Obviously the club doesn't seem to think so.

I doubt many have forgetten it, I have seen you mention it at least 3 times. I think that in the case of Warfe his contract should have been paid out.
And don't give me that crap that they can't affoard it..... !!

Liz may have mentioned it a few times, but that's probably because people seem to forget that it could be a key reason. Perhaps they can't afford it - there was a cash crunch earlier this year.

This I agree with to a degree, but I really think that Warfe is the exception.
Furthermore, warfe may well be a liability , as an old slow and undependable player who has been given chance after chance after chance 9more than many others) and who is always mediocre. What kind of message does that send to tha young ones ???

Obviously the coaching staff have a different view on what Warfe can offer to the team.

[footyhead]

Obviously the coaching staff have a different view on what Warfe can offer to the team. [/B][/QUOTE]

Obviously , but for what reasons ?? No good ones that i can see.