Leo and Crouch must retire

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Push The Limits
    On the Rookie List
    • Dec 2006
    • 27

    Leo and Crouch must retire

    Now that Crawford has shown the way and retiring at the top, Leaping Leo and Crouch must retire for the good of the team.

    My reasoning is that this next draft will be the last time in the next 3 that the Swans will have a chance to draft a good crop of nearly ready to play youngsters.

    We only have 3 picks in the draft and if Leo and Crouch retire, we wil have 5 and its looks like this draft is quite deep.

    Leo and Crouch must now think what is best for the team as do the coaches.

    We badly need some key defender types as well as a key CH or F forward AND WE MUST GET THEM NOW.

    Please Leo and Crouchy, be men and know that your time has come.

    The next TEAM List changes must be submitted within the next 2 weeks before the Draft itself.

    Go gracefully now, Leo and Crouch and give us a chance to pick another 2 picks in the draft.
  • Chilcott
    Regular in the Side
    • Jan 2008
    • 595

    #2
    I disagree about Crouchy. If he can get his body right, I think he'll do alright next season.

    As for Leo, I think the only reason he's running around again, is becase there was noone ready to step-up. Obviously Peter Faulks was not the one and Jesse White is untried as a full back. Based on this, I am afraid next season will be one season too many for Leo, much like Matthews and Everitt this year.

    Comment

    • AnnieH
      RWOs Black Sheep
      • Aug 2006
      • 11332

      #3
      You're kidding right?
      Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
      Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

      Comment

      • Chilcott
        Regular in the Side
        • Jan 2008
        • 595

        #4
        Kidding about what Annie - Crouchy or Leo?

        For Leo, there were some definite signs throughout this season that his career is coming to a close.

        He is not as quick as he once was, therefore, was getting tackled and caught with the ball more often. His decision making was below an acceptable standard and his opponents were more often younger, quicker and stronger.

        Perhaps, if Roosy plays him away from a KP he may find a spot, but in saying that, would be up against a few other players that can play the flanks/wings better than what Leo could.

        I would love it for Leo to retire on a high and not retire after a season in and out of the seniors.

        Comment

        • Primmy
          Proud Tragic Swan
          • Apr 2008
          • 5970

          #5
          Crouchy is just fine. Leave him be.

          Leo, well I thought he would go at the end of this season, but no. He does create a diversion with his crash bang, but he gives away so so so many frees. Dunno. Perhaps it would have been better he retired, but.....
          If you've never jumped from one couch to the other to save yourself from lava then you didn't have a childhood

          Comment

          • AnnieH
            RWOs Black Sheep
            • Aug 2006
            • 11332

            #6
            Originally posted by Chilcott
            Kidding about what Annie - Crouchy or Leo?

            For Leo, there were some definite signs throughout this season that his career is coming to a close.

            He is not as quick as he once was, therefore, was getting tackled and caught with the ball more often. His decision making was below an acceptable standard and his opponents were more often younger, quicker and stronger.

            Perhaps, if Roosy plays him away from a KP he may find a spot, but in saying that, would be up against a few other players that can play the flanks/wings better than what Leo could.

            I would love it for Leo to retire on a high and not retire after a season in and out of the seniors.

            Both.
            Agreed Leo has the decision making skills of a junkie, he was caught because of a few bad decisions, but in the main he's still able to get the ball out of the defensive 50. We need Leo at least for another year ... if he's playing at 75% so be it. The kiddies NEED him - you can't buy the type of defensive experience Leo has.
            As for Crouchy - the year off did him the world of good. As the season progressed so did his skills for the "new" game. Barring injury, Crouchy has at least two seasons left in him. He's a gun.
            Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
            Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

            Comment

            • reigning premier
              Suspended by the MRP
              • Sep 2006
              • 4335

              #7
              I's like Crouchy to stick around. Even if it is just to @@@@ with Aker's head.

              Comment

              • Alison
                On the Rookie List
                • Feb 2003
                • 155

                #8
                I hope they both prove you wrong!!! Let's be positive!! Maybe LRT could have played full back to replace Leo or maybe Jesse White - don't think so!

                Comment

                • Bleed Red Blood
                  Senior Player
                  • Sep 2003
                  • 2057

                  #9
                  Originally posted by AnnieH
                  We need Leo at least for another year ... if he's playing at 75% so be it. The kiddies NEED him - you can't buy the type of defensive experience Leo has.
                  I disagree. The squad as a whole has so much experience that Leo being there as well isn't as beneficial as it would be in a defense such as, say, Richmonds.

                  Anyone who took Leo's spot would play on the 3rd or 4th tall of the oppositions anyway with Bolton, Richards and LRT already in the side.

                  Comment

                  • desredandwhite
                    Click!
                    • Jan 2003
                    • 2498

                    #10
                    Not going to happen.

                    If the club wanted Barry to retire, they would not have offered a one-year contract. One suspects that it will be the last though, barring a miraculous turnaround in form and fitness.

                    Crouch is still on contract, so the club won't cut him.

                    As for the players involved, it's all very well to say "they should retire for the good of the team". Would anyone voluntarily give up a contract and a year's salary for the good of the team?

                    It'll be one last year for each of them. It's not like we have a lot of early picks either. The order looks like it will be: 12, 30, 61, 62, 78, 94, 110, 128.

                    So we would get the chance to use picks 62 and 78 - Not super inspiring considering the extra money the club would have to pay to use them.

                    177th Senior AFL Match - Round 4, 2009 - Sydney vs Carlton, SCG. This is obviously out of date. I suppose I'll update it once I could be bothered sitting down with the fixture and working it out....
                    Des' Weblog

                    Comment

                    • laughingnome
                      Amateur Statsman
                      • Jul 2006
                      • 1624

                      #11
                      Originally posted by reigning premier
                      I's like Crouchy to stick around. Even if it is just to @@@@ with Aker's head.
                      A perfectly good reason
                      10100111001 ;-)

                      Comment

                      • royboy42
                        Senior Player
                        • Apr 2006
                        • 2076

                        #12
                        I had a feeling I saw that Leo was offered a one year and it was understood that he would not be an automatic selection? I'm quite prepared to be told that I imagined it. Anyone else have that memory?
                        Also,I thought Crouchy finished the season quite strongly as he ran into match fitness and got hold of the 08 plan. He gets another year for sure in my books.

                        Comment

                        • Bear
                          Best and Fairest
                          • Feb 2003
                          • 1022

                          #13
                          They should both be there because they both still have good service to offer for at least another year.

                          It will be important that their bodies hold together though.

                          Given Leo was still a key runner/link from defence last year, he,Tadgh, etc suffered from the fact we had a slow midfield that was often shut down man on man and offering less and less clear options to kick to.

                          Tadgh was running circles at times and getting into trouble. Leo has a different apoproach and takes them on more. Looks a little more risky but you can't just slam it on the boot 60s style anymore. You have to try and retain possession.

                          It's a little more complicated than "Leo gets caught more often".
                          "As a player he simply should not have been able to do the things he did. Leo was a 185cm, 88kg full-back and played on some of the biggest, fastest and best full-forwards of all time, and constantly beat them." Roos.
                          Leo Barry? you star! We'll miss ya, ''Leapin''.

                          Comment

                          • chammond
                            • Jan 2003
                            • 1368

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Bear
                            Given Leo was still a key runner/link from defence last year, he,Tadhg, etc suffered from the fact we had a slow midfield that was often shut down man on man and offering less and less clear options to kick to.

                            Tadhg was running circles at times and getting into trouble. Leo has a different apoproach and takes them on more. Looks a little more risky but you can't just slam it on the boot 60s style anymore. You have to try and retain possession.

                            It's a little more complicated than "Leo gets caught more often".
                            Crikey, a reasoned opinion . . . are you sure you've got the right forum?

                            When assessing experienced players like Leo, you have to consider the whole package. He certainly makes more errors than most other quality defenders, but he also has more possessions and more marks than most, and he's the king of rebounds from deep in defence.

                            When Leo retires, we'll certainly give away less defensive free kicks, but we'll also have fewer defensive marks, and we'll find it much harder to rebound from the back line of defence.

                            Comment

                            • Triple B
                              Formerly 'BBB'
                              • Feb 2003
                              • 6999

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Bear
                              Given Leo was still a key runner/link from defence last year, he,Tadhg, etc suffered from the fact we had a slow midfield that was often shut down man on man and offering less and less clear options to kick to.
                              This is where we missed Fosdike most in 2008.

                              He is easily our best in finding space on a wing and giving the backmen a get out clause when coming out of defence.
                              Driver of the Dan Hannebery bandwagon....all aboard. 4th April 09

                              Comment

                              Working...