Round 6 ins and outs

[Sockeye Salmon]

Well he's shorter and less mobile. To be honest I think Skipper's a talented undersized ruck, but I've rarely seen anything to indicate he's a KPP, especially a CHB. I think Wight is the stopgap until Williams gets back or unless McD shows some form in the 2's (and regains fitness). Wight isn't strong enough in contests, but at least he can get to them, most CHF's would leave Skip in the dust.

I've been convinced of that for years.

Skipper was taken at pick 70. He was passed up by most because he was seen as purely a ruckman and at (then) 192cm was seen as being too short.

We took the risk that he would grow another couple of inches and if he had he would be a very good player by now. While he grew a bit, he didn't grow enough.

He'll tear it up in the WAFL soon.



PS. Skipper was listed as 192cm when he was drafted. A couple of years later he was listed as 196cm, now he's listed as 193cm. I saw him standing next to Brian Lake at the club last year and Skip is clearly taller than Lake. I'd say 196cm is right. Why would they list him as 193cm?

[hujsh]

PS. Skipper was listed as 192cm when he was drafted. A couple of years later he was listed as 196cm, now he's listed as 193cm. I saw him standing next to Brian Lake at the club last year and Skip is clearly taller than Lake. I'd say 196cm is right. Why would they list him as 193cm?

This seems to happen all over the place. It's not that hard to put the right height on the website

[The Underdog]

I've been convinced of that for years.

Skipper was taken at pick 70. He was passed up by most because he was seen as purely a ruckman and at (then) 192cm was seen as being too short.

We took the risk that he would grow another couple of inches and if he had he would be a very good player by now. While he grew a bit, he didn't grow enough.

He'll tear it up in the WAFL soon.



PS. Skipper was listed as 192cm when he was drafted. A couple of years later he was listed as 196cm, now he's listed as 193cm. I saw him standing next to Brian Lake at the club last year and Skip is clearly taller than Lake. I'd say 196cm is right. Why would they list him as 193cm?

Agree 100%. He would be a great ruck if he was big enough, but he ain't and apart from one game where he kicked 5 and one contested mark against St kilda at a crucial time, he's never shown the ability to play key position in the AFL. I've certainly never seen anything to suggest he'd be a good CHB. I'm not saying he's not talented just unfortunately not tall enough to play his natural position.

[wb_age]

^^
Too right. The only reason i see both Skipper remaining on our list is purely for back up.

[LostDoggy]

Wight might be quicker, but Skipper reads it better which means there is no difference. There is no doubting Skipper desire after late last season.

I'm sure Skipper played some games in the backline in his career. I recall one now NAB cup game at Kardinia park where we got pumpedby he was moved back and wasn't too bad.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Wight might be quicker, but Skipper reads it better which means there is no difference. There is no doubting Skipper desire after late last season.

I'm sure Skipper played some games in the backline in his career. I recall one now NAB cup game at Kardinia park where we got pumpedby he was moved back and wasn't too bad.

The only time I can remember Skipper playing back was against Richmond a few years ago and he was terrible. From memory Stafford and Simmonds both kicked goals on him in a very short time.

[Mantis]

Agree SS.

If Wight was to be replaced at this point in time and taking into account that Williams and Everitt are not available for selection I would prefer McDougall to play as a defender compared to Skipper. I have yet to see Skipper play effectively as a defender in Dog's colours.