#25 Josh Fraser

Johnson#26 · Post by **Johnson#26** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 12:29 pm

One problem is he can't keep his feet all that often. Much of the time, he ends up going to ground. As Malcom Blight once said ina commentry - 'Another example of Fraser going to ground when he doesn't need to'.

I'm not bagging Fraser at all, and he is one of my favourite players - just wondering what others opinions are - so far, mixed views.

snow24 · Post by **snow24** » Thu Nov 18, 2004 4:45 pm

The simple fact of that matter is he's reached his full potential at his current playing weight. He will not get any better at all if he doesn't start hitting the gym. Tarrant was a snapper when he first got to the club and look at the size of him now. Josh is simply too skinny to be a Ruckman or a Key Foward. The best ruckman and CHF's in the comp all have weight behind them, he has to get to Gardner , Jeff White size.

MarkT · Post by **MarkT** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 1:40 pm

The problem with your theory snow is that you want to take an unconventional talent and turn it into a run of the mill type player in a run of the mill type roll. I'd rather use the tall, agile, skilled, smart player in a more unique roll. Just because he is 200cm, he doesn't have to be a ruckman or a KPP. Why can't he be a half forward flanker or a roaming forward that ventures onto the ball? The last time we had a no KP forward that was hard to match up on was 1990. This time we could have one in conjuntion with a real KP FF and CHF.

Post by **BBHS** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 5:19 pm

MarkT wrote:The problem with your theory snow is that you want to take an unconventional talent and turn it into a run of the mill type player in a run of the mill type roll. I'd rather use the tall, agile, skilled, smart player in a more unique roll. Just because he is 200cm, he doesn't have to be a ruckman or a KPP. Why can't he be a half forward flanker or a roaming forward that ventures onto the ball? The last time we had a no KP forward that was hard to match up on was 1990. This time we could have one in conjuntion with a real KP FF and CHF.

I think thats what I was getting at earlier. well put

BHPIE · Post by **BHPIE** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:43 pm

Cannibal said it all, but if you want to talk about underachievers ,see Tarrant.

Post by **Cam** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:33 pm

- I thought;
- Daicos, whilst a magician, was soft and for years too easily tagged out of big games.
- Shaw has a hack who couldn't kick.
- Banks didn't use much of his talent.
- Manson should have been delisted.
- Barwick was past it.
- Starcevich was too soft to be useful in crunch games.
- Francis was a young hot head who wouldn't stand up under pressure.
- Russell was soft, as was Morwood.
- Gayfer was talentless & Kerrison and Turner whilst honest were expendable

The only decent players I thought were capable of anything were Monkhorst, Ned, Pants, Christian, McGuane, Rowdy, Wright & Crosisca.

The more I think about 90, the players we had, how we escaped Hawthorn, how we played off in October, how Essendon had 2 weeks off...

...the more I think we arsed that one win out of our last 14 or whatever it is GF losses. Yeah we smashed essendon on that day.. but.. you know what i am saying?

Will we see another flag in the next 20 years? It's been 14 already. Are they harder to win now than ever?

MagpieDynasty · Post by **MagpieDynasty** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 10:27 pm

Cam, I think we were more fortunate to draw against the Weagles and ultimately win in the replay. The Bomber side of '90 was also not overly star studded. In fact I would say that the two teams on that day were at best, honest and hard working rather than abundantly skilful. We had more belief and showed true grit particularly after the Brown/Daniher incident. We must believe that we will see a flag in the next 20 years - the players and administration certainly do. I believe we will nail it in 2005, so should all of you!

The Collingwood Turtle · Sat Nov 20, 2004 1:11 am

[quote="Cam"]- I thought;
- Daicos, whilst a magician, was soft and for years too easily tagged out of big games.

Cam - I hope you were on some sort trip with the Daics comment.

Daics won 2 Copelands as centreman in 1982 & 1988 under PLENTY of heat.

Do you forget the 1984 1st semi final when the master kicked 7 MAGICAL goals versus the FILTH ?

Anyway onto another subject ...........

Josh Fraser whilst many people believe he's the ants pants, he is the so overrated it's sickening.

At 6ft 7in he rarely dominates the Ruck & struggles at Centre Half Forward on a consistent basis when played there.

At the end of day he's the WORLD TALLEST HALF FORWARD FLANKER.

Hope he proves me wrong, but I won't hold my breath.

sq3 · Post by **sq3** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:28 am

If our 1990 team played our 2004/2003 or 2002 they would unmercifully flog us by at least 10 goals.

In 1990 we had players that were hard at the ball and had GUTS - something that is sadly lacking in todays team.

Most of the forwards would faint if they had to line up on Ned and have Kerro running around behind them. Who is a closer checking backman than Gayfer - no one.

The center line with Pants was unstoppable as he flogged Anderson TWICE in the same finals series.

The forward line with Barge and Daicos and they could have thrown in Ronnie would have sacred the shite out of most backmen that play now.

Monkey in the ruck, Banks hunting players down - etc., etc.,

Tough, hard and guts - the 3 main things missing in todays players.

Post by **Cam** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:56 am

So what you are saying sq3 is that our 90 team is the equivilent of the 2003 Brisbane Lions?

Johnson#26 · Post by **Johnson#26** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 9:58 am

- Daicos, whilst a magician, was soft and for years too easily tagged out of big games.
- Shaw has a hack who couldn't kick.
- Banks didn't use much of his talent.
- Manson should have been delisted.
- Barwick was past it.
- Starcevich was too soft to be useful in crunch games.
- Francis was a young hot head who wouldn't stand up under pressure.
- Russell was soft, as was Morwood.
- Gayfer was talentless & Kerrison and Turner whilst honest were expendable

Cam, doesn't your discription of Shaw sound al little like....Mark McGough? And Starcevich like...Alan Didak? And Francis.....Leon Davis?

Post by **Cam** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 10:43 am

ya.. there were a few intentions. Some people take their chances at history, others don't.

sq3 · Post by **sq3** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 11:16 am

Cam - YES - exactly correct.

Lethal must have modeled his Brisbane Lions teams of 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the 1990 Pies.

I still think the 1990 Pies would have beaten the Lions as Ned would have KO'd Brown in the first 10 minutes.

Barge or Ronnie would have killed Lynch, Leppitsch and Mal.

No Contest.

HAL · Post by **HAL** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 11:18 am

Or what?

HAL · Post by **HAL** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 11:21 am

sq3 wrote:Cam - YES - exactly correct.

Lethal must have modeled his Brisbane Lions teams of 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the 1990 Pies.

I still think the 1990 Pies would have beaten the Lions as Ned would have KO'd Brown in the first 10 minutes.

Barge or Ronnie would have killed Lynch, Leppitsch and Mal.

No Contest.

Or what?

This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.

#25 Josh Fraser